Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Empires at War1911-1923$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Robert Gerwarth and Erez Manela

Print publication date: 2014

Print ISBN-13: 9780198702511

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: August 2014

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198702511.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 16 June 2019

Empires at the Paris Peace Conference

Empires at the Paris Peace Conference

Chapter:
(p.254) 13 Empires at the Paris Peace Conference
Source:
Empires at War
Author(s):

Leonard V. Smith

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198702511.003.0014

This chapter shows how peacemaking and empire disrupted each other after the Great War. As peacemaking moved beyond what had been the Western Front, the Paris Peace Conference gradually became a conference of empires motivated by imperial preoccupations. Even writing the Treaty of Versailles laid bare some of the troublesome characteristics of empires after 1919. The Covenant of the League of Nations created the mandate system, which posed a structural, ideological challenge to the very notion of empire. Mandates were supposed to be self-determining states in the making, not colonies. Accepting a Class A mandate meant accepting a “colony” with an expiration date, as well as formal accountability to the League. Peacemaking and empire disrupted each other most radically in the Middle East. The Arabic-speaking former Ottoman domains became Class A mandates, and housed populations resentful that they had not been given immediate independence, as successor states had been in Europe. In Syria and Lebanon, the postwar French imperial hub wet to some trouble to acquire troublesome spokes of debatable commercial or strategic value. The Treaty of Sèvres, made with the regime of the sultan, provided for the de facto partition of Anatolia according to allied imperial interests. But the real locus of sovereignty had shifted to Greek and Turkish successor states, which settled the matter through renewed war. The British attempted to secure some vestige of imperial interests in the Chanak Crisis of 1922, by asking for Dominion support in the event of renewed war with the forces of Mustafa Kemal. When the Dominions refused, the British Empire for a moment ceased to function as a unitary agent. If an empire cannot command, how is it an empire?

Keywords:   Empires, First World War, League of Nations, Paris Peace Treaties

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .