Al-Taraky Lebanese Party and its stance on the Establishment of the state of Greater Lebanon 1921-1923 a Historical Study
اسم المجلة: مجلة أوراق ثقافية
Al-Taraky Lebanese Party and its stance on the Establishment of the state of Greater Lebanon 1921-1923 a Historical Study
حزب التّرقي اللبناني وموقفه من قيام دولة لبنان الكبير 1921-1923 دراسة تاريخيّة
م. م. ياسر خاشع عبيد([1]) Yasir Khashea Obaid
تاريخ الإرسال:14-2-2026 تاريخ القبول:11-3-2026
الملخص turnitin:3%
لم يكن تأسيس حزب التّرقي اللبناني نابع من تطور المجتمع اللبناني، بقدر ما كان عمليّة اقتباس تبنتها بعض النّخب المتأثرة بالغرب بعد اعلان الانتداب الفرنسي على لبنان، بل إنّ فكرة تأسيسه كانت قائمة على أساس طائفي عنصري وبمساعدة ودعم فرنسي. فكانت عضويته مقتصرة على أبناء الطائفة المارونيّة وغالبيتهم من المؤيدين للانتداب الفرنسي على لبنان وقيام دولة لبنان الكبير، ونظرًا للأهداف التي وضعها في برنامجه فقد كان حزبًا إصلاحيًّا يعتمد في سياسته ووجوده على دعم الانتداب الفرنسي له. واستمد حزب التّرقي مواقفه الأيديولوجيّة من الغرب وانغلق على الواقع بكل خصوصياته مما جعله عاجزًا عن الاستمرار والبقاء. أضف إلى أنّ عناصر هذا الحزب وقياداته، قد تكونت من الطبقة البرجوازيّة ولم تتمكن من الانفتاح على الجماهير؛ فكان هذا الحزب أول تجسيد لتحالف البرجوازيّة التّجاريّة-الماليّة البيروتيّة مع الوجاهات الجديدة القادمة من الجبل، ونتيجة لهذه العوامل لم يستمر نشاط هذا حزب طويلًا وسرعان ما دبت الخلافات السياسية والانقسام بين مؤسسي الحزب وأعضائه، حتى تحول هذا الانقسام الى كتلتين سياسيتن تعارض إحداهما الأخرى، الكتلة الوطنية بزعامة إميل إدّه، والكتلة الدّستوريّة بزعامة بشارة الخوري.
الكلمات المفتاحيّة: الأيديولوجيا، الانتداب، الطائفيّة
Abstract:
The establishment of the Lebanese Progress Party did not stem from the development of Lebanese society, but it was rather a process of institutional and ideological appropriation adopted by some elites influenced by the West after the declaration of the French mandate over Lebanon. The idea of its establishment was based on a racist sectarian basis and with French assistance and support; its membership was limited to members of the Maronite sect, functioning as a reformist entity. The party’s existence and ideological framework were fundamentally anchored in the French Mandate, making its political survival contingent upon French administrative support. The Progress Party derived its ideological orientations from the West, while remaining detached from the reality and its local specificities. In addition, the elements of this party were formed from the bourgeois class and were unable to open up to the masses; so, this party was the first embodiment of the alliance of the Beirut commercial-financial bourgeoisie with the new notables coming from the mountain. As a result of these factors, the activity of this party did not last long, and political differences and division quickly arose between the founders and members of the party, until this division turned into two political blocs opposing each other: the National Bloc led by Emile Eddé and the Constitutional Bloc led by Bechara El Khoury.
Keywords: ideology, mandate, sectarianism, Lebanese Progress Party, Bourgeoisie.
Introduction:
The development of political and partisan consciousness in the Western world was intrinsically linked to the emergence of parliamentary systems. Political parties in the West evolved as vehicles for challenging autocratic regimes, aiming to transition from absolute rule toward democratic governance. Once these democratic principles were firmly established, these parties engaged in organized political competition within a constitutional framework, seeking either to exercise power or to exert influence over it.
In discussing political and party awareness in the Arab countries, it is evident that the historical and political development of those countries differs from the development witnessed by Europe due to several factors, including political, social and cultural factors, and this difference is explained in the folds of the research.
