EGYPT UNDER the EGYPTIANS GENERAL LORD ALLENBY BRITISH HIGH Cclmmissione;R

EGYPT UNDER THE EGYPTIANS GENERAL LORD ALLENBY BRITISH HIGH CclMMISSIONE;R [Frontispiece. EGYPT UNDER THE EGYPTIANS By MURRAY HARRIS WITH EIGHT ILLUSTRATIONS LONDON : MCMXXV Primed i11 Gre~~l Brllllff& by 'I'Hl! LOIIDOII AIID IIORWICII PR£SS J.IMI'I'ED, sr, ODES' WOitRS NORWICH CONTENTS PACI! I. THE PROTECTORATE, ITS GENESIS AND ABOLITION I II. THE SUEZ CANAL 33 III. PAST AND PRESENT METHODS OF GOVERN- MENT 44 IV. EDUCATION • 65 V, IRRIGATION • 85 VI. THE PLAGUES AND FLESHPOTS OF EGYPT • I IO VII. CAUSES OF ANTI-BRITISH FEELING • 116 VIII. SAAD PASHA ZAGLUL : A CHARACTER SKETCH • 126 IX. THE PEOPLES OF EGYPT • . I 32 X. COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY IN EGYPT I87 XI. EGYPT AND THE SUDAN • 208 XU. THE NEW ROLE OF ENGLAND IN EGYPT 222 INDEX • 237 v LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS GENERAL LORD ALLENBY Frontispiece TO FACE PAGE GENERAL SIR JOHN MAXWELL 8 SIR MURDOCH MACDONALD 97 SAAD PASHA ZAGLUL . 126 KING FUAD , 133 ADLY PASHA YEGHEN . 153 AHMED PASHA ZIWER . 234 MAP OF THE NILE BASIN . 240 vii The Author gratefully acknowledges the permission of The Times and The Illustrated London News to reprint articles published by them. EGYPT UNDER THE EGYPTIANS I THE PROTECTORATE, ITS GENESIS AND ABOLITION DuRING his first interview with the Governor of Saint Helena, Napoleon said that Egypt was the most important country in the world. Two factors, which have since arisen, have immeasurably increased its importance; they are the Suez Canal and cotton. Too much stress cannot be. laid on the strategic value of the former, as it is the sole line of communication between England and her Eastern Colonies and the latter has given Egypt an economic importance undreamt of even in the days prior to the discovery of the Cape route, when there was a considerable volume of transit trade, as the whole traffic between Europe and the East had to pass overland. Lanca shire depends almost exclusively on Egypt for the finer grades of cotton and this has made of her soil by far the most valuable agricultural land in the world. Napoleon's expedition to the Eastern Mediterranean was not mere idle filibustering, but was primarily designed to interfere with our communications, which he realiz.ed were vulnerable at this point. His views are given in a letter to the Directory, which contained z EGYPT UNDER THE EGYPTIANS these words-" pour detruire veritablement 1' Angle terre, i1 faut nous em parer de l'Egypte." Supremacy in Egypt is still more essential for England to-day, but it is remarkable, that, as early as at the beginning of last century, statesmen of note of all nationalities, including Mohamed Ali himself, took it for granted that the paramount interest in Egypt was that of England and the most far-sighted of them saw that it was inevitable that England should play the leading role. Increasing recognition of this special interest at home led to deeper commitments in the country and was one of the contributory causes of the Occupa tion. The destinies of Egypt thus became indis solubly bound up with those of the British Empire, but latterly a gradual and general weakening of conviction concerning the mission of England in Egypt and of the all-importance of our supremacy there, coupled with graver preoccupations nearer home, have resulted in the relaxation of the bond. In such circumstances, as much depends on the individual in these democratic days as in the most absolute oligarchies of the past. So we find that the destiny of Egypt has been shaped by three men of note. Other personalities have appeared from time to time in the limelight, but their passage has been ephemeral and their imprint on the affairs of the country evanescent. The salient personalities are, of course, Lord Cromer, the administrator, Lord Kitchener, the soldier, and Saad Pasha Zaglul, the nationalist. Egypt, as she is to-day, is the work of these three men. THE PROTECTORATE 3 We have it on the authority of Lord Edward Cecil, who was in daily offiCial contact with Lord Kitchener. for many years in Egypt and the Sudan, that his most cherished ambition was the foundafion of the Viceroyalty of the Near East and North Africa. The Hampsht're carried with her to the bottom of the North Sea all immediate possibility of the realization of this dream of Empire. Its official abandonment was voiced by Lord Curzon in the House of Lords when he said, "the ·opportunity of incorporating Egypt in the Empire was deliberately and, in his opinion, wisely rejected." This opportunity, which for year~ had been sought by Lord Kitchener, came at the end of 1914, after the entry of the Turks into the War on the side of the Central Powers. It is quite certain that no opposition would have