The Afghan war in 2001

The Gulf War in 1991

The conflict between Iraq and Iran from 1979 to 1989

The conflict between Afghanistan and the Soviet Union from 1979 to 1989

The Kippur war in 1973

The 6-day war in 1967

The Suez Canal Crisis in 1956

The war of Israeli independence in 1948 between Israel and Arab states…

This short summary, with the current problems of Palestine and terrorism (with groups like Hezbollah, Jihad, Hamas for example), puts emphasis on the instability of the Middle East. This part of the world is in a way a mosaic of ethnic groups, of civilisations, of cultures, of religions, of languages; and also a very important economic region. Actually, there are many petroleum and gas resources, and it has always been a main artery between Europe and Asia. All these differences and economic rivalries make it difficult to establish peace or maintain it. Even if it is impossible for the moment to imagine the issue of these conflicts and the future political configuration of the Middle East, we wanted to speak about it, because we really think that our future is linked to the fate of the eastern countries.

Our objective is not to describe the recent wars or analyse the Afghan situation. There are thousands of articles and books about these themes. So we have tried to adopt a political and historical outlook and explain the origins of this instability. That is why we decided to base our presentation on the famous personality of an English secret agent, Sir T.E. Lawrence. We chose him, because his role during the first World War was ambiguous. On the one hand, he represented the interests of great colonialist powers (GB, France and Russia). On the other hand, he embodies their hesitations and their duplicity, relating to the division of this region and the creation of Israel.

As only a few people really know Sir T. E. Lawrence, we will talk about his life and his writings, in order to point out his true participation or influence in this part of the world (and above all the relationship that he established with the Arab leaders). Then we will analyse the myth of this figure on a cinematographic plan thanks to a comparison between different movies about this secret agent. Thirdly, we will explain the reasons for the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and recount the different steps of the Middle East division after the first World War.

Thomas Edward Lawrence, an archaeological scholar turned war hero, as Lawrence of Arabia, in 1914-1918, became a myth in his own lifetime, even before he published his own version of his legend, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom.

More than a military leader and inspirational force behind the Arab revolt against the Turks, he was a "superb" tactician and highly influential theoretician of guerrilla warfare.

Thomas Edward Lawrence was born in Wales, in Tremadoc, on August 15, 1888, to Sir Thomas Chapman and Sara Madem, the governess of Sir Thomas' daughter.

As "Mr. and Mrs." Lawrence, the couple had five sons, Thomas Edward was the second of them.

In 1896, the family settled in Oxford, where T.E. (for Thomas Edward) attended High School and Jesus College in which he studied his first interest: medieval military architecture.

He pursued it in its historical settings, studying crusaders castles in France and, in 1909, in Syria and Palestine, submitting a thesis on this subject (this thesis was posthumously published in 1936, under the title Crusaders Castles).

As a protégé of the Oxford archaeologist D.G. Hogarth, he acquired a travelling fellowship from Magdalen College and joined an expedition excavating the Hittite Settlement of Carchemish on the Euphrates, working there from 1911 to 1914.

He used his free time to travel on his own and get to know the language and the people.

Early in 1914, he explored, with his research director, northern Sinai, on the Turkish frontier east of Suez.

As it was supposed to be a scientific expedition, it was, in fact, sponsored by the Palestine Exploration Fund, and it was more a map-making reconnaissance from Gaza to Aqaba, destined to be of almost immediate strategic value.

The month the war began, Sir Lawrence became a civilian employee of the Map Department of the War Office in London, responsible for preparing an useful military map of Sinai.

In December 1916, he was a Lieutenant in Cairo; he was assigned to intelligence because there was a lack of experts on Arab affairs, especially experts who had travelled in the Turkish-held Arab lands.

In his "new job", T.E. Lawrence spent more than a year interviewing prisoners, drawing maps, receiving and processing data from agents behind the enemy lines, and produced a handbook on the Turkish Army.

