Miscellaneous papers on the Near and Middle East [‎34r] (67/70)

[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty’s Governmen t. 1
f'A CIJI /VTF.D TO THt
PERSIA
[August 13.j
(CONFIDENTIAL. Section 1.
[ 116385 ] No. 1 .
Earl Curzon to Sir G. Grahame.
(No. 1061.)
Sir, Foreign Office, August 13, 1919.
I ASKED M. de Fleuriau to call upon me this afternoon in order to draw his
attention to an announcement which had appeared in the French newspapers of the
impending despatch of a French judicial mission to Tehran. I recapitulated to the
French Minister the previous history of this question, and read to him verbatim my
notes of the last conversation which I had on the subject with M. Gambon when the
latter visited me in the Foreign Office on the 4th July.
I had explained to M. Gambon on that occasion that, while I had no reason to
object to the deputation to Tehran of French professors skilled in medicine, surgery,
and mathematics, I was at a loss to understand why the institution of a Law School
or the sending of French Professors of Law should be required. I had pointed out
that, the frontier between law and politics being admittedly thin, there was some
reason to fear that the French lawyers, in the absence of any serious occupation, might
feel tempted to take a hand in the local political game. I had also put to the French
Ambassador the hypothetical case of what his Government would have thought and
said had the British attempted a similar move in some sphere of clearly French
influence. In reply, M. Gambon had said that, upon his approaching visit to Paris, he
would discuss the question of the French legal professors ; and he had left upon my
mind the impression that it would not be necessary to persevere with that part of the
French programme.
In these circumstances, I had been considerably surprised at reading in the
“ Temps” only a few days ago an announcement to the effect that a French Judicial
Mission had been formed by the French Minister of Justice, with the consent of the
French Minister for Foreign Affairs, and was to leave for Persia next month to found a
School of Law in Tehran. The names of the members of the mission were given, and
it had been added in the “ Temps ” that the mission itself Could not fail to benefit
French influence in the East.
The ground which 1 had taken in my conversation with M. Gambon was, I now
told M. de Fleuriau, greatly strengthened by what had passed in the interval. The
British Government had for some time been engaged in negotiations with the Persian
Government, culminating in an agreement which I had just concluded and which was
about to be published in both countries. I gave the French Minister a general sketch
of the contents of this agreement, and I said that it seemed to me singularly
inappropriate that—at a time when the Persian Government had themselves recog
nised the predominant political interest of Great Britain by inviting her assistance
in the manner provided for in the agreement—the French Government should think it
fit to appear upon the scene almost in the guise of rival competitors, suggesting to
Persia and to the world that the old competition between European nations (in former
times usually Russia and Great Britain) was about to be revived, and that France
regarded with some jealousy the occupation of the field by England.
M. de Fleuriau undertook to verify what I had said to M. Gambon, and to
communicate to Paris the substance of our conversation to-day.
I went on to say to the French Minister that indications had reached me lately
from more than one quarter of an inclination on the part, not, I hoped, of the French
Government, of whose loyalty I was convinced, but of certain advanced sections of
1 rench colonial and public opinion, to pick causes of quarrel with this country, and to
adopt an attitude towards Great Britain that was scarcely consistent with the close and
cordial alliance between us, which was still in being. One day it was Syria, another
day it was Tangier, again it was some other part of the Eastern world. I told him
that I thought we had said good-bye.to the policy of pin-pricks, which had done so
much to exacerbate relations between our two countries in the past; and, when on the
part of the two Governments there was still the firmest intention in the public interest
to pursue a policy of close co-operation, it seemed to me little short of scandalous that
any encouragement should be given to those who sought to poison the wells.
1 reminded M. de Fleuriau that, upon my instructions, Sir Ronald Graham had spoken
[523 n—1]