Although many historical studies have made great strides in studying political parties in the Arab world, studying these parties in Lebanon is still in its infancy. These studies have dealt with a number of political parties that played important roles in the history of Lebanon, but they have neglected other parties. This study, therefore, aims to shed light on the political role played by the Lebanese Progress Party in an era that is considered one of the most important eras in the history of modern Lebanon. It was founded in 1921, and included prominent political figures that played an active role in Lebanese politics during that period, such as Emile Eddé, Bechara El Khoury, Michel Chiha, and others.
Accordingly, the problem of the research lies in the fact that the Lebanese Progress Party was founded with French blessing, that the majority of its members were supporters of the French mandate over Lebanon, and its membership was limited to the Maronite sect. Accordingly, the central question revolves around the extent of this party’s contribution to the events in Lebanon and Lebanese politics. In order to discuss the central question, it is necessary to put forward some hypotheses to know the impact of this party on the events in Lebanon during that period: Was its policy sectarian or extremist? Did its members put the party’s interests or their personal interests before the interests of their country, particularly by accepting administrative positions within the French mandate government. This research further examines whether the party’s actions served the broader interests of Lebanon or focused on specific sectarian agendas, and to what extent its activities influenced Lebanon’s political trajectory.
The historical development of the countries of the Arab world differs from the development that occurred in Europe before the emergence of political parties there. These countries were subject to colonial control and did not have the opportunity to enjoy a constitutional parliamentary life, so political parties emerged gradually. Therefore, political parties in the Arab world appeared at the level of the masses and did not know the rules of organized party competition. The function of these parties in the Arab world differs from their function in Europe; they are not an electoral tool as much as they are a tool for struggle and change. Political parties appeared in the Arab world in their modern concept in the second decade of the twentieth century (Al-Rawi, 1981, 18). These parties were not a phenomenon stemming from the development of Arab society; they were merely a process of intellectual appropriation carried out by elites influenced by the West (Al-Rawi, 1981: 19).
These parties were established without realizing the dangers of fragmentation, the Balfour Declaration([2]), and the imposition of the mandate resulting from the Sykes-Picot Agreement ([3]) and the San Remo Conference. ([4]) They also lagged behind the state of national consciousness called for by Arab associations in the late Ottoman era, which was embodied by the Great Arab Revolt in 1916. The political parties in the Arab world were distinguished at this stage by several features, the most important of them are: calling for political reform within the framework of the constitution while neglecting social reform, maintaining a local and regional nature while devoting their efforts to obtaining local political independence without aspiring to national work, little engagement with the masses – particularly the peasantry – due to feudal control and rural cultural limitations, and ignoring the specificities of local reality, which eventually resulted in their inability to survive (Al-Rawi, 1981: 19-20).
Nevertheless, these indicators did not diminish the role of political parties; they underscored the necessity of collective mass action in resisting foreign invasion and fragmentation. Such efforts ultimately reinforced the institutionalization of party work (Ismail, 1973: 12).
Speaking of political and partisan work in Lebanon, the French mandate period witnessed the emergence of many partisan and political blocs in Lebanon, some of which were an extension of Arab or international parties, while others expressed political developments or events witnessed by Lebanon. These parties differed among themselves in their organizational structure, political and ideological orientations, and also differed in the degree of their influence on the internal political situation in Lebanon (Al-Obaidi, 2005: 207). In any case, the political arena in Lebanon witnessed, following the declaration of the establishment of the State of Greater Lebanon in 1920, a difference in the attitudes of a number of Lebanese associations and parties according to their political orientations and their influence by different ideologies, which resulted in many intellectual forces as well as partisan and political movements that began to increase day after day (Al-Ahdab, 1975: 61-62). Consequently, the French mandate authorities facilitated the emergence of specific political entities, notably the Lebanese Progress Party, to align with their strategic interests in Lebanon (Salman, 2017: 94).
