Was president Wilson right to support the Greater Syria plan in 1919?

This would have created a huge country consisting of Syria,the Lebanon, and Palestine including the East Bank region. Think of the security and ease of travel,as well as the economic potential. Isthis one of the great what-might-have -beens of history or could this construct be revived?

11 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    He never actually saw the King-Crane Commission Report which is online and contained the recommendations you reference. He suffered a stroke the day before it was submitted to him. Yes,from the vantage point of 1919 it would obviously have prevented a tremendous amount of suffering and created a large nation with three major ports and five major cities. The havoc done by the Zionists could have been altogether avoided; the Commission was extremely ill-disposed to zionism. The zionist rape of Lebanon would not have occurred. The persecution of the Palestinians would not have occurred and would be happening today. The economic balkanization of the region would not have happened. It would be a major state today.

    Would it be possible to revive the plan: yes,on the basis of historical/territorial claim. Both the Lebanon as it was known until the French severed it from Syria in 1920 and Palestine have been considered a part of Syria since at least 500 B.C when Herodotus wrote of the region. To this day they have a homogenous language and culture: the al sham culture,or what the French dubbed "Levantine". Religiously Greater Syria has been about 85% Muslim and 15% Christian since the advent of Islam. In Syria the Syrian and Armenian Orthodox Churches do not suffer the persecution they do at zionist hands in Occupied Palestine. There is a party founded in 1933 in Syria called the Social-Nationalist Party that promoted the Greater Syria agenda. I support it. Check out their website. They were banned for many years until Bashir Assad rescinded the ban in 2002. I think unification along the lines proposed by the SSNP is practical and desirable.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yes. He did not actually have time to come out in favor of it,this being the conclusion of his own King-Crane Commission report. But he suffered a severe stroke and the U.S. failed to enter the League of nations,hence we were not able to obtain the Mandates for Palestine-Syria as the region was then known. Obviously from today's perspective a great deal of violence and bloodshed could have been avoided by establishing a single unified entity out of the region instead of permitting the British and French to carve it up. It would have meant stability,economic vigor,freedom of movement and foremost we might have been spared the devastating conquest of Palestine 1948-67 plus the endless attacks on the Lebanon,originally a part of Syria. The region had a common language,culture and economy. Could it still be done? Unlikely but an attractive notion; however there would be many hurdles to cross.

  • 4 years ago

    Great No Amazing No Alright Yes

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    meanwhile i am looking at Iraq the region refuses 3 new iraqs while amical"america +israel" both are in favor

    Saudia is threaten all the time to be parted into three Egypt into two plus the question of sinai Sudan the same

    America at that time saw in UK the target so they all the time wanted that UK to have less influence meanwhile UK and france were splitting the arab countries according to their convenience

    remind you of the stand that America took towards 1956 war "UK France and Israel"against Egypt in which america stood on the side watching the fall of UK taking France down meanwhile later on lifting Israel up

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yes,I wish he had not been felled by a stroke. The King-Crane Commission derived this proposal from the wishes of the Syrian and Palestinian leaders of politics and commerce they had interviewed. It is still possible,particularly since Bashir Asad has lifted the ban on the Syrian Social-Nationalist Party. I wish them the best of luck. Only Syria has stood faithfully with the Palestinians during their long and continuing ordeal.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    No...Greater Syria has no historical basis, it would have eventually collapsed.

    Look at this:

    http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thum...

    Sorry, but that's unrealistic.

  • momw
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    It would have been great and would have avoided many of today's problems in the Middle East.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yes. I think we should revive it. It was the best approach then and it's the best approach now.

  • Zeno
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    Yes,at the time but I think today the Palestinians would prefer their own state.

  • 1 decade ago

    No, Syria is part of Turkey.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.