Papers of the War Cabinet's Eastern Committee [‎167r] (333/544)

15
t »
LORD ROBERT CECIL: I should like the Paper I referred to to be circulated.
LORD CURZON: Do you think we ought to take Syria, the Lebanon, Armenia,
and so on, at the same time as Palestine, or have two separate discussions?
LORD ROBERT CECIL: They overlap a little, but Palestine is more or less a
separate discussion. I do not think there is the slightest doubt about what ought to
be done there, if we can get it.
GENERAL SMUTS: Perhaps we can do the whole lot together.
LORD ROBERT CECIL: You will let Sir Eyre Crowe's Paper* be circulated^-
the little Paper.
LORD CURZON: The Paper about the Caucasus?
LORD ROBERT CECIL: Yes.
LORD CURZON: We have no Paper from any Office putting forward the
position as regards Syria or Palestine.
LORD ROBERT CECIL: There is one dealing with the whole of our treaty
obligations.
(Lorid Robert Cecil withdrew.)
LORD CURZON: We will look at that and have another meeting. The first
question we are all agreed upon is to get Captain Wilson, in finding out the opinion
of the people, to ascertain whether they are in favour of a single Arab State from
the north of Mosul dbwn to the sea. Secondly, there is the question of, an Arab
ruler. I myself should be willing to put the question, “ Do they want him?” Apart
from the diplomatic considerations named by Lord Robert, it seems to me absurd,
if they do not want such a man at all, that we should appoint him.
MR. MONTAGU: I think that question should be put. It is likely the right
man does not exist. There is something more important than diplomatic considers
tions.
GENERAL SMUTS: Does not our whole case have the bottom knocked out of it?
MR. MONTAGU: Suppose there is a series of Nakibs, or whatever you like to
call them, without a titular head?
LORD CURZON: I should like to put the second question: Are they in favour
of a single Arab ruler of the State? Thirdly, if so, to whom do they incline? I do
not know what the view of the Committee generally is about the matter.
GENERAL MACDONOGH: I am in favour of what Lord Robert says.
LORD CURZON: And not give them a voice in the matter?
GENERAL MACDONOGH: It is an essential part of our policy to have an
Arab ruler, and has been ever since the beginning.
LORD CURZON- It has never been mentioned except when discussing the
question with Sir Percy Cox. He suggested the Nakib of Baghdad, but he did not
suggest the Nakib of Baghdad should be the head of a State from Mosul to the
sea There was to be a man in Baghdad, and a separate ruler in Basra.
GENERAL MACDONOGH: We have always spoken of the Arab facade, ^.nd
that indicated to me that we are contemplating an Arab ruler.
MR. MONTAGU: What does an Arab facade mean one Arab ruler? Why
not three or four?
GENERAL SMUTS- That makes me incline to the belief that we must put
all three questions. It is possible the Arabs themselves may say “ We want three:
we want a man at Basra, another at Baghdad, and another at Mosul. I do not
see any objection to that, from our point of view, except that we do not carry
Hussein with us. If that is the Arab view I do not tbink we should object. I am
afraid we shall have to put in that question.
I ORD CURZON: I think we ought to have the three questions. Perhaps
Mr Montagu will draft a telegram. We must be careful what we say about a
* E.C. 2339.