In 1915, his brothers, Will and Franck, were killed in action in France. At the same time, Egypt was the strategic area for Middle Eastern military operations of prodigious inefficiency.

After a trip to Arabia, T.E. Lawrence was convinced of an alternative method of undermining Germany's Turkish ally.

In October 1916, he came with the diplomat Sir Ronald Storrs on a mission to Arabia, where Hussein Ibn Ali, the Emir of Mecca, had proclaimed a revolt against the Turks.

Sir Lawrence received permission to consult a son of Hussein, Fayçal, then commanding an Arab force south-west of Medina.

He was back in Cairo in November 1916, and asked his superiors to abet the efforts at rebellion with arms and gold.

Then, he joined Fayçal's army again as a political and liaison officer.

T.E. Lawrence was not the only officer that became involved in the Arab rising, but he quickly became its brains, its organizing force, its liaison with Cairo and its military technician.

The second part of his "job" consisted in a hit and run guerrilla operation against the Turkish lines, mainly keeping the Damascus-to-Medina railway inoperable.

As a consequence, Sir Lawrence was called "Emir of dynamite" by the Bedouins.

His first victory was Aqaba, on July 6, 1917, in the northernmost tip of the Red Sea, after a two-month march.

Then, he tried to co-ordinate the Arab movements with the campaign of Gen.

Sir Lawrence was captured in November in Dara, by the Turks, while reconnoitring the area in Arab dress: he was recognized, captured and tortured. This experience, described in many of his literary works, left him real scars.

In December, he entered and took part in the victory parade in Jerusalem, returned to his actions with Fayçal's forces, and rose to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel with the Distinguished Service Order (DSO).

He entered Damascus in October 1918, but he was exhausted by his experiences: he had endured the extremities of hunger, weather and disease.

Just before the Armistice, disillusioned and distinguished, he left for home and refused, at a royal audience, the Order of the Bath and the DSO, in front of George V.

He vainly lobbied for Arab independence at the Paris Peace Conference (even appearing in Arab dress) , in 1919, and lobbied against the detachment of Syria and Lebanon from the rest of the Arab countries, as French mandate.

In March 1921, he was called to the Middle East as adviser on Arab affairs to the colonial minister but he rejected all the offers of further positions in government and decided to join the Royal Air Force (RAF) on August 28, 1922, under another name, but he was released on January 1923.

Finding reinstatement impossible, T.E. Lawrence looked for another service and joined the Royal Tank Corps on March 1923, under his real name, for the first time : Thomas Edward Shaw.

Posted in Dorset, he bought a cottage, named Clouds Hill.

His last years were spent among RAF' seaplanes, although he was not allowed to fly, and he worked on improved designs for high-speed seaplanes.

Discharged from the RAF on February 26, 1935, Sir Lawrence returned to Cloud Hill to face a retirement at 46, but he died on May 19, after six days of coma, due to a motorcycling accident.

T.E. Lawrence wrote several literary works; the most famous of them are :

- The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, published for the first time in 1922

- The Mint, posthumously published in 1936

- The Letters, published in 1938.

The main work, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, has got a very special history, full of incidents.

This book, stylistically self-conscious yet masterly memoir, unique in its period, is one of the greatest modern epics in the English language and can be considered as the published version of Lawrence 's legend.

The work, composed of ten books, was begun in 1919-1920, when All Souls College allowed T.E. Lawrence to write on the Arab revolt.

The redaction was not "continuous", and the books number 2 to 7, and number 10, were written in Paris, between February and June 1919.

The introduction was written in Cairo, in July-August 1919, and the Introduction and the first book in London, by the end of 1919.

Then, Sir Lawrence lost all his work (except the Introduction and books 9 and 10) at Reading station in London, on Christmas 1919.

One month later, he started writing again his work, for 3 months, but he burnt his text in 1922, because he wasn't pleased.

So, he started the third and last version in London, Djeddah and Amman, in 1921 and finished it in February 1922: it was 330.000 words long.

