ENGLAND, TURKEY, AND PERSIA.
[To TUN EDITOR Or THE "SPECTATOR."]
Si,-Will you allow me, notwithstanding the difference of our points of view, to say a few words on the article concerning "The Mohammedan Appeal to Germany" which appeared in your issue of October 29th ?
You express the opinion that the Turks who made the
protest and appeal in question "might have taken more trouble to understand whatBritish policy in Persia is," and a little further on you express the conviction "that all sensible Englishmen would regard with dismay the thought of occu- pying and administering Southern Persia as we occupy and administer Egypt." I confess with the deepest regret that I believe the Turks see much more clearly than do most English- men whither the recent actions of the British Foreign Office are leading us, whether it be the goal at which they are aiming or the rocks on which they are drifting. The case of Egypt, to which you refer, offers too close a parallel to be ignored, and in this connexion I cannot refrain from citing a remark made by Lord Cromer in the first volume of his "Modern Egypt" :—
" When Lord Granville deprecated a British or Anglo-French
armed intervention in Egypt, there can be no doubt that he meant what he said, and, moreover, that he bad behind him the pre- ponderating weight of British public opinion."
What I fear is that, substituting "Sir Edward Grey" for "Lord Granville," " Anglo-Russian " for "Anglo-French," and "Persia" for "Egypt," this sentence, or something like it, may be written in a few years' time by the future chronicler
of the "inevitable" results which will have followed from a policy into which we have " drifted by accident," though it may appear in Imperialist eyes "not only right, but also most in accord with British interests" (Lord Cromer, op. tit., p. 330). If it be true that "he who desires the end sanctions the means," it is equally true that he who employs the means must be supposed to desire the end. Both Turks and Persians are sufficiently familiar with the history of former "inevitable" occupations of Mohammedan lauds by England, Russia, and France to make them thoroughly alarmed at the present course of events in Persia; nor does the similarity of our modern doctrine of "the inevitable" in politics to their supposed theological tenets concerning "Kismet" afford them material consolation.
I trust, Sir, that you will not lend your countenance to
what I must regard as the erroneous and dangerous notion advanced by certain sections of the British Press that the Constantinople meeting was "engineered" by Germany or by any one else. It was undoubtedly, in my opinion, a genuine and spontaneous manifestation of the indignation and alarm aroused throughout the Mohammedan world by what they can only understand as a combined Anglo-Russian attack on the freedom and independence of the most ancient,. the most civilised, and the most harmless and unaggressive of the surviving independent Mohammedan States. I wish I could share your belief that that indignation and alarm are unfounded.
Lastly, you observe in your "News of the Week" that " the only country which occupied Persian territory without -
excuse is Turkey herself." Is this quite a fair way of putting it? For nearly a century Turkey has had no reason to fear any act of aggression from Persia, her peaceful and inoffensive neighbour. But now that Azarbayjki is filled with Russian troops she has cause for grave anxiety, especially as, not- withstanding all promises to the contrary, these troops show no sign of departure. If Russia has commercial interests in Persia, so has Turkey ; if Russia claims that her nationals need protection, has not Turkey the same claim ?
No doubt Persia would prefer not to see Turkish troops occupying her territory; but they do not excite one tithe of the apprehension aroused by the Russian army of occupation. Much has been said of the hostility between Sunni and Shi'a Mohammedans; but much has been done in recent years to abate that hostility, and, even apart from religion, there is a community of culture and Watanschauting between -all Muslims which constitutes a great bond of solidarity. Within the last three years I have met and conversed with scores of Persians, many of them prominent leaders of the people, and while all have expressed fear of Russia, not one, I think, has complained of Turkey, whom they rather regard as their chief support., believing that both nations will stand or fall together.—Apologising for the length of this communication, I am, Sir, Lc.,
EDWARD G. BROWNE.
Previous page
