1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
aliya0001 [1]
3 years ago
14

What did the British and French mandates in the Middle East have in common?

History
2 answers:
storchak [24]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

Both mandates, do not respect the ethnic and historical differences of the people who lived in that territory and formalized borders that were not recognized by the inhabitants

Explanation:

  • The French Mandate of Syria (called the French Mandate of Syria and Lebanon until 1922), was a mandate of the League of Nations on the northern part of Syria and on Lebanon, the two territories were previously part of the Ottoman Empire. The mandate was created after the First World War and through the partition of the Ottoman Empire, determined by the victorious powers, being the most benefited France and the United Kingdom. During the two years that followed the end of the war in 1918 and according to the terms agreed in the Sykes-Picot Agreement signed by the British and French, it was the British who controlled the vast majority of Ottoman Mesopotamia (now Iraq) and part from Ottoman Syria (Palestine and Transjordan), while the French controlled the rest of Syria, Lebanon, Alexandreta and other parts of southeastern Turkey. In the early part of the 1920s, the League of Nations formalized the control imposed by the British and the French over these territories by a system of mandates and the Mandate of the League of Nations of Syria was assigned to France on September 29. 1923, which included the territories that today constitute the current states of Syria and Lebanon. The administration of the region under French control was carried through several governments and different territories, including the Federation of Syria (1922-24), the State of Syria (1924-30) and the Republic of Syria (1930-1958) , as well as the smaller states of Greater Lebanon, the Territory of the Alawites and the State of Yébel Druz. The French mandate of Syria lasted until 1943, when two countries emerged, the current Syria and Lebanon and also the Hatay Province, which had joined Turkey in 1939. French troops withdrew from Syria in 1946.
  • The British Mandate of Palestine was a territorial administration entrusted by the League of Nations to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the Middle East, following the First World War and as part of the partition of the Ottoman Empire, with the status of low territory mandate. The territory on which it was established corresponded to the southern region of the Mediterranean Levante, a region that the Ottoman Empire lost as a result of its defeat in the war. Although the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland administered these territories de facto from 1917, the Mandate entered into force in June of 1922 and expired in May of 1948. At first it included the present territories of Jordan, Israel and the present Palestine , although from September of 1922 the United Kingdom separated the Eastern part of the same, creating the Emirate of Transjordania.
sweet [91]3 years ago
5 0
They ignored the realities of the region when they set their artificial boundaries and they did not have a consistent governance model
You might be interested in
When we’re fully automatic weapons banned
skad [1K]

The domestic manufacture of new machine guns that civilians could purchase was effectively banned by language in the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 (also known as "McClure-Volkmer"). The language was added in an amendment from William J. Hughes and referred to as the Hughes Amendment.

5 0
3 years ago
Which of the following were reasons the colonies were dissatisfied (unhappy) with Great Britain? (Select all the apply)
tiny-mole [99]
E hope that helped lmk if it’s right have a good night
5 0
3 years ago
 What is an ironic conclusion that can be drawn about Andersonville Prison?
gizmo_the_mogwai [7]

its actually D). The Confederacy could afford to move a large number of prisoners hundreds of miles, but could not afford to feed and house the prisoners.

5 0
3 years ago
Name the court case that established judicial review
mario62 [17]
Marbury vs. madison established this.
3 0
4 years ago
The four leading global hubs of maritime trade of this period were
eduard
Your answer will be -Cairo Quanzhou Melaka and Quilon
5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What was ONE important outcome in the Atlanta Campaign of 1864?
    10·1 answer
  • Which use the boldfaced vocabulary word correctly?
    11·2 answers
  • What word/ words relate best to the house of burgesses ?
    5·2 answers
  • How did steamships transform immigration?
    11·1 answer
  • Adolph hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Josef Stalin could all be classified as
    14·1 answer
  • Which of the following were French motivations for the colonization of Indochina? The French saw Indochina as a market for Frenc
    6·2 answers
  • What did the people in Greece use to bye and sell goods?
    5·1 answer
  • What is another name for the public land strip and where was it located​
    5·1 answer
  • ⁺xoxo, answer fast pls! <3
    9·1 answer
  • William Penn was the of Pennsylvania
    14·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!