Withdrawal Of British Troops Research Articles

Cilicia in the Documents of the U.S. State Department in 1919−1920

The diplomatic documents from the U.S. Department of State stored at the National Archives of the USA in Washington and Republic of Armenia in Yerevan, which were officially published in volumes by the U.S. Government yet in 1931-1947, contain remarkable material on Cilicia. They throw light upon the negotiations between the leaders of the United States, Great Britain, France, Italy and delegations representing those countries at the 1919-1920 Paris International Peace Conference on political status and borders of Cilicia, establishment of a mandate for it, withdrawal of British troops from the region, occupation of Cilicia and Syria by French troops. The documents of the State Department reveal the contradictions between the Great Powers on the above-mentioned issues, describe their interests in the region. Records for the meetings of the Council of Ten of February 4, Council of Four of March 20, May 14, 21, 31 and Council of Five of July 18, August 25, 1919 are valuable from this point of view. The “Scheme for settlement in the Turkish Empire” of May 21, 1919, reflects the position of the Prime Minister of Great Britain D. Lloyd George on Cilicia. The U.S. President W. Wilson’s approaches concerning Cilicia are reflected in reports of the U.S. Commissioners in Turkey C. Crane and H. King of August 28, 1919, and the chief of the military mission to Armenia General J. Harbord of October 16, 1919. The difficulty of the Turkish border demarcation through Cilicia is presented in a note issued by the Allied Supreme Council on April 26, 1920, to U.S. Secretary of State B. Colby. The U.S. State Department diplomatic documents confirm that the Allies were practically not interested in resolving the issue of ensuring the security of Cilicia and its Armenian population. Based on the 1916 Sykes-Picot Anglo-French secret agreement, the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres provided for the transference of the mandate of Cilicia to France. It became the beginning of handing over the land to the Kemalist Turkey. Thus France, seeking to receive its state debt from Turkey, became an accomplice to the new genocide of Cilicia Armenians.

Congressional Hearings on Northern Ireland and the “Special Relationship,” 1971–1981

ABSTRACTIn 1971, Senator Edward Kennedy co-sponsored a resolution in Congress calling for the withdrawal of British troops from Northern Ireland. The House of Representatives Sub-Committee on Europe held hearings on this resolution in February 1972 in the immediate aftermath of the deaths in Londonderry of “Bloody Sunday.” These hearings represented the first time that several high profile American political figures had spoken out on the developing conflict in Northern Ireland and, whilst the hearings did not lead to a significant change in American policy towards the conflict, the threat of further ones persisted from the Richard Nixon to the Ronald Reagan administrations. This analysis examines the impact of the 1972 Congressional hearings and the threat posed by the possibility of future ones in the wider context of United States policy towards the Northern Ireland conflict until 1981.

An Historical Atlas of the Zulu Rebellion of 1906 (review)

