File 53/1915 Part IV 'German War: Turkey; Caliphate etc' [‎226v] (449/481)

6
known in India, would fall from their grasp. A very strong iactor to m 3 - mind,
in the maintenance of this situation, is the fact that British Indian officials,
particularly military officers have not at their disposal the knowledge of the
Turkish politics and the real actions and composition of the Committee, to
enable them to act with confidence and to speak with eeriainty in conversa
tion. I have met several young officers who were devoted to and interested
in their men, and who with true Knglish good nature said that it was only
natural that, being Moslems, their men should feel in a difficult position, and
who were astonished when I explained the real nature of the Commiitee of
Union and Progress. It nnyv be objected that no matter wh it Englishmen
may sa}' in the course of conversation to Indians, it will have no effect as the
Indians will not believe them, personally 1 agree that this will be so at lirst
but as the truth is on our side sooner or later we shall produce a better
atmosphere, and at least put hostile influences on the defensive.
British civil and military officials are trained in India to have a great
regard for religious susceptibilities of natives, the}" roughly conceive that
the young Turks are the leaders of a united people, and that Turkey is a
real Islamic power as it was in the days of Abdul Hamid, consequently they
are handicapped by the sense that in Indian Moslem feeling, we are
confronting a popular feeling based on a logical foundation, did they realise
that they are merely facing the unwitting dupes of cosmopolitan knaves of
the Committee of Union and Progress, who believe neither in Allah or the
Koran, the}' would be heartened and stiffened by a sense of right which is
at present lacking.
British, especially Englishmen, are notoriously bad actors, and nothing
puts an Englishman in a worse position than the feeling that there is
something to be said for the other side. I feel that it is very important that
steps should be taken to make it quite clear to British military and civil
officials that from the Mohammedan point of view there is nothing to be said
for the young Turks. A brief history of the young Turkish movement
circulated as a confidential paper to all British officers either civil or military
m contact with Moslems would, at least, rectify this deleterious influence.
Tile above was written before I had an opportunity of reading the
memorandum-prepared by the Political and Foreign Department, Simla,
for my information—its date is 28th October. However, I do not feel that
it contains any information contrary to the opinion I have expressed.
Section IV is to my mind exceedingly interesting and indicates a new
cangei. The attitude of the “ intellectuals ” towards education, and the so-
called revolt against “ old-school ” teaching, is identical with the attitude of
the young Turks towards the Ulema, save with this difference, that the
1 urkisii Ulema are a learned and cultivated body of well-trained clergy with
considerable prestige, whereas the Indian old-school Moslems are disorganised,
atrophied, and feeble, so far as learning is concerned.
1 he Intellectuals of India are evidently trying the same game as the
Committee of l mon and Progress—that is, to engross all political power in
the hands of a clique of journalists, pleaders, and functionaries, to oust the
cencal element, but to retain its power to excite an ignorant mob to
massacre or rebellion when necessary. I feel that this is a time when those
responsible for our policy should face facts, and not allow themselves to be
b inded b} catchwords An old-school Moslem may be fanatical, but his
fanaticism has a logical basis, and may be tempered or assuaged, or even
leasone 1 > f 1 ( j re 18 111 his mind an element of righteousness which can
>e appealed to, and an element of love of justice which makes him sooner or
a er amena ) 1 n intellectual with an imitation European training,
wilh cnv-)-of the European surging in his heart—who is an agnostic and
tas no belief whatever m religion, but sees in Islam a political engine
whereby immense masses of men can be moved to riot and disorder—is far
more dangerous.
I he fanatic is sincere and is moved by a direct impulse, the intellectual
s insincere and moved by policy. It is absolutely vain to expect less
natality from a Mohammedan “intellectual” revolutionary than from a
tl IT t , T at ? st Arn ? e " ,an massacres prove this, as every action of
tin ( -omim lte e o f 1 111011 and 1 rogress proves this. Furthermore, 1 would *
* Memorandum on Indian Moslems—not reprinted.