Papers of the Interdepartmental Conference on Middle Eastern Affairs [‎21v] (42/290)

10
(d.) O.E.T.A. North —
The G.O.O. is understood to have asked for a general authority to make advances
to meet current expenses, but nothing has yet apparently been sanctioned. The
expenditure in this district, however, appears to be solely of a military nature.
The only estimate the Treasury have received is that submitted by General
Clayton in the enclosure to Foreign Office letter (114/W/44) of the 27th January for
a monthly minimum of 150,000Z. for O.E.T.A. East. It appears, however, that the
roreign Office themselves are doubtful whether this estimate does or does not
include—
(n.) The monthly subsidy of 60,000b for the Emir Feisal; or
(b.) Current expenses in O.E.T.A. West, as well as O.E.T.A. East (see Foreign
Office telegram No. 43 E. of 30th January).
(e.) Besides these ordinary expenses of the administration there have been very large
disbursements on account of relief of destitute persons, Armenians, and other native or
Allied subjects. In their letter of 28th January (213126/X/l 150) the Foreign Office
supply a statement showing roughly—
£
Spent up to the end of January ... ... ... 33,000
('lothing and blankets for refugees at Barquabah (? single
disbursement or monthly recurrent) ... ... 48,000
For Armenians at Damascus, &c. ... ... 25,000 a month.
Besides this the G.O.C. asked for 1,000b a month for all Armenians, and reports
that in January he spent 3,000b for distressed Allied subjects, 24,000b for Jewish
subjects (whether these are included in the Foreign Office summary in letter of
28th January is not quite clear). There is further reported 25,000b spent up to
10th February, and the G.O.C. asks for 25,000b monthly until repatriation of the
distressed persons can be effected.
The conclusion is that we are likely to be faced during 1919-20 with the necessity
of providing very large sums from Civil Votes to assist this administration. Nothing
like an accurate estimate has so far been furnished, but it looks as if the demand will
range from a minimum of 175,000b to a maximum of from 330,000Z. a month.
Provision for these funds must presumably be made in a separate Vote to be submitted
to Parliament by the Foreign Office.
2. Financial Control.
The position appears to be that, in each of the three administrative districts
(omitting for the moment O.E.T. North), there is a major-general in charge of the
administration with a financial adviser. At headquarters there is no financial adviser
proper, but General Allenby is assisted by Mr. Huggett, the local adviser to the Army
Council. The post of financial adviser in the three districts is filled in O.E.T. South
by Colonel Gabriel, in O.E.T. West by certain French experts, and in O.E.T. East
by an Arab official with French experts to assist him. The Treasury desire to submit £
that this is an unsatisfactory state of affairs. So long as British funds continue to
be liable for any deficiency in local revenues, it is essential that the control should be
in British, and not in French or Arab hands. Further, a strong and experienced
financial adviser at headquarters appears to be needed, and it appears doubtful whether
Mr. Huggett has the necessary qualifications for this post. It is, therefore,
recommended that—
(1.) A civilian financial adviser be appointed at once at headquarters with the local
rank of brigadier-general or possibly even of major-general (in order to meet
military convenience), who should have the right, as did the financial
agent in Egypt, to report direct to the Foreign Office, if necessary, without
control by the G.O.C. in C., who should, however, be furnished with copy
of the correspondence in his capacity as head of the civil administration
(see Treasury letter 40931/18 of the 3rd December).
(2. A local financial adviser should also be appointed in each of the administrative
districts, who should have considerable independent powers, and should
have the same right of reporting direct to the financial adviser at
headquarters without restriction by the local military authorities.