Following the end of Ottoman rule and the imposition of the French mandate in 1920, the state of Greater Lebanon was proclaimed. This pivotal transition triggered diverse reactions among the Lebanese concerning the establishment of this new political entity (Longrigg, n.d.: 141), Then, the declaration of the state of Greater Lebanon in the same year, the attitudes of the Lebanese varied regarding the establishment of this new entity, as a minority of Maronites showed their support for a small Lebanon that was limited to Mount Lebanon, and their refusal to dissolve their sectarian specificity in a wider environment. this isolation on the part of some of this party members and their denial of the Arab cause and Arab affiliation returned to express itself at the beginning of the civil war that broke out in Lebanon in 1975 (Qassir, n.d.: 365). In addition, the advocates of this movement rejected linking Lebanon in one way or another to its Arab and Islamic surroundings and demanded the continuation of the French military presence in Lebanon to ensure their political presence (Deeb, 2015: 18).
This Party adhered to the French mandate and defended it, and its constant answer to those demanding independence was to call for the revival of Greater Lebanon to be a Christian national homeland in the East with a French guarantee. The party was open to alternative foreign protections; for instance, should France withdraw its support, they were willing to turn toward Britain. Their primary objective remained securing Lebanon’s survival as an independent state, distinct from its regional surroundings. This party did not accept any kind of political unity for Lebanon with any other Arab country, even if this unity came under the auspices of a friendly Western country such as Britain, for example (Deeb, 2015: 18;Abu Salih, 1998: 18). In contrast, the Arab unity movement in Lebanon – primarily represented by the Constitutional Block led by Bechara El Khoury – took a negative attitude toward the mandate rule. The former party, led by Emile Eddé, monopolized power under French auspices and later sought a treaty with France in 1936, Furthermore, certain Christian factions, notably among the Greek Orthodox community and some Protestant circles, maintained their ideological connection with Syria. These groups aligned with the majority of Muslims in Lebanon in opposing the separatist project (Qassir, n.d.: 365).
Between these two minorities, the majority of Maronite notables, led by the church, supported the option of establishing the state of Greater Lebanon under the protection of France (Qassir, n.d.: 365). Among the most prominent advocates of Greater Lebanon were Emile Eddé, ([5]) Bechara El Khoury, ([6]) Michel Chiha, ([7]) Auguste Dib, and others. This party, which was established on the ground by virtue of the decisions of the mandate authority determined the composition of the Lebanese political community. Consequently, specific figures imposed themselves at the top of the political pyramid, having commenced their careers prior to World War I within the framework of the independent state of Mount Lebanon (Qassir, n.d.: 365).
When General Gouraud ([8]) declared the State of Greater Lebanon, ([9]) the third Lebanese delegation was still in Paris, having left in mid-September 1920 (Mizher, n.d.: 937; Al-Obaidi, 2005: 119). Before arriving in Lebanon, the members of the delegation passed through Alexandria, where they met with members of the Lebanese community in Egypt. On September 8, 1920, Yousef Al-Sawda received a letter from Bechara Al-Khoury informing him of the new organization of the State of Greater Lebanon and the administrative position offered to him. The letter stated:
“I have been offered the position of Secretary-General in Greater Lebanon, and I am hesitant, and I am waiting impatiently for the return of Emile Eddé….. If Emile Eddé is in Alexandria, you can inform him of what may interest him in this letter” (Al-Sawda, 1967, vol. 1: 283).
Yousef responded to Bechara Al-Khoury with a letter that read:
“Emile Ede has returned with the delegation… and he will convey the details of our discussions. He informed me of his acceptance of a position, suggesting that if you remain in your current role, I should take over your law practice in Beirut… I expressed my gratitude but declined to make an immediate decision regarding this matter” (Al-Sawda, 1967: 285).
During his residency in Egypt during World War I, Émile Eddé joined the National Party. ([10]) This is corroborated by a document sent by Father Boules Rizk ([11]) to Patriarch Elias Hoayek on September 16, 1920, concerning the status of the Maronite community in Egypt. The document noted that this party shared common goals with the Lebanese Union Society (Jam’iyat al-Ittihad al-Lubnani) (Al-Sawda, 1967: 287). According to Father Risk, the members of the National Party were apparently advocating for a constitutional government in the form of a hereditary emirate, preferably under French leadership, to strengthen bilateral ties. Nevertheless, they remained steadfast in demanding full Lebanese rights and were committed to expediting independence while opposing any colonial tendencies, regardless of the shifting political landscape (Moeti, 1992: 95).
