U.S. Policy Toward Syria - 1949 to 1958

By Ibraheem Saeed Al-Baidhani

U.S. Policy Toward Syria - 1949 to 1958 is a historical document of an important phase of the history of Syria, as well as important scientific stages on the history of United States Policy towards Syria. It deals with the historical period bounded by the coup Hosni leader in March 1949 and the unity of Syria and Egypt in February 1958.
Confined tracks U.S. policy toward Syria in this period, a two-lane, the first is the role of the U.S. and U.S. interests in the context of conflict and competition between Internationals as the United States was one of the main players in the stage of coups in Syria, as well as its policy that painted according to the interests and international readings. Tried States which confirm and chart the course of events according to their interests, and the book provides read and follow-up to the conflict and rivalry over Syria in the Cold War, and U.S. concerns about the growing tide of Communist and Soviet. Moreover, the Arab-Israeli conflict gave a shadow over the course of United States Policy towards Syria.
The second track of U.S. attempts to force Syria to engage in the policy, it has taken U.S. pressure different aspects such as pushing Syria in the policy of alliances and blocs and regional arrangements for the Baghdad Pact and the draft of Eisenhower, as well as the pressure through the conspiracy against the government or the pressure and threat that destabilize the situation in it. This path has taken shape the Syrian position which took the character of rejection and resistance on the one hand and the trend towards Egypt on the other hand. And therefore appears to be in the mind of the U.S. decision-maker reveals the reality of the situation of what is happening in Syria and gives justification to the obsession that the U.S. administration sees and according to what suits their international interests.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris US
• Release date: Apr 4, 2014
• ISBN: 9781493190942

Ibraheem Saeed Al-Baidhani

Professor of modern history at the College of Arts, Al-Mustansiriya University, a specialist in the history of the United States and Europe (U.S. policy toward Syria). Has published seventy researches in areas of competence and published two books in English: • U.S. Policy toward Syria, 1936–1949 • U.S. Policy toward Syria, 1949–1958 And published twelve books in Arabic. Participated in many international scientific conferences inside and outside Iraq. Gave hundreds of historical and scientific lectures in the field of civil society, human rights, and culture of peace. Gave lectures on the culture of peace in the Iraqi Cultural Center in Washington and Stockholm.

Book preview

Copyright © 2014 by Ibraheem Saeed Al-Baidhani.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Rev. date: 03/31/2014

To order additional copies of this book, contact:

Xlibris LLC

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

[e-mail]

540652

CONTENTS

Chapter I:   The position of the U.S. military coups in Syria, 1949-1954

The position of the United States of coup Husni Zaim in March 1949

U.S. position on the coup Sami al-Hinnawi* 14 August 1949

Attitude of the United States of coups Shishakli in Syria 1949-1954

Shishakli first coup 19 December 1949 and the U.S. position

B—the U.S. position of the second coup Shishakli November 29, 1951.

The United States Position From Mustafa Hamadoun 1954 Coup

Chapter II:   U.S. pressure on Syria 1955-1957

U.S. support for the Baghdad Pact in 1955 and the pressure on Syria

Motives and circumstances of the assassination of Colonel Adnan al-Maliki in 1955 The U.S. position

The U.S. position of a plot in 1956 in Syria

U.S. policy toward Syria Eisenhower project in 1957 as a model

Chapter III:   Syrian army and the Egyptian-Syrian unity in 1958

Turkish crowds and Turkish pressure on Syria As part of U.S. plans 1955-1957

Syrian army and its role in the political life of the Syrian 1954-1958

Clusters and centers of power within the military

The army and communist influence

Arms deal

Disobedience Qatana*

The role of the Syrian army in the unity

U.S. position on the unity of Syria and Egypt in 1958

The final implications of Perceptions

Endnotes

S yria has a strategic location is important, as well as the importance market and strategy stems from the importance of the Middle East region with important market, economic, and extends Syria on an important area of the Mediterranean coast east, and these coasts off the movement of world trade for the transfer of raw materials for the global industry, and including oil at the forefront of material transported from the coast of the Mediterranean Sea, Mahan has described the Mediterranean that it will be the scene of constant conflict, and it will be one master and is dominated by one superpower. And pass through Syria, railway lines, which was one of the most important engines of international politics and areas of conflict and competing countries, especially between Germany and France, since Syria’s coastline and its proximity to the Suez Canal, making it an arena of conflict and competition, which gave greater importance discovered oil in the Near East and the Arabian Gulf, and thus received in the U.S. interest because of its factors of market, economic and Syria’s important graded in another area, in the description of it lies in strategic region in the world that is home run airstrip and raids mission to air traffic, as well as it knot air transport and sea, it is a vital necessity important in the framework of international competition, a task of major powers that are looking for the promotion and strengthening its international status through the control and domination over strategic areas.

