Papers of the War Cabinet's Eastern Committee [‎93r] (185/544)

[365—25a]
F
15
in the hands of the Foreign Office the results were far from satisfactory. Indeed,
sc strongly do I feel this that I have considerable doubts whether it was wise to leave
even Southern Persia under the military control of India. I am disposed to think
that that decision will have to be reviewed before very long, unless, indeed, it ceases
to be an area of military operations properly so called, as distinguished from the
necessary policing of a disturbed district.
(Initialled) R. C.
Foreign Office, July 20, 1918.
The questions raised in this file belong to two different categories: the first
relates to a question of high policy, the second to a question of machinery.
The question of policy essentially turns on whether our course in Persia and
Mesopotamia should be steered from Simla or from London., There is no doubt
something to be urged in favour of the first alternative; but 1 understand that
Indian methods are popular neither in Persia nor among the Arabs, and this is, I
think, conclusive. Whether the control of our policy in these regions shall be left
to the Foreign Office or whether a new Office should be created in Downing Street
to deal with them, is a problem which may be left alone till after the war.
As regards the Eastern Committee. I think its critics exaggerate its short
comings. I do not love government by Committees, but Committees are inevitable
where more than one Department is concerned in any group of transactions. Now
in the regions with which the Eastern Committee concerns itself, the Foreign Office,
the 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. , and the War Office are at the present moment all equally interested.
All must be represented at every meeting, and at some meetings it is necessary to have
a Treasury representative in addition. If it be remembered that, since this Com
mittee largely takes the place of the Cabinet so far as the subjects with which it deals
are concerned, and that therefore the Cabinet must be adequately represented upon
it, I do not think that its constitution can be greatly improved.
It may be the fact, perhaps it is, that some of the items on its agenda are not
sufficiently important to be dealt with by a body so constituted; but this evil, if it
exists, could easily be remedied by empowering the Chairman to relegate such
questions for provisional decision to a small Departmental Committee appropriately
constituted.
A. J. B.
Foreign Office, July 27, 1918.
E.C.-1008.
“ THE WAR 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 Memorandum 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.