Reviewed by: An Historical Atlas of the Zulu Rebellion of 1906 Bruce Vandervort An Historical Atlas of the Zulu Rebellion of 1906. By Paul S. Thompson. Scottsville, South Africa: Privately published, 2001. ISBN 0-620-29275-X. Table of contents. List of abbreviations & symbols used. Maps. Bibliography. Pp. 73. Can be obtained by e-mailing the author at thompson@ukzn.ac.za. Price: Rands 100 + postage. The Anglo-Zulu War did not end, as moviegoers might assume, on 23-24 January 1879 at the battle of Rorke's Drift, where Stanley Baker and Michael Caine saw off a 4,000-strong Zulu impi with a little help from the South Wales Borderers. Nor did it end, as closer observers of the war might think, on the Fourth of July 1879, when British troops, lumbering forward in a great parallelogram bristling with Gatling guns, breechloaders, and cannon, managed to drive off a Zulu army of 20,000 men and burn Ulundi, the capital of Cetshwayo, the Zulu king. The final act in Zulu armed resistance to white encroachment on their lands and efforts to transform them from farmers and herders into farm laborers and mine workers came only in 1906. That uprising, long overshadowed by the events of 1879 and largely forgotten now, is the subject of Paul Thompson's Historical Atlas of the Zulu Rebellion of 1906. A research scholar at the University of Natal in South Africa, Thompson hopes his heavily annotated atlas will resurrect interest in the 1906 upheaval and serve as a guide to the movements and engagements of its contending forces when the centenary of the event is celebrated in two years time. Thompson is well placed to provide this kind of stimulus. The Field Guide to the War in Zululand and the Defence of Natal 1879, one of a number of books he has coauthored with Zulu wars scholar John Laband, has gone through several editions since its original appearance in 1979. [End Page 974] As Thompson explains in his introduction to the atlas, the Zulu uprising came in the wake of government imposition of a poll tax on the African population of Natal province. The poll tax was levied when an earlier hut tax did not sufficiently impoverish Zulus to force them to seek employment on white farms or down South Africa's mines. Word of the new tax, however, only added to what was already a mood of economic crisis among the Zulus, brought on by government parceling out of some of their lands to white settlers, sustained drought, and an epidemic of rinderpest that had devastated their cattle herds. When the government chose to meet local refusal to pay the new tax with armed force, clashes took place with losses on both sides. The ensuing conflict was fought by "citizen soldiers" in both camps. Withdrawal of British troops from South Africa after the Second Boer War meant that the task of putting down the Zulu rebellion fell to the Natal militia. As Thompson points out (p. 2), "a militia of sorts"—the groups of retainers or amabutho around traditional chiefs—did most of the fighting for the Zulus as well. The leadership of the insurgents devolved upon one of these chiefs, Bambatha, who claimed to have the power to make his fighters impervious to the white man's bullets. This did not turn out to be the case. Some 3,000 Zulus died in the fighting, including Bambatha, who perished in the decisive battle of the war, at Mome, on 10 June. Thirty white soldiers lost their lives in the war. Repression was savage, reflecting the great insecurity felt by the white population of Natal, outnumbered as it was 10 to 1 by Africans. Around 7,000 Zulus were sentenced to prison, many at hard labor. But, as far as the white population of Natal, and indeed the rest of South Africa, was concerned, the war and subsequent repression had done what the hut and poll taxes could not. As another writer on the subject has noted, by 1909, an estimated 80 percent of the adult males in Zululand had migrated elsewhere in search of work, most of them to the gold...

The Course of Irish History

Agreement and the withdrawal of British troops from regular patrols in Northern Ireland, this new edition of a perennial bestseller narrates and interprets Irish history as a whole. Designed and written to be popular and authoritative, critical and balanced, it has been the core text in both Irish and American universities for three decades. It has also proven to be an extremely popular book for casual readers with an interest in history and Irish affairs and is considered the definitive history among the Irish themselves. Chapters are grouped together by century or by general time period, ranging from prehistoric Ireland to the present, and each has been written by an English or Irish historian specializing in that area. This edition of the book has been revised and enlarged and is illustrated throughout with line drawings, black and white, and color photographs. It is an essential text for anyone interested in the history of Ireland.

Arab league

On July 20, 1961, Kuwait was admitted to membership in the Arab League as an independent Arab state. Earlier the Iraqi delegates had walked out, alleging that the League was joining with British imperialism. Kuwait was the eleventh state to join the League. The League Council unanimously approved a three-point resolution: 1) the Kuwait government would undertake to request the withdrawal of British troops as soon as possible, and the Iraqi government would undertake not to resort to force; 2) the League would support any wish expressed by Kuwait for unity or union with other League member states, and the League welcomed Kuwait as a member and supported its application for membership in the UN; and 3) the Arab countries undertook to offer effective help to Kuwait to safeguard its independence. An Arab League military mission, led by Lieutenant-General Ahmed Halim Imam, arrived in Kuwait on August 7, 1961; it included representatives of Jordan, Lebanon, the United Arab Republic, and the Arab League secretariat. It was also accompanied by Abdel-Azia Husain, who had represented Kuwait at the recent Arab League meetings and was expected to be Kuwait's first ambassador in Cairo. The mission was the outcome of the July 20 decision of the League to give Kuwait all effective aid necessary to preserve its independence on condition that it asked for the withdrawal of British troops. On August 13, the paper work necessary to bring Kuwait under the protection of the Arab League and enable the British forces then in Kuwait to leave was completed.