And returns the beginnings of penetration of the U.S. in the Levant to 1820 when he arrived to follow the Christian church under the supervision and control of the American Council on monitors missionaries abroad, the United States, like other major countries that preceded it in the sphere of influence and penetration in other countries, they fought compete with missions French and British missionary. And focused on the development of relations and interests by commercial interests and cultural penetration and protect charities, medical, and followed the United States through the influence of missionary during the Ottoman states and strengthened its trade relations with the Ottoman Empire and the signing of the Treaty of Amity and trade exchange in 1830.

Continued missionaries U.S. work and expansion arose Americans in the creation of thirty-three primary and secondary schools in Syria and Lebanon during the past 1834-1860, and in 1866 was the establishment of college Syrian Protestant (American University later) and the religious institutions, cultural and missionary U.S. are in the protection and support of the U.S. government at the end of the nineteenth century, the number of U.S. missionary institutions in Syria and Palestine to more than two hundred institutions linked to all U.S. diplomatic bodies.

The First World War a new phase in the course of U.S. policy toward the Middle East and the direction of the region where they are located Syria throughout our research, and increased U.S. interest in the Middle East, probably led to the emergence and growth of the Zionist movement, which was seeking to establish a national homeland for the Jews in Palestine and their quest to get support and the support of Britain and the United States, and in pushing and encouragement of the Zionist movement has increased interest in the Middle East, as well as it used the aspiration of Arabs towards independence position input new through the principles of the age of four in 1918 and encourage people the right to self-determination and to achieve stability, and then participate in a committee (but Crane) on assignment, but she was willing to become a state mandated, and generally to encourage the United States and support the right of self-determination was inconsistent with its call and support to the demands of the Zionist movement to establish a national home in Palestine, the important thing is that the war first World made the United States an influential element in the region’s issues, especially the Palestinian issue.

The Committee (CNC Crane) in 1919, an important station of the stations of interest and the U.S. presence in the region, despite the objection of France and Britain to send a committee to explore the wishes of the population in the diagonals are separated from the Ottoman Empire, the Commission concluded that visited Syria into a real desire for unity and independence in Syrian Palestine, and choose the United States to be the mandatory power, revealing the Committee’s report on the state of hostility and hatred to France in Syria, and in any case, the United States, which has increased their desire and interest influence in the region, the key element that determines the economic and military power make it close to what is happening levels after the First World War, and despite the withdrawal to participate in international politics and lack of participation in the League of Nations, but it’s incentive and participate in the sharing of oil wealth, and focused on its own interests as a major.

The United States and France are linked into agreements shape the relations between them and how to deal on international issues, was organized by the Convention in 1853 political matters and exchange of consuls and the subject of fugitives from commercial vessels, as well as the two countries signed a treaty on extradition in 1909, while processed Article VII of the Mandate list for the year 1923, the subject of the exchange of criminals and stipulates that pending the conclusion of special agreements on extradition, the extradition treaty in force between states and foreign countries Mandatory will be applied in the territory of Syria and Lebanon. So after France became the mandatory power for Syria has become necessary on the United States that is looking for a formula it believes its interests in Syria and through France. After correspondence and conversations reached both the United States and France to sign the treaty French European on the fourth of April 1924, which recognized under the United States mandated the French on Syria, and has achieved its goal of ensuring the rights of its citizens and created favorable conditions for the work of her wishes missionary and acts of excavations, and got the United States the rights granted to member states of the League of Nations.

Focused on the United States to the ongoing negotiations between France and Syria on the signing of the treaty French Syrian in 1936 on the independence of Syria, including that the treaty ending the French mandate over Syria, so it means a change in the interests and requires consultation with them in this regard, and focused on U.S. interests whose institutions missionary, educational and commercial The United States believes that the disturbances experienced by Syria over demands for independence, which is reflected on the property, rights and investments and interests of the U.S., the United States is aware that Syria’s strategic importance, as the pipeline transportation of oil from Iraq to the Mediterranean, passing through its territory, as well as that the United States following the developments taking place in Syria, as it came to their interests.

France dropped its obligations in maintaining the unity of Syria under the Mandate, has paved the way for this abandonment since 1921 when he gave Iskenderun special provision and privileges in the language and the administration, and after the signing of the Treaty French Syrian in 1936, moved Turkey to conclude a treaty similar with France on Iskenderun Brigade, and that matter any ongoing negotiations between France and Turkey on Iskenderun Brigade received the attention of the U.S. government in the goal of protecting American citizens and property, as well as to maintain their interests and privileges and in particular missions, including excavations.

The exaggerated the United States to describe the risk of transmission of Iskenderun in Turkey is not the goal of stirring interest in the search for formulas to protect and assert U.S. interests in the region, it was the interests and demands of the U.S., especially in relation to the effects present in the negotiations French-Turkey, the United States were not limiting factor French Turkish agreement, as it guaranteed the rights and interests of its citizens in Syria under Article IV of the Mandate on Syria, under articles I and VI of the Treaty French—the U.S. in 1924.

