Papers of the War Cabinet's Eastern Committee [‎80r] (159/544)

t lord Gurzon. ®
[This Bocmnent is the Property^of His Britannic Majesty's Goyernment.J
Printed for the War Cabinet. August 1918.
SECRET.
E.C.-1008.
WAR CABINET.
EASTERN COMMITTEE.
“THE AVAR IN THE EAST.”
(Functions of the Eastern Committee.)
Memorandum by Lord Curzon.
(Previous Papers: G.T.-3834, G.T.-3905, G.T.-3978, G.T.-4940, G.T.-5084. War
Cabinet 363, Minute 20; and War Cabinet 369, Minute 11 .)
The important questions raised by Mr. Montagu in his Memorandum of the 5th
July (E.C.-718/G.T.-5084) have now been reviewed by the War Office Memorandum
of the 15th July (E.C.-809), by the Foreign Office Memcxandum of the 17th July
(E.C.-978), and in notes by Lord Robert Cecil of the 20th July (E.C.-978) and
Mr. Balfour of the 27th July (E.C.-978), and these papers reveal a very considerable
measure of agreement on the principal points that have been raised. As Chairman
of the Committee, I should like to comment upon them.
1. Mr. Montagu proposes that the Committee should be reconstituted as a
Committee of Ministers only, with expert advice and assistance available in the room.
That is exactly what the Committee is. If reference be made to the note of the
C.I.G.S. (G.T.-3834), and the War Cabinet discussion and decision upon it (War
Cabinet 369/11), it will be seen that the Members of the Committee are:—
The Chairman.
General Smuts.
The Foreign Secretary.
The Indian Secretarv.
C.I.G.S.
The Foreign Secretary is accompanied by the Permanent Under-Secretary, and
fhe Indian Secretary, by his Political Secretary, the C.I.G.S. is sometimes
accompanied by the D.M.L—sometimes replaced by him. Sir M. Sykes and
Mr. Oliphant attend as Foreign Office and India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. auxiliaries to the War
Cabinet Secretary (Colonel Storr). As we do not vote, but decide by discussion, no
technical change in the position of those who attend the Committee seems to be
required. Even if carried out, it would make no difference in the way in which cur
work is done.
2. Mr. Montagu lays it down as an accepted premise that action is delayed by
the necessity of awaiting the decision of a Committee which cannot meet often, and
the War Office think that this cannot be disputed, and that the Committee is over
burdened with executive work. I take leave to dispute both propositions. The
members of the Committee are, perhaps, not so well aware as the Chairman must be
of the conditions under which it meets. Any member of the Committee is at liberty
to ask for a meeting by communicating with the Secretary (who immediately consults
the Chairman) on any day. No meetingffias ever been refused. On many occasions I
have suggested a meeting, only to be told that the Departments concerned did not
require it. Ten days recently elapsed without a meeting, because the Departments,
not the Chairman, deprecated it. I am not aware of any question of importance, the
decision of which has been delayed by the procedure or constitution of the Committee.
Some questions—as, for instance, the discussion of the present subject—have been
delayed, not by the Committee, but by the slowness of the Departments in submitting
their views.
[678]
2
D. iv.
gi