This text was published in Oxford for the first time during the first quarter of 1922 , by The Oxford Times.

T.E. Lawrence condensed his work several times, in 1923-1924 (when he was in the Royal Tank Corps) and in 1925-1925 (Royal Air Force) and decided to send it to subscribers by the end of 1926 and the beginning of 1927: then, his work was 280.000 words long.

Only 107 copies were published and there was no other version published during his lifetime.

Because of the cost of printing "Seven Pillars", Sir Lawrence wrote a condensed version of The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, whose title is Revolt in the Desert, in 1926, and which was published in The Daily Telegraph in December 1926 and in an unexpurgated edition in 1927.

The title of the work is a reference to the Bible, more precisely to the Book of Proverbs in which we can find this sentence : "Wisdom built a house: it built its seven pillars".

Sir Lawrence used this title for one of his works on seven cities (Mecca, Aqaba, Cairo, Damascus, etc.) as he was a student. Because he thought this work had no maturity, he decided to "throw" it away but he kept the title in memory.

The Seven Pillars of Wisdom is one of the few twentieth century works in English to make epic figures out of contemporaries. It is an action packed narrative, replete with incident and spectacle, with rich character portrayals and a tense introspection that bares the author's complex mental and spiritual transformation.

T.E. Lawrence received the "help" of his friends, writing his book, the most famous of them is George Bernard Shaw, who suggested lowering the emotional pitch and cutting out the possibly libellous and politically questionable passages, but also the homosexual passages about the behaviour of the Arab troops when they were without women.

This historical and mythical character obviously inspired Hollywood which gave him his depth and his fame.

Several films which have a direct or indirect relationship with Lawrence of Arabia’s life, adventures or Middle Eastern conflicts during the first World War have been made, but only those of Christopher Renaul and David Lean will be dealt with this paper since they are the most famous and they are both complementary and different.

1/ One character, two movies

The oldest and the most famous movie about Sir T.E Lawrence is the production of David Lean from 1962. This Lawrence of Arabia comes close to perfection in the realms of cinematography musical score, artistic performances and especially screenplay which remains true to T.E Lawrence’s biography. To summarize the plot, during the first World War, in the Middle East, the main British interest was to keep the Turks from gaining control of the Suez Canal. In contrast, they had little interest in the various allied Bedouin tribes in the region, given their fragmentation and archaic fighting methods. However, according to T.E Lawrence (played by Peter O’Toole) the Arab groups are fundamental. Unfortunately, he spends all day colouring maps in Cairo. However, luck comes his way when Mr Dryden (Claude Rains) a key political figure, manages to persuade General Murray (Donald Wolfit) that Lawrence should be seconded to the British Arab bureau. He has undoubted intellectual skills that can be put to use gathering information, and the office would also rid themselves of his disturbing personality by placing him far out of the way in Arabia. Thus, Sir T.E Lawrence begins his adventures and he gets offered an open mission to find Prince Fayçal (Alec Guinness) and determines what the best action is to take with the help of Sherif Ali Ibn El Karish (Omar Sharif who brings a rare humanity to the film, indicating a deep understanding of both the brutality of life and the need for compassion), he launches himself into the conquest of desert. The film focuses on four major events presented in the Seven Pillars of Wisdom: in flashback, the glorious conquest of Aqaba, Lawrence’s capture and torture in Deraa, the no prisoner massacre and the anti climatic fall of Damascus.