The members of the third delegation returned to Beirut on September 25 (Al-Sawda, 1967: 937). On the 28th, Abdullah Khoury, Michel Chiha, and Bechara Al-Khoury had dinner at Emile Eddé’s house to discuss the country’s affairs (Al-Khoury, 2001: 155). However, the French Commission had organized the country and divided it into governorates and directorates, and appointed Governor Trabuad and his assistants (Abdul Satir, 1986: 203; Al-Shammari, 2006: 49).
As for the Board of Directors, Gouraud dissolved it and replaced it with an administrative committee composed of fifteen members (Ghandour, 1992: 322; Al-Hassan, 1959: 154).
As a conclusion, the reason for Emile Eddé’s exclusion from the committee was due to his hostility with the French officials in Lebanon, especially Coulondre, as Emile Eddé was demanding the organization of the Lebanese administration outside the scope of Ottoman laws and a national ruler over Lebanon. This committee enjoyed an advisory role and had the right to express an opinion on matters related to legislative matters, administrative systems, setting the state budget, and determining new taxes, fees, and monopolies (Saadeh, 1996, Vol. 2: 24-37; Awidat, 1961: 453).
In light of this administrative reality with the increasing French interference in Lebanon’s internal affairs, the conflict between two currents intensidied: the first current was led by Daoud Amoun and demanded the election of a French ruler for Lebanon; and the second current was led by Emile Eddé and demanded the election of a Lebanese ruler (Zeilaa, n.d.: 11). Consequently, the political party called the Progress Party was formed in Beirut in January 1921 (Deeb, 2008: 90; Lebanese newspaper As-Safir, 1980), whose slogan was ‘For the sake of Lebanon with France’. The party was composed of an administrative committee of fifteen members (Khalifa, 2014: 103), and Emile Eddé declared the party’s objectives as follows:
“First: Defending freedom of religion in Lebanon.
Second: Maintaining the political independence of Greater Lebanon under the French mandate.
Third: Determining the percentage of representation in parliamentary elections according to the decree issued by the mandate administration (Turki, 2009: 31; Zahir, 1974: 273; Deeb, 2010, 105).
These were the first attempts to establish a political party within Lebanon during the French mandate period. The supporters and founders of this party envisioned Lebanon’s independence as independence from Syria guaranteed by France. The party’s program called for defending national traditions, freedom of religious belief, and appointing government employees on the basis of competence and merit (Tarabulsi, 2008: 142). Of course, in the context of the political lexicon of that period, this meant reducing the role of Muslims who were “supposedly” less “worthy” and “competent” (Qassir, n.d.: 365). The executive committee of this party in Beirut was formed of 15 members, including Marquis Jean de Frege as president (Taqi al-Din, n.d.: 269). Naoum Bakhos as vice president, Emile Eddé as secretary, and Emile Qashua (director of the Bank of Syria and Lebanon) as treasurer (Dakroub, n.d.: 243). Other prominent members of the party included banker Michel Chiha, lawyer Bechara El Khoury, lawyer Alfred Naqqash, merchant Charles Corm, Dr. Shukri Qardahi, Emile Arab, Alphonse Zenie, and others. Members of this party played a prominent role in local politics throughout the mandate period. It is sufficient to confirm in this regard that Emile Eddé, Bechara El Khoury, and Alfred Naqqash would assume the presidency of the Lebanese Republic during and after the mandate (Shaqour, 2015: 127; Zahir, 1974: 273) ……
The presence of Emile Eddé as the party’s secretary clearly expressed the French support for it, as Alexander Riachi stated: “For the French, Emile Eddé was representing France of the East, France with its traditions, relations, and protection of Christians, especially the Maronites in Lebanon.” As for the Jesuits, they strongly supported the party in their press and among their fellow countrymen, because in their view the Progress Party “would be the link between the government and the Lebanese people, as well as between all religious sects” (Zahir, 1974: 273).
