Papers of the War Cabinet's Eastern Committee [‎86r] (171/544)

Lord Ourzon.
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty s Government.]
r
Printed for the War Cabinet. September 1918.
SECRKT.
F.C. 24 A.
WAR CABINET.
EASTERN COMMITTEE.
Minutes of a Meeting of the Eastern Committee held in Lord Curzons Room at the
Privy Council Office, on Tuesday, August 13, 1918, at 4 p.m.
Present:
The Right Hon. the Eaul Curzon of Kedleston, K.G., G.C.S.L, G.C.LE.
(in the Chair).
The Right Hon. Lord Robert Cecil,
K.C., M.P., Assistant Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs.
General Sir H. H. Wilson, K.C.B.,
D.S.O., Chief of the Imperial General
Staff.
The Right Hon. E. S. Montagu, M.P.,
Secretary of State for India.
Lieutenant-General the Right Hon. J. C.
Smuts, K.C.
Lieutenant-Colonel L. Storr, Secretary.
The War in the
East:
Functions of the
Eastern
Committee.
THE Committee had before them a paper by the Secretary
of State for India, entitled “ The War in the EastJ” (E.C.-718)
together with notes on the said paper by the Chief of the Imperial
General Staff, the Foreign Office, and the Chairman (E.C.-809, E.C.-
978, and E.C.-1008) (Appendix).
Mr. Montagu said that it would shorten the discussion if he
withdrew at once two suggestions he had put forward in his paper
for consideration, not because he had altered his view, but because
it was obvious from the papers that had circulated that he would
not obtain the assent of his colleagues. It seemed to be agreed, for
no member of the Committee had supported his proposal, that the
conduct of the war in the East, or any part of it, could not be given
over to India or to any organisation outside London. The members
of the Committee opposed the proposal to do this, and the military
advisers of the Committee also objected.
He desired, however, that it should be placed on record that,
however large the theatre which the war embraced, however great
the extension eastward, the Committee and their advisers appeared
unwilling to consider any devolution of management, which
apparently could only be permitted in the case of very small wars,
such as the war in German South-West Africa or the Pacific
Islands. This view r would appear to result inevitably in ever-
increasing responsibilities on those already overburdened in London.
But, in view of what had been written, he did not see any use in
pressing his views further.
The second point which he felt that in view of opposition he
must abandon was his suggestion that political and military control
in Persia should be harmonised. Mr. Montagu said that he had
pointed out the difficulties already caused by the welter of conflicting
B
[365—25a]