What was the King-Crane Commission and its significance?

The King-Crane Commission was a 1919 American investigation into the political attitudes of the Middle East, significantly influencing post-WWI territorial decisions.

The King-Crane Commission, officially known as the Inter-Allied Commission on Mandates in Turkey, was established by President Woodrow Wilson in 1919. The commission was led by two Americans, Henry Churchill King, an educator, and Charles R. Crane, a businessman. Their task was to travel to the Middle East to investigate the political attitudes and aspirations of the local populations, particularly in relation to the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire after World War I.

The commission's findings were significant as they revealed a strong preference among the local populations for complete independence or, failing that, for American administration. This was in stark contrast to the plans of the European powers, particularly Britain and France, who intended to divide the region into mandates under their control. The commission's report, therefore, represented a challenge to European colonial ambitions in the Middle East.

Despite the commission's findings, the report was largely ignored by the Allied powers. The British and French went ahead with their plans to divide the region, leading to the creation of modern states such as Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. The commission's report was not published until 1922, and even then, it received little attention.

However, the significance of the King-Crane Commission lies not only in its immediate impact, or lack thereof, but also in its longer-term implications. The commission's report provides a valuable historical record of the political attitudes in the Middle East at a crucial juncture in its history. Moreover, the disregard of the commission's findings by the European powers can be seen as a contributing factor to the political instability and conflict that has characterised the region throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. The commission's work, therefore, continues to be relevant to contemporary discussions about the historical roots of current issues in the Middle East.