The alliance between the Beirut commercial elite and mountain notables effectively institutionalized the party’s exclusionary nature. By imposing high subscription fees that sidelined the working class, the party ensured its alignment with French economic interests, as reflected in the editorial policies of its mouthpiece, ‘Al-Ummal’ (Tarabulsi, 1999: 22; Muhsin, 1999: 255)
The activity of the Lebanese Progress Party did not last long (Al-Khoury, n.d., vol. 1: 115). Disagreements quickly arose between the founders and members of the party, Emile Eddé’s thinking reflected the traditional Maronite perspective on independence. Consequently, he emphasized the necessity of securing sufficient external guarantees for Lebanon’s sovereignty. Furthermore, he expressed significant apprehension toward Arab nationalism and its calls for regional unity, fearing that such movements could jeopardize Lebanon’s distinct identity. While Bechara El Khoury was more realistic than him, he was not less committed to Lebanon’s independence than Emile Eddé. He realized the importance of the Islamic presence in Lebanon and what this presence imposes in terms of the need for settlement, so he did not find it wise to denounce Arab nationalism, even though Bechara El Khoury was not an Arab nationalist, but rather tried hard to reach an agreement with them (Qassim, 1977: 191).
In El Khoury view, this reflected the thinking of Michel Chiha and other prominent Christian businessmen in Beirut, such as Riad al-Sulh, who found in the Arab countries the natural field for their economic activity, and insisted on strengthening relations with them, while maintaining their reservations regarding the idea of Arab unity (Ramadan, 2014: 233). Eddé and al-Khoury also differed in their view of the French mandate. The former saw it as a guarantee for Lebanon’s independence, while the latter considered it an obstacle towards the Christian-Muslim cooperation, which in his view was the best guarantor of this independence. Al-Khoury believed that Christian-Muslim cooperation was possible, and that the two groups’ participation in opposing the French mandate and demanding complete independence was the starting point for this cooperation. While Emile Eddé and others were upset by the insistence of Lebanese Muslims on opposing the Lebanese entity in its current state, Al-Khoury believed that this Islamic opposition must disappear, or at least be modified, if the Christians showed some understanding of the Muslims’ position on the mandate, and stopped showing exaggeration in showing friendship for France (Salibi, 1967: 219).
Consequently, the alliance that included the pro-French mandate factions within the Progress Party disintegrated. Each of them had its alliances on the other fronts. Emile Eddé allied with Khair al-Din al-Ahdab among the Sunnis of Tripoli and with his counterpart Jumblatt among the Druze of the mountain. As for Bechara al-Khoury, his circle of alliances was wider than his opponent’s, and included the Arslans family among the Druze, Ahmad al-Asaad and Sabri Hamadeh among the Shiites, Khalid Chehab, the representative of the Bekaa, and Abdul Hamid Karami in Tripoli, among the Sunnis, and from the Maronites Hamid Franjieh in Zgharta, Camille Chamoun and Farid al-Khazen, who had close ties to the Patriarch, Michel Zakour, the owner of the newspaper “Al-Ma’rad”, and Salim Takla, the Catholic, the Director of the Interior, the Governor of Beirut and its Mayor (Tarabulsi, 2008: 26). This division quickly turned into two political blocs opposing each other, the National Bloc and the Constitutional Bloc. The first was led by Emile Eddé, who maintained his loyalty to France throughout his life and an almost declared coldness towards Muslims, which led him to suggest transferring some of them to other Arab countries to avoid upsetting the balance of the Christian sectarian majority. In contrast, the Constitutional Bloc gradually asserted itself under the leadership of Bechara El Khoury and his cousin, the journalist and banker Michel Chiha, as the bearer of an independence project, then later as the voice of the opposition, and finally as the pillar of an independent Lebanon after its relationship with the Muslim nationalist leaderships strengthened (Qassir, n.d.: 365).
Thus, the Lebanese Progress Party, founded in late 1921, quickly disintegrated as its activity diminished within a year of its establishment. This decline was primarily due to internal disagreements and divisions. Furthermore, the party’s sectarian nature was evident in its membership, which was restricted exclusively to the Maronite Christian sect; more importantly, its existence remained heavily dependent on French support
Conclusion
The Lebanese Progress Party, as defined by its reformist program, was structurally dependent on the French mandate for its political. This party was the first embodiment of the alliance of the Beirut commercial-financial bourgeoisie with the new notables coming from the mountain. This party also had a specifically Maronite Christian face, and no Islamic presence was evident among its members. The activity of the Lebanese Progress Party did not last long, as disagreements quickly arose between the founders and members of the party, and this division quickly turned into two political blocs opposing each other, the National Bloc and the Constitutional Bloc. The first was led by Emile Eddé, who maintained his loyalty to France throughout his life, and the second was led by Bechara El Khoury and his cousin, the journalist and banker Michel Chiha, as it carried an independence project.
