EGYPT AND THE PAN-ISLAMIC DANGER.
THE correspondence respecting the Turco-Egyptian frontier published on Monday contains documents of the greatest possible interest, documents which we trust will be read with care by all who are concerned, not merely with our position in the Valley of the Nile, but with the general problem of our political relations with the pro- fessors of the Mohammedan faith. The first part of the White Paper which contains the correspondence proves with what skill, tact, and firmness Sir Edward Grey and Lord Cromer met the attempt of the Sultan to seize a portion of Egyptian territory. Though they were fully aware of the great risks involved, and of the power which the Sultan undoubtedly possessed of embarrassing our position in Egypt if the matter were forced to extremities, they did not hesitate to tell the Sultan that they were prepared, if necessary, to use the whole force of the British Empire to prevent his act of international piracy. That they were justified in doing so we cannot doubt. In spite of the danger of a Pan-Islamic outbreak in Egypt and North Africa generally, it would have been most unwise to have yielded to, or even temporised with, the Sultan's demands. The danger, though not inconsiderable, was one of those dangers which occasionally have to be faced, and which cannot be avoided by any attempts at compromise. Beyond this political lesson, so well and so effectively enforced, the White Paper contains despatches from Lord Cromer which draw attention to two other matters. The first, though not the most important, of these is the question of the excesses of the native Press in Egypt, and of the best way of dealing with those excesses. The next is the problem of Islamic fanaticism. Lord Cromer shows that though the free Press which he has allowed to grow up in Egypt has conferred some notable benefits, it also has its bad side. No English ruler objects to opposition, or even to mordant criticism, but the native Press has gone far beyond that. The tendency of the baser Arabic papers has been to inflame Moslem sentiment against Christians and Europeans, and to appeal to religious fanaticism of the worst kind. Again, the writing has not been confined to the rabble, but has been actually encouraged, Lord Cromer tells us, "by many persons occupying -very high positions inside and outside Egypt." In view of the character of these newspapers, Lord Cromer points out that many people ask why they have not been sup- pressed, for the existing law is amply sufficient for this purpose. Curiously enough, there would be little objection raised by the natives to such suppression. Again and again representative natives have suggested to Lord Cromer that the " reptile " Press should be dealt with sternly, and on two occasions the Egyptian General Assembly urged the Government to take strong action against it. To quote Lord Cromer's own words, "I have talked to scores of Egyptians on this subject, and I have heard of their views through many other sources. I do not think I have ever heard a single expression of opinion in favour of the liberty, degenerating into license, which the vernacular Press now enjoys. On the other hand, I have been urged over and over again to adopt repressive measures." He goes on to point out that the British policy in this matter is not in the least understood, and illustrates it most effectively, as he so often does in his public writings, by an anecdote. An educated native a short time ago said to a British official in the Soudan : "I cannot understand your Press policy." To this the British official—a soldier, we believe—. replied : "You will not do so until the Gordon College has been in existence for three hundred years."
In spite, however, of the fact that the excesses of the vernacular Press do so much harm, that its liberty is not regarded with satisfaction even by our opponents among the better class of Egyptians, and that suppression would not cause any outburst of ill-feeling, Lord Cromer decides, and, we think, rightly decides, to leave the Press alone, except in very extreme cases. Here are his reasons :— " In the first place, I think the present Government in Egypt ought to be, and is, quite strong enough to stand on its own merits, and to neglect the ravings of the Pan-Islamic press. In the second place, as a strong advocate of the general principle that the press should be free, I think that any Government is infringing that principle if it begins to pick and choose between those news- papers of which it approves and those of which it disapproves. Under a system of government such as that which exists in Egypt, and which is necessarily more or less bureaucratic, it is most desirable that the press should be free. This freedom, in respect to the whole European press—the writing in which appears to me to have greatly improved, not merely in tone, but also in ability, during the last few years—and to a considerable section of the vernacular press, is, I consider, an almost unmixed benefit to the country. I should be sorry to have even the appearance of threatening it."
