Essay and key terms

User Generated

Enxnax

Writing

Description

Assignment 1:

Choose and define five (5) of the following key terms in a full paragraph each. You need to tell me the basic who/what/where/when stuff, but most

importantly the significance to the course. Make these good, as they are

each worth one point each, i.e., one per cent of your total grade. Please type

your answers and staple multiple pages.

(2-2.5 pages is good)

Possible Short-Answer Options:

-Kemalism

-Authoritarian Modernism

-Operation Ajax

-The 1967 War

-1982 Lebanon War

-The Intifada

-The Ba’th Party

-al-Anfal / Kurdish Genocide

-‘Deep State’

-Camp David Accords

-The Gulf Crisis

-Tahrir Square


-------------------------

Assignment 2:

PLEASE START WITH FILE SRC 10 (1 Pg. each)

Spread across the term are ten days during which you will need to have read through and brought in some written thoughts on a primary source document that I will provide through Blackboard. Primary sources are materials that historians draw upon in order to interpret the past. You will be reading over each of these documents when assigned and writing up your thoughts on no more than one page, the object being to situate the document into historical context and try to understand what it can tell us about the person or persons who produced it. We will discuss these in class, either in small groups or as a large group. Your papers will be collected, as they are the basis for your score. My criteria for judgement include whether it is obvious that you read the document and how seriously you took the assignment to analyze it in context (i.e., how hard you tried!).

