File 978/1917 Pt 1 'Mesopotamia: administration; occupation of Baghdad; the proclamation; Sir P Cox's position' [‎74r] (152/402)

From Sir P. Cox, 25th July 1917.
(Addressed to Foreign, repeated to Secretary of State for India,
with copy to Army Commander.)
(Received 11 p.m., 26th.)
2768. Please see Secretary of State s telegram of 4th July regarding
Mesopotamia Administration.
I had been awaiting instructions from Government of India before
submitting my views.
On leceivmg the telegram I sent copy to Army Commander whose views
had been called for by Chief of the General Staff and he discussed it with
me. I gather that he saw no reason to alter views expressed in paragraph 12
of my telegram T. 1049, dated 7th April, and feared that adoption of
Secretary of State’s proposals would mean division of authority prejudicial
to military interests of force.
As regards myself, the views expressed in the paragraph above cited
were based on the experience of the preceding 2-Jr years. The events of the
past three months however, have caused me to modify them somewhat for
the following reasons (cpovip, \AAn.dix-ci^
Granted that we are both imbued with the fullest/(? trespass) desire to
make good assurance(s) which we have given to Government, yet in practice
many difficult questions arise in regard to which there is room for consider
able divergence of view as to what is or is notin the interests of Government
or in harmony with spirit of their/talonto ;—(? proofed) in our own particular jfujhcy; o*aA evt
sphere, neither Army Commander nor I can lay claim to infallibility. 1 am
consequently brought to opinion that it would be more satisfactory for His
Majesty’s Government as well as fairer to each of us that the former should
receive regular and frequent reports which will both keep them posted in
regard to progress of their policy, and will incidentally enable them to satisfy
themselves that a just balance is being maintained between military and
political or civil interests. In short, as regards question of report, I am
entirely in favour of it, more especially in view of probability that military
situation during the coming winter will preclude assembly of the proposed
Commission as early as was expected. _ . . -
Ab to question of my being given title of Civil Commissioner, 1 am not
aware precisely what Army Commander’s views are on the point but they
will no doubt be given fullest consideration. With the clear limitation
imposed, I do not think my appointment as such need prove any incon
venience to him while the civil administration will certainly benefit. In
this connection I hope it will be conceded that in past three years, during
which I have endeavoured to render loyal co-operation to five succeeding
General Officer Commanding’s, there has been little evidence of any tendency
on my part to assert myself unduly at their expense, and 1 shall endeavour
that there is as little m future. . . . « n ,
Mv sole concern is that, the civil and poht.eal interests of Government
shall be adequately safeguarded. In regard to these interests whatevei may
be my nominal title or status, vis-^vis the Army Commander and not
withstanding his supreme authority, the mere fe^ltelv
throughout the period make it impossible that I can be divested completely
of personal responsibility whether present or ultimate.