Papers of the War Cabinet's Eastern Committee [‎170r] (339/544)

5
A rather disquieting feature was introduced into the case when the Sykes-Picot
Agreement was concluded in May 191ti. Under the unfortunate partition of spheres
that was contemplated by that arrangement, the whole of Cilicia and the greater part
of the three Armenian vilayets of Sivas, Kharput, and Diarbekr were included in the
Blue Zone which was assigned to the French, and in which France has the right to
establish such direct or indirect intervention as she may require. The remaining
Armenian vilayets of Erzerum, Van, and Bitlis, as well as the vilayet of Trebizond,
were included in the liussian sphere. That part of the Agreement has lapsed, whatever
may be said of the remainder, and in regard to those parts of Armenia or of Turkey in
Asia partly inhabited by Armenians, we have an absolutely free hand. During the war
the Armenians in the northern part of this area, inhabiting what is often called Russian
Armenia, have set up a sort of independent republic of their own, which is still in some
kind of existence, with a capital at Erivan. The rest of the Armenians, I am afraid,
are, for the most part, fugitives on the face of the earth, and the telegrams that we
have read during the last few days from General Clayton and from other authorities in
that part of the world show the lamentable extent of the distress from which these
wretched exiles are suffering.
Since the armistice was concluded the Turks have been called upon under the
terms of the Armistice—which, however, was a little vague on the point—to evacuate
Cilicia, wdth a view, in the main, of securing it as a possible nucleus of an Armenian
State in the future.
Now the Americans come upon the scene with these proposals as regards material
assistance, which in themselves are not only philanthropic, but seem to be directed to a
very urgent need, but which are thought in some quarters to cloak a political purpose
of some seriousness. This is a verv brief summary of the events as regards Armenia,
and it brings us to the present stage.
Now as to our general policy wdth regard to Armenia, I imagine that there can be little
doubt, whether we look at it from the point of view of our pledges or of our political
interest. We want to have an independent Armenia, an Armenia which, if not now,
at some time in the future, and whether its boundaries are narrow or wide, shall be a
self-governing community. Our reasons for desiring that object are, it seems to me,
three in number. In the first place, adopting the terminology which has become popular
wdth regard to Palestine, we desire to provide a national home for the scattered peoples
of the Armenian race. As long as they are diffused in helpless and hopeless minorities,
in areas inhabited for the most part by the Kurds and Turks, every man’s hand is raised
against them, and any chance of settled life or autonomous existence cannot be said to
exist. Secondly, w^e want to set up an Armenian State as a palisade, if I may use the
metaphor, against the Pan-Turanian ambitions of the Turks, w’hich may overflow the
Caucasian regions and carry great peril to the countries of the Middle East and East.
Thirdly, we want to constitute something like an effective barrier against the aggression
—if not now, at any rate in the future—of any foreign Powers, impelled, by ambition or
by other motives, to press forward in that direction. That, I think, is a fair statement
of the reasons for which probably all of us here desire the erection of an independent
Armenian State.
At this stage two questions are involved. The first is that of the size and
boundaiies of the State, as to which I do not propose to say much. The second
is as to the Great Power—because obviously some Power is required—which shall
take it in charge, and, to use a popular phrase, be the mandatory of the Pow r ers
in general to guide and sustain Armenia on her march to the future that we
desire. If you will read the case that has been drawn up by the Foreign Office,
you will see that they favour what 1 may call a larger Armenia. That is shown
in the map which is attached. If you glance at that map for a moment, y<>u will
see that the Armenia that is contemplated in th^ Foreign Office Memorandum
starts in the eastern corner of the Levant A geographical area corresponding to the region around the eastern Mediterranean Sea. , from Mersina. It then runs along the
Taurus range and the western side of the Anti-Taurus, past Sivas, which is included
in the country coloured Armenian, and reaches the Black Sea at a point marked as
Cape Yasun. This area includes two ports, one of them inconsiderable, the other of
great importance, Kerasund and Trebizond. If you follow the boundaiies to the east
and south-east, you will find that it further includes the very important centres of
Erzerum, Bayazid, Mush, Bitlis, and Van. Its southern limits are a line that runs
from south of the Gulf of Alexandretta to the north of Antioch, through Aintab,
Diarbekr, and Sert, to the northern boundaries of Jezireh and Kurdistan. I will not
trouble to analyse those boundaries any more closely at the moment. I will merely
point out to the Committee that it would be the greatest mistake to suppose that this
[365—41] C