Unformatted Attachment Preview

ABD AL-RAHMAN AL-JABARTI (1753–1825/26) CHRONICLE OF THE FRENCH OCCUPATION (1798) On Monday news arrived that the French had reached Damanhūr and Rosetta, bringing about the flight of their inhabitants to Fuwwa and its surroundings. Contained in this news was mention of the French sending notices throughout the country demanding impost for the upkeep of the military. Furthermore they printed a large proclamation in Arabic, calling on the people to obey them and to raise their “Bandiera.” In this proclamation were inducements, warnings, all manner of wiliness and stipulations. [al-Jabarti cites the proclamation] It ends here word for word. Here is an explanation of the incoherent words and vulgar constructions which he put into this miserable letter. His statement “In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate. There is no god but God. He has no son, nor has He an associate in His Dominion.” In mentioning these three sentences there is an indication that the French agree with the three religions, but at the same time they do not agree with them, nor with any religion. They are consistent with the Muslims in stating the formula “In the name of God,” in denying that He has a son or an associate. They disagree with Muslims in not mentioning the two Articles of Faith, in rejecting the mission of Muhamad, and the legal words and deeds which are necessarily recognized by religion. . . . Then, their statement “On behalf of the French Republic, etc.,” that is, this proclamation is sent from their Republic, that means their body politic, because they have no chief or sultan with whom they all agree, like others, whose function is to speak on their behalf. For when they rebelled against their sultan six years ago and killed him, the people agreed unanimously that their state, territories, laws, and administration of their affairs, should be in the hands of the intelligent and wise men among them. . . . They follow this rule: great and small, high and low, male and female are all equal. Sometimes they break this rule according to their whims and inclinations or reasoning. Their women do not veil themselves and have no modesty; they do not care whether they uncover their private parts. Whenever a Frenchman has to perform an act of nature he does so wherever he happens to be, even in full view of people, and he goes away as he is, without washing his private parts after defecation. ************** His saying fī hādhā ’l-taraf (hither), means “this part of the earth.” His statement wa-qūlū li ’l-muftariyīn (but tell the slanderers) is the plural of muftarī (slanderer) which means liar, and how worthy of this description they are. The proof of that is his saying “I have not come to you except for the purpose of restoring your rights from the hands of the oppressors,” which is the first lie he uttered and a falsehood which he invented. Then he proceeds to something even worse than that, may God cast him into perdition, with his words: “I more than the Mamluks, serve God. . . .” There is no doubt that this is a derangement of his mind, and an excess of foolishness. . . . The Qur’ān is one of the miracles of the Prophet which proves his truth, and that he is the Prophet to the end of time, and that his nation is the most noble of all nations. These people deny all that and lie in every thing they enumerate . . . . His saying “[all people] are equal in the eyes of God” the Almighty, this is a lie and stupidity. How can this be when God has made some superior to others as is testified by the dwellers in the Heavens and on the Earth? Taken from al-Jabarti, “Chronicle of the French Occupation, 1798,” in Perspectives from the Past: Primary Sources in Western Civilizations, 5th ed., eds. James Brophy, Joshua Cole, John Robertson, Thomas Max Safley, and Carol Symes (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2012), 2:294–297. Ze’ev Jabotinsky ‘The Iron Wall’ (aka, Vladimir Jabotinsky) (4 November 1923) It is an excellent rule to begin an article with the most important point. But this time, I find it necessary to begin with an introduction, and, moreover, with a personal introduction. I am reputed to be an enemy of the Arabs, who wants to have them ejected from Palestine, and so forth. It is not true. Emotionally, my attitude to the Arabs is the same as to all other nations – polite indifference. Politically, my attitude is determined by two principles. First of all, I consider it utterly impossible to eject the Arabs from Palestine. There will always be two nations in Palestine – which is good enough for me, provided the Jews become the majority. And secondly, I belong to the group that once drew up the Helsingfors Programme, the programme of national rights for all nationalities living in the same State. In drawing up that programme, we had in mind not only the Jews, but all nations everywhere, and its basis is equality of rights. I am prepared to take an oath binding ourselves and our descendants that we shall never do anything contrary to the principle of equal rights, and that we shall never try to eject anyone. This seems to me a fairly peaceful credo. But it is quite another question whether it is always possible to realise a peaceful aim by peaceful means. For the answer to this question does not depend on our attitude to the Arabs; but entirely on the attitude of the Arabs to us and to Zionism. Now, after this introduction, we may proceed to the subject. Voluntary Agreement Not Possible There can be no voluntary agreement between ourselves and the Palestine Arabs. Not now, nor in the prospective future. I say this with such conviction, not because I want to hurt the moderate Zionists. I do not believe that they will be hurt. Except for those who were born blind, they realised long ago that it is utterly impossible to obtain the voluntary consent of the Palestine Arabs for converting "Palestine" from an Arab country into a country with a Jewish majority. My readers have a general idea of the history of colonisation in other countries. I suggest that they consider all the precedents with which they are acquainted, and see whether there is one solitary instance of any colonisation being carried on with the consent of the native population. There is no such precedent. The native populations, civilised or uncivilised, have always stubbornly resisted the colonists, irrespective of whether they were civilised or savage. And it made no difference whatever whether the colonists behaved decently or not. The companions of Cortez and Pizzaro or (as some people will remind us) our own ancestors under Joshua Ben Nun, behaved like brigands; but the Pilgrim Fathers, the first real pioneers of North America, were people of the highest morality, who did not want to do harm to anyone, least of all to the Red Indians, and they honestly believed that there was room enough in the prairies both for the Paleface and the Redskin. Yet the native population fought with the same ferocity against the good colonists as against the bad. Every native population, civilised or not, regards its lands as its national home, of which it is the sole master, and it wants to retain that mastery always; it will refuse to admit not only new masters but, even new partners or collaborators. Arabs Not Fools This is equally true of the Arabs. Our Peace-mongers are trying to persuade us that the Arabs are either fools, whom we can deceive by masking our real aims, or that they are corrupt and can be bribed to abandon to us their claim to priority in Palestine , in return for cultural and economic advantages. I repudiate this conception of the Palestinian Arabs. Culturally they are five hundred years behind us, they have neither our endurance nor our determination; but they are just as good psychologists as we are, and their minds have been sharpened like ours by centuries of fine-spun logomachy. We may tell them whatever we like about the innocence of our aims, watering them down and sweetening them with honeyed words to make them palatable, but they know what we want, as well as we know what they do not want. They feel at least the same instinctive jealous love of Palestine, as the old Aztecs felt for ancient Mexico, and their Sioux for their rolling Prairies. To imagine, as our Arabophiles do, that they will voluntarily consent to the realisation of Zionism. In return for the moral and material conveniences which the Jewish colonist brings with him, is a childish notion, which has at bottom a kind of contempt for the Arab people; it means that they despise the Arab race, which they regard as a corrupt mob that can be bought and sold, and are willing to give up their fatherland for a good railway system. All Natives Resist Colonists There is no justification for such a belief. It may be that some individual Arabs take bribes. But that does not mean that the Arab people of Palestine as a whole will sell that fervent patriotism that they guard so jealously, and which even the Papuans will never sell. Every native population in the world resists colonists as long as it has the slightest hope of being able to rid itself of the danger of being colonised. That is what the Arabs in Palestine are doing, and what they will persist in doing as long as there remains a solitary spark of hope that they will be able to prevent the transformation of "Palestine" into the "Land of Israel." Arab Comprehension Some of us have induced ourselves to believe that all the trouble is due to misunderstanding – the Arabs have not understood us, and that is the only reason why they resist us ;if we can only make it clear to them how moderate our intentions really are, they will immediately extend to us their hand in friendship. This belief is utterly unfounded and it has been exploded again and again. I shall recall only one instance of many. A few years ago, when the late Mr. Sokolow was on one of his periodic visits to Palestine, he addressed a meeting on this very question of the "misunderstanding." He demonstrated lucidly and convincingly that the Arabs are terribly mistaken if they think that we have any desire to deprive them of their possessions or to drive them our of the country, or that we want to oppress them. We do not even ask for a Jewish Government to hold the Mandate of the League of Nations. One of the Arab papers, "El Carmel," replied at the time, in an editorial article, the purport of which was this: The Zionists are making a fuss about nothing. There is no misunderstanding. All that Mr. Sokolow says about the Zionist intentions is true, but the Arabs know that without him. Of course, the Zionists cannot now be thinking of driving the Arabs out of the country, or oppressing them, not do they contemplate a Jewish Government. Quite obviously, they are now concerned with one thing only- that the Arabs should not hinder their immigration. The Zionists assure us that even immigration will