The agreement is still the basis for a lot of borders in the Middle East, the cause of many conflicts. I understand this agreement caused many Palestinian-Israeli conflicts, and that the Kurds kinda don't want to be grouped within Iraq, but besides those two examples, what other problems did the Agreement cause?
I’m happy to take on any questions you might have that aren’t addressed in the threads that /u/jschooltiger linked to from me because I think they answer your question in quite a lot of depth.
But to just address it quickly for anyone who doesn’t click through: Sykes Picot most decidedly did not cause the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and did not cause the Kurds of Mosul province to be grouped within Iraq. Sykes Picot was signed before the Balfour Declaration and the Palestinian Mandate which ultimately bound Britain to the Zionist project that eventually led to the creation of Israel. It’s conception of Iraq was divided between France and Britain. It also is not the basis for many borders in the Middle East at all. If you look at the borders they actually drew, just about the only ones that even approximately stand is the rough boundary between what would become Israel and Lebanon and the northern border or Jordan with Syria, which is largely empty desert.
Edit: couple typos, including typing Jordan instead of Lebanon. Had typed this on my phone on the subway :)
Hi there. Not discouraging further comments here, but this question has gotten some interesting responses in the past:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3kegic/the_partitioning_of_the_ottoman_empire/
And if you like podcasts, you may be interested in this episode of the AH podcast with u/cptbuck: