Prior to the centenary of Sykes-Picot in 2016, the media and scientists generated strong interest in the long-term effects of the agreement. The agreement is often cited as "artificial" borders in the Middle East, "without regard to ethnic or sectarian characteristics, which has led to endless conflicts."  The question of the extent to which Sykes-Picot has really marked the borders of the modern Middle East is controversial.   In the chain of agreements between France, Russia and Great Britain, Russian demands were first confirmed: France confirmed their agreement on 26 April and Britain on 23 May with formal sanctions on 23 October. The Anglo-French agreement was confirmed in an exchange of letters on 9 May and 16 May.  As a further sign of British discontent with Sykes-Picot, Sykes wrote in August a "Memorandum on the Asia Minor Agreement" to support its renegotiation, to make the French understand that they "are doing a good job, that if they cannot make military efforts consistent with their policy, they should change policy." After much discussion, Sykes was ordered to enter into an agreement or complement to Sykes-Picot ("Project Arrangement") on the "future status of hejaz and Arabia," which was reached until the end of September.  However, before the end of the year, the agreement still had to be ratified by the French government.  The agreement was drawn up and negotiated by the country`s diplomats over the next few months and signed by the Allies between 18 August and 26 September 1917.  Russia was not represented in this agreement because the Tsarist regime was in the midst of a revolution. The lack of Russian approval of the Saint-Jean-de-Maurienne agreement was then used by the British at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference to invalidate it, a position that greatly outraged the Italian government.  Sykes himself withdrew from the agreement, tried to change Picot and helped formulate Balfour`s statement. In 1919, Zionist leader Nahum Sokolov wrote: "From the point of view of Zionist interests in Palestine, [Sykes-Picot] rightly met with strong criticism; but it was Sykes himself who criticized him most harshly and who, in changing circumstances, distanced himself completely from it. In the years that followed, the Sykes-Picot agreement came under fierce criticism from arabs who dreamed of a united homeland and from Kurds who had shattered their hopes for autonomy. I also have the honour of declaring that Her Majesty`s Government is proposing to the Russian Government to fully enter into the agreement in order to exchange notes that correspond to those exchanged by this Government and its Government of Excellence on April 26 last year. Copies of these notes will be communicated to Excellence as soon as they are exchanged.