Introduction to Symposium on the Many Lives and Legacies of Sykes-Picot

Abstract

Although their motivations varied, many senior British officials who were expert in imperial and Middle-Eastern matters condemned the Sykes-Picot treaty as a mistake almost as soon as it was signed. T.E. Lawrence wanted the British government to repudiate it and was assured by Gilbert Clayton, the head of the Arab Bureau in Cairo, in a letter he wrote to Lawrence in 1917, that “‘It is in fact dead and, if we wait quietly, this fact will soon be realized’.” Lord Curzon denounced the treaty as “not only obsolete ‘but absolutely impracticable,’” and further declared that only “gross ignorance” could account for the boundary lines in the treaty. Sir Mark Sykes was said to be ashamed of his involvement in the Treaty that was to bear his name. Despite these efforts, so soon after its birth, to announce the demise and irrelevance of Sykes-Picot, its complex, variegated, and evolving legacy has survived and is still very much with us.

Public Reactions to Secret Negotiations in International Politics

“…The agreement, leaked by newly empowered Bolsheviks in Russia in 1917, indicated that the UK government intended to renege on its promises it made to Arab nations. While the legacy of Sykes-Picot is contested, the secret agreement is characterized as a critical part of Middle East history (Anghie, 2016). Since truly secret agreements are by their nature difficult to quantify, it is hard to know how many of them exist.…”