The other film is the production of Christopher Renaul in 1990, A Dangerous man: Lawrence after Arabia. It is based on T.E Lawrence’s life after the first World War. This film continues where David Lean’s leaves off. In 1919, at the start of the Paris Peace Conference, T.E Lawrence (played by Ralph Fiennes, The English Patient is the most well known of Ralph Fiennes’ film) prepares for his greatest battle yet: to deliver the promised land of Syrius to his wartime Hashemite allies. Played out in a labyrinth of council chambers and lobbies of faded imperialism, Lawrence ‘s campaign confronts him with opponents more deceitful and lethal than any he encountered in the desert. Together with his comrade-in-arms, Prince Fayçal (Alexander Siddeg), Lawrence charms the salons of Paris and London with social niceties while using his growing political skills to passionately plead the Arabic cause until his goal is achieved. This film has more of a fictitious aspect. It is inspired by T.E Lawrence’s biography but it focuses on a certain part of his life and not the most well-known one. The action takes place in Europe and in the Arabic Peninsula and it focuses on the social aspect of T.E Lawrence.

2/ Two films, two legends

It is interesting to put emphasis on the performance of both actors, Peter O’Toole and Ralph Fiennes. They embody the heroic and contradictory uncrowned King of Arabia and they give depth to the complex and jelly-like personality of T.E Lawrence.

Lawrence was a multi-faceted character of such complexity that not many actors could really do him justice without "playing to the rafters". Ralph’s T.E Lawrence is conflicted, ambivalent, passionate and deeply troubled, whereas Peter’s Lawrence of Arabia is more a teetering combination of keen intelligence charisma and barely concealed madness. The performance of Ralph Fiennes, like Peter O’Toole’s one is close to T.E Lawrence’s life, he was a solitary, masochistic adventurer who paradoxically wanted to be both extraordinary and ordinary, a man blinded by his own ego. For both movies, the casting was very difficult. Indeed, for Ralph Fiennes, A Dangerous Man: Lawrence after Arabia was one of his earlier roles and it was the same for Peter O’Toole.

About Lawrence of Arabia, the casting is so impressive: on the one hand, the most famous actors act in this film (Alec Guinness, Anthony Quinn, Omar Sharif…) they give an artistic touch to historical characters; on the other hand, an unknown actor Peter O’Toole appears, he embodies a legend and he becomes The Legend. In 1958, David Lean began his casting and wanted to cast Dirk Bogarde, Marlon Brando, Richard Burton for the part of T.E Lawrence, finally, he preferred to choose from those numerous famous actors, Peter O’Toole a young unknown Irish actor.

New Yorker Magazine established a comparison between Fiennes and O’Toole when the film of Christopher Renaul opened in 1992: "Mr Fiennes is pitch perfect as the desert hero manoeuvring amid the smoky corridor of the 1919 Paris Peace Conference. Mr Fiennes hair is browned than his model’s and physically he is more imposing. He has the right eyes, though. They are not blazingly blues, like Peter O’Toole’s, but a metaphorically more ambiguous blue-grey which is closer to the image indicated by one of Lawrence’s Arab detractors: "the sky shining through the empty eye sockets of skull".

But, A Dangerous man: Lawrence after Arabia does not have the epic sweep of David Lean’s Lawrence of Arabia, not very surprising, the budget for A Dangerous Man was considerably less than for the David Lean film. David Lean is the specialist of epic films, Lawrence of Arabia lasts 222 minutes; too long, the distributors decided to cut it at the editing and reduced it to 202 minutes. In 1989, for the opening of Cannes Festival, the long version with original scenes was screened. Without a big budget, Christopher Renaul has crafted a very worthwhile film for people who are interested in T.E Lawrence, or in finding a little-known but worthy film.

How can David Lean’s Lawrence of Arabia succeed in transforming ordinary historico-military events into a cinematographic myth? Some specific examples can help to understand the success of this movie.

1/ From an historical point of view

When this film opened in 1962, the United Kingdom was finding its current power. This was a bad period for the British monarchy, as it lost its last large colonies and its role as an important actor in international relations because of the Cold War which polarized the world between the USSR and the United States of America. In the 1950s, the Suez Crisis caused Great Britain to lose a large part of its role in Arabic countries’ politics and it woke up to the precariousness of its rank among the middle powers. Before, the United Kingdom was the political heart of the region, providing stability to the coexistence of Middle Eastern countries. Thus, the impact of David Lean’s movie is significant because it perpetuated a legend, not only through its title, but also through its inspiration. This movie is the witness of English history and, to a certain extent, it glorifies British nationalism in focusing on a glorious period of Great Britain through a war hero. T.E Lawrence contributes to the efforts during the first World War to defend British interests and to reject imperialism in Arabic Peninsula. This film has an undeniable political dimension which certainly explains its success.

