Letters and Papers Concerning the Trans-Persian Railway and Other Railways in Persia [‎160v] (320/442)

2001 Supply (Committee). HOUSE OF
COMMONS Foreign Office. 2002
[Mr. Noel Buxton.]
of the spirit of domination, ascendancy,
and usurpation for first place in Europe,
or we have the idea of individual superi
ority in Europe, then judging by history
there is a danger arising from this position
which has led us into trouble in the past,
sometimes with France and sometimes with
Russia. A great many people who sup
ported the policy which led to the Boer
war are now of opinion that that war was
not unavoidable, and that the policy was
mistaken. All at least would admit there
were fears, certainly there were expecta
tions of early successes which were not
justified by the conflict. \\ as the Boer Avar
necessary at the time 1 On that, Avidely
different opinions are held, and opinions
are to a great extent changed. [An Hox.
Member: “No.”] It is possible at all
events
The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN (Mr.
Maclean): I do not see Avhere the Boer
Avar arises on this question.
Mr. NOEL BUXTON : I Avill not pursue
it, but boAV to your ruling, because I have
nothing further to say, except that the
spirit which prompted that Avar, in the
opinion of many, at all events on this side
of the House, may be the spirit Avhich is
concerned in the present question of
Anglo-German relations. It is even pos
sible that the experts may depart a little
from the course of unbiassed reason, and it
is only unbiassed and impartial reason
ableness Avhich saves a nation from con
flict. If a conflict arose, such as the
Leader of the Opposition said might
arise, from want of human Avisdom,
it Avould be a conflict among the least of
Avhose results would be the extinction of
the Government Avhose policy led up to
such an unfortunate time.
Sir J. D. REES-: It was encouraging to
hear from the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs just now that to know
where Teheran is is something of a quali
fication for speaking on foreign affairs.
But I as one Avho has also lived at Teheran,
and has had a very close official acquaint
ance for tAventy years with Persian affairs,
feel almost disqualified to address the
Committee. At any rate my disqualifica
tion, such as it is, caused me to support
with indignation and impatience the
speech of the hon. Gentleman the Member
for Mayo (Mr. Dillon), who Avithout any
knoAvledge of the country, the people,
language, or subject, Avith all the valour of
ignorance, addressed the Committee in a
speech in Avhich he concealed or sup
pressed, if he knew them, every fact to
the credit and advantage of Russia, and
put forward every fact with Avhich lie is
filled by those so-called Nationalists—I do
not know why they allocate to themselves
that title—whom he represents. Had he
been desirous of representing matters
fairly to the Committee he might have re
presented that it Avas solely oAving to the
forbearance of Russia at Tabriz that the
Nationalists were able to defeat the Shah ;
that it Avas solely owing to their forbear
ance not to allow their Cossack regiments
to fight—for one Cossack regiment can put
to flight the Avhole of the forces of the
Nationalists—that the Medjliss Avere able
to get into poAver—the Medjliss which has
made the country, the country which I
knew under the absolute Monarchy safe
and comfortable, into an absolute welter of
disorder, assassination, chaos, and every
thing which is discreditable to Govern
ment. It seems to me a painful thing that
a fluent and glib speech of that character
should be made which completely misre
presented every circumstance. I really
hesitate very much to go into Persian
affairs again, but I hope that the Under
secretary if he is taking notes for the in
formation of his chief. Avill say on my be
half that, much as I admire the conduct of
foreign affairs by the right hon. Gentle
man, I should think it still more efficient if
he Avill endeavour to discourage the ques
tions put to him Avhich are based upon a
kind of assumption that Russia is a tyran
nical PoAver, and Avants to eat up Northern
Persia and destroy that pet lamb of the
Parliamentarians, the Medjliss, Avhich, in
point of fact, OAved its very existence to
the forbearance of Russia far more than
to ourselves, though avc too have had
our share in forming it and producing that
caricature of Parliamentary Government
Avith which some people are pleased on
account of its being called a Parliament.
It is like that other blessed word Meso
potamia, which co\ T ers every inefficiency
and evil and instability in the circum
stances of the country AAdiich can possibly
be imagined. If the right hon. Gentle
man the Secretary of State speaks again
I should like to ask wdiat he meant—I
think he meant everything extremely fair
and well—but I should like to ask him what
he meant by saying that Russia had an
idea of trade in the Trans-Persian Rail-
Avay. I hardly belieA r e that he could con
template that she would make any trade
out of the Trans-Persian Railway. It is
perfectly notorious that Moscow and not