Papers on British policy and the Arab movement [‎4r] (9/380)

7
©
* •
Administration in Irak, Syria, and Palestine ; (v.) Relation of Sherif Husein to His
Majesty’s Government; and (vii.) Existing British Treaties and Agreements with Arab
Governments in the independent area. The relation of British commitments to deside
rata under these heads will be discussed below.
(iv.) Foreign Administration in Irak, Syria and Palestine.
In his private telegram of the 18th October, 1915, to Sir E. Grey, Sir H.
McMahon reported that “ with regard to Basra vilayet Faroki accepts tlie fact that
special measures of British control will he necessary, in view of Great Britain s inteiest
there ” (p. 51).
In their instructions telegraphed to Sir H. McMahon on the 20th October, 19lo,
the Foreign Office replied on this point:—
“ Mesopotamia. —In view of the special interests in the Bagdad Province and
area actually in our occupation, the proposed sphere of British control, namely,
the Basrah vilayet, will need extension. This will not, of course, prejudice oui
interests with Arab Chiefs ” (p. 52).
This was embodied on the 24th October, 1915, in Sir H. McMahon’s second letter
to the Sherif:—
“ With regard to the vilayets of Bagdad and Basrah, the Arabs will recognise
that the established position and interests of Great Britain necessitate specia
measures of administrative control in order to secure these territories from foreign
aggression, to promote the welfare of the local population and to safeguard our
mutual economic interests” (p. 54).
The Sherif took up the question on the 5th November, 1915, in his third letter to
to Sir H. McMahon :—
“ As the provinces of Irak are parts of the pure Arab Kingdom, and were, in
fact, tire seat of its government in the time of Ali, and in the time of all the
Khali's who succeeded him ; and as in them began the civilisation of the Arabs,
and as their towns in those provinces were the first towns buili in Islam, where
the Arab power became so great; therefore these provinces are greatly \ alued by
all Arabs, far and near, and their traditions cannot be forgotten by them.
Consequently we cannot satisfy the Arab Nation or make them give up such a
" title to nobility. But in order to render an accord easy, and taking into
consideration the assurances mentioned in the fifth article of your letter, to keep
and guard our mutual interests in that country as they are one and the same, for
all these reasons we might agree to leave under the British administration foi a
short time those districts that are now occupied by British troops, without the
rights of either side being prejudiced thereby (especially those of the Aiab Nation,
which interests are economic and vital to it), and against a sum paid as compen
sation to the Arab Kingdom for the period of the occupation, in order to meet the
expense which every new Kingdom is bound to support; at the same time
respecting your agreements with the Sheikhs of those districts, and especially
those which are essent ial ” (p. 92).
t
About the same date, in his conversations with Sir Mark Sykes, Faroki discussed
the whole question of British priority of economic enterprise and administrative
assistance in Mesopotamia, and of a similar position in Syria for branee :
“ The Arabs would agree to a convention with France to allow her a monopoly
of all concessionary enterprise in Palestine and Syria: the latter being defined as
bounded as far south as Deir Zor by the Euphrates, thence to Deraa and to Maan
along the Hejaz Railway. x ,
“As far South as Maan the Hejaz Railway could be^ sold to french
concessionnaires, Arabs further agreeing to employ in this area European emp oyes
and none but French as advisers. To be noted that Arabs only undertake to
employ Europeans if they need them, but Faroki points out that the object of this
stipulation is to avoid any appearance of control oyer them (Arabs). In this aiea
the Arabs would agree to accord special recognition to all french educational
establishments.
“ As regards the remainder of the Greater
Northern Mesopotamia) the Arabs would agree
Great Britain” (p. 104).
Arabia (Irak and Jezireh and
to an identical convention with
ISfCi