In World War II the interests of the United States can see the failure and betrayal of the alliance German Japanese because they see it as a threat to their interests, either Germany aspire to enter to South America and Japan policies compete with the United States in the Far East, and although it is seeking to expand areas of influence in the Middle East and the strengthening of the considerations and national interest to cultural interests, and therefore they can bring it to inherit some areas of influence of Britain in the region, but it also was forced to ally with Britain as part of the ongoing conflict in World War II and occupied Syria, and the general area of the Near East status of largest and more attention from the U.S. government, they are the link between the Turks and the British on the one hand, and the defeat of the French United States paid more attention to Syria and the U.S. Consul General in Beirut urges allies must defend Syria as one of the main defenses of the Allies against the Axis, increase over the French troops that were in Syria was estimated heavily on the United States a source of arming and supplies and military equipment, and therefore the fall of Paris and the Vichy government to make the United States give further follow-up and attention to the situation in Syria, if the control of the Germans and Italians on airports which threatens oil concessions in the Arabian Gulf, and therefore the years 1940-1941 was full of German and Italian activities in Syria and have raised concern and interest of the United States.

And generally have contributed to the United States to play the role of mediator between the leaders the French and British to carry out a military campaign in the month of June and July in 1941 to end the influence of German in Syria and the elimination of the Vichy government in which, following the announced Cathero High Commissioner, the French and the Commander in Chief in the East representative of the Government of France Free independence of Syria in the 27th of September, 1941 when Sheikh Taj al-Din al-Husseini, President of the Republic, and the United States issued on 29th of November, 1941 statement confirmed the sympathy with the aspirations of the natural and legitimate for Syria and its independence, and asked France to look at the Treaty of 1924 as in force effect until the signing of a new treaty, but the United States drew the attention of France, but it despite the fact that its traditional policy based on sympathy with the aspirations of Syria and Lebanon toward independence, But believes that it is necessary to know that France, the United States installed in the treaty rights cannot be changed or canceled without her consent. Overall it took to recognize the independence of Syria, according to U.S. declaring Cathero takes place where discussions and dialogues with the diplomats with each other in accordance with the interests of the U.S., as well as with both France and Britain. The approach of U.S. policy toward Syria over the past 1943-1945 and carried out by France acts of abuse and bombing and tied inhumane with the population, and the rejection of the French policy of this and discuss the developments in Syria, independence and participation in the UN within the framework of the decisions in the context of international interests and international competition.

We conclude from this historical introduction to say that Syria Station attention by decision-makers in the United States for its strategic location and the passage of pipelines transporting oil, and followed up minutes of the ongoing developments in which a researcher for securing their own interests and the interests of its citizens and its institutions and cultural missionary and archaeological, and dealt with Syria and described based important in the framework of international interests and international competition.

CHAPTER I

The position of the U.S. military coups in Syria, 1949-1954

The position of the United States of coup Husni Zaim in March 1949

O n March 30, 1949 overthrew the military coup carried out by units of the Syrian army led by Chief of Staff leader (Colonel Husni zaim) in the Syrian government without bloodshed and gave Syrian President Shukri al-Quwatli and Prime Minister Khaled Azm and his government resigned and issued Husni zaim decreed in resolving the status of Deputies Syrian and the formation of the constitutional committee tasked with preparing a draft of a new constitution and electoral law and announced its intention to conduct new elections and stressed the leader in public statements and in a letter addressed to the Secretary General of the United Nation intention to Fulfill all its international commitments to Syria and pledged to negotiate a truce with Israel. ¹

For the position of the United States and its role in the coup must solicit the views of a number of writers and researchers insiders and other stakeholders who took this subject, some of them see (the Central Intelligence Agency, were not inactive in the region and that there was evidence that the coup of the results of the U.S.² intervention and stresses Mohamed Hassanein Heikal Egyptian writer known that there were not social forces behind the coup, but there were financial interests in the forefront of U.S. oil companies Tap line the government Shukri Quwatli failed to reach agreement with them in this regard and that link men CIA Husni zaim known was between Britain and the United State that time a dispute over the spoils of oil in the Middle East, ³ and in another book emphasizes the author himself during his speech about the role of men CIA (Kermit Roosevelt) saying (where he was to participate in the operations side of the coup Husni zaim of a coup converged when the demands of politics with the demands of the oil companies).⁴

And confirms Salah El Akkad U.S. participation and their role actively in the coup by saying (that the project Tapline took the evidence of the U.S. involvement in the coup and adds supporters of this opinion witnesses Others, such as ready Husni zaim in coordinating plans with Nuri Said to fight communism and the acceptance of the draft defense for the Middle East be complementary to NATO and signed a truce with Israel.⁵ Moreover, the Minister of State and Vice President