Resources
1-Abu Salih, A. (1998). The Lebanese crisis in 1958. Arab Publications House.
2-Al-Ahdab, A. (1975). New Lebanon. Dar Al-Ilm Lil-Malayin.
3-Alam El-Din, W. (1965). The covenants related to the Arab homeland 1908-1922. Dar Al-Kitab Al-Jadeed.
4-Al-Hassan, H. (1959). Constitutional law and the constitution in Lebanon (2nd ed.). Al-Hayat Library.
5-Al-Kayali, A. W. (1994). The political encyclopedia (Vol. 4). Arab Institution for Studies and Publishing.
6-Al-Khoury, A. (2001). His diaries during the negotiations for Greater Lebanon: Paris 1920 (S. Salama, Ed.). Al-Lawzira.
7-Al-Khoury, B. (n.d.). Lebanese facts (Vol. 1). Publications of Lebanese Papers.
8-Al-Obaidi, S. M. A. (2005). French policy towards Lebanon 1918-1938 [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Institute of Arab History and Scientific Heritage.
9-Al-Rawi, G. F. (1981). The position of Lebanese parties on Arab unity 1946-1958 [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Al-Mustansiriya University.
10-Al-Satir, L. A. (1986). Contemporary history of Lebanon (4th ed.). Dar Al-Mashreq.
11-Al-Satie’, A. N. (2008). History and documents of the second half of the twentieth century. [Publisher unknown].
12-Al-Sawda, Y. (1967). In the path of independence (Vol. 1). Dar Al-Rihani.
13-Al-Shalq, Z. (1989). From the mandate papers: A history of what history neglected. Dar Al-Nafayes.
14-Al-Shammari, R. A. F. (2006). French policy towards Syria and Lebanon 1920-1946 [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Al-Mustansiriya University.
15-Al-Sulh, S. (2000). Lebanon: Political absurdity and unknown fate. Dar Al-Nahar.
16-As-Safir. (1980, April 3). As-Safir newspaper, No. 2138.
17-Awidat, A. (1961). Constitutional systems in Lebanon and the Arab countries. Awidat Publications.
18-Burj, M. A. (1974). A study in modern and contemporary Arab history. Anglo-Egyptian Library.
19-Dakroub, M. (n.d.). Roots of the red oak (3rd ed.). Dar Al-Farabi.
20-Deeb, K. (2008). This ancient bridge. Dar Al-Nahar.
21-Deeb, K. (2010). Beirut and modernity. Dar Al-Nahar.
22-Deeb, K. (2015). Warlords and temple merchants (4th ed.). Dar Al-Farabi.
23-Dhaher, M. (1974). Social history of Lebanon 1914-1926. Dar Al-Farabi.
24-Ghandour, Z. (1992). Electoral systems. National Center for Information and Studies.
25Ghanam, R. (2007). The Lebanese parliamentary dictionary. Dar Bilal.
26-Ghazawi, M. Q. (2021). The Balfour Declaration: The wonders of history and reality. Dar Al-Akademia.
27-Hajjar, J. (1999). Syria, the Levant: A study and documentary file on the Sykes-Picot Agreement. Dar Talas.
28-Hokayem, A., Bou Malhab, D., & Charaf, J. (2003). Le démantèlement de l’Empire Ottoman et les préludes du mandat: 1914-1919. [Publisher unknown].
29-Ibrahim, G. A. (2022). The Balfour Declaration conspiracy deed. Dar Al-Karma.
30-Ibrahim, M. (1999). Lebanese parties between national awakening and sectarian ideologies. In The state of Greater Lebanon (p. 255). Publications of the Lebanese University.
31-Ismail, T. Y. (1973). Political organizations in the world. Journal of Arab Studies, 9(11).
