Coll 6/43 'Pan Arab Congress 1933. Attitude of H.M.G. to a Pan Arab Movement' [‎435r] (870/1144)

THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HIB BRITANNIC MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT
EASTERN (Genp^w,).
June 13, 1933.
SECRET.
[E 3119/347/65]
-aT
Section
\ T o. 1.
Attitude of His Majesty'$ Govetffment towards the Question of Arab Unity.
THE phrase “ Arab unity ” is an extremely vague one, which has been used
in many different senses.
2. It is generally most in evidence on such occasions as Arab or Moslem
congresses, and was freely bandied about during the Moslem Congress at
Jerusalem in the autumn of 1931. On such occasions it is generally used
extremely loosely as a popular rallying cry against either “Western imperialism ’’
or the Zionist movement; but in actual fact it seldom amounts to much more than
a rather undigested idea of co-operation between Arabic-speaking people in
matters of education and propaganda, and possibly also in such politico-religious
questions as that of the Heiaz Railway, the future of the Holy Places, &c. Arab
unity in this sense is something rather akin to pan-Arabism, and appears to have
no more practical significance than the rather shadowy pan-Islamic movement, of
which so much was heard some twenty years ago.
3. From the political and practical point of view. “ Arab unity ’ ’ should
mean the union, either in a single State or in a confederation of autonomous
States, of all former Ottoman territories, south of present-day Turkey, which
have a predominantly Arab population. This would limit the application of the
idea to the north-western half of Arabia, i.e., to the Arabic-speaking territories
north-west of a line drawn from the middle of the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. to the southern
end of the Red Sea. It is, in fact, only to this area that the idea can be regarded
as properly applicable, and it is therefore mainly from this point of view that
the question is discussed in the present memorandum. But attempts may well
be made to extend the idea of Arab unity to the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. States and to
Southern and South-Eastern Arabia generally. It is thus not possible to consider
the problem without touching on its possible relation to these areas also.
4. The idea of Arab unity, as applied to the former Ottoman territories,
i.e., to the Arabic-speaking areas north-west of the line mentioned in the
preceding paragraph, was the ultimate aim of the Arab revolt during the war, and
was the ideal for which the Hashimites, under Hussein and Colonel Lawrence,
strove during the war and armistice periods. There is no doubt that the
remaining members of the Hashimite family—Feisal, Ali and Abdullah—have
never abandoned this dream, although subsequent developments have rendered it
impracticable.
5. The most important of these subsequent developments, from the purely
Arabian point of view, has been the rise to power of Ibn Baud, and his conquest
of the greater part of the Arabian Peninsula,-including the former Kingdom of
the Hejaz. The dynastic rivalry between the Hashimites and the Saudis renders
it almost inconceivable that there could be any close or organic combination
between the territories respectively ruled by them. It is true that King Feisal
of Iraq has come to terms with King Ibn Baud and is now in friendly relations
with Saudi Arabia, and that we are working hard—with at last a fair hope of
success—to secure a similar rapprochement between Ibn Baud and the Amir
Abdullah of Transjordan Used in three contexts: the geographical region to the east of the River Jordan (literally ‘across the River Jordan’); a British protectorate (1921-46); an independent political entity (1946-49) now known as Jordan . But the rivalry between the two family systems is
still a basic factor in the situation, and unless one group were virtually to
disappear, there seems no prospect whatever of any effective combination of the
territories at present ruled by Ibn Baud {i.e., the greater part of the Arabian
Peninsula, including the former Kingdom of the Hejaz) with those at present
ruled by the Hashimites {i.e., the independent Kingdom of Iraq and the mandated
territory of Transjordan Used in three contexts: the geographical region to the east of the River Jordan (literally ‘across the River Jordan’); a British protectorate (1921-46); an independent political entity (1946-49) now known as Jordan ). While the Arabs are themselves divided into these
two camps, any talk of Arab political unity in the wider sense must be illusory.
6. It would, moreover, be impossible in present circumstances for His
Majesty’s Government to support either of these groups against the other, since
they are bound by special obligations to each. Apart from the support which the
Hashimites gave to the Allied cause during the Great W^ar, King Feisal and the
6924 [8732] b