New Page 1

In my previous article "The Kurdish rising in Turkey" I wrote in March 20, above all I pointed out, "The Britishers will probably try to send unlucky Assurian battalions to capture sandjak Hakkjari, which they lost to Turks last autumn. This way they will try to regain the strategic heights to defend the Mosul oil".

45 days had hardly passed since then when we saw what we had forseen was partially realized. A very important cable was sent from Angora11 on April 16:

"Gangs of Aissors (" Assyrian battalions" referred by F. Atturaya) have appeared to put down the locals on the frontier Turkish territories. Assyrians assisted by the British soldiers seized ground in Urmia and Salmas. Besides, the British negotiated this issue with the Persian government."

Later there appeared new confirmations of this information from the same Angor source on April 25 and 27 (articles in the official Turkish newspaper "Soon Saat"). After all a cable from Hammadan of May 15 did not at all confirm the seizure of Urmia and Salmas, though it did not deny the Angora information about the further escalation of Assyrian arming by the British in Mesopotamia as well as about putting on more combat battalions totaling nearly 15,000 soldiers.

Therefore, while Kurdish rising went on just as it obviously was inspired and sup- ported by the British people in Northern Kurdistan, Assyrian regular battalions led by the British officers and equipped with the modern military vehicles were put forth in North and Northeast in order to regain native territories of highland Nestorians in Sandjak Hakkjari, Urmia and Salmas.

The cables also said that this Assyrian operation was very successful, for Kemalists2 were fighting back with rebellious Kurds in a short while Assyrians came to seize some part of sandjak Hakkjari of the Van Vilayett, and then they took Urmia and Salmas in North-West Persia. 3

In order to give a more correct analysis of the events in Upper Mesopotamia and in northwest Persia after the Kurdish rising was curbed, I should like to look at some facts from the recent past of our small but very restless nation.

Assyrians in Urmia and Salmas in Persia, Hakkjari and in Northern Mosul in Turkey were drawn by force into the imperialistic war in 1914-1918. It happened due to activity of Russian and British agents, and on the other hand, due to suppression they felt from the Enver Turkey4 and the feudal Persia. Assyrians were told falsely that they would "enjoy independence under patronage of one of the world powers in the Middle East for what Assyrians should do for the allies" In 1916 the Russian military command organized two Assyrian battalions to be sent to the mountains to fight with Kurds who were on the side of Turkey. .

When the October revolution in Russia broke out and the Russian troops had to withdraw from the Persian and Mesopotamian front, Assyrians began to concentrate their force in Urmia and Salmas. In February 1918 after the Persian Cossacks attacked them, Assyrians destroyed them and took over in Urmia and Salmas. Then they began to pre- pare themselves to fight with Ali Assan-Pasha troops which were marching to Urmia from Van and Mosul.

Since February till July 1918 Assyrian people were fighting with regular Turkish divisions and irregular Kurdish gangs to survive in the world. The fighting went on for about six months. Assyrians defeated the enemies 16 times over this period taking some 1,000 captive.

Having spent all the military supplies, Assyrians in the total number of 99, 000 (including 20,000 Armenians from Van) moved toward the South to unite with the British. They actually had to walk about 1,000 miles to Baghdad first. Over 16,000 women and children were left dead on the road then. In Hammadan the "allied" Assyrians were disarmed by the "friendly" British and were furthermore sent to Bakuba, Mesopotamia.

In 1919 under the pretext of returning to fight over their native lands, the British again organized 6 infantry and cavalry battalions from the remainder of Assyrians and sent them regrouped into a police force, which suppressed the rising Kurds or Arabs in Mesopotamia in the following 6 years. Meantime, the British did not keep the promise they had given Assyrians to take over in Hakkjari, Urmia and Salmas, nor they enjoyed some "independence". Therefore, they became indignant, especially those who were better cultured in Persia, and in 1921 Assyrians left the frontline and some returned to Persia, some went off to Baghdad, and some fled even to North America. Thus, highland Assyrians finally split with Urmians in Persia.

When Assyrians returned to Persia, they met bad luck again. This time around, the Persian government instructed its consuls abroad to carry secret or open negotiations with German colonists and trans Caucasian sectarians about capturing the former Assyrian territories in Urmia and Salmas that were deserted in 1918.

Meantime, Reza-khans government al- lowed only 5,000 Assyrians to return to their native land for they proposed, " Assyrians should not be over 10% of the entire Muslim population in Urmia and Salmas." The remainder of Assyrians had to face the hateful British again as they tried to clutch at the last straw in the conflict. There was a strong tendency to move to the Soviet Union then, but they failed to do it.

