ملف من أوراق مطبوعة مصنفة تحت عنوان "التفاوض المصري" بين كرزون وعدلي باشا والوفد المصري [و‎‎٢‎٩] (١٧٨/٥٧)

5
Lord Curzon then referred to the recent disturbances in Alexandria, which,
however they may have originated, terminated in an attack upon Europeans. How
had these disturbances been put down ? Not by the Egyptian police or the Egyptian
army, but by British troops. What would have been the result had the disturbances
proceeded? Other Powers—French or Italian—would have landed troops and
Egyptian ports would have been occupied.
The Egyptian delegation had expressed their desire to be consulted with regard to
the negotiations with foreign Powers, and their right to be so was admitted, but they
would learn that, before relinquishing the rights which those foreign Powers now
possessed in Egypt, they would insist upon the presence of a British force for the
protection of their nationals. There would presumably continue to be a considerable
British and foreign population in Egypt who would have to be protected. Even the
presence of a British High Commissioner necessitated adequate safeguards being
provided for his personal safety. Troops would be required for all these purposes, even
though they might not, and very probably would not, be used for all these purposes,
and it was no use discussing how many troops were to be there, or where they were to
be placed, until an agreement had been reached with regard to the reasons for their
presence.
Bushdi Pasha said that the presence of foreign troops in Egypt for internal
purposes was incompatible with the idea of independence. There had been special
reasons for the disorders of 1919 which would not exist in the future, and so far as
the defence of the frontiers was cortcerned they could be left to the Egyptian army.
Lord Curzon enquired whether it was really proposed that Great Britain should
assume the responsibility of protecting Egypt’s frontiers and at the same time forfeit
the right to maintain troops in Egypt. He reminded the delegation of the experiences
of the Egyptian army in the past and referred to the fate of Hicks Pasha.
Adly Pasha explained that the Egyptian army would first defend the frontiers,
and should they require as'sistance they would then turn for it to Great Britain.
Lord Curzon replied that in practice this would result in the Egyptian army
landing themselves in difficulties and then appealing to Great Britain to extricate
them. He urged the delegation to look facts in the face. He had nothing to say
against the Egyptian army, of whose courage he entertained no doubts, but it was
useless to shut their eyes to the experiences of the past.
Lord Curzon then referred again to the question of internal disturbances and the
protection of foreigners.
Adly Pasha said that they had certain judicial rights.
Lord Curzon reminded the delegation that one of the first results of the recent
disturbances at Alexandria had been the despatch of an Italian cruiser to that port.
A similar thing would occur on the next occasion.
Adly suggested that Great Britain would prevent this.
Lord Curzon pointed out that that was precisely the reason for retaining British
troops in the country.
Bushdi Pasha said that in the past there had been special causes which had
produced disturbances, and that the Egyptian Government had never been organised
to deal with them. In the future, however, the causes would have disappeared, and
the organisation of the Egyptian Government would have improved.
Adly Pasha added that the recent riots had been merely a continuation of a two
years’ revolution.
Lord Curzon asked the delegation whether they could expect that foreign Powers
would be willing to accept their assurances with regard to there being no such trouble
in the future and with regard to the improvements of the Egyptian army and Egyptian
organisation generally. .
Rushdi said that foreign Powers had never sent troops to Egypt in the past.
Lord Curzon said that this was because the British troops had been there.
Rushdi said that the riot at Alexandria had been a pure accident.
Adly said that the report that had been drawn up with regard to that riot was
too. absolute in tone, and based its conclusions on premises that did not justify them.
He said that its publication at the present time would do harm to the course of the
negotiations, and that it would be seized upon by his political opponents, who would
suggest that it was issued on purpose to provide arguments for maintaining troops in
Egypt.
Rushdi Pasha said that the riot was against the Government and not against
foreigners.
Lord Curzon then read a telegraphic summary of the report. He said that he was