'Papers relating to transfer of Middle Eastern Affairs to the Colonial Office and creation of a new Department there, 1920-1921, with Cabinet notes of Milner, Montague, Churchill, self, and others' [‎34v] (68/136)

#
to attend to two wholly dissimilar jobs, viz the direct
number of Colonies and Protectorates, and the conduct of what a ^
diplomatic relations with the self-governing Dominions. amount of
the Middle East, he will have to be relieved of the Dominions work the amount ot
which is much greater than is commonly supposed, and is, I am Jad to say - t y
growing as tie! of a new kind spring up between the ^ «dJ^rngdom and the
Dominions in place of the old relation of a. central authority to dependent
commumtieSjer whichever Secretary of State the new Department is Placed I agree
with Lord Curzon and Mr. Montagu in holding that there will have to be a
Standing Committee, to keep the Minister at the head of ^^^““VSirectly
with those of his colleagues who, in the discharge of their several duties^are d^^ .y
affected by the course of affairs in the Middle Eas . . To a lesser
vitally concerned in what happens in Persia, Mesopotamia and Arab J h
but still a substantial extent, territories administered bv the Colonial Oftce sud
Somaliland and British East Africa, are also aftected by our policy witn rega a
“and the Sudan. Moreover the Middle Eastern Depayme^t and the Co o
nffipp k v virtue of its control of East Africa—are both equally interesiea
Abyssinia From other points of view also there is something to be said for bringing
the experience of the Colonial Office to bear, only of course by way of consultation
noon the soluDon of Middle Eastern problems. 1'or I do not quite agree with Dird
Cuirzon that the work which the Colonial Office has done in Africa does not be r
the remotest resemblance to that which will arise in the Ptobtens of the Middle
East ” On the contrary, there is m my opinion a great deal to be learnt in this
re!At from our recent dealings with the Moslem Emirates of Nigeria which
certainly are not devoid of “ traditions of sovereignty and independence and w heu
we have been able to make successful use of native systems of government which have
at least some of “ the characteristics of a civilised btate.
I do not wish however, at this stage to enter into a discussion of the exact
composition ofC ’ Eastern Committee ” I fear I might find myself involved in
proposals for a complete reconstruction of our Cabinet machinery. It is sufficient for
the moment to record my adhesion to the view, that a co-ordinating body of some sort
isneces^ary to keep the policy of the Middle Eastern Department inline with that
of the other branches of the Government which are most closely related to it. ^
June 17, 1920.