be regulated strictly according to the economic needs of Palestine. The Arabs have never doubted that: it is a truism, for otherwise there can be no immigration. No "Misunderstanding" This Arab editor was actually willing to agree that Palestine has a very large potential absorptive capacity, meaning that there is room for a great many Jews in the country without displacing a single Arab. There is only one thing the Zionists want, and it is that one thing that the Arabs do not want, for that is the way by which the Jews would gradually become the majority, and then a Jewish Government would follow automatically, and the future of the Arab minority would depend on the goodwill of the Jews; and a minority status is not a good thing, as the Jews themselves are never tired of pointing out. So there is no "misunderstanding". The Zionists want only one thing, Jewish immigration; and this Jewish immigration is what the Arabs do not want. This statement of the position by the Arab editor is so logical, so obvious, so indisputable, that everyone ought to know it by heart, and it should be made the basis of all our future discussions on the Arab question. It does not matter at all which phraseology we employ in explaining our colonising aims, Herzl's or Sir Herbert Samuel's. Colonisation carries its own explanation, the only possible explanation, unalterable and as clear as daylight to every ordinary Jew and every ordinary Arab. Colonisation can have only one aim, and Palestine Arabs cannot accept this aim. It lies in the very nature of things, and in this particular regard nature cannot be changed. The Iron Wall We cannot offer any adequate compensation to the Palestinian Arabs in return for Palestine. And therefore, there is no likelihood of any voluntary agreement being reached. So that all those who regard such an agreement as a condition sine qua non for Zionism may as well say "non" and withdraw from Zionism. Zionist colonisation must either stop, or else proceed regardless of the native population. Which means that it can proceed and develop only under the protection of a power that is independent of the native population – behind an iron wall, which the native population cannot breach. That is our Arab policy; not what we should be, but what it actually is, whether we admit it or not. What need, otherwise, of the Balfour Declaration? Or of the Mandate? Their value to us is that outside Power has undertaken to create in the country such conditions of administration and security that if the native population should desire to hinder our work, they will find it impossible. And we are all of us ,without any exception, demanding day after day that this outside Power, should carry out this task vigorously and with determination. In this matter there is no difference between our "militarists" and our "vegetarians". Except that the first prefer that the iron wall should consist of Jewish soldiers, and the others are content that they should be British. We all demand that there should be an iron wall. Yet we keep spoiling our own case, by talking about "agreement" which means telling the Mandatory Government that the important thing is not the iron wall, but discussions. Empty rhetoric of this kind is dangerous. And that is why it is not only a pleasure but a duty to discredit it and to demonstrate that it is both fantastic and dishonest. Zionism Moral and Just Two brief remarks: In the first place, if anyone objects that this point of view is immoral, I answer: It is not true: either Zionism is moral and just ,or it is immoral and unjust. But that is a question that we should have settled before we became Zionists. Actually we have settled that question, and in the affirmative. We hold that Zionism is moral and just. And since it is moral and just, justice must be done, no matter whether Joseph or Simon or Ivan or Achmet agree with it or not. There is no other morality. Eventual Agreement In the second place, this does not mean that there cannot be any agreement with the Palestine Arabs. What is impossible is a voluntary agreement. As long as the Arabs feel that there is the least hope of getting rid of us, they will refuse to give up this hope in return for either kind words or for bread and butter, because they are not a rabble, but a living people. And when a living people yields in matters of such a vital character it is only when there is no longer any hope of getting rid of us, because they can make no breach in the iron wall. Not till then will they drop their extremist leaders whose watchword is "Never!" And the leadership will pass to the moderate groups, who will approach us with a proposal that we should both agree to mutual concessions. Then we may expect them to discuss honestly practical questions, such as a guarantee against Arab displacement, or equal rights for Arab citizen, or Arab national integrity. And when that happens, I am convinced that we Jews will be found ready to give them satisfactory guarantees, so that both peoples can live together in peace, like good neighbours. But the only way to obtain such an agreement, is the iron wall, which is to say a strong power in Palestine that is not amenable to any Arab pressure. In other words, the only way to reach an agreement in the future is to abandon all idea of seeking an agreement at present. OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS 177 FRENCH MANDATE FOR SYRIA AND THE LEBANON1 The CounciloftheLeagueofNations: Whereasthe PrincipalAlliedPowershave agreedthat the territory of Syriaand the Lebanon,whichformerly belongedto the TurkishEmpire shall,withinsuchboundariesas maybe fixedby the said Powers,be entrustedto a Mandatorychargedwiththe dutyofrendering administrative adviceand assistanceto the population, in accordancewiththe provisions ofArticle22 (paragraph4) ofthe CovenantoftheLeague ofNations;and Whereasthe PrincipalAlliedPowershave decidedthatthe mandatefor theterritory referred to aboveshouldbe conferred ontheGovernment ofthe FrenchRepublic,whichhas acceptedit; and Whereasthe termsof this mandate,whichare definedin the articles below,have also beenacceptedby theGovernment oftheFrenchRepublic and submitted to the CounciloftheLeagueforapproval;and Whereasthe Government of the FrenchRepublichas undertakento exercise thismandateonbehalfoftheLeagueofNations,in conformity with thefollowing provisions; and Whereasby the aforementioned Article22 (paragraph8), it is provided thatthedegreeofauthority, controloradministration to be exercised bythe nothavingbeenpreviously Mandatory, ofthe agreeduponby themembers League,shallbe explicitly defined by theCounciloftheLeagueofNations; thesaid mandate,defines Confirming itstermsas follows: ARTICLE 1 The Mandatoryshall frame,withina periodof threeyearsfromthe comingintoforceofthismandate,an organiclawforSyriaandtheLebanon. Thisorganiclaw shallbe framed in agreement withthenativeauthorities and shalltakeintoaccounttherights, interests, and wishesofall thepopulation inhabitingthe said territory.The Mandatoryshall furtherenact measuresto facilitate ofSyriaandtheLebanon theprogressive development as independent states. Pendingthe comingintoeffect ofthe organiclaw, theGovernment ofSyriaand theLebanonshallbe conducted in accordance withthespiritofthismandate. The Mandatoryshall,as faras circumstances permit,encouragelocal autonomy. ARTICLE 2 The Mandatorymay maintainits troopsin the said territory forits defence. It shallfurther untilthe entryintoforceof the be empowered, organiclaw and the reestablishment of publicsecurity,to organizesuch local militiaas may be necessaryforthe defenceof the territory, and to oforder. These employthismilitiafordefence and alsoforthemaintenance ' LeagueofNationsOfficial Aug.1922,p. 1013. See declarationgivingcondition Journal, of approvalof the mandatesforPalestineand Syria,infra,p. 193. 178 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW localforcesmayonlybe recruited fromtheinhabitants ofthesaid territory. The said militiashallthereafter be underthelocal authorities, subjectto the authority and the controlwhichtheMandatoryshallretainoverthese forces. It shallnotbe used forpurposesotherthanthoseabove specified save withtheconsentoftheMandatory. to the NothingshallprecludeSyriaand the Lebanonfromcontributing cost of the maintenance of the forcesof the Mandatorystationedin the territory. The Mandatoryshall at all timespossessthe rightto makeuse of the ports,railwaysand meansofcommunication ofSyriaand theLebanonfor thepassageofitstroopsand ofall materials, suppliesand fuel. 3 The Mandatoryshall be entrustedwiththe exclusivecontrolof the foreignrelationsof Syria and the Lebanon and withthe rightto issue exequatursto theconsulsappointedby foreign Powers. NationalsofSyria and theLebanonlivingoutsidethelimitsoftheterritory shallbe underthe and consularprotection diplomatic oftheMandatory. ARTICLE ARTICLE 4 The Mandatoryshallbe responsible forseeingthatno partoftheterritory ofSyriaand theLebanonis cededorleasedorin anywayplacedunderthe controlofa foreign Power. ARTICLE 5 The privilegesand immunities of foreigners, includingthe benefitsof or consularjurisdiction and protection as formerly enjoyedby capitulation usage in the OttomanEmpire,shall not be applicablein Syria and the Lebanon. Foreignconsulartribunalsshall,however,continueto perform theirdutiesuntilthecomingintoforceofthenewlegalorganization provided forinArticle6. UnlessthePowerswhosenationalsenjoyedtheaforementioned privileges on August1, 1914,shall have previouslyrenouncedthe and immunities rightto theirreestablishment, or shallhave agreedto theirnon-application duringa specifiedperiod,theseprivileges and immunities shall at the expirationof the mandatebe immediately reestablished in theirentirety or withsuchmodifications as mayhave beenagreeduponbetweenthePowers concerned. ARTICLE 6 The Mandatoryshallestablishin Syriaand theLebanona judicialsystem whichshallassureto nativesas wellas to foreigners a completeguarantee oftheirrights. Respectforthe personalstatusofthe variouspeoplesand fortheirreligiousinterestsshall be fullyguaranteed. In particular, the controland OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS 179 of Wakfsshall be exercisedin completeaccordancewith administration religious lawandthedispositions ofthefounders. ARTICLE 7 ofspecialextradition Pendingtheconclusion theextradition agreements, treatiesat presentin forcebetweenforeign Powersand theMandatoryshall applywithin theterritory ofSyriaandtheLebanon. ARTICLE 8 The Mandatoryshall ensureto all completefreedomof conscienceand the freeexerciseof all formsof worshipwhichare consonantwithpublic orderand morality.No discrimination ofanykindshallbe madebetween the inhabitantsof Syria and the Lebanonon the groundof differences in race,religionor language. The Mandatoryshallencouragepublicinstruction, whichshallbe given themediumofthenativelanguagesin use in theterritory ofSyria through andtheLebanon. The rightofeach community to maintainits ownschoolsfortheinstructionand educationofitsownmembers initsownlanguage,whileconforming to sucheducationalrequirements ofa generalnatureas the administration mayimpose,shallnotbe deniedorimpaired. ARTICLE 9 The Mandatoryshallrefrain fromall interference in the administration oftheCouncilsofmanagement (Conseilsdefabrique)or in themanagement of religiouscommunities and sacredshrinesbelonging to the variousreligions,theimmunity ofwhichhasbeenexpressly guaranteed. ARTICLE 10 The supervision exercisedby the Mandatoryoverthe religiousmissions in Syriaand theLebanonshallbe limitedto themaintenance ofpublicorder and good government; the activitiesof thesereligiousmissionsshallin no norshalltheirmembers way be restricted, be subjectedto any restrictive measureson the groundof nationality, providedthat theiractivitiesare tothedomainofreligion. confined The religiousmissionsmay also concernthemselves witheducationand relief,subjectto thegeneralrightofregulation and controlby theMandatoryor ofthe local government, in regardto education,publicinstruction and charitable relief. ARTICLE 11 The Mandatoryshallsee thatthereis no discrimination in Syriaor the Lebanonagainstthe nationals,includingsocietiesand associations, of any oftheLeagueofNationsas comparedwithitsownnationals, statemember 180 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW or withthenationalsofany otherforsocietiesand associations, including taxationor commerce, theexerciseofproeignstatein mattersconcerning or navigation,or in the treatment of shipsor airfessionsor industries, thereshallbe no discrimination in Syriaor the Lebanon craft. Similarly, in ordestinedforanyofthesaidstates;thereshall againstgoodsoriginating underequitableconditions, acrossthesaidterritory. be freedom oftransit, or causeto be imposed may impose Subjectto theabove,theMandatory suchtaxesand customsdutiesas it mayconsider by thelocal governments actingunderits necessary. The Mandatory,or the local governments any specialcustoms advice,may also concludeon groundsof contiguity withan adjoiningcountry. arrangements The Mandatorymaytakeor causeto be taken,subjectto theprovisions ofparagraph1 ofthisarticle,suchstepsas it maythinkbestto ensurethe and to safeguard ofthesaid territory ofthenaturalresources development ofthelocalpopulation. theinterests Concessionsfor the developmentof these naturalresourcesshall be of nationalitybetweenthe nationalsof all grantedwithoutdistinction thattheydo not League ofNations,buton condition ofthe statesmembers infringe upon the authorityof the local government.Concessionsin the shallnotbe granted. This clauseshallin no natureofa generalmonopoly ofa purelyfiscal to createmonopolies Mandatory waylimittherightofthe and with the Lebanon, Syria and of of the territory interest in the character appear would which resources the fiscal territory a viewto assuringto the bestadaptedto thelocalneeds,or,in certaincases,witha viewto developing an organization by thestateorthrough eitherdirectly thenaturalresources or indirectly either not involve underits control,providedthatthisdoes of favor the in ofthenaturalresources thecreationofa monopoly directly which treatment Mandatoryor its nationals,norinvolveany preferential equaland industrial commercial wouldbe incompatible withtheeconomic, above. ityguaranteed ARTICLE 12 The Mandatoryshalladhere,on behalfofSyriaand theLebanon,to any alreadyexisting,or whichmay be conagreements generalinternational withtheapprovalofthe League ofNations,in respectof cludedhereafter in armsand in drugs,the traffic the slave trade,the traffic the following: commercialequality,freedomof transitand navigation, ammunition, and measor wirelesscommunications, aerialnavigation, postal,telegraphic artorindustries. ofliterature, uresfortheprotection 13 The Mandatoryshall securethe adhesionof Syriaand the Lebanon,so far as social,religiousand otherconditionspermit,to such measuresof commonutilityas maybe adoptedby theLeagueofNationsforpreventing diseasesofanimalsandplants. and combating disease,including ARTICLE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS 181 ARTICLE 14 The Mandatoryshalldrawup and put intoforcewithintwelvemonths proviwiththe following in conformity fromthisdate a law ofantiquities in thematterofexcavasions. Thislaw shallensureequalityoftreatment researchto the nationalsof all statesmembersof tionsand archieological theLeagueofNations. or any productof human (1) "Antiquity"means any construction A.D. 1700 year the than activityearlier ofantiquitiesshallproceedby encourage(2) The law fortheprotection mentratherthanbythreat. an antiquitywithoutbeingfurnished Anypersonwho,havingdiscovered to in paragraph5, reportsthe same to an referred withthe authorization shall be rewardedaccordingto the of the competentdepartment, official valueofthediscovery. department, maybe disposedofexceptto thecompetent (3) No antiquity ofanysuchantiquity. theacquisition renounces unlessthisdepartment No antiquitymayleave the countrywithoutan exportlicencefromthe saiddepartment. destroysor damagesan or negligently (4) Any personwho maliciously antiquityshallbe liableto a penaltyto be fixed. (5) No clearingof groundor diggingwiththe object of findingantiquities by underpenaltyof fine,exceptto personsauthorized shallbe permitted, department. thecompetent or pertemporary (6) Equitabletermsshall be fixedforexpropriation, interest. manent,of lands whichmightbe of historicalor