English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study examines Britain’s Middle Eastern policy discussions in relation to the future of Kurdistan. It argues that perceptions of the Kurdish question were significantly influenced by the conflicting strategies of the India Office and of the Foreign Office. The primary aim of this study is to examine Mark Sykes’s specific role in determining the future of Kurdistan by neglecting its cause in the post-Ottoman settlement, which has not been considered in the previous literature. Sykes’s views of the Kurds strongly influenced the British policy decision not to recognize the validity of the Kurdish question, and to leave the Kurds off the new map of the Middle East. In addition, this article identifies the role of Orientalist ideology, critiquing Sykes’s perception of the Kurdish question by applying a post-colonial approach primarily based on Edward Said’s theory. It concludes that Sykes’s understanding of Kurdistan was translated into the British policy-making process, both during the war and in the postwar period, which consequently contributed to the post-Ottoman complexity of the Kurdish question to this day.

The post-Ottoman order in the Middle East: Mark Sykes and the complexity of the Kurdish question