Papers of the War Cabinet's Eastern Committee [‎82v] (164/544)

General Smuts was of opinion that draft A . we ^ t rather
beyond the terms of W ar Office telegram to the G.O.C.-in-C^ ilgypt,
(E.C. 1017) and he suggested that the last four lines oi the draft
should be eliminated or amended.
General Macdonogh said that he agreed with General Smuts
and reminded the Committee that General Allenby, in his telegram
of the 26th July (E.C.-953) had stated :—
“ In event of my troops occupying part of Syrian areas which
are regarded as of special interest to h ranee I shall he
ready to accept, subject to my supreme authority, French
advice 'and assistance in regard to purely administrative
affairs so long as they do not conflict with military
requirements.”
This appeared to be as far as it was necessary to go. General
Macdonogh also drew the attention of the Committee to the fact
that the proper designation of General Allenby w'as “ G.O.C.-in-( .,
Egypt,” not “ Commander of the Egyptian Expeditionary Force ”
as suggested in the drafts.
The Chairman thought that the proposed agreements required
revision. It was obvious that very great care must be exercised in
the final drafting of the pronouncements, and he suggested that the
Foreign Office should re-draft the annexures to Sir Mark Sykes’
memorandum, and that the matter should be brought up again at
a future meeting.
This was agreed to.
2. The Chairman reminded the Committee that about six months
previously an attempt had been made by His Majesty’s Government
to reach an agreement with the French in regard to the whole
Arabian question, arising out of the Hedjaz policy, the agreement to
include Muscat, The French, taking advantage of our reluctance
to proclaim a protectorate there, had tried to claim absolute equality
with us in the Hedjaz, where our interests were necessarily predomi
nant. The War Cabinet had, at the time, asked the Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs and Lord Curzon, on behalf of His
Majesty’s Government, to meet a French Minister and M. Picot at
the Foreign Office, with a view to arriving at an agreement. A form
of words had been drawn up for submission to the French Govern
ment, but he had heard nothing of it since. The Chairman thought
it highly desirable to clear up the whole situation before the end of
the war, and to regularise the position in the Hedjaz, where it was
difficult to define a preferential status for ourselves short of a pro
tectorate which was impossible, but where a failure to arrive at any
solution would inevitably produce friction between the French and
ourselves at a later date. In Lord Curzon’s opinion, the analogy of
Afghanistan might possibly be applicable.
Lord Robert Cecil said that the matter had been nearly resusci
tated in the course of the last week or two over the question of
Italian guns for the Hedjaz A draft declaration had been
prepared in his department, and had been submitted to the High
Commissioner at Cairo, who considered that it went too far. Lord
Robert said that he had then suggested reviving the old declaration,
but this had been negatived ; and all we had committed ourselves to
so far was “ a desire that the Holy Places should be independent
during the war.” His own view was that it might be clearly laid
down that nobody but ourselves could be permitted to interfere in
the external affairs of the Hedjaz. Lord Robert, who undertook to
furnish copies of the draft declaration to members, further informed
the Committee that Cherchali had left the Hedjaz, and that his
successor was reported not to be confining himself, as his Govern
ment had agreed, to purely commercial interests.