2/ From an artistic point of view

The success of Lawrence of Arabia by David Lean is not arbitrary. In fact, it was recognized as a masterpiece by those in show business, it received 10 Academy Awards nominations, winning 7 awards including Best Director, Best Picture, Best Color Cine, Best Colour Art, Best Sound, Best Music Score (by a French musician, Maurice Jarre) and Best Film Editing, a list not often attained by other films. Lawrence of Arabia is not a simple biography or an adventure movie, although it contains both elements, but a movie that uses the desert as a stage and as an entire character, a movie where reality is stranger than fiction. A New York Times journalist explains that David Lean has the ability to take a mirage and make it real. He transformed what the spectators believed to be nothing more than a speck on the horizon into a human being by using his original filmography technique. Thoughts, dreams, and needs remain barely touched in a film which is more a catalyst and figurehead than a biography about the man himself.

Lawrence of Arabia can be studied and understood on two main levels:

The scenery. Landscapes are simply amazing! The desert playing a central role. According to a film critic, it is a friend, a foe and the love interest. There are no words to describe the desert, emotions are felt only by seeing the tortured wind streaming across the baked sands, swirling and twisting under the Sun’s "anvil". The desert is the anonymous killer of the movie, for instance, the wayside cross of Azim, one of men who followed Sir T.E Lawrence, after having been abandoned by his camel, illustrates this idea. As the plot is uncovered, we are the privileged spectator of the birth of a love story. Indeed, T.E Lawrence falls in love with the desert and, bit by bit, he makes it his own. The desert becomes an object of desire, a force which is both unforgiving and romantic. For example, we can underline the importance of the change of clothes. At the beginning of the movie, Lawrence dresses in a British army uniform signifying that he belongs to the British world and war strategy. Then, when he runs to find Prince Fayçal, he wears a turban to protect himself from the sun. Finally his friend Sherif Ali Ibn El Kharish burns his uniform and gives him a traditional Bedouin dress. This is symbolic because it means the birth of Lawrence of Arabia and the death of the soldier Lawrence, highlighting the special relationship which bonds the desert to Sir T.E Lawrence.

The music. The movie is not only based on a visual aspect but on an aural aspect as well. Recorded by a famous French musician, Maurice Jarre, the music forms an integral part in the construction of this epic. The symphony in the musical score emphasizes the great passages in the film by its long melodies which accompany Lawrence throughout his journeys. For the viewers, the music is almost a lover to the man, as he has no friends and finds himself isolated in the unforgiving desert. In fact, the music goes as far as to replace the dialogue, making it an irreplaceable chaperon to the plot. Maurice Jarre succeeds in giving more depth and emotion to the movie thanks to his music. Certainly, in Lawrence of Arabia, the desert is an entire character but as a silent actor, it can express its feelings only through the music. Moreover, the brilliant score mixes rousing orchestral themes with elements of Arabia-sounding rhythms, producing a haunting effect. Like David Lean, Maurice Jarre wanted to underline the mix between British and Arabic culture.

Three main ideas can describe the situation in the Middle East before the first World War.

1/ The decline of the Ottoman Empire

The Ottoman Empire started to decline for internal reasons. In order to compete with the western countries, it tried to reform its system. But it was very difficult because of the incompetence of the administration. It was also based on an elitist system, with so many inequalities, and it was composed by a lot of minorities. Before the beginning of the 20^th century, this diversity was a force for this empire thanks to the dynamism of the conquests. But it became a source of fragility and there were reactions from the oppressed minorities and Kurdish, Arab and Armenian nationalist movements were created (and sustained by the European countries in order to destabilise the Ottoman Empire).

