File 2764/1904 Pt 3 'Baghdad Railway: general negotiations 1910-1912.' [‎107r] (222/544)

;
tke Property of His Britannic Majest y’s Government.]
EASTERN DEPARTMENT.
s SECRET SERIES.
[33767]
No. 1 .
[August 28.]
Section 5.
/at oor. v ,C,/ ' r (j ‘ ^ U( ^ ianan to Sir Edward Grey.—(Received Auqust 28.)
(No. 239.] ^ 7
^ tht? ur f d ^ Petersburgh, August 23, 1911.
pablication oi the Russo-German agreement with regard to Persia has, in
general, been received coldly by the St Petersburgh press, and M. N 6 ratof appears to
to be somewhat disappointed by the absolute lack of any display of enthusiasm
ihe “ Novoe Vremya ” breathes a sigh of relief on at last being delivered from the
long strain of uncertainty, but otherwise has little of good or ill to say of the agreement
It points out, however, that Germany’s declaration of political “ desinteressement ” is
merely a repetition of her assurances with regard to Morocco, and wonders whether it
will prove any more binding.
The article compliments Russian diplomacy on its action in including in the zone
m yv hich Gei man } 7 undertakes not to seek concessions, the small strip of neutral
teiritoi } 7 along the Afghan frontier. It thinks this will tend to prevent complications
since, theoretically at least, it will exclude German adventurers from that region. It
has also a good word to say for Russia’s reserve as to her pecuniary and economic
interests with regard to the Bagdad Railway, which will enable her to withhold her
consent to any increase of the Turkish customs dues destined for the purposes of the
railway.
It criticises sharply the arrangement with regard to the Tehran-Khanikin line, and
says that the onl\ chance left for Russia is to build the trans-Persian line to India as
speedily as possible. Otherwise Russian traders in North Persia may as well shut up
shop and return home, for their places will be taken by Germans.
The “ Rech,” winch is always violently against the Government, takes the view
that “ Russian trade in Persia has been sacrificed.” It cites Algeciras and Morocco as
standing warnings, and concludes with the taunt that the date of the publication of
the agreement was chosen in order to humiliate Russia in the eyes of her ally France,
and to give Germany a breathing space in the ridiculous position in which she found
herself in the Morocco negotiations.
The £< Bourse Gazette ” remarks sarcastically that in the agreement “ obligations are
distributed evenly—at least, numerically speaking.” Russia has lost everything that
she once possessed in Persia, but this is due rather to the lethargy and greed of Russian
traders than to any fault of Germany, who has only acted in accordance with modern
notions and left out of consideration everything but her own material interests. The
paper does not think that Germany will follow her Moroccan tactics in the case of the I
Russo-German agreement, as the maintenance of good relations wfith Russia is a political I
dogma of the German Emperor.
The “ Sviet,” the organ of the Nationalists and the Right, says that the balance of
the agreement is much in favour of Germany, but nevertheless welcomes it as puttino-
an end to the long period of suspense and in the hope that it may induce Russia to |
wake up and build her own railway into Persia and so save it from the Germans.
The “ Zemschina,” the organ of the Extreme Right, takes an unexpectedly anti-
German view. It points out that, with any considerable development of German trade
in Persia, Germany, whatever she may say now, is bound to have political interests in
that country. The dangerous part of the agreement is that in which a limit is set
for the construction of the Tehran Khanikin line. The article urges the immediate
construction of railways in Persia, but warns its readers against being carried away by
fantastic schemes, such as the line to India. What is required is a cheap type of line
to carry goods at slow speed.
Articles still continue to appear in many of the papers, but the above brief
summaries of the published views of the chief papers of widely different political
complexion are, I think, sufficient to show that the agreement has not been hailed with
enthusiasm in any quarter.
I have, &c.
GEORGE W. BUCHANAN.
[2150 ee—5]