Max Nordau, On Zionism (1905)

‘Max Nordau, On Zionism’ is a passage from Max’s 1905 overview on Zionism

(Wiesner-Hanks 317). There are two generations: one that was influenced by Mendelssohn’s

theories and views of the Jewish religion, and another taking a different approach to address the

Zionist question, diverging from the traditional path of past generations (Wiesner-Hanks 317).

This new generation chooses a different approach to the ‘Mission of Judaism’. Instead of

following the mission, which states that Jews must be spread out among the nations to educate

them slowly to pure rationalism (Wiesner-Hanks 317), they believe that it is impossible to be

dispersed in nations full of harm and hate without there being consequences to their beings

(Wiesner-Hanks 317). They would be molded into others and wouldn’t fully flourish into who

they are. The goal is a slow process, more like a distant dream where they can be normal people

with land and rules following their own structure (Wiesner-Hanks 317). In this way, it is similar

to the old ways of Zionism (Wiesner-Hanks 317). Yet, instead of waiting for a miracle to happen,

they use political powers and their strength and resources to achieve this dream (Wiesner-Hanks

317).

This new Zionism has risen partly due to the ambition of modern educated Jews to

preserve the ancient stock for the furthest future possible (Wiesner-Hanks 317). It is also affected

by two things: the national idea and international politics, and second is Anti-Semitism

(Wiesner-Hanks 318). The national idea inspired many to wish for independence, but later

transformed into hating foreigners; this caused Jews to think more deeply and discover national

individuality (Wiesner-Hanks 318). Jews were outcasted by other nations who emphasized the

differences between them and the Jews (Wiesner-Hanks 318). Antisemitism has taught many

Jews to find their way back to their roots(Wiesner-Hanks 318). Many Zionists used Antisemitism
as a means to reflect upon relations with other nations(Wiesner-Hanks 318). The Zionism that

has been analyzed is that of free educated Jews, while those who are weak will continue to

suffer(Wiesner-Hanks 319). They both share the same goal of the national Jewish reunion

(Wiesner-Hanks 319). These are the differences between these types of people who take a

different approach to Zionism.

Sultan Abdul Mejid, Imperial Rescript (1856)

The ‘Imperial Rescript’ is an official proclamation written by Sultan Abdul Mejid of the

Ottoman Empire (Wiesner-Hanks 324). It aims to ensure equal treatment for all citizens

regardless of their race, language, or religion, addressing the violence against non-Turkish

groups that often led them to leave Ottoman rule (Wiesner-Hanks 324). The Sultan confirms and

upholds the rights and protections granted to religious communities by previous rulers

(Wiesner-Hanks 325). Non-Muslim communities, such as Christians, will verify their rights

within their own group under the Sultan's supervision (Wiesner-Hanks 325). They won't incur

extra fees but will provide a set amount to local leaders for repairs (Wiesner-Hanks 325).

Everyone will have the freedom to practice any religion without fear of coercion

(Wiesner-Hanks 325). Trials for those wronged will be public, with witnesses swearing on their

holy books (Wiesner-Hanks 326). Ottoman law and police organizations will ensure people feel

safe and protected (Wiesner-Hanks 326). Land can be bought and sold, and taxes will be uniform

for all (Wiesner-Hanks 326). Lastly,he closes off by saying each state must submit a report on

their annual budget and processes, and threats to agriculture and commerce will be eliminated

(Wiesner-Hanks 326).
Cecil Rhodes, From Confessions of Faith (1877)

Ceicil Rhodes's 'Confessions of Faith' is an extract from his thoughts on power and racial

identity (Wiesner-Hanks 328). Everyone has a goal in life and each works hard to achieve that

goal (Wiesner-Hanks 328). Cecil’s dream was to be of use to his country; he found that the

English weren’t bringing in as many humans due to lack of land (Wiesner-Hanks 328).As the

greatest race, it would better if more english inhabited these nations (Wiesner-Hanks 328).He

believed that the more land that the Anglo-Saxon race, the more influence they would have,

leading to end of all wars (Wiesner-Hanks 328).

His idea was to form a secret society, with one goal to further the reach of the British

Empire, bringing the fragmented world under one rule (Wiesner-Hanks 329).Using America as

an example of failure, he goes to talk about their government and how all problems would be

solved under British rule (Wiesner-Hanks 329). He asserted that an English father would never

bring his child to another country's land (Wiesner-Hanks 329). He stated that Africa still has

potential and we should seize the opportunity (Wiesner-Hanks 329).He believed it is our duty to

acquire as much territory as possible, to increase the Anglo-Saxon race, the best race the world

treasures (Wiesner-Hanks 329).