archaeological to excavateshallonlybe grantedto personswhoshow (7) Authorization experience. The Mandatoryshall sufficient guaranteesof archaeological act insucha wayas to excludescholars authorizations, these not,ingranting of any nation withoutgood grounds. (8) The proceeds of excavations may be divided between the excavator and the competentdepartmentin a proportionfixedby that department. reasons,theexcavatorshallreceive forscientific If divisionseemsimpossible in lieu ofa partofthefind. a fairindemnity ARTICLE 15 Upon the cominginto forceof the organiclaw referredto in Article1, an arrangementshall be made between the Mandatory and the local governby thelatterofall expensesincurredby the Mandamentsforreimbursement tory in organizing the administration,developing local resources, and carryingout permanentpublicworks,of whichthe countryretainsthe to the Councilof the shallbe communicated benefit. Such arrangement LeagueofNations. 182 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 16 languagesofSyriaandtheLebanon. FrenchandArabicshallbe theofficial ARTICLE 17 The Mandatoryshallmaketo the Councilofthe League of Nationsan of the Councilas to the measurestaken annualreportto the satisfaction ofthismandate. Copiesofall duringtheyearto carryout the provisions duringthe yearshallbe attachedto the promulgated laws and regulations said report. ARTICLE 18 The consentofthe CounciloftheLeague ofNationsis requiredforany ofthetermsofthismandate. modification ARTICLE ARTICLE 19 ofthemandate,theCounciloftheLeagueofNations On thetermination by the to safeguardforthe futurethe fulfillment shall use its influence including obligations, ofSyriaand theLebanonofthefinancial Government ofSyria assumedby the administration regularly pensionsand allowances, or oftheLebanonduringthe periodofthemandate. 20 shouldarisebetween The Mandatoryagreesthatifanydisputewhatever to the relating of Nations the League of theMandatoryand anothermember such of the mandate, or the applicationof the provisions interpretation the to submitted be shall dispute,if it cannotbe settledby negotiation, the 14 of for Article by CourtofInternational Justiceprovided Permanent CovenantoftheLeagueofNations. shallbe depositedin originalin the archivesof The presentinstrument by the Secrecopiesshallbe forwarded theLeagueofNationsand certified oftheLeague. oftheLeagueofNationsto all members tary-General day of July,one thousandnine Done at Londonon the twenty-fourth hundredand twenty-two. ARTICLE BRITISH MANDATE FOR TOGOLAND 1 The CounciloftheLeagueofNations: Whereas,by Article119 ofthe treatyof peace withGermanysignedat Versailleson June28, 1919,Germanyrenouncedin favorof the Principal Alliedand AssociatedPowersall her rightsover her overseapossessions, Togoland;and therein including Whereasthe PrincipalAlliedand AssociatedPowers agreedthat the 1LeagueofNationsw OfficalJournal,Aug. 1922,p. 880. O’Mara 1 How I was mistaken for Isis leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi - and why it breaks my heart • By Iyad el-Baghdadi Islamic State chief Abu Bakr al-BaghdadiReuters On 26 December, I reported the latest speech by Islamic State (Isis) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on Twitter. A Russian media outlet made the incredible mistake of reporting that I was him, and that caught on in several more papers. Before the end of the week, even Twitter briefly blocked me before realising its mistake. But as well as being incredibly sloppy journalism, it's quite poignant that I was O’Mara 2 confused with the IS (Daesh) chief, seeing how the two "Baghdadis" are ideological competitors. I am anArab Spring activist who campaigns for an Arab world in which human rights are inviolable; he is the theocratic leader of a terrorist organisation pretending to be an Islamic State. Lookalike? I admit there are some similarities - we both wear a hat Iyad al-Baghdadi Except for the black headgear, I don't share much with the IS chief by way of resemblance. But pointedly enough, the Arab Spring and IS arise from the same pool of frustrations – they are both native revolutionary movements demanding radical change, competing for the psyche of the region's youth. The future Arab world they see can't be more different – but they both offer promises of dignity, unity, autonomy, prosperity and revival. The Arab Spring arose from a stagnant, unjust Arab order that failed to offer hope or dignity to its young population; it signalled a rejection of the status quo, which it sees as corrupt and wishes to replace it. It sought to apply relentless pressure to achieve reform – by ballots if possible, or by the overthrow of tyrannical rulers if necessary. It expressed an idealistic, non-chauvinistic pan-Arabism and sought to rediscover and correct Islam's role in our future. O’Mara 3 Respectively, IS arose from a broken Arab order, exploiting instability to ride a wave of disenfranchisement, despair and humiliation. It used the brutality of tyrannical regimes to amplify its message and appeal. It is virulently hostile towards all Arab regimes and seeks to undermine and topple them. And despite its unapologetic sectarianism, it paints itself to its followers as a pan-Islamic "state" in which Muslims are equal regardless their ethnicity. Polar opposites It crushes me every time someone falls for their evil – I wish I could have an hour's conversation with each one of these young people and make them see that there's another way But while the