British Syria post WW1 Consequences?

So, this is something I've been pondering for a time.

Let's say post World War One, Britain gets Syria instead of France. Would they promise Abdullah of the Hejaz Syria as his own Kingdom to rule as a thank you for aiding them against the Ottomans? If they did, how stable/long term would Hashemite Syria be? And secondly what changes in the region as a consequence? Does Faisal still get Iraq? What would the French get if not Syria?
 
So, this is something I've been pondering for a time.

Let's say post World War One, Britain gets Syria instead of France. Would they promise Abdullah of the Hejaz Syria as his own Kingdom to rule as a thank you for aiding them against the Ottomans? If they did, how stable/long term would Hashemite Syria be? And secondly what changes in the region as a consequence? Does Faisal still get Iraq? What would the French get if not Syria?

Faisal's original plan was to become king of Syria rather than Iraq and the British would probably be fine with this. So Syria becomes a monarchy under a British mandate like OTL Transjordan and Iraq, with Faisal as the monarch. Abdullah would become the King of Iraq in this scenario. I don't see any particular reason why Hashemite Syria should be unstable. The Hashemites had more support and legitimacy in Syria than they ever did in Iraq. They're Sunni Arabs just like the majority of Syrians. A lot of Syria's OTL problems were the results of the French playing divide and rule with the various minorities. If the British rule the way they did in OTL Transjordan and Iraq then this will be less of an issue.

Even if the French do not get the Syrian interior they had the strongest interest and influence in the coast so you might still have a French Lebanon and possibly Latakia and Alexandretta too.

Borders would be a bit different. A British Syria would include the territory that became Transjordan in OTL. The sanjak Of Zor will likely be attached to Iraq rather than Syria (it's more natural and came close to happening even in OTL with a French Syria). If British Syria still includes Alexandretta then Syria may retain it forever. Without having to compromise with France the British can draw the Palestine-Syria border however they wish. They may set the borders of the Palestine mandate to include the Golan heights.

In OTL the British tried to trade the French a greater share of Germany's colonies in return for Syria so that's the easiest answer to what France gets instead.
 
Faisal's original plan was to become king of Syria rather than Iraq and the British would probably be fine with this. So Syria becomes a monarchy under a British mandate like OTL Transjordan and Iraq, with Faisal as the monarch. Abdullah would become the King of Iraq in this scenario. I don't see any particular reason why Hashemite Syria should be unstable. The Hashemites had more support and legitimacy in Syria than they ever did in Iraq. They're Sunni Arabs just like the majority of Syrians. A lot of Syria's OTL problems were the results of the French playing divide and rule with the various minorities. If the British rule the way they did in OTL Transjordan and Iraq then this will be less of an issue.

Even if the French do not get the Syrian interior they had the strongest interest and influence in the coast so you might still have a French Lebanon and possibly Latakia and Alexandretta too.

Borders would be a bit different. A British Syria would include the territory that became Transjordan in OTL. The sanjak Of Zor will likely be attached to Iraq rather than Syria (it's more natural and came close to happening even in OTL with a French Syria). If British Syria still includes Alexandretta then Syria may retain it forever. Without having to compromise with France the British can draw the Palestine-Syria border however they wish. They may set the borders of the Palestine mandate to include the Golan heights.

In OTL the British tried to trade the French a greater share of Germany's colonies in return for Syria so that's the easiest answer to what France gets instead.

Interesting this would definitely terrify the Sauds then, and I do wonder if Abdullah might be more successful in holding Iraq
 
Lebanon would definitely still become a French Mandate, they had a long history in the area so there was no way that they'd agree to anyone else gaining it. There's also the fact that if Britain is effectively gaining most of the Middle East they need to give France something otherwise they're going to make trouble over other things at Versailles, plus recognising France's—IIRC token—contribution to the Palestine Campaign.
 
I'm actually working on a scenario where Britain takes Syria. It's a part of a larger Hashemite scenario, a wank really, which leads to a 'unified' Arab Middle East, in case you're interested (not to detract or distract from this thread).

Interesting this would definitely terrify the Sauds then, and I do wonder if Abdullah might be more successful in holding Iraq

Out of all the brothers, Ali, Abdullah, Faisal, and Zeid, Abdullah was known as the most politically adept and ambitious. He was offered the crown of Iraq around the time that Faisal's Syria declared independence in OTL. It would've been tough but I think Abdullah would've found some way to wrangle Iraq. Then if the royal family survived long enough to have Hussein on the throne then that'd be really interesting. Hussein is historically viewed as one of the great 'survivors' of Middle Eastern politics and having him in charge of Iraq would be supremely interesting!
 
I'm actually working on a scenario where Britain takes Syria. It's a part of a larger Hashemite scenario, a wank really, which leads to a 'unified' Arab Middle East, in case you're interested (not to detract or distract from this thread).



Out of all the brothers, Ali, Abdullah, Faisal, and Zeid, Abdullah was known as the most politically adept and ambitious. He was offered the crown of Iraq around the time that Faisal's Syria declared independence in OTL. It would've been tough but I think Abdullah would've found some way to wrangle Iraq. Then if the royal family survived long enough to have Hussein on the throne then that'd be really interesting. Hussein is historically viewed as one of the great 'survivors' of Middle Eastern politics and having him in charge of Iraq would be supremely interesting!
I’d love to read that timeline!

And a hundred percent agree. Hussein as king of Iraq would be fascinating
 
Top