Therefore, the unjust national policy of the Persian government made the miserable Assyrians of Urmia and Salmas face the British again. Thus, since 1922 Assyrians in Mesopotamia being stuck between the Turkish hammer and the Persian anvil fell victims to the British imperialists. The latter made use of the former hatred and desperation to pursue their own interest in the oil lands of Mosul and to defend their strategic routes from Turkey.

The British had prepared the Kurdish rising in the Eastern villayetts of Turkey largely inhabited by Kurds especially after Armenians had been ousted. They planned it actually for the arrival of the League of Nations committee in Mosul in February 1922 to participate in a "free" plebiscite decision upon the controversial question. The British implied by this scheme that the Committee should have to know if Kurds of Mosul were satisfied with them. And this attitude would be shown in the events in Turkey itself. The British wanted the entire world to see who and what Kurdish tribes were after.

But it was only one third of the victory, and two other thirds should be completed in the future. It is never enough to gain some- thing, it is more important to prepare a fruitful ground to hold it down after all. For this purpose Baldwin's government more active on the international scale than its precursor, headed by the socialist opportunist MacDonald, was trying to set up two buffer states (at least in autonomy with Iraq) in the north-east of Mosul. This buffer territory was to include both Kurds and Assyrians on the way to build up a solid wall just in case of a Turkish invasion. It must be remembered that this aspect of the question was very important for Baldwin and its aggressive conservative government in case of escalation of conflicts in the Middle East (what seemed to be almost predictable).5 Therefore every British strong- hold on the northern frontiers of the "independent" Iraq seemed very important indeed. Thus, the creation of a buffer state of Kurds to the north of Mosul and a similar Assyrian state to the north-east was a very essential instrument in the political situation that happened in the Middle East at the time.

North America or the United Kingdom would certainly be unable to import oil from Mosul safely without securing transportation in passages over Jesiribn Omar down in the Tiger river valley, and over Julamerk down the Upper Zab River and also through the northeast gates from Urmia- Soudjbulakh. For this purpose the British could well use mandated highland tribes otherwise, the British oilers would hardly make investments into this rich oil well scheme. Monopolist financiers never liked to take a risk. Though the Assyrian newspaper said in Constantinople an international oil company was set up to exploit those wells in Mesopotamia and Persia but it never would be launched until this business was fully secured over the years in this land of milk and honey".

What practical goals did the British military command and its diplomats pursue when the British troops took over in Hakkjari of Van, Urmia and Salmas in North-west Persia'?

1. It is doubtless that if the British wanted to take Hakkjari in the past few years, they pursed only one goal, namely, to strengthen their presence in this mountainous region, which commands over "the whole Mesopotamia, for only who controls all the heights and passages there, will be able to have this very rich plain in the hands.

2. This control can be done only if this area is inhabited by a people who could be easily sold on the idea of independence, and who would simultaneously be against the state which certainly tries to deprive this people of this legitimate right. In this case the Assyro-Chaldean people in the Upper Mesopotamia (like Kurds in Northern Kurdistan) due to national, religious and social contra- dictions between them and Turks can be this people to be used by the British as a reliable barrier against the Kemalist Turkey they needed historically. For this purpose they sent Assyrian battalions to Hakkjari, Urmia and Salmas.

3. The British inspired Assyrians and Kurds to rise in an attempt to shape their autonomy independent of Turkey and Persia and still dependent on the British. This way they wanted to hold the ground in oil and cotton fields of Mesopotamia and finally to keep these great strategic paths to them on the way to India, Persian Gulf and Suez canal.

4. At last, the recent journey of the young Assyrian Patriarch Mar-Shumun to London to see Archbishop of Canterbury and rumors about the setup of the "independent Assyria" certainly ", had a link with this new intrigue, which could be ended in a tragic fashion for miserable Assyrians especially if the British went on their perfidious policy.

Turkey and Persia did their "best" to bring this little nation over to the British side by the inadequate national, religious and agricultural policy.

The London City financiers were craftily using the crystal position of the historical nation turning it into a powerful instrument in their struggle with the revolutionary Turkey on its frontiers with Iraq.

1 The old name of Ankara, the capital of Turkey (ed),

2 After Mustafa Femal Ataturk. Turkey president in 1923-1938 (ed)

3 Though further confirmation of seizing Urmia and

Salmas or of Assyrian force defeat has not reached us till recently (F. Atturaya).

4 Enver Pasha, head of the triumvirate to govern Turkey at the time (ed).

5 Please take notice of these words said by Dr. F Atturaya in its prophecy in 1925 (ed).