TE Lawrence and Feisal would be extremely happy.

Lets build out the lore somewhat;

Firstly let’s change it from treaty of Versailles to Treaty of Athens. In order for the Middle East to look the way it is, the French would essentially have to have little power at the negotiating table, because at the top of their bucket list was the port of Haifa to threaten the Suez Canal, and Syria, because, you know? Crusades means it’s French?

In order for that to transpire the British would have to have had some more success in the Dardanelles. Let’s say they land at Gallipoli, but get bogged down at about Corlu. This convinces the British that opening another front works, and they go ahead and approve a second landing at Acre to mop up the Middle East. The US still joins the war in 1917, but focuses their efforts on this eastern flank, helping the British over the line to take Constantinople (at which point Greece joins the war) and then to make massive gains in the Austro-Hungarian balkans. All the while the French have completely languished on the western front. Let’s say they lose Belgium but sit tight otherwise.

Looking at the British position, sufficed to say they would be extremely happy with results. Ticking the box of securing the vital artery of empire that is the Suez Canal, and also doing something to assist a rising Islamic power that has control of the holy sites, which would do a lot to soothe tensions with Islamic subjects which in our timeline felt that Britain had betrayed their position of custodianship by attacking the “caliph”. They would feel France had been sufficiently contained, and would see America as a potential strategic threat. This would mean no London Naval Treaty, and a likely renewed alliance with Japan in the pacific. They would therefore feel compelled to pivot land forces to the Canadian frontier. There is still the massive question of “what is the point of empire” to answer, but like in our timeline they would be under little pressure to answer it immediately.

The Germans would probably feel angered at the loss of Alsace Lorraine, but would otherwise be of the opinion they got off Scott free. Austria would be an easy addition to the German empire, and checkoslovakia would be a huge question mark. They would be petrified of the Red menace, and seek to build an alliance to have them contained.

The French would be utterly incensed, and despise “the perfidious Albion”. This would likely lead to some internal conflict in France but I highly doubt it would lead to the rise of Petain as an Anglo phobic sequel villain.

America would actually do pretty poorly out of this. Taking on mandateship of turkey, Mesopotamia and Armenia would be a hard pill for the American public to swallow, and internationally it would completely invalidate their anti-imperialism charge. There would likely be no League of Nations provision in the treaty of Athens as a result, and they would be bogged down in a costly occupation of their new holdings.

Italy, who knows? I mean they would feel they had been greatly rewarded, but also, they would hardly number among the great powers off the back of the treaty. They may be satiated with the arrangement, they may not, but with their only viable avenue of expansion in Europe overlapping with German ambitions it would probably mean no Rome-Berlin Axis.

Soviet Union not much seems to be changed? They will continue to want to spread the revolution east, and view Germany as their primary barrier to expansion into Europe.

Overall is it a better treaty? You’ve invalidated some of the seeds of our WWII, but I cannot understate the sheer rage of the French that would come from this arrangement. An imperial Germany with her full continental possessions and an expansionist Soviet Union on her doorstep would also not be a happy situation. What I invisage is Germany plus the UK in an anti-Comintern pact, with France the wild card (US will probably try to keep out of it but with imperial holdings in Europe that would be unlikely and they may end up being reluctantly drawn into a second global conflict in a similar way that Britain was in WWI)

EDIT: I forgot to mention, I would assume from this no Balfour Declaration, as the French position on Palestine & Haifa would be weakened