Moreover, the great powers became more and more present on an economic and cultural level. The foreign capital came to 9 billion Francs: 54% from France, 25% from Great Britain, 9.3% from Germany. Europe controlled the bank system, the ways of communication (railways, ports and roads), the main public services (water, gas, electricity and telephone), mining activities and the petroleum industry. At the same time, it tried to fight against local industries in order to develop its own exports towards the Ottoman Empire. So the latter became dependent from foreign investments and was indebted to the western countries.

The cultural penetration was also very important. Effectively, the colonialist countries tried to extend their influence to this region through their nationals, the missionary societies and their educational system. For example, France received more than 100 000 pupils in its establishments.

In a way, we can say that the Ottoman Empire was ready to be shared.

2/ The presence of great colonialist powers in the Middle East

The presence of great colonialist powers in the Middle East became a movement of ‘invasion" and was a means to enclose the Ottoman Empire. France conquered North Africa, with essentially the colonisation of Algeria, and Great Britain seized progressively territories and states like Malta, the Emirates of the Gulf, Aden, Oman, Cyprus, Egypt, Sudan and the south of Arabia. It established different political status in order to extend its empire and reinforce its supremacy.

But France, Great Britain, Germany and Russia had also many economic interests. The collapse of The Ottoman Empire would have been for them a means to ensure the ways of communication with Asia, obtain cheaper raw materials, find new markets for their products and profitable investments for their capital.

So the war was a sort of pretext to destroy the Ottoman Empire and take possession of its territories and its wealth.

3/ The duplicity of the British foreign policy

On the one hand, it promised the French government it would give them Syria and Lebanon; and it wanted to defend its own political and economic interests (above all concerning oil imports).

On the other hand, Great Britain negotiated with Ibn Saoud and Hussein in order to obtain their participation in the fight against Germany and its Turkish ally. It promised to support their nationalist claims, liberate the Arab populations and create independent Arab states. So Lawrence of Arabia was sent close to Hussein to organise the Arab revolt. He became the liaison officer of Fayçal, Hussein’s son. He participated in the Bedouin movements and in fights against the Turks. With the Arab "army", he sustained the offensive of General Allenby in Palestine and Syria. As the local leaders, he really thought it would have been possible to create a big Arab Empire and maintain good relationships between that new power and Great Britain.

So the geopolitical situation before 1914 was very complex and was linked to rivalries between the Ottoman Empire and the great colonialist powers.

Two agreements were decisive in the evolution of this situation : the Sykes-Picot Agreement in May 1916 and the Balfour Declaration in November 1917.

1/ The Sykes-Picot Agreement (may 1916)

It was a secret agreement firmed by Sir Mark Sykes (GB) and Mr. François Georges Picot (France). The agreement had to be kept secret because it was a real dismemberment of the Middle East and of the Ottoman Empire. France, GB, and Russia (because it agreed these decisions) did not take into consideration the cultural, ethnic and religious differences of the local populations. They did not respect their freedom and their right to become independent, and so they did not fulfil their commitments towards Arab leaders…

This agreement established a double status: some territories were put under direct control and others were considered as areas of influence. It also divided this region into 4 parts: a French one (Lebanon, north of Syria), an English one (Kuwait, Mesopotamia, northern Palestine), an international one (the rest of Palestine and the city of Jerusalem) and a Russian one (that is to say the territories conquered during the war).

[See the map in the document that we gave to them]

2/ The Balfour Declaration (November 1917)

In a letter written by Arthur James Lord Balfour to Lord Rothschild, in 1917, the British government announced its desire to establish a Jewish home in Palestine. This letter represented the first political recognition of Zionist aims by a great power.

But this idea was totally in contradiction with the Arab nationalist movements and the promises to recognise and sustain the independence of Arabs. That is why nationalist movements became more active and their claims stronger during the inter-war years and the British presence and political domination in the Middle East were contested.

So it was the symbol of the decline of the British Empire, and these oppositions seemed like the first fruits of the current conflicts and the tragic situation that the Middle East is experiencing.

But we can ask ourselves why Great Britain decided to change its foreign policy and to sustain the Zionist movement. Arthur Koestler summed up the complexity of the situation very well: "A nation promised solemnly to a second one the territory of a third one". Why ?

In the context of the war, Great Britain wanted to obtain the support of Jewish communities, that had became a real force in Europe and in the United States. They would have put pressure on the American leaders to enter the war and would have avoided the defection of the Russian ally. In the long-term, Great Britain wanted to fight against the French influence in this part of the world and did not accept the presence of France in Palestine, that is to say near to the Suez Canal and the ways of communication with its empire.

The Zionist movement was aware of the British strategic interests, but it used this opportunity to realise a dream: the creation of an independent and strong Jewish state. That is why it maintained some pressure on Great Britain during the inter-war-years.

So there was a lot of hypocrisy from these two actors, and also from the other European countries.

We will have to speak about two another facts in order to really understand the complex division of this part of the world and the tensions that exist now : firstly the intervention of the Soviet Union, and secondly the Sèvres Peace Agreement (August 10, 1920) and the role of Mustafa Kemal.

1/ The Soviet Union

The (new) Soviet Union disapproved of the Sykes-Picot Agreement signed by the former tsar. It abandoned all the tsarist pretensions in the name of freedom and of the right to self-determination. But in fact, it had two main interests : on the one hand, to extend its influence to the Middle East ; on the other hand, to destabilise and to fight against France and above all GB.

2/ The Sèvres Peace Agreement in 1920

This agreement was really a dismemberment of Turkey, the ally of Germany during the war, and it symbolised the death of the Ottoman Empire. It lost its European part and also important areas of Anatolia (where Kurdish and Armenian states should have been created). The Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits were put under allied jurisdiction. But, a military leader, Mustafa Kemal, did not accepted this situation, which was synonymous with submission, and organised a rebellion. After many fights and victories, he obtained its revision. A new treaty (the Lausanne Agreement July 24, 1923) established a real independent country in the borders that we know now, but it had also two contradictory consequences:

- the creation of a Republic and of a new force in the region

- the non-respect of Kurdish and Armenian minorities

Sir T.E Lawrence was above all a well known military strategist who tried to unify the Arabic Peninsula and to defend Arab nationalism. In spite of his failure, he succeeded in underlining the burning issue of the dismemberment of this region of the World. His private life was secret and unknown even by his fellows, so it is difficult to grasp his jelly-like personality and to understand his political opinions.

Hollywood, fascinated by this kind of hero, created Lawrence of Arabia’s myth. The famous director David Lean made an epic film as he likes that. With a lot of means and an huge budget, he tried to glorify the British power and to erase the unhappy memory of the Suez Canal Crisis. David Lean, like Christopher Renaul, did not succeed in solving the mystery of Sir T.E. Lawrence, but, they try to give depth and reality to this ambiguous character.

We only wanted to present the different actors and explain the origins of the current conflicts. In our opinion, the most important thing is to stress the violation of the rights of minorities and the irrational (or perhaps selfish) aspect of the division of this region. The great powers only thought in terms of their own economic and political interests, that is to say to dominate and exploit the populations of the Middle East, without anticipating the consequences of such a policy.

- T.E. Lawrence, Les Sept piliers de la sagesse, Paris, Folio, 1992, 943 p.

- Alain Gresh et Dominique Vidal, Les 100 portes du Proche-Orient, Paris, Editions Autrement, 1989

- Britannica Encyclopaedia

- Encyclopédie Universalis

- Encyclopédie du cinéma, Larousse, 1998

- Chronique du cinéma, Bordas, 1995