Papers of the War Cabinet's Eastern Committee [‎188r] (375/544)

15
MR. BALFOUR : I do not know its commercial value. Arabia is not cut olf from
the sea. I do not think we can conceive Arabia as a potential sea Power, with a
merchant fleet. That has never been in their mind at all. They have depended for
their oversea trade upon other peoples ships and ports, and they will not feel being cut
off from the sea as a European nation would feel it ; so that if we can secure for them
access to foreign goods, as we shall secure for them, and if we keep these ports open, I
do not know that they have very much to lose by the French having this strip of
coastline.
LORD CURZON : 1 think Colonel Lawrence would probably disagree with that.
It would mean this : If Beirut is French, the whole of the railway up to the gates of
Damascus is French, though Damascus is to be an Arab town. If they have Iripoli
it would mean almost the whole of the railway to Homs must be French too. Homs is
an Arab town. 1 cannot conceive an Arab State accepting such a situation. Perhaps
Colonel Lawrence will tell us what he thinks about it.
COLONEL LAWRENCE : The position of the port is a very serious one, for two
reasons. Firstly, Customs. It is a question whether you give the French the whole
strip of the Syrian coast and hand over the Customs of the Syrian ports to the
interior ?
MR. BALFOUR : Yes. You mean that the French might abuse their position as
the owner of the sea to tax the through traffic ?
COLONEL LAWRENCE: Not only that; indirect taxation in Turkey is the
thing from which the whole of the Government revenue is drawn, and direct taxation
is worthless.
GENERAL SMUTS: They would not be able to use that form of taxation,
because along the frontier there would be so much smuggling that they could not use
it; and they could not do it at the coast, because it is not in their hands.
MR, BALFOUR : That might be a matter of international arrangement, I speak
merely of the coast of Syria. I think we shall have to consider this question of access
from the sea and taxation from an international point of view in connection with the
European ports.
COLONEL LAWRENCE: And I think it is a mistake to call Faisal’s State
“Arabia.” We call it “ Arab,” because that is an adjective only. Arabia, perhaps,
has access to the sea in the Red Sea, and requires nothing more than it has. Syria
hopes to cut itself off, as far as possible, from the Hejaz. A separatist movement is on
foot and as far as I can influence it, it will become stronger still. Syria, as laid down
in the striped area on the Sykes-Picot map, is an impossible country; it has an immense
desert frontier and no sea^ frontier. Even supposing the French were good about
Customs, receipts, and railway dues, it would never be a country that would be more
than a source of discord, if you cut it off from Arabia in the soutti, the sea on the west,
and Mesopotamia on the east.
LORD ROBERT CECIL : I am strongly in favour of having an Arab port at
Tripoli. Apart from that, Damascus does not depend upon Tripoli, does it ?
COLONEL LAWRENCE : I think it will in the future.
LORD ROBERT CECIL: Its present great trading relations are with the south ?
COLONEL LAWRENCE : With Haifa ? Not much.
LORD ROBERT CECIL : It is mainly the market for Arabia ?
COLONEL LAWRENCE: No. From Beirut is where it comes most, and from
Tripoli and Homs, but that is a railway matter. The railway line from Tripoli to
Homs is the only commercial railway that will exist between the sea and the interior.
LORD CURZON : Do you incline to this partition on the coast that I have been
sketching out ? Do you think it is a feasible arrangement ?
COLONEL LAWRENCE: I think we have involved ourselves in it as the only
solution, although it is very unfortunate.