'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' [‎35v] (70/136)

to attend to two wholly dissimilar jobs, viz., the direct administration of a l^irge
number of Colonies and Protectorates, and the conduct of what are virtually
diplomatic relations with the self-governing Dominions. If he is also to look after
the Middle East, he will have to be relieved of the Dominions work, the amount of
which is much greater than is commonly supposed, and is, I am glad to say, constantly
growing as ties of a new kind spring up between the United Kingdom and the
Dominions in place of the old relation of a. central authority to dependent
communities.
But under 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 that Department in touch
with those of his colleagues who, in the discharge of their several duties, are directly
affected by the course of affairs in the Middle East. It is obvious that India is
vitally concerned in what happens in Persia, Mesopotamia and Arabia. To a lesser
but still a substantial extent, territories administered by the Colonial Office, such as
Somaliland and British East Africa, are also affected by our policy with regard to
Arabia and the Sudan. Moreover the Middle Eastern Department and the Colonial
Office—by virtue of its control of East Africa—are both equally interested in
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,
upon the solution of Middle Eastern problems. For I do not quite agree ’with Lord
Curzon that the work which the Colonial Office has done in Africa “ does not bear
the remotest resemblance to that which will arise in the problems of the Middle
East.” On the contrary, there is in my opinion a great deal to be learnt in this
respect from our recent dealings with the Moslem Emirates of Nigeria, which
certainly are not devoid of “ traditions of sovereignty and independence ” and where
we have been able to make successful use of native systems of government which have
at least some of “ the characteristics of a civilised State.”
I do not wish, however, at this stage to enter into a discussion of the exact
composition of an “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
is necessary to keep the policy of the Middle Eastern Department in line with that
of the other branches of the Government which are most closely related to it.
M.