been forthcoming from our Allies; The last thread of vassaldom to the Porte was cut. But again that essentially British aversion to the "situation nette," so beloved of the French, led to a half measure. Lord Kitchener was engrossed with far more important affairs and probably looked on the proposed change in the status of Egypt as a stepping stone to annexation. The Protectorate was declared on December 18th, 1914, and much of the subsequent trouble can be traced to the use of that very word. The Arabic is "humaya," and the same term is applied to denote the bond between the local Christian population and their authorities. The Moslems of the Near East have a deep-rooted contempt for the Levantine; 4 EGYPT UNDER THE EGYPTIANS it is shown in an even more marked fashion by the term applied to subject Christian races in Turkey " raya" or cattle. Moslem Egypt felt then that there was something contemptuous in the word. An outright declaration of annexation as a Colony, with a promise of the autonomy they have now been granted, might have raised less resentment. A Moslem lawyer of great influence in Cairo and a power among the Nationalists once expressed the opinion to me that a terrible " gachis " had been made and that we might have kept the British flag floating over Egypt and so retained this most im portant pawn in world affairs, by annexation in 1914 with a definite promise of representative autonomous government at the end of the War. He realized that this would have been the consummation of the wishes of every good Englishman and would have been prepared to respect our anxieties and admit the compelling argument of the Suez Canal, provided that a form of dominion government had been con ferred· on them. For years before the occupation, Egypt had invited the co-operation of foreign advisers and the system could have been retained. It has been frequently advanced that a number of public pronouncements (given as sixty in a Nationalist tract) of Great Britain's intention to \\ithdraw from Egypt, rendered a declaration of annexation on December I 8th, 1914, impossible, and that the aboli tion of the Protectorate on February zznd, 1922, was inevitable on the same ground. But withdrawal 'vas promised when the internal THE PROTECTORATE 5 state of the country permitted it and then only if the training and education of the political classes had. attained a degree which would satisfy the world at large, that the country would continue to be properly administered and foreign interests not be jeopardized by withdrawal of British Control. It can be argued with a considerable show of reason, that if ever circumstances alter cases, the lsuppression of the suzerain rights of Turkey over :Egypt by her defeat mi the field of battle at the hands 1 of the British entitled Great Britain to assume the · Turkish privilege. In fact it is difficult to refute the argument that Egypt was won by. right of conquest from the Turks, especially with the example of the mandates conferred by the Treaty of Versailles on· Great Britain over the territories of Mesopotamia and Palestine. Indeed our established position in the country gave us a more authentic warrant to su premacy in Egypt than right of conquest did in the case of Mesopotamia and Palestine, where the question of British supremacy was never mooted before the Picot-Sykes agreement of 1915. Some still upheld the view, that the fortuitous circumstance of the defeat of the Turks did not release us from our pledges. In my opinion, the f question of suzerainty was determined by the magni i ficent generalship of Allenby, whose defeat of the Turks was, both in conception and execution, perhaps the most brilliant feat of arms of the whole War, and that to fuLfil our promises up to the letter under these new conditions, Dominion Home Rule should have 6 EGYPT UNDER THE EGYPTIANS been conferred on Egypt, when she had reached that stage of development, which would ensure the experiment being attended by no risk. From a generous impulse, as some pretend, or out of weakness, as it seems to others, the retention of Egypt in the Commonwealth of Nations, which is called the British Empire, was not insisted on; the privileged position secured by Great Britain by the Protectorate was in turn abandoned and complete independence was granted her as an autonomous constitutional state, with the minimum safeguards for the protection of the foreign bondholder in the persons of Financial Adviser and the Debt Com missioners, a Judicial Adviser to guarantee the proper administration of Justice, a Director of European security, and a garrison to protect the lives and properties of Christian minorities and to secure the Suez Canal. Thus has England given all and \gained nothing-not even the goodwill of the Egyptians.

Load more