32-Kamel, M. (n.d.). The Greater Arab State. Dar Al-Maaref.
33-Khalifa, Y. H. (2014). Emile Eddé and his political role in Lebanon until 1949 [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Anbar.
34-Longrigg, S. H. (n.d.). Syria and Lebanon under the French Mandate (P. Akil, Trans.). Dar Al-Haqiqa.
35-Mizher, Y. (n.d.). General history of Lebanon (Vol. 2). [Publisher unknown].
36-Moeti, A. (1992). Political and social history of Lebanon. Ezz al-Din Foundation.
37-Qassim, J. Z. (1977). The Lebanese crisis: Its origins, development, and various dimensions. Institute of Arab Research and Studies.
38-Qassir, S. (n.d.). History of Beirut (M. T. Ghosh, Trans.). Dar Al-Nahar.
38-Rabbath, E. (1973). La formation historique du Liban politique et constitutionnel. [Publisher unknown].
40-Ramadan, A. K. (2014). The Lebanese national division during the French Mandate 1920-1943. Journal of Historical Studies, (16).
41-Sa’adeh, F. (1996). Encyclopedia of parliamentary life in Lebanon (Vol. 2). Al-Karim Modern Printing Press.
42-Salibi, K. (1967). Modern history of Lebanon. Dar Al-Nahar.
43-Salman, B. I. (2017). The position of the Lebanese on the declaration of the State of Greater Lebanon and the Lebanese Republic 1920-1946 [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Baghdad.
44-Shaqour, H. (2015). Political parties, forces and currents in Lebanon (1926-1952) [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Beirut Arab University.
45-Shukri, A. O. (2011). Economic and social developments in Lebanon under the French Mandate 1920-1943: Historical study [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Mosul.
46-Taqi al-Din, S. (n.d.). The sectarian question in Lebanon. Dar Ibn Khaldun.
47-Traboulsi, F. (1999). Connections without connection. Riad Al-Rayis Books.
48-Traboulsi, F. (2008). Modern history of Lebanon from the Emirate to the Taif Agreement. Riad Al-Rayis Books.
49-Turki, T. A. (2009). Political parties in Lebanon 1920-1958: A historical study [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Anbar.
50-Zeilaa, N. (n.d.). President Eddé speaks. [Publisher unknown].
1-Assistant Lecturer at the University of Baghdad, Faculty of Political Science, Iraq yasser.khasha@copolicy.uobaghdad.edu.iq
مدرّس مساعد في جامعة بغداد – كلّيّة العلوم السياسيّة – العراق.
([2])Balfour Declaration: The letter sent by Lord Arthur James Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, on November 2, 1917, to Baron Lionel Walter Rothschild, announcing that the British government pledges to help the Jews establish a national home for them in Palestine: (Ibrahim, 2021: 1-6).
([3]) Sykes-Picot: A secret colonial agreement between Britain and France. The main agreement was reached between Britain, France and Russia to divide the Ottoman Empire and seize the Arab East. France and Britain reached a final agreement on the understanding after sending George Picot by the French government, its consul general in Beirut, on November 9, 1915, as a high commissioner charged with negotiations with the British government representative, Sir Mark Sykes, a member of the British House of Commons who was interested in Arab affairs and the British high commissioner for Near Eastern affairs. During the first five months of 1916, eleven letters were exchanged, which determined the terms of the agreement, which were named after the negotiators and which were signed secretly in Cairo on May 16, 1916. (Hajjar, 1999).
([4])San Remo Conference: This conference hold on April 25, 1920, in Italy based on the decision of the Supreme Council of the Peace Conference held in Paris following World War I in 1919, to divide the Ottoman Empire among the victorious countries. France was given both Lebanon and Syria (Al-Sulh, 1974: 313).
([5]) Emile Eddé (1884-1949): Born in Damascus on May 6, 1884, where his father worked as a translator at the French Consulate in Damascus. He completed his secondary education at the Saint Joseph College of the Jesuit Fathers in Beirut in 1900. He then traveled to France and studied law at the University of Aix-en-Provence, graduated in 1905. He returned to Beirut and worked in the office of Professor Nicolas Shoshaty. He was also appointed a lawyer for the French Consulate in Beirut from 1912 to 1914. When World War I broke out, he fled to Alexandria, where he was sentenced to death in absentia. After the war, he was chosen as a member of the first Lebanese delegation with the Board of Directors to the Peace Conference in Paris to demand the independence of Lebanon, as well as to the third conference, and contributed to the establishment of the state of Greater Lebanon: (Ghanam, 2007: 29).