The other point to which we desire to draw attention is the strange nature of Mohammedan fanaticism. Most people in England find, it difficult to understand how, in spite of the blessings which we have conferred upon the Egyptian population, that population during the trouble with the Sultan was almost unanimous in favour of Turkey and against ourselves. And this though it was obvious that if the rule of the Turks were again estab- lished in Egypt the country would in a year or two be bled as white as veal ; that all the prosperity which is now enjoyed by the peasant cultivators, and indeed by all classes, would disappear ; and that every form of cruelty, oppression, and tyranny would be as rife in the Valley of the Nile as it is to-day in Tripoli or Syria. Struck by a situation so astonishing, many persons here have gone on to argue that our rule must have failed in Egypt, and that in some way or other we must have uncon- sciously done the Egyptians more harm than good. "They could not prefer the Turks to us unless in some way we were doing them an injury." Those who argue in this way do not know the nature of the Oriental mind. They forget that to an Oriental there is nothing impossible, or indeed nothing strange, in affirming with conviction and sincerity two absolutely contra- dictory propositions. The Western feels that he must choose between them. The Eastern sees no necessity. As Lord Cromer puts it, "it is the extreme incon- sistency of the Oriental mind which renders Eastern affairs so difficult of comprehension, and, I should add, so interesting to Europeans." Lord Cromer illustrates exactly what he means by quoting a most remarkable anonymous letter received. by him during the height of the frontier crisis. We wish that we could find space to quote this striking, we might almost say touching, letter in. Mown, for it shows exactly how the Eastern mind moves. The letter, which is addressed to Lord Cromer as the "Reformer of Egypt," begins by expressing in simple and dignified language the hope that the grave differences between England and the Turkish Empire may pass away. "As the hopes of men for things desired are often dis- appointed, so also—for God is merciful to His creatures— do their fears of evil come to naught." The man, who writes "in the name of the people of Egypt," but who tells Lord. Cromer that he is not a man of great name— "my person and my dwelling are alike unknown to you"— goes on to condemn those who say: "The curse of God upon the Christian ! " "May hell consume the unbeliever, his household, and his possessions!" "Such curses pollute the lips of the curser, and the camel lies in wait for the driver who smites him unjustly." The writer calls Lord Cromer the "Reformer of Egypt," he says, because "by this name you are known between the seas and the deserts ; also many, but not all, of the English who serve under you have followed in your footsteps.' And then he proceeds :— " He must be blind who sees not what the English have wrought in Egypt: the gates of justice stand open to the poor ; the streams flow through the land and are not stopped at the order of the strong; the poor man is lifted up and the rich man pulled down; the hand of the oppressor and the briber is struck when out- stretched to do evil. Our eyes see these things, and we know from whom they come. You will say : Be thankful, Oh, men of Egypt! and bless those who benefit you'; and very many of us— those who preserve a free mind and are not ruled by flattery and guile—are thankful. But thanks lie on the surface of the heart, and beneath is a deep well."
Therefore, says the writer, if it comes that there is "war between England and Abd-ul-Hamid Khan," all this will count for nothing. Every Moslem will hear only the cry of the Faith :— " Is men we do not love the sons of Osman; the children at the breast know their works, and that they have trodden down the Egyptians like dry reeds. But as Moslems they are our brethren; the Khalif holds the sacred places and the noble relics. Though the Khalif were hapless as Bayezid, cruel as Murad, or mad as Ibrahim, he is the shadow of God, and every Moslem knust leap up at his call as the willing servant to his master, though the wolf may devour his child while he does his master's work. The call of the Sultan is the call of the Faith ; it carries with it the command of the Prophet (blessings, &c.) I and many more trust that all may yet be peace; but, if it be war, be sure that he who has a sword will draw it, he who has a club will strike with it. The women will cry from the house-tops, 'God give victory to Islam The Writer, who is obvioutly a Man of no little oUltivation, fully recognises what is the obvious answer to such an outburst as this. You will say, he says : "The Egyptian is more ungrateful than a dog, which remembers the hand that fed him. He is foolish as the madman who pulls down the roof-tree of his house upon himself." And then follows the essential touch, the touch which differentiates the East from the West :-- " It may be so to worldly eyes, but in the time of danger to Islam, the Moslem turns away from the things of this world, and thirsts only for the service of his Faith, even though he looks in the face of death. May God (His Name be glorified) avert the evil!
Signed by one, in the name of the people of Egypt."
It may be said by pessimists : "What is to be done with such a people as this ? You cannot benefit them, for no matter how much they appreciate your benefits, they will throw them away with their eyes open in a fit of fantastic fanaticism." No doubt such a feeling is natural ; but those who indulge it forget that the extreme inconsistency of the Oriental mind of which Lord Cromer speaks cuts both ways. It no doubt prevents us reaping the reward of gratitude from the Oriental, but it also prevents him making his fanaticism effective. His belief that things can be and not be at one and the same time is his undoing. It is because he does not realise that you must make a choice between two contradictory propositions, that though he may sometimes be able to conquer he is never able to govern, and that the future of the world belongs to the Western man and not to him. You may send a paradox high into heaven like a star-scattering rocket, and "cast beyond the moon," if only your zeal and enthusiasm and blind belief are strong enough, but you can never build upon a foundation of paradox any- thing that will stand. And therefore it is only to the men who know how to choose a principle or a course of action and to be loyal to it, as the Roman in the past and the Englishman in the present, that is given the power to rule in peace and security. We and other Western nations may have many difficulties in the future in our dealings with Islam, and it is conceivable that for a time and in parts of the world the Cross may temporarily give way to the Crescent ; but in the end the Western will prevail, if only he keeps true to his own faith and his own ideals and does not Orientalise himself,—does not commit that unforgivable offence which the Greek summed up in the word matCw.
Meantime, and whatever happens, the man of British race in his government, whether in Egypt or in India, has but one thing to consider. He must not worry himself as to whether Easterns are grateful or ungrateful, or as to whether anything can ever be done "with such a people." He must think only of his immediate duty. That duty is to govern justly and to give wise and humane laws to the subject peoples,—to rule in the interests of the governed and not of the governors, to think not of what is best for himself, or even for his own race, but for those for whom he stands in the sacred place of a trustee. If he performs that simple but august duty, his rule will be long in the land of the Oriental. Let him remember also that he has always on his side what at first sight looks as if it were against him,—the fatalism of the Oriental :— " Men of the West! Ye understand us not; We you no more. Ye take our good for ill; Ye scorn what we esteem man's happiest lot— Perfect submission to creative will."
In his fatalism no less than in his inconsistency of thought and action the Moslem proclaims himself unfit to rule, and thus predestined to the control of those who understand the arts of peace as well as of war.
Previous page
