MUSIC - Rule Britannia
Although WWI began in 1914 the military efforts of Great Britain in the Middle East were still negligible in 1916 when the Sykes-Picot Agreement was formed. Neither the British nor French had leverage when making the agreement and so the terms were fairly equitable and followed the precedent established in 1909-10 through the Anglo-French railroad agreement. However, by 1918 the situation had changed dramatically. Great Britain has expended considerable military resources moving north from Egypt into the Ottoman Empire. The military had moved all the way to Mosul, in northern Iraq, and the British felt that their military efforts should be rewarded. They did not like the fact that, according to the terms of the Sykes-Picot Agreement, after the war they would need to give to the French land they were currently occupying. They considered the territory they had won through military might theirs by right and were willing to pressure France to make concessions. The French had frequently offered to help Great Britain obtain its military objectives in the Middle East but their help was always refused. This refusal allowed Great Britain to maintain its leverage and justification for change in the division of the Middle East. (McTague. 1982, 101) & (Hughes, 1999, 143).
In addition to pressuring the French to make concessions based on British military efforts, the British also used Syrian nationalism and the WWI drive towards self-determination to tip negotiations in favor of Great Britain. As the war came to a close American President Woodrow Wilson increased his call for governmental self-determination in areas freed from imperial domination. The Middle Eastern areas previously controlled by the Ottoman Empire fit this definition and so were prime candidates for national self-determination. Clearly the British did not want self-determination in the areas assigned to them, but they realized that the threat of nationalism could be used to pressure the French to make concessions in the areas designated for French control. This tactic was made more effective by the good relationship enjoyed between Great Britain and the Syrian national leader Feisal (Hughes, 1999, 143).