WI: Mandate of Mecca?

427px-Sykes-Picot.svg.png


What were the chances that either France, or the UK establishes a mandate territory over the Arabian strip of land bordering the Arabian Sea after WWI?

What could be the impetus for such and how do you think it would effect the short term and long term history of the middle east?
 
It didn't happen because the Saudis were defeating the British and French Forces and the Turks were wrecking the British and French as well.

The San Remo Conference was a result of a series of Saudi and Turkish victories that laid the modern borders of today's middle east.

Originally Raqqah, Deir Ezzor and Hasakah Province were to be part of Iraq, but Turkish Victories and Saudi Advances wrecked that and forced the Sykes-Picot agreement to be null and void.

The British were barely able to check the Saudi Advance on the Jordanian Strip that allows Jordan to border Iraq.
 
Area on map is coastal area of Nejd and Mecca locates in coast of Red Sea. So both you mean, Nejd or Mecca?
 

Delta Force

Banned
If you really mean the Persian Gulf (the red zone along the coast), that would obviously involve putting many of the world's larger petroleum fields under the control of a single great power.
 
If you really mean the Persian Gulf (the red zone along the coast), that would obviously involve putting many of the world's larger petroleum fields under the control of a single great power.
That might be a problem apart from the fact that nobody realized it existed at the time, ;) afterwards it might make for problems but in 20s its fine and anyway who would be able and willing to stop GB in 20s ?
 
Area on map is coastal area of Nejd and Mecca locates in coast of Red Sea. So both you mean, Nejd or Mecca?

No, the map outlines OTL mandate territories.

I'm asking What if the opposite side of the arabian peninsula was included as a mandate as well. (Hedjaz region)
 
No, the map outlines OTL mandate territories.

I'm asking What if the opposite side of the arabian peninsula was included as a mandate as well. (Hedjaz region)

This probably would cause pretty bad blood between extremist Muslims and Western World when infidels control holiest city of Islam. Might be that there would even worse extremist Islam problem.
 
I'm asking What if the opposite side of the arabian peninsula was included as a mandate as well. (Hedjaz region)
Well the British had already been actively courting/supporting Hussein bin Ali which means you'd need to have that changed. IIRC the Hashemite's declared the Kingdom of Hejaz in 1916, does anyone happen to know when in 1916 that was and if it was before or after the Sykes-Picot Agreement was reached?
 

LordKalvert

Banned
Mecca was specifically excluded by the allied powers who recognized the importance of the city- the earliest agreements stipulated that Mecca and Medina would be under the control of an "independent Muslim power"
 
Nobody would ever even consider that. Critically from the British POV, Hijaz was ruled by a independent British ally, however minor, whose cooperation had been instrumental in defeating the Ottomans.
There was not even the slightest shadow of a claim over the land in question by any non-Muslim country. The most valuable known resource in the area was, well, revenue from the pilgrimage and the associated prestige among Muslims (it is still the case now, for the most part), something that any non-Muslim country could hardly consider aspiring to.
And of course, everyone would be aware that it would be seen, to put it mildly, as a major irritation to all Muslims. I am not sure that general Jihad would follow in the given timeframe, critically because, among other things, there might be a lack of recognized authority with the ability to proclaim such Jihad. But, at any rate, it would be a surefire way to secure lots of headaches to colonial empires who already ruled tens of millions of Muslims, many of whom already fairly unsympathetic to say the least, for absolutely no gain whatsoever.
 
Top