Papers written by Curzon on the Near and Middle East [‎33r] (65/348)

[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty’s Government.]
1 •"
EASTERN. [September 24.]
CONFIDENTIAL. Sbctiok 1.
[132731] No. 1.
Earl Curzon to Sir E. Crowe.
(No. 6206.)
Sir, Foreign Office, September 24, 1919.
THE French Ambassador called on Lord Hardinge on the 22nd instant.
In the course of conversation he alluded to Syria and the conflict of public opinion
on the subject of the action of British officers in that country. Lor i Hardinge
therefore seized upon this opportunity of putting to him very clearly the views which
I had already expressed to his Excellency. He told him that no country could have
acted more loyally towards the French Government in regard to Syria than we had,
that every complaint which had been shown to have any justification hid been at once
set right, but that, nevertheless, in spite of the bona fides of the British Government, a
campaign of calumny had been organised in the French press, and apparently the
French Government did nothing whatsoever to check it. This, Lord Hardinge pointed
out to him, was making a very bad impression upon me and His Majesty’s Government
at a moment when we were trying to induce the Emir Feisal to recognise our engage
ments towards France by which we considered ourselves bound, and which were in
reality not in conflict with our engagements with King Hussein. For this action on
our part we were incurring the mistrust of Feisal and of the Arab community, and it
would be as well that the French Government should realise the disinterestedness of
our action and take some steps to put an end to the press campaign against Great
Britain.
M. Gambon said in reply that it was a great mistake to imagine that the f French
Government could take control of such papers as the Debats” and the “Echo de
Paris,” two very independent journals He maintained that the complaints of the
press were justified, and be related certain facts, such as the taking over of the railways
constructed by French capital in Syria, the elimination of all French employes, and the
refusal to allow repairs to be carried out on these lines. Another instance he gave was
the seizure of the customs sheds at Beirut, which had put an end to all activities in the
port, but he admitted that this had now been arranged. Lord Hardinge pointed out
to M. Gambon that this was ancient history, and that what he was saying only served
to confirm what he, Lord Hardinge, had already said, that if any complaint of the
French authorities was justified it was immediately put right by the military authorities
on the spot, and that being the case, surely the French Government could have passed
the word round to the press to cease their attacks on British policy in Syria in view of
an arrangement being practically settled. But, Lord Hardinge added, this was not the
only quarter in which a campaign of hostile propaganda was being carried on against
Great Britain, for the same thing was being done in Tehran, where an active campaign was
in progress, headed by the French and American Ministers, against the Anglo-Persian
Agreement. Lord Hardinge reminded M. Gambon that on two occasions his excellency
had declared to me the complete political disinterestedness of the French Government
in Persia, and that 1 had taken note of these declarations. Consequently it was all the
more astonishing to me that the French Minister should be assuming a hostile role
towards His Majesty’s Government in the Persian capital at this moment. Lord
Hardinge addeb that he trusted that M. Gambon would bring these facts to the notice
of his Government, and that M. Bonin would receive a severe reprimand.
M. Gambon admitted that my statement, that he had twice declared the
disinterestedness of France in Persia, was absolutely coirect and that the position
remained precisely the same in that respect.
As for the remarks made in the French press against the agreement, he said that
there was a certain feeling of surprise that no warning had been given to t he French
Government that such an agreement was in prospect, and that the absence of such a
warning to an Ally had been wounding to their susceptibilities, but that he could not
believe that there was any serious opposition in the French press t>» the agreement.
As for M. Bonin, he knew nothing at all about him or what he was doing, but he would
not fail to bring his activities to the notice of his Government in the hope that a stop
might immediately be put to them. He added that he had been promoted from the
Consular Service and was apparently suffering from Morbus consularis.
I am, & •.
GURZON OF KEDLESTON.
[776 aa —1]