previous sub-section
A Case Study in Centralization: The Hijaz under Young Turk Rule, 1908–1914
next sub-section

Sharif Husayn’s Campaigns

Once the Ottoman government strengthened its position in northern Hijaz, it collaborated with the sharif in campaigns aimed at bringing under control centers of unrest further south. Rather than overextending itself in the Peninsula, İstanbul chose to avail itself of the resources that the sharif could summon up and to assist him militarily, if and when needed. Husayn sought to extend his sphere of influence through these campaigns. His interests were best served by cooperation with the government.

The major local tribal potentates and several lesser ones in the Peninsula were all interested in expanding their spheres of influence. Ibn Rashid of Hail (in northern Najd) had been in alliance with the government since the turn of the century against Ibn Sa‘ud, his powerful rival in the Najd. The enhancement of the government presence in nearby Medina put an effective check on any expansionist ambitions of Ibn Rashid and assured his loyalty. Another local power holder, Imam Yahya of Yemen, was far removed from the reach of the others. İstanbul found it necessary to make a separate peace with the imam in 1911, which granted him autonomy and also removed him from the power struggles to the north. The newest competitor near the Hijaz was Muhammad al-Idrisi. Like Ibn Sa‘ud and Yahya before him, Idrisi gathered a following by propagating his own particular religious message. Thus, Ibn Sa‘ud and Idrisi came to be the principal rivals of Sharif Husayn in his efforts to maintain his authority among the tribes of the Hijaz and to extend it to neighboring areas.

The sharif first set out to consolidate his position vis-à-vis Ibn Sa‘ud. In March 1909 a confrontation between the forces of Ibn Rashid and Ibn Sa‘ud near Medina ended in the latter’s defeat.[104] During the conflict one of the largest tribes of eastern Hijaz, ‘Utayba, submitted to Ibn Sa‘ud. At the end of the hostilities the ‘Utayba chiefs wanted to re establish a connection with the Hijaz. In view of the weakness of the Sa‘udis, whose leader Shams al-haqiqa claimed to have been killed during the fighting with Ibn Rashid,[105] Sharif Husayn convinced the government to accept the pleas of the ‘Utayba chiefs, who argued that the ‘Utayba could constitute a buffer at the Najd border against any attacks on the railway.[106] The grand sharif also sent an expedition against another important tribe, Mutayr, under the leadership of his two sons ‘Abdullah and ‘Ali.[107]

In the spring of 1910 Sharif Husayn prepared for another display of force, this time against Ibn Sa‘ud. The sharif was prompted to some extent by the fear of a joint action by Ibn Sa‘ud and the newly ascendant Idrisi against the grand sharifate. In April Sharif Husayn informed İstanbul of his decision to send deputies to Najd to collect the religious zekat tax that had not been paid for more than thirty years.[108] He demanded from Ibn Sa‘ud the taxes for the Qasim region and invited the people of Qasim to pay allegiance to the grand sharifate. At the end of July Husayn designated his son ‘Abdullah as his deputy and left his summer residence in Taif with his three other sons, Faysal, Zayd, and ‘Ali, and a Beduin force of 4,000 for an “investigative” expedition.[109] He contacted both the governor and the commander of the Hijaz forces for military assistance, but İstanbul was reluctant to see a major showdown in Najd and did not comply with the request.[110]

One of the objectives of Sharif Husayn’s hastily prepared expedition against Ibn Sa‘ud was to show his rivals that, despite the recent separation of Medina from the Hijaz, he retained his following among the tribes as the strongest local chief in the region. He also hoped to receive military assistance from the government and thus lead his enemies to believe that he could count on the capital’s full support. It seems that İstanbul chose to curb his ambition. Husayn’s renewed request for aid after he engaged in hostilities with Ibn Sa‘ud’s forces, taking prisoner in the process Sa‘d ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman, the brother of Emir ‘Abd al-‘Aziz al-Sa‘ud, was also denied.[111]

The sharif signed a pact with Ibn Sa‘ud. According to the terms relayed to İstanbul by ‘Abdullah, it stipulated that Ibn Sa‘ud would refrain from collecting the zekat among the ‘Utayba, that the shaykh of Qasim would be elected by its inhabitants, and that the latter would pay an annual tax to the province of the Hijaz.[112] While Sharif Husayn attempted to present his expedition as a victory for himself and the government, the muhafız of Medina, ‘Ali Rida Pasha, reported that the grand sharif had to withdraw from Qasim because he was running out of supplies and Ibn Sa‘ud was preparing to attack him from his rear. According to the muhafız, the sharif had to return shorn of glory, pretending that the gifts he had received along the way were really booty.[113] The absence of any change in the relations of Ibn Sa‘ud and the sharif, as well as Sa‘ud’s subsequent noncompliance with the terms of the pact, support the view that the sharif’s “victory” in 1910 was a hollow one.[114] In 1911 Ibn Sa‘ud restored the taxes on the ‘Utayba. “It has been rumored,” Ambassador Lowther wrote to Sir Edward Grey in his report for the last quarter of 1911, “that the Grand Shereef contemplated another expedition against Bin Sa‘ud, the success of his former expedition in 1910 being considered very doubtful.”[115] Husayn was mostly on the defensive vis-à-vis his rival in Najd during the rest of his term.

Only a few months after Husayn arrived in Mecca as emir, Idrisi of Asir declared himself mehdi (messiah) in Sabya and invited all Muslims to join in a jihad (holy war) against the Ottoman government. As the governor of Yemen sent a copy of the declarations that Idrisi distributed among the tribes and urged the government to take effective measures to secure his arrest,[116] Sharif Husayn dispatched an emissary to Asir to investigate the situation.[117] Husayn maintained that it was the shortage of civil and military functionaries in this region that allowed the uprising and urged that central authority be strengthened in the region by sending additional officials.[118] This would be an unusual request for a local notable who did not have a symbiotic power relationship with the central authority.

İstanbul sought to establish a relationship with Idrisi similar to the one it had with Sharif Husayn. Indeed, in March 1910 the sharif alleged that a secret agreement concluded between the government and Idrisi was prompting Idrisi to renewed attacks.[119] Grand Vizier İbrahim Hakkı Pasha assured the sharif that Idrisi had no official capacity or prerogatives and that the government was merely trying to deal with him in friendly ways.[120] In November 1910 Husayn expressed his indignation regarding the İstanbul paper Al-‘arab,[121] which published articles of a nature, he claimed, that would dissipate all measures previously taken against Idrisi. He described the articles as depreciative of Arabs and nothing less than open and official encouragement to the tribes to join forces with Idrisi.[122]

Idrisi’s insurrection was not perceived in the capital to be as serious a threat as Sharif Husayn’s alarm suggested. Despite İstanbul’s concil iatory stance toward the rebel chief, however, later reports from not only the grand sharif but also from other civil and military authorities in the region (the command of the Seventh Army,[123] the mutasarrıfs of Asir[124] and Jidda,[125] and the Hijaz governor[126]) led the government to reappraise the situation. These reports mentioned that Idrisi was bringing many tribes under his influence and was planning an attack on Mecca during the pilgrimage season. This would threaten more than the sha rif’s regional influence and could also invite foreign intervention, since colonial subjects of European powers like Britain and France would be in Mecca in the pilgrimage season.

Idrisi blockaded Abha at the end of 1910, cutting the communications of the Ottoman garrison in the town.[127] As İstanbul authorized Husayn to undertake a campaign against Idrisi, the sharif asked for his son ‘Abdullah to be granted a leave from Parliament to come to Mecca.[128] Meanwhile, İzzet Pasha was sent to the Hijaz with reinforcements to join the sharif and his sons in the military campaign against Asir.[129] On his way to battle, the sharif met with tribal chiefs in the Qunfidha region, who rendered their submission to him.[130] However, on the battleground Idrisi managed to repulse the forces loyal to the government.[131] Further setbacks followed;[132] any victories the sharif’s forces had were modest.[133] In spite of the lack of any apparent success in his expedition against Idrisi, the government sent Sharif Husayn decorations in August 1911.[134]

In the spring of 1912 Idrisi renewed his attacks in cooperation with Italian forces. Italy, at war with the Ottoman government in Tripolitania, was applying naval pressure in the Red Sea. The skirmishes continued into the summer with no decisive confrontations between the rebels and the sharifian and Ottoman forces led by Sharif Faysal and Hadi Pasha.[135] Despite Husayn’s objections, resistance to Idrisi was relaxed as the conclusion of peace with Italy seemed near.[136] In October, on the eve of the agreement with Italy, Husayn urged the grand vizier vehemently that Idrisi should not be a beneficiary of the peace agreement. İstanbul, however, replied that a pardon had been extended to Idrisi and that he was expected to submit to the government.[137]

Both Idrisi and Ibn Sa‘ud remained irritants to the sharif in his quest for predominance in Arabia. The government discouraged Husayn from decisive showdowns with these two leaders. İstanbul’s aim was not to establish direct control over the Peninsula once and for all, but rather to maintain a position of strength vis-à-vis the different local power holders. This policy denied the sharif the greater eminence that he hoped to attain in the Peninsula by virtue of his loyalty to the government. However, no alternative was left to Sharif Husayn other than to continue to play the role designated for him in the capital.


previous sub-section
A Case Study in Centralization: The Hijaz under Young Turk Rule, 1908–1914
next sub-section