two movements are "revolutionary", the similarities seem to end here. Once we delve into how completely different the changes they want to bring, and how diametrically opposed their preferred mechanisms are, we start to see why Arab Spring activists such as myself are absolutely infuriated at IS and abhor it and its ilk. IS's vision is a horrific zombie of the Arab Spring's dreams. The Arab Spring wanted to achieve unity through a deep acceptance of diversity; it called for an open, civic nationalism. It campaigned for individual rights, and had Christians and Muslims, Sunnis and Shias, men and women protest shoulder to shoulder. It rejected sectarianism and "otherisation", and demonstrated an anti-authoritarian tendency that mistrusted anyone with too much power, demanding transparency and accountability. IS, in stark contrast, wants to impose a brutal "unity" through enforced uniformity, informed by a dismal black-or-white world view. It is an overtly sectarian state that unapologetically oppresses minorities, and even other Muslims. It sees individuals as dispensable and tramples their rights in the name of the collective – much like many of the old regimes do. It does not want to end tyranny – it only wishes to forcibly impose one with a religious mandate. O’Mara 4 Most importantly, the Arab Spring expressed a deep belief in the power of non-violence to bring about change; it started with a symbolic self-immolation rather than a violent attack. Its tool was mass protests filling the streets and squares of Arab cities to demand change. Although violence did break out occasionally in Arab Spring demonstrations and marches, the vast majority of it was directed at the protesters by officers or hired thugs of the regime. IS, on the other hand, deeply believes violence is the only way – one of its key manifestos is literally titled The Management Of Savagery. IS's blood lust is evil incarnate – proudly posting snuff videos in which they behead, burn, blow up and drown hapless prisoners. It openly boasts that its target is not peace but perpetual and unrelenting war against everyone who opposes it by any means necessary, be it terrorism or asymmetric warfare. Youth and radicalisation You can perhaps begin to see why it's infuriating for an Islamic libertarian to be confused for a terror mastermind. But what causes me the most anguish is IS's attempts to radicalise young men and women and sell them on its vision and ideas. What drives me to study radicalisationis the fact that the Arab Spring and IS compete for the psyche and support of youthful, angry, hopeful Arabs and Muslims. The best and most final revenge against IS is an Arab future in which they're irrelevant; an Arab future in which we find dignity without them We offer these youth diametrically opposite interpretations for the humiliating state of the Arab world; I insist it's because we have allowed unchecked power, abuse of rights and unaccountable rule. The "other" Baghdadi, on the other hand, says it's caused by native traitors and foreign conspirators because we failed to properly apply religious rules, leading to divine wrath and vengeance. What makes a young person susceptible to radicalisation revolves around identity, purpose and meaning. IS recruiters targets these soft spots, presenting a closed identity and a violent vision blasphemously packaged as "Islamic". It crushes me every time someone falls for its evil – I wish I could have an hour's conversation O’Mara 5 with each one of these young people and make them see there's another way. Arab Spring as solution IS had guns but we never did. Eventually, two counter-revolutionary axes assaulted our Arab Spring – one spearheaded by Saudi Arabia and another by Iran. The two regional powers continue to fight over the region, over the crushed homes and bodies of countless innocent civilians. But they cannot stem back the tide forever, as the demographics of the region mature and the world realises tyranny can no longer bring stability. IS and other extremisms are on the menu of ideas because they claim they'll achieve certain things – dignity, justice, unity and revival. The best and most sustainable way to defeat them is to outperform them in achieving those promises. We need to rob them the grievance that they continue to exploit. The best and most final revenge against IS is an Arab future in which they're irrelevant; an Arab future in which we find dignity without them. The Arab Spring is the world's best hope to end the cycle of tyranny and terrorism that the Arab world is stuck in. In the regional chess game, we are the underdog; but we also represent the concerns and aspirations of the average young man or woman who wants to live in peace, get along with his neighbours, and be free to pursue his own prosperity. The Arab Spring was never the problem; it's the solution.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Name:
Course:
Institutions:
Date:
The iron wall (4th November 1923)
The writer Ze’ec Jabotinsky claims that the reputation that people has concerning him is
not true. People have refuted him to be an enemy of the Arabs who wants them ejected from
Palestine. He says that his emotions and attitude towards the Arabs is the same as to all other
nations that is polite indifference. He is guided by two principles on the political life. For ...


Anonymous
Just the thing I needed, saved me a lot of time.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags