Rockefeller Archive Center

Rockefeller Archive Center Research Reports are created by recipients of research travel stipends and by many others who have conducted research at the RAC. The reports demonstrate the breadth of the RAC's archival holdings, particularly in the study of philanthropy and its effects. Read more about the history of philanthropy at resource.rockarch.org. Also, see the RAC Bibliography of Scholarship, a comprehensive online database of publications citing RAC archival collections.

2 results found

reorder grid_view

Efforts to Eradicate Malaria in Palestine

January 1, 2011

Significant hope was vested in the League of Nations (LON) when it was established after World War I. As declared during its first council meeting held in Geneva, Switzerland, in January 1920, "humanity at large looks towards the League for the solution of the tremendous problems arising out of the War." Stemming from this was the mandate system, which was enshrined in Article 22 of the Covenant of the LON. The mandate system was intended to be a deviation from prior colonial practices. In contrast to colonialism, during which there was no formalized international supervisory power over the colonizers, various powers were delegated to oversee the administration of the territories of the former Ottoman, and German powers. The territories which belonged to the vanquished powers would be placed "in trust" under the administration of various mandatory powers. The mandatory powers had to adhere to the principles in Article 22. Additionally, the LON was supposed to supervise the various powers designated to ensure that the territories 'unable to stand by themselves' were duly guided towards self-government. Three categories of mandates were prescribed. The "A" mandated territories were deemed to the closest to the attainment of self-government, in contrast to the "B" and "C" mandates that were deemed to be further remote from civilization. Regarding the Ottoman Empire, Great Britain was allotted an "A" mandate over Palestine and Iraq; France was similarly given a mandate over Syria and Lebanon. These territories were deemed incapable of governing themselves by the Principal Allied and Associated Powers and were thus placed under the administration of more capable powers with the objective of leading them towards eventual self-government.

The Near East Relief's Caucasus Branch Operation (1919-1920)

January 1, 2011

This report intends to expand our knowledge as well as to contribute to the existent historiography on the Near East Relief (NER), an American humanitarian organization, which has been understudied. We wish to pinpoint three main aspects of the NER's early history. The first being tension between one of the main ideological assumptions of the organization -- i.e., to carry out rehabilitation programs that went beyond short-term emergency relief -- and the absolute necessity to undertake vast relief operations. The NER's Caucasus Branch operation illustrates this tension. Second, the 1919-1920 relief operation in the Caucasus sheds light on why it was necessary for the NER to cooperate with other American organizations, such as the American Relief Administration (ARA) and the American Red Cross (ARC). We will provide details about this complex relationship later in the report. Finally, this research report provides an opportunity to reflect on the ideology(ies) and working methods of NER workers. Contrary to what one might think, the NER was far from being a monolithic organization. The Board of Trustees, the executives, and the men (and women) on the spot had different views on the NER's objectives as well as on how they 2 should be achieved. In 2009, Sarah Miglio wrote a Rockefeller Archive Center (RAC) research report entitled "America's Sacred Duty: Near East Relief and the Armenian Crisis, 1915-1930." It was based on some of the sources referred to in our RAC research report. Miglio focused on America's "Sacred Duty" in the Near East and more specifically, on the Armenians during and after the genocide. Our objective is to offer a closer look at the operational work carried out by the NER. Miglio focused on the significance of the Armenian crisis for the American public, whereas our objective is to look into more pragmatic aspects of the programs of the NER for Armenians and other civilian populations.

Showing 2 of 2 results