Papers of the War Cabinet's Eastern Committee [‎214r] (427/544)

SIR HAMILTON GRANT: I quite see that, but at the same time we should
probably be able to watch her better if we stood hand-in-hand with France in the
matter than if we pushed her out altogether and left her to intrigue with the
Idrisi and down the eastern littoral as she has dene before. When Italy came into
the war we had to take military action in the Red Sea which we should not have
done otherwise, in order to anticipate probable action on the part of Italy, and leav
ing Italy out is not going to prevent her staking out claims on the eastern shore of
the Red Sea. We had then to occupy certain islands. If we got her in on fair terms
and as a signatory to a self-denying ordinance in the matter, she would be stopped
from further intrigues better than if left out.
LORD ROBERT CECIL: Our experience has not been that with Italy, so
far, so much as with France. There was a Colonel Br^mond there at an early
stage of the war who did nothing but intrigue.
SIR HAMILTON GRANT: We had not come to any agreement at that time.
LORD ROBERT CECIL: And I do not think any agreement would stop
Brdmond.
LORD CURZON: I agree with the view of the Government of India as far
as this, that it is desirable to make an arrangement with the French and the
Italians about the Hejaz and about the way in which commercial concessions and
similar matters are to be managed in the future. But I should be very reluctant
to admit the Italians, or even the French, to sharing the subsidy; I should like to
.arrange the subsidy ourselves.
LORD ROBERT CECIL: I would like to get rid of the subsidy in the form
of a tribute from Damascus, if that could be done, and then say, as far as our
agreement with the French and Italians is concerned, it would be a self-denying
agreement, and we would none of us interfere with the foreign relations of this
gentleman except for strictly pilgrimage purposes, and that he would be bound
himself in the same way not to allow any outside Power to deal with his foreign
relations. What I do not want is to have a wretched competition between two
Western Powers for the favours of an Oriental.
SIR HAMILTON GRANT: If it really was a self-denying agreement that we
would all' keep to, would not that be better than that we should go in and the
others be continually intriguing to get in behind our back?
LORD ROBERT CECIL: It would be better. That is the best thing to be
done, I am disposed to think. The difficulty is, the French have got their man
Cherchali there; he is purely a commercial agent in practice; he is always planning
something.
SIR HAMILTON GRANT: The arms question would be simplified if we got
both France and Italy in too.
LORD CURZON: We have been discussing these questions rather in the air;
I have not seen any definite statement or suggestion of policy on behalf of the
Foreign Office about Arabia. It is alluded to in a great many papers.
LORD ROBERT CECIL: It is dealt with in the Crowe-Toynbee Paper.
LORD CURZON: Mr. Montagu, have you any suggestion as to what should
be done at the Peace Conference as regards treaties, subsidies, and arms?
MR. MONTAGU: Not about subsidies. There may be a trucial treaty on
a commercial basis.
LORD CURZON: I hope we shall not do that with anybody.except the Trucial
Chiefs. I do not think the writer The lowest of the four classes into which East India Company civil servants were divided. A Writer’s duties originally consisted mostly of copying documents and book-keeping. of the Paper understood v what they are.
SIR LOUIS MALLET: The arms traffic question is being dealt with sepa
rately. An international convention is being drafted for discussion.
LORD CURZON: In the paragraph dealing with the Hejaz there is nothing
indicating a very clear view of the Foreign Office as to what ought to be done.
LORD ROBERT CECIL: No, there is not. “In the Hejaz, then, British
desiderata seem to be limited to the conclusion ot a Crucial treaty on a
restricted basis, and for the maintenance of predominant influence we have to