Coll 15/5 'EGYPT British community in Egypt: problems of post-war reconstruction' [‎20r] (39/68)

O'
alliance at present is on an essenticSV polit ical basis, and as
such it is at. time s cr it icised by Sgyptians as burdensome and
even inconsistent with their independence and Sovereignty, It is
however recognised as a reality and it certainly has the effect
putting the British Empire on a footing quite above that of an;y
other foreign nation,, If after the war this Alliance could be
not so much superseded by, as developed into a close commercial
bond, the danger of foreign competition would be to a great
extent eliminated, and a flourishing Anglo-Egyptian trade could
created to the mutual benefit of both countries#
be
V
ihe firsc essential condition for any such trade drive is
that British^ subjects should be secure in their rights to reside
in -»gypt, Their position is at present regulated by the terms of
the jviontreux Declaration which guarantees the right to remain in
-'F’ypt to all British subjects who have resided there for at
least five years 0 Unfortunately the meaning of this con-
cession is uncertain. The view of the Egyptian Government is
that the guarantee is restricted to those who on the date of
tne signing of the iviontreux Convention, i,e, in 1937, were
residing in agypt and had continuously resided there for the
last five years# This view was communicated to the interested
Powers by the Egyptian Government at the end of 1939, HMG Her or His Majesty’s Government in London. do
not accept this interpretation, and as long ago as early in
1940 protested against the restricted meaning on which the
Egyptian Government proposed to act, claiming that five years
residence in Egypt prior to the date at which the question of
the right to remain in or to re-enter Egypt arose, was the
necessary qualification, This difference of interpretation has
never been solved, and in consequence many British subjects are
nuite uncertain where they stand, and fear that after the war
may be impossible to prevent the Egyptian Administration from
acting on the narrower meaning and turning them out. It is re
commended therefore that this point should be cleared up now, >tt
the same time it is pointed out that it would now be inadvisable
m°n PreSS f ° r an in ' ter P re tation as wide as that put forward by
1 * were to be established that the five years is to be
calculated from the date when the question arises in any
case ? Egyptian Government would probably, and even
justifiably, be unwilling to renew a -residential visa for a
fo^flaibnf'hU after has resided four years in the country,
allowed to remain*in Kpt'forYfmryea^ “tTiTs*' 11 18
name ly°t hat "in U nter ^®tiorshouL be Af!me^
they should be regarded as havinfouaU??^*?* ln Sgypt ln 1937
they had then eomifletpri ng qua;L;Lfled the concession if
breaks for leave or busines^ o^wr 81 ^^ 6 to normal
vear<? Business;, or when such period of five
years r.sidence was completed thereafter. 16
/)n
a!
the safeguard therfbv ^BU erp ^ tatlon can be agreed upon,
limited ^moer ofir° nly be a PPli = a ble to a ’
the transition period 8nd for the Oration of
continue to operate iA Egvo? unlo i C Q^ erC i al firp,s are to
Sti^tle^
by the introduction of new' men fr^Mel^ierKin^d^^r^he
IPfS