([6]) Bechara Khalil El Khoury (1890-1964): He was the first president of the Lebanese Republic in the national era. His term lasted from (1943-1952). In 1914, he left for Egypt at the beginning of World War I. After completing his law studies in Paris, he returned to Lebanon to work as a lawyer. General Gouraud appointed him Secretary General of the Government of Mount Lebanon in February 1920. In September of the same year, when France declared the state of Greater Lebanon, he was appointed a member of its administrative council and remained in that position until the first representative council was elected in April 1922. In 1923, he became a judge in the Ministry of Justice after practicing law for a period of time. He became Minister of the Interior in the Ministry of Auguste Adib in 1926. In 1927, Charles Debbas asked him to form his first ministry and appointed him a member of the Senate at the same time. In September 1943, after Lebanon gained its independence, he was elected President of the Republic by unanimous vote of Parliament: (Al-Satie’, 2008: p. 63).
([7]) Michel Antoine Chiha (1891-1954): He was born in Aley District. He received his education in several schools and finished it at Saint Joseph University in 1906. He then moved to Egypt in 1915, where he studied law in Cairo and obtained a degree. He returned to Lebanon in 1919, and was elected as a representative of Beirut in the second representative council in 1925. He was a member of the committee tasked with drafting the Lebanese constitution: (Ghanam, 2007: p. 99).
([8]) Henri Eugène Gouraud (1867-1946): A French general, born and died in Paris. He graduated from the Saint-Cyr Military College in 1888, and quickly moved to the colonial service and demonstrated his brilliance in the state of Mali. He was promoted to the rank of colonel in 1907, and entered a course at the Center for Higher Studies until 1910. He returned to Marrakesh to consolidate the protectorate and was commander of the Fourth Army in the Dardanelles campaign in 1915, when he was wounded in his right arm and was appointed Resident General in Marrakesh. Then he was appointed High Commissioner through the period (1919-1923), in Syria and announced the establishment of the state of Greater Lebanon (Al-Kayali, 2011: 11).
([9])Greater Lebanon State: The Greater Lebanon State included the North Lebanon governorate, with its government center (Zgharta) and consisted of: A- Akkar District, which includes Akkar District and the section south of the Great River (Hisn al-Akrad), except for the section north of (the Great River). B- Zgharta District: It consists of the directorates of Al- Zawiya, Al-Danniyeh, and Bisharri, C- Batroun District, which consists of the Koura and Batroun directorates (2) Mount Lebanon directorate, with its government center (Baabda), and consists of the Keserwan District, the Matn District, and the Chouf District, Deir al-Qamar Directorate (3) South Lebanon directorate, with its government center (Sidon), and consists of the Sidon, Tyre, and Hasbaya districts. (4) Bekaa directorate, with its government center (Zahle), and consists of (Rasia District, Bekaa, Baalbek, and Hermel Directorate). (5) Beirut City and its suburbs (6) Tripoli City and its suburbs. And for Beirut to be the capital of Greater Lebanon (lawyer, n.d.: 460), (Alam El-Din, 1965: 232), (Al-Shalq, 1989: 116), (Historque du, 1973: 318).
([10])The Lebanese National Party, founded in Egypt during the First World War, was headed by Habib al-Bustani, and among its members were Youssef Akar, Gabriel Bard, Emile Eddé, and Youssef Mubarak, in addition to a large number of French figures(Moeti, 1992: p. 95).
([11]) Father Boules Rizk: A Lebanese cleric from the Maronite Christian sect, he was the deputy of Patriarch Elias Hoayek and responsible for the Maronite sect in Egypt. He played a prominent role in gathering and uniting the Lebanese in Egypt to demand the expansion of Lebanon’s borders. (Al-Sawda, 1967: 287), (Hokayem, 2003: 112).
