Anglo-French
Railway Agreements over
Syria 1909-1910
As
the first decade of the 20th Century
drew to a close, much of the world had been divided by the great
powers, notably Great Britain, France and Germany, into formal colonies
or informal spheres of influence. The major area lying outside of
these spheres was the Ottoman-controlled Middle East. As the
great powers struggles amongst themselves to gain influence in this
area, their primary tool was the railroad. By establishing a
railway contract within a Middle Eastern area the great power nation
could gain political and economic power over the affairs of that area.
In 1909-1910 Britain and France entered into a prolonged struggle over
the railway concessions in Syria. Both nations knew that by
gaining permission to build railroads in Syria they would be gaining
influence in the country as well as the ability to restrict the
activity of the other nation within Syria.
The leaders of the Ottoman Empire were aware both of the importance of
railroads in the establishing and maintaining of influence in a region
and of the imperialistic designs of the European powers upon areas
under Ottoman control. Therefore they supported the building
railroads that would consolidate Ottoman control and stave off advances
by the European powers. Two such railways were the Hijaz Railway,
connecting southern Syria, the Hijaz and the Yemen to the rest of the
Empire, and the planned Baghdad Railway,
which would do the same for southeastern Anatolia, northern Syria and
Mesopotamia. Britain and France were not particularly interested
in promoting Ottoman interest but they were willing to appease the
Turks when it furthered their goals.
This struggle over influence in Syria marked the beginnings of the
Anglo-French partition of the Middle East that would be facilitated
through the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 and would come to fruition
following WWI. These railway agreements divided the Middle East
into British and French spheres of influence, with the French gaining
exclusive access to Syria and the British to Mesopotamia. These
same divisions would form the basis for the future Sykes-Picot
Agreement. Not until 1918 would the British seriously challenge
French dominance in Syria but during the intervening years the British
would become increasingly aware of Syria’s significance in any
attempt
to defend Egypt and the Suez Canal from Eastern invasion (Khalidi,
1980, 113-186).
The Sykes-Picot Agreement contained a section specifically addressing
the importance of railways in the governing and control of the Middle
East:
"That
in area (a) the Baghdad
railway
shall not be extended southwards beyond Mosul, and in area (b)
northwards beyond Samarra, until a railway connecting Baghdad and
Aleppo via the Euphrates valley has been completed, and then only with
the concurrence of the two governments.
That
Great Britain has the right to
build, administer, and be sole owner of a railway connecting Haifa with
area (b), and shall have a perpetual right to transport troops along
such a line at all times. It is to be understood by both governments
that this railway is to facilitate the connection of Baghdad with Haifa
by rail, and it is further understood that, if the engineering
difficulties and expense entailed by keeping this connecting line in
the brown area only make the project unfeasible, that the French
government shall be prepared to consider that the line in question may
also traverse the Polgon Banias Keis Marib Salkhad tell Otsda Mesmie
before reaching area (b)." - terms of the Sykes-Picot Agreement,
1916
click
here
to view the map to which the statement refers