File 4722/1918 Pt 8 'Mesopotamia: Situation' [‎214v] (439/995)

t
16
I
■
m
■
%
U
St
Telegram—P. (Clear Line).
To—Civil Commissioner, Baghdad.
From—India Office, London.
No. of words 15.
Dated and received 8 th July, 1920.
Your telegram of July 3rd 8039. Invitations should not he
Baghdadi officer pending further instructions.
issued to
Deleted from Reuters, July 23rd.
Telegram from authoritative French source states that war exists with
Feisul, King of Syria, from July 10th in consequence of Feisul’s temporising
attitude in connecton with French endeavour to arrange use of Beyrout-
Aleppo line via Beyak which latter is just within Feisul’s territory. Use of
this line is essential for transport and communication for French troops in
East Cilicit who are endangered owing to action of Mustapha Kamel’s forces
who have cut other railway hitherto available. French have now occupied
without opposition Beyak which is main junction to Damascus and they will
probably occupy other railway strategic points. French point out that this
action was dictated by military circumstances. They have every intention
of respecting Feisul’s sovereignty under mandate allotted French bv Turkish
Treaty and Anglo-French agreement but if necessary French will occupy
whole of Beyrout-Aleppo railway in order to safeguard situation until Feisul
guarantees unimpeded traffic.
London, July 20th .—Moving adjournment in Commons last night to
discuss immediate danger to British interests arising from threatened hosti
lities in Syria, Ormsby-Gore vigorously criticised Government. He declared
that supreme British interest in Middle East as elsewhere was restoration of
peace which alone would allow of poltical freedom and economic prosperity.
French ultimatum would inevitably entail employment of further British
troops and money. Bonar Law replying, pointed out that France had accept
ed mandate for Syria at San Bemo, Emir Feisul consenting. French troops
had been massacred and other outrages committed. Interference on part of
Commons would be equivalent to interference of French Chamber in our
action against lawless Arabs in Mesopotamia. France had not violated her
Mandate for Syria. Britain meant to honour her promise to Arabs and
France replying to our questions declared that there was no intention of
instituting permanent military occupation after mandate had been accepted
•and older restored. That was our own policy in Mesopotamia. Bobert Cecil
and others expressed opinion that Government’s reply would do great deal to
■allay existing anxiety.
Extracts deleted from Renters News, received 20th July, 1920.
Jjondon, July 23rd. A\ riting to Times Col T. E. Lawrence says he does
not consider it astonishing that patience of Mesopotamians has broken down
after two years. They welcomed news of our mandate because they thought it
meant Dominion self-government, but at present there is not a single responsible
Mesopotamian sharing in defence or administration of their country He
declares that only cure is immediate change of policy and suggests that
Arabic should be Government language thus reducing number of Britishers
and incieasing qualified Arabs; formation of two divisions of local volunteers
entirely composed of Arabs who should be entrusted with maintenance of
order; and evacuation of every British and Indian soldier. He is of opinion
that these changes would take twelve months, and that under these conditions
Arabs would be as loyal to us as anyone elsewhere in Empire without costing
•anything. He concludes by suggesting that bargain could be made with
regard to oil in Mesopotamia saying that Arabs seem to be willing to shed
their blood for freedom, how much more then for oil?
London J)dy 22nrf —Curzon speaking in Lords emphasized that in Meso
potamia and I alestine he had acted on principle that wishes of communities
concerned must be principal consideration in selection of mandatory and
there was no evidence that inhabitants of either country wished other manda-
tory than Britain. He had made most earnest efforts to learn real mind of
inhabitants of Mesopotamia. Difficulty was that they could not make up
their minds as to what form of independence they wanted.
Telegram. “
From—Civil Commissioner, Baghdad.
To—Secretary of State for India, London.
No. 9005.
Dated 26th July, 1920.
Debates in House of Commons on June 23rd and leader in “ Times ” of
June 24th impel me to offer a few comments as to alleged unpopularity of
Indians m Mesopotamia.