 Ottoman Empire: The Young Turks & Armenian Genocide

The Ottoman Empire faced a turbulent decline in the early 20th century, coinciding with

the rise of the Young Turks in 1908. This nationalist group aimed to unify the empire under

Turkish nationalism, but their agenda had tragic consequences for the Armenian populace. The

Young Turks initiated the Armenian Genocide, viewing Armenians as a threat and subjecting

them to discrimination and oppression, which laid the groundwork for further atrocities.Despite

their desire for modernization, the Young Turks' nationalist ideology resulted in the suppression

of ethnic and religious minorities, particularly Armenians. Their decision to ally with Germany

and Austria-Hungary during World War I further tarnished their legacy. Their siding with

Germany resulted in the Young Turks drawing all of the middle east into what had been at

this point a European war (Wiesner-Hanks 765). The aftermath of the genocide continued to

haunt the region, shaping the establishment of modern-day Turkey and serving as a cautionary

tale of the dangers of unchecked power and persecution.

The Young Turks, a nationalist and modernist political movement, gained control of the

Ottoman Empire in the early 20th century. They were driven by a fervent Turkish nationalism,

viewed the Armenians as a threat to their political ambitions and embarked on a systematic

campaign of mass killings and deportations, now recognized as the Armenian Genocide. Other

laws will be passed, which will force the Armenians to vacate their homes. And in the name of

national security, the Armenians are going to be deported away from important cities and

deported into the desert area - isolated areas within the empire (Gorman,Eastern Front & U.S

Entry). They had been driven into the Syrian Desert and were later discovered at As-Salt in

northern Jordan (Wiesner-Hanks 764).Through a series of coordinated attacks, forced

relocations, and systematic executions, the Young Turk regime sought to eliminate the Armenian

presence from the Ottoman lands, resulting in many casualties.

The Young Turks, a group of progressive, nationalist, and modernist Ottoman

intellectuals and military officers, were deeply dissatisfied with the ineffective and autocratic

rule of the Ottoman Sultanate. Driven by a desire for reform and a rejection of the outdated

imperial system, they organized a revolution that overthrew the Sultan and established a new

constitutional government. The Young Turks' rise to power marked a significant turning point in

Ottoman history, as they sought to transform the empire into a more centralized, secular, and

efficient state. However, this would later lead to the brutal suppression of minority groups, most

notably the Armenian Genocide, would come to define the legacy of the Young Turk movement.

The Young Turk movement was driven by a potent blend of nationalism and a desire for

modernization within the Ottoman Empire. Seeking to centralize power and transform the empire

into a more cohesive, efficient state, the Young Turks embraced a fervent nationalism that often

came at the expense of minority groups. This nationalist ideology manifested in the suppression

and persecution of ethnic and religious minorities, most notably the Armenians, who faced

unspeakable atrocities in the form of the Armenian Genocide. The Young Turks' vision of a

strong, unified Ottoman state relied on the marginalization and elimination of populations they

deemed threats to their nationalist ambitions.

The Armenian people had a long-standing presence within the Ottoman Empire, having

inhabited the region for centuries. However, their status as a minority group subjected them to

consistent discrimination and oppression at the hands of the ruling Sultanate. Authorities made

efforts to convert Armenian Christians (Wiesner-Hanks 422). The rationale for attacking the

Armenian people - is this idea was spread that the Armenians sided with the Russians. Even
though the Armenians were part of the Ottoman Empire, the Young Turks spread the idea that the

Armenians were actually working for Russia, Why? Because the Armenians were Christian

(Gorman,Eastern Front & U.S Entry). Armenian Christians were viewed as second-class citizens,

facing severe restrictions on their religious practices, economic opportunities, and political

rights. They were forced to pay heavy taxes and were often the targets of violent attacks by

Ottoman authorities and Turkish nationalist groups. After the Armenian genocide only 100,000

to 200,000 armenians survived (Wiesner-Hanks 764).This marginalization of the Armenian

community laid the bricks for the tragic events that would occur under the rule of the Young

Turks.

In conclusion, the Young Turks' decision to ally the Ottoman Empire with Germany and

Austria-Hungary during World War I ultimately proved to be a catastrophic mistake. As the war

raged on, the once-mighty Ottoman state found itself on the losing side, its imperial ambitions

crumbling in the face of military defeat. Amidst the chaos and upheaval of the war, the Young

Turks further cemented their legacy of infamy by orchestrating the systematic massacre of the

empire's Armenian population, a heinous act now recognized as the Armenian Genocide.The

collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the downfall of the Young Turk regime marked an important

moment in the region's history. The legacy of the Young Turks, once hailed as progressive

reformers, became forever tainted by the atrocities they committed against the Armenian people.

The aftermath of the genocide continued to haunt the region, contributing to the establishment of

the modern Republic of Turkey, which struggled to come to terms with its dark historical legacy.

The Young Turks' nationalist authoritarian tendencies had led to the destruction of the very

empire they sought to preserve, a cautionary tale of the dangers of unchecked power and the

persecution of vulnerable minority groups.

 World War I: Treaty of Versailles Impact on the Middle East

With the end of World War I, the victorious Allied powers gathered in Versailles to

dictate the terms of peace. The Treaty of Versailles, signed in 1919, had a profound impact on the

Middle East region. Among its many provisions, the treaty called for the dissolution of the

Ottoman Empire, which had controlled much of the Middle East for centuries. This led to the

division of the former Ottoman territories into new nation-states, often with little regard for

existing ethnic, religious, or cultural boundaries. Promises of independence made to Arab

leaders were largely brushed aside, and Britain and France extended their power in the

middle east, taking advantage of the breakup of the Ottoman Empire (Wiesner-Hanks

746). The treaty granted control over these newly formed nations to the European colonial

powers, notably Britain and France, who began to redraw the map of the Middle East according

to their own strategic and economic interestsThis arbitrary carving up of the region sowed the

seeds of conflict and instability that would reverberate throughout the 20th century and into the

present day.

The Treaty of Versailles, aimed to reshape the global landscape in the aftermath of World

War I. Two key provisions of the treaty were reparations and disarmament. Germany was

required to pay massive sums in reparations to the Allied powers, crippling its economy and

fostering resentment. Germany had to accept what's known as the War Guilt Clause. That

basically means that Germany accepts full blame and responsibility for the war, as if Germany

caused the war and therefore should be punished for the war (Gorman, Treaty of

Versailles).Additionally, the treaty imposed strict limits on Germany's military, prohibiting the

country from maintaining a sizable armed forces(Gorman, Treaty of Versailles). Germany has to

disarm its military and decommission those dreaded U-boats. And then Germany had to pay
reparation (Gorman, Treaty of Versailles).These measures were intended to prevent Germany

from ever again posing a threat to its neighbors. Territorial changes were also a significant

component of the treaty, as it redrew the map of Europe and the Middle East. The Ottoman

Empire's dissolution led to the creation of new nation-states, such as Iraq and Syria, which were

placed under the control of European colonial powers. These dramatic shifts in the geopolitical

landscape would have far-reaching consequences, ultimately setting the stage for future conflicts.

The collapse of the once-mighty Ottoman Empire following World War I left a power

vacuum in the Middle East. In the wake of the Ottoman defeat, the victorious Allied powers

sought to carve up the region according to their own strategic and economic interests. The

Sykes-Picot Agreement, a secret deal made between Britain and France in 1916, divided the

Middle East into spheres of influence, ignoring the wishes and aspirations of the local

populations. They planned that once the Ottoman Empire was defeated, they would break-up the

empire and gobble-up all its land - where Great Britain would take the land of Palestine, which

includes the city of Jerusalem, the area of Jordan, and Iraq. Whereas France would take Lebanon,

Syria, and parts of Turkey (Gorman, Treaty of Versailles).This arbitrary redrawing of borders

would have profound and long-lasting consequences, sowing the seeds of conflict that continue

to this day. The dismantling of the Ottoman Empire and the imposition of colonial rule by the

European powers set the stage for a tumultuous century in the Middle East, as various nationalist

and religious movements emerged to challenge the new order.

After the conclusion of World War I, the victorious Allied powers sought to reorganize

the former Ottoman territories in the Middle East. Article 22 of the covenant of the League of

Nations established a mandate system, where by territories previously controlled by the

defeated states, principally the ottoman Empire and Imperial Germany, were given to
individual states among the allied powers as “Advanced nations” to administer as a sacred

trust for the benefit of its “native people”(Wiesner-Hanks 746) .Under this system, the newly

formed League of Nations granted specific powers to various Allied nations to govern and

develop certain regions that had previously been under Ottoman control. The British Mandate of

Palestine was one such example, where the United Kingdom was entrusted with administrative

authority over the territory of historic Palestine. This Mandate period, which lasted from 1920 to

1948, would set the stage for the complex political and territorial disputes that would unfold in

the region in the years to come.

The Balfour Declaration, issued in 1917 by the British government, expressed its support

in creating a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. This declaration was seen as a

major step towards the creation of a dream, as it provided official British backing for the Zionist

movement.And this is known as the Zionist Movement - a national home for the Jewish people

(Gorman, Treaty of Versailles). And a scattering of the Jewish people is known as the Jewish

Diaspora. And there had already been a movement to establish a Jewish home state with

Jerusalem being the capital. The Balfour Declaration also conflicted with previous promises

made by the British to the Arab population in the region. During the war, the British had made

agreements with the Arab leaders, promising them independence and self-governance in

exchange for their support against the Ottoman Empire. This created a challenging situation

where the British had made contradictory pledges to both the Jews and the Arabs.

In conclusion, the aftermath of World War I, the treaties that followed, notably the Treaty

of Versailles, profoundly shaped the Middle East in good and bad. The division of former

Ottoman territories and imposition of colonial rule created a fragmented and volatile geopolitical

landscape, ignoring the region's complex social and religious dynamics. These actions sowed
deep-seated divisions, mistrust, and unresolved conflicts that continue to reverberate today.The

failure to consider the aspirations and grievances of diverse Middle Eastern populations

exacerbated tensions and fueled resentment towards foreign powers. Mandates and agreements

like the Sykes-Picot Agreement further alienated local communities. This legacy of external

interference shapes the region's political, social, and economic dynamics, hindering stability and

cooperation.Understanding the historical context of these treaties is crucial for addressing

contemporary challenges. It provides insight into deep-seated grievances and the interplay of

local and global interests. By acknowledging this history and working towards inclusive

solutions, there is hope for creating a better future.