"الملف 73/7 I (D 19) وضع الكويت، سكة حديد بغداد، والمفاوضات الأنجلو تركية في ١٩١١" [و‎‎٣‎٦] (٦٣١/٨٩)

5
The point that seemed to give us pause in our relations with England at
the moment was the rights claimed by England in the Persian Gulf. As we
did not clearly grasp her demands on the point, we were of the opinion that
England ought to be asked what she wants in the Persian Gulf. We are glad
to find that the Times article forms a reply to that question, for, as the
Times says, the English ought to be as little doubtful of the friendly inten
tions and cordial disposition of the Turks as the Turks should be that England
will approach the question with a sentiment of friendship and justice.
We were satisfied that explanations would be given in the Times which
would lighten the darkness ; but unhappily we must admit that the lines we
read did not come up to our expectations.
In the Times article there is visible a state of nerves and trembling
as astonishing as it is painful. We naturally cannot fail to notice the vehe
ment attacks made on us by a paper which is assuring us that we shall always
find friendly feelings in the English. If Russia enters into negotiations with
Germany without notice to her friends, and if Germany wins" a position of
friendship in Turkey in a very short time by coming to the help of the Turks
at a moment when none of her friends, not even England, stretched out a
hand, the fault is not ours, and we ought not to have the consequent annoyance
visited on our heads. If there is a party which is responsible for English policy
not taking its rightful active part in the affairs of the East, it is not Turkey.
This being the case, it is not right to attribute the aloofness of England
and Erance from Turkish policy and the resumption by Germany of her old
friendship with Turkey to our ill-treatment of various Ottoman elements. That
is a subterfuge, and an admission that they are not the friends of Turkey. If
the Young Turkey Government finds it necessary to proclaim martial law in
certain places and has recourse to stern measures, the reason and wisdom
of the step is known to the whole world. In these first years the constitutional
regime is bound not to wink at any aggressive action; that is necessary for
the safeguard of its glory and honour. When we note that the leader of the
Egyptian Nationalists, Mohammed Eerid Bey, has just been condemned to six
months' imprisonment for writing a preface to a book, we cannot understand
how Young Turkey, with its three-year-old constitution, can justly be blamed
for not applying the laws of liberty and equality as fully as the English. Hence
it is absolutely wrong to say that the Young Turks have resolved to follow a
policy of force and severity, tyranny, and oppression, and that, having
realised that they will therefore be debarred from friendship with Liberal
Governments, they have inclined towards German policy. We cannot
reconcile this view with the weight of such a paper as the Times. Perhaps
speaking the truth openly like this arises from a fault similar to
that lack of political ideas which the Times finds in us. If these are our
only faults, we admit them.
What does England want in the Persian Gulf ? It is not very easy to
understand that clearly from the Times articles. That paper divides English
interests in the Persian Gulf into two parts—economic and political. We
think we can readily admit the economic interests, for what England wants is
that her trade should not be prejudiced to the benefit of her rivals. As we
have no intention of favouring one side more than another, it is unthinkable
that a difference should arise on that point.
But it is the question of political interests that is hard to understand. The
attention :of the Times has been particularly struck by the articles of
the Tanin, and our brother, Ismail Hakki Bey, about the Sheikhs of
Mohammerah and Koweit. In this respect, it reminds us that the Sheikh of
Mohammerah has no connection with the Ottoman Government. Turkey,
however, never made such claim ; the Sheikh of Mohammerah is under Persia.
But has that Sheikh any connection with England? At least he is our co
religionist. Nevertheless, the Turkish Government claims no right over the
Sheikh of Mohammerah ; but our right to desire to put a stop to the Sheikh's
agitation and attacks in Ottoman territory will be generally admitted. Can
the Constitutional Government wink at the presence in Bussorah itself of the
secret paid agents of the Sheikh as the means of carrying out his various aims ?