British stake claim to dominate post-war Arab federation¶
Core Argument¶
Here, the chapter dissects the November 1943 crisis in Lebanon, where French colonial forces violently suppressed the Lebanese parliament after it unilaterally declared independence. The core argument is that this episode is not a clash between democratic allies and fascist enemies, but a naked struggle between rival imperialist powers—British and French—over post-war spoils. The text insists that the war is not a crusade for freedom but a competition for colonies, oil, and strategic dominance.
The key claim is that British imperialism actively encouraged the Lebanese nationalists to provoke the crisis, using them as a lever to oust French influence from the Levant. Evidence is drawn from the Daily Express and Reynolds News, which note that British-backed figures like the Iraqi regent and King Farouk of Egypt were promoting a Pan-Arab federation under British tutelage, encompassing the oil-rich territories of Egypt, Palestine, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. The author argues that British protests against de Gaulle’s repression are cynical: Britain denies independence to Palestine and India while posing as a friend of the Arabs. The French, led by de Gaulle, are portrayed not as democratic liberators but as imperialists who would “wade in the blood” of colonial peoples and, tomorrow, French workers.
The chapter draws heavily on the history of broken promises since World War I, when Britain and France pledged Arab independence in exchange for revolt against the Ottoman Empire, only to impose mandates and occupation. It references the 1938 Palestinian revolt as precedent. The theoretical context is Leninist imperialism: the war is an interimperialist conflict, and the coming defeat of Germany will merely shift the struggle from military to political and economic means. The Moscow Conference of 1943 is cited, where France was excluded from the European Advisory Commission, revealing its subordinate status.
The polemics are sharp and multiple. The primary target is British imperialism, accused of double-dealing and hypocrisy. De Gaulle is attacked as a “perjured” imperialist. The Labour Party—both its leadership and its “lefts”—is ridiculed for defending either British or French imperialism while maintaining the fiction of an anti-fascist war. The Stalinists, including the Daily Worker and French communist Florimond Bonte, are condemned for covering up the conflict and pressuring de Gaulle to accept a satellite role, thereby betraying the Lebanese masses. Goebbels is noted as exploiting the incident to expose Allied hypocrisy, a fact the author uses to underscore that imperialist crimes serve one another. The chapter concludes with a call for British workers to demand unconditional independence for all Arab peoples and a socialist federation.