Kurdistan as a separate post-WWI League of Nations mandate?

In the wake of WWI, when the former Ottoman Empire was being carved up, could Kurdistan have been established as a protectorate separate from Iraq and Turkey?
 
In the wake of WWI, when the former Ottoman Empire was being carved up, could Kurdistan have been established as a protectorate separate from Iraq and Turkey?

Actually, it was, under the original Treaty signed at Sevres. However, there were problems with implementing this. Large Kurd and Kurd-Turk inhabitated areas were arbitarily assigned to mega-Armenia, and whereas Britain occupied southern Kurdistan with Mosul, northern Kurdistan was under Turkish control. If I'm not misinformed, during the Turkish War of Independence, the Kurds mostly sided with Turkey. They had both been loyal to the Ottoman Empire, they were both Muslim, and they were both unenthusiastic about living in Armenia or western puppet-states.

At the end of the war, the Turks expected to get Mosul and southern Kurdistan back. The border with Iraq wasn't officially defined until much later, and I believe abandoning the claim was controversial.

So basically, that was already the plan, but it failed because at this point the Kurds were siding with Turkey against the implementation of Sevres.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Actually, it was, under the original Treaty signed at Sevres. However, there were problems with implementing this. Large Kurd and Kurd-Turk inhabitated areas were arbitarily assigned to mega-Armenia, and whereas Britain occupied southern Kurdistan with Mosul, northern Kurdistan was under Turkish control. If I'm not misinformed, during the Turkish War of Independence, the Kurds mostly sided with Turkey. They had both been loyal to the Ottoman Empire, they were both Muslim, and they were both unenthusiastic about living in Armenia or western puppet-states.

At the end of the war, the Turks expected to get Mosul and southern Kurdistan back. The border with Iraq wasn't officially defined until much later, and I believe abandoning the claim was controversial.

So basically, that was already the plan, but it failed because at this point the Kurds were siding with Turkey against the implementation of Sevres.

My point exactly, Ataturk need to lose his wars for it being possible, and Mega Armenia with those borders would never had happened anyway, weren't enough Armenians to handle such amount of territory.
 
So, if the Ottomans get particularly badly beaten in WWI and Ataturk's independence wars fail, it's plausible?

Oh, good. I just needed to know for a TL I'm doing, and in bizzaro-WWI, the Ottomans lose so badly that Russia gets Constantinople and the Bosporous as an exclave, while the rest of Thrace is divided between Greece and Bulgaria. Greece also gets the Dardanelles. Also, I butterflied Ataturk.
 
Last edited:
So, if the Ottomans get particularly badly beaten in WWI and Ataturk's independence wars fail, it's plausible?

Oh, good. I just needed to know for a TL I'm doing, and in bizzaro-WWI, the Ottomans lose so badly that Russia gets Constantinople and the Bosporous as an exclave, while the rest of Thrace is divided between Greece and Hungary. Greece also gets the Dardanelles. Also, I butterflied Ataturk.

Hungary?

...Hungary?

...Hungary?

I'm guessing you meant Bulgaria.

Well, the Russians getting Constantinople is actually way more plausible than Greece, in my opinion. Russia has the resources to hold it down, if it's a Tsarist autocracy it doesn't have to worry about popular opinion, and it can''t be restrained by the Entente powers. So yeah, if the Ottomans lose hard, that's possible.

While I totally believe that Great Men can and do have an effect, I'm pretty certain that all other things being the same in October, 1918, another decorated officer will emerge to lead the Turks. This will have enormous butterflies, of course, but the War of Indepedence should still happen. It was a natural offshoot of enforcing a Carthiginian peace on an intact army.

Of course in your scenario, all other things are not equal. Point is moot.
 
Of course in your scenario, all other things are not equal. Point is moot.

Very true. Russia's a liberal constitutional monarchy, Germany encompasses everything from Bohemia, Prussia and Austria to all of modern-day Alsace and Lorraine, Germany, Italy and Russia are allied against Britain, France and the Ottomans, Germany has a lease on Vladivostok, France has turned to authoritarianism between the end of the Second French Empire and the start of WWI...

You get the idea. There are so many goddamn butterflies it's not funny.
 
Top