File 705/1916 Pt 2 'Arab revolt: Arab reports; Sir M Sykes' reports' [‎177r] (351/450)

of the 27th June, 1916, the paper says that if the Sherif succeeds in establishing his
independence the Sultan of Turkey will assuredly lose his claim to the Caliphate of
Islam. The position of the Sherif appears to be a strong one, and this is the third loss
which Turkey has suffered since her alliance with Germany. She has already lost
Cyprus and Egypt.
The “ Desh ” of the 28th June, 1916, refers to the news from Calcutta that there
is general rejoicing in Moslem circles over Arabian independence. Indeed, Mahommedans
should realise that since the Young Turks have assumed the administration of Turkey
pilgrimage to the Hejaz has become a dangerous enterprise, and pilgrims have been
plundered at the instance of the Turkish authorities at Mecca and Jeddah. It may be
now expected that the Arabs will be able to protect the pilgrims properly with the help
of the British. Many Mahommedans in India are rejoicing over the attempt of the
Arabs to throw off the Turkish yoke.
The “ Desh ” of the 30th June, 1916, states that some Mahommedans deplore the
Sherif s proclamation and characterise his action as rebellious. The Mahommedans of
Lucknow held a meeting on the 27th June to consider how far the protection of the
sacred places of Islam will be endangered by the Sherif s rebellion. It remains to be
seen what view of the situation is taken at the meeting. The Mahommedans of
Calcutta, however, are rejoicing over the Sherifs proclamation, and are saying that the
Arabs have a natural right to independence. In its issue of the 1 st July, 1916,
the paper says that the Mahommedans, not only in Arabia but in several Indian
provinces, are glad that the Sherif has declared Arabian independence. K. B. Walji
Lalji, a prominent Mussulman of Madras, declares that the news has been received
with satisfaction by the Mahommedans of Madras. Indeed, many Indian
Mahommedans, who formerly used to sympathise with the Turks, are now regarding
them with abhorrence.
The “ Panjabee ” (Lahore), of the 4th July, 1916, reproduces the remarks of the
Englishman” regarding the resolution of the All-India Moslem League on the declaration
of Arab independence, and observes :—
“ As this is a matter which concerns only the Moslem community, we entirely
agree with a Calcutta contemporary that it is no part of our business either to
applaud or to condemn expressions of Mahommedan opinion either in the press or
at public meetings. An attitude of aloofness is what befits other communities in a
matter which clearly does not concern them.”
Writing about the Lucknow meeting, the Urdu “Bulletin” (Lahore) of the
5 th July, 1916, remarks that Indians should feel pleased at the Arab independence,
although ’it has been proclaimed at a distance of hundreds of miles from India. It is,
however, surprising to see that Indian Mahommedans, so far from feeling glad at the
event, are expressing sorrow and indignation at the conduct of the Arabs.
3. Sikh Papers.
The “ Hindustan ” (Lahore), of the 5th July, 1916, publishes a note headed
“ Independent Arabia,” in which it says that the Sherifs army hap demolished stations
on the 1 Hejaz Bailway for a distance of 100 miles, wrecking the line at the same time.
To tell the truth it is this railway which has brought about the revolt of the Arabs;
seeino- that it has thrown out of employment as many as 180,000 Bedouins, whose
livelihood depends only on carrying pilgrims from Jeddah to Mecca, from the latter
place to Medina, and thence to Damascus. This was why some years back they did
not allow the Turks to proceed with the section of the Hejaz Bailway proposed to be
constructed between Mecca and Medina.
In another place the paper quotes an extract from the Paisa Akhbar disapproving
of the conduct of the Arabs in rebelling against Turkey, and says that it is surprising
that those who rejoice over the independence of every other nation should feel offended
at the independence of the Arabs. The present war is being waged to restore their
liberty to the weaker nations, and Bussia and Great Britain joined in it only to preserve
the independence of Serbia and Belgium. Again, it has also been decided to confer
Home Buie on Ireland, while Egypt has freed herself from the clutches of Turkey And
if the Arabs have now secured their natural right, why should anyone feel ofiended at
it ? Are the Arabs, who once ruled half the world, now unfit to administer their own