The Suez Canal
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
< c ^ CO > DO ^ 2 OU_1 64589 1 1 ^ CQ -< CO ?^ > OSMANIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Call Na 3^7. $T-A-n-/6) 6 f ^Accession No. 2-~) >72~ Autfaar This bode $hou$ be returned on or before the cUfe last marked below. THE SUEZ CANAL Its Pasty Present, and Future than half the inter- MOREcontinental shipping of the world passes through the Suez and Panama canals, and of the ships passing through the former more than half fly the British flag. The Suez Canal is thus, as Disraeli realized, the key to India, and much else. In this, the first book on the subject published by an Englishman for nearly sixty years, the history of the Suez Canal from the earliest times to. the present is set forth authoritatively and vividly from the point of view of British interests. The narrative is amply documented, and includes much material and some ideas which will be new to many readers. The author's aim is to throw light and focus public opinion upon a problem which, in the words - of the late Lord Grey, is very complicated and requires to be elucidated*. He has certainly succeeded in doing so. By the same Author THE PERSIAN GULF. 1928 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PERSIA. 1930 LOYALTIES: MESOPOTAMIA, 1914- 1917. 1930 Reissued in Oxford Bookshelf. 1936 MESOPOTAMIA, 1917-1920; A Clash of Loyalties. 1931 Reissued in Oxford Bookshelf. PERSIA (Modern World Series). 1932 WALKS AND TALKS. 1934 Reissued in Oxford Bookshelf. T 935 WALKS AND TALKS ABROAD. 1936 Reissued in Oxford Bookshelf. *939 RICHARD BURTON (Fifth Burton Memo- rial Lecture). INDUSTRIAL ASSURANCE. 1937 BURIAL REFORM AND FUNERAL COSTS. 1938 WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION. 1939 GALLANTRY: its public recognition in peace and in war at home and abroad. *939 THE SUEZ CANAL Its Pasty Present, and Future BY LT.-COL. SIR ARNOLD T. WILSON K.C.I.E., C.S.I., C.M.G., D.S.O., M.P. * The question of the Suez Canal Company's con- cession is a very complicated matter, which requires to be elucidated.' MR ,, CRrY in House of Commons, Juty 1910. * The prosperity of the Kast is now dependent upon the interests of civilization at lar^e, and the best means of contributing to its welfare, as well as to that of humanity, is to break down the barriers which still divide men, races, and nations/ OK LFSSFPS, July ' He that taketh a\vay weights doth as much advan- tage motion as he that acideth wm^s.' LORD CHANCELLOR BACON. SECOND EDITION OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON NEW YORK TORONTO OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AMEN HOUSE, E C. 4 LONDON EDINBURGH GLASGOW NEW YORK TORONTO MELBOURNE CAPETOWN BOMBAY CALCUITA MADRAS HUMPHREY MILFORD PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, OXFORD BY JOHN JOHNSON, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY ' Much can be done by temperate and courteous discussion. It is impossible that two great nations like France and England should not have clashing and conflicting interests, for they have possessions and protectorates in every quarter of" the globe, and they touch each other in almost every part of the world. If they had not competing interests and rival ambitions they would not be the great nations they are. Rivalry in every direction is the very essence of their greatness, and neither can complain of the other because it is ambitious and far-reaching. Neither could forgo its ' ambitions vuthout descending in the scale of nations. Monsieur WASHINGTON French Ambassador, at the hlansion House ' 6 March 1893 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION book was published in December 1933, at a time more -- favourable than the present to the dispassionate consideration of international problems. Much has happened since then. A Treaty of Alliance between Great Britain and Egypt, signed on 26th August 1936, has substituted a permanent military defensive alliance for the British military occupation of Egypt. Egypt was therein recognized as a sovereign independent State and announced her intention of joining the League of Nations (she has since done so). The following article deals with the Canal Zone. 'ARTICLE 8. In view of the fact that the Suez Canal, while being an integral part of Egypt, is a universal means of communication as also an essential means of communication between the different parts of the British Empire, His Majesty the King of Egypt, until such time as the High Contracting Parties agree 1 that is in a to its the Egyptian Army position ensure by own resources the liberty and entire security of navigation of the Canal, authorises His Majesty the King and Emperor to station forces in Egyptian territory in the vicinity of the Canal, in the zone specified in the annex to this Article, with a view to ensuring in co-operation with the Egyptian forces the defence of the Canal. The presence of these forces shall not constitute in any manner an occupation and will in no way prejudice the sovereign rights of Egypt.' The Annex provides that, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 7, the numbers of the British forces to be maintained in the vicinity of the Canal shall not exceed, of the land forces 10,000, and of the air forces 400 pilots, together with the necessary ancillary per- sonnel for administrative and technical duties, excluding civilian per- sonnel, e.g. clerks, artisans, and labourers. The areas over which the forces will be distributed are specified; necessary lands and durable barrack and technical accommodation, including an emergency water- supply and reasonable amenities, are to be provided for them by the Egyptian Government, with certain contributions from H.M. Govern- ment. The effect of this clause can best be understood in the light of the Constantinople Convention of 1888 (to which Austria-Hungary, 1 It is understood that at. the end of the period of twenty years specified in Article 16 the question whether the presence of British forces is no longer necessary owing to the fact that the Egyptian Army is in a position to ensure by its own resources the liberty and entire security of navigation of the Canal may, if the High Contracting Parties do not agree thereon, b^ submitted to the Council of the League of Nations for decision in accordance with the provisions of the Covenant in force at the time of signature of the present treaty or to such other person or body of persons for decision in accordance with such other procedure as the High Contracting Parties may agree. b PREFACE Britain, France, Germany, Holland, Italy, Russia, Spain, and Turkey were parties). The preamble of this Convention set forth the desire of the signatories to create 'an organization definitely able to guarantee the rights of all nations to the use of the canal as specified by the first and second concessions of Said Pasha (1854-56) and the firman of the Sultan of Turkey (February, 1866)'. Article i reads as follows : 'The Suez Canal shall always be open, in time of war as well as in time of peace, distinction its to every vessel, commercial and military, without of flag. In con- sequence, the high contracting parties agree not to disturb in any manner what- soever the free use of the canal either in times of peace or in times of war. The canal shall never be subject to blockade.' Article 9 provides that the Government of Egypt is responsible for the defence of the Canal. If she is unable to undertake it, the task reverts to the Ottoman Empire, Article 10 provides that the Govern- ment of Egypt and the Ottoman Empire may take whatever steps they deem opportune to assure a proper defence of Egypt. Since 1915, when Egypt became independent of Turkey, these clauses have become obsolete and, under the Treaty of 1936, Britain has naturally and properly assumed responsibilities formerly apper- taining to Turkey. But the Convention of 1888 remains valid in inter- national law, and binding upon all signatories so far at least as it has not been rendered obsolete by changed circumstances. The Canal has not been neutralized, but rather universalized. It is required to be kept open in time of peace and of war to the ships of all nations, including ships of war and those carrying military supplies. It is neutral only to the extent that, under the Convention of 1888, 'no act of hostility may be committed within its limits*. It is not easy to reconcile the International Convention of 1888 with the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of 1936. The former is unquestionably in some respects obsolete: the latter corresponds to the facts of the present day and to the interests and needs of the signatories. The Canal is of primary importance to Britain, but is also, as the Treaty explicity recognizes, *a universal means of communication', and incidentally a vital link in the French, Dutch, and Italian line of communication with their overseas possessions. It is, in fact, of vital importance in time of peace to all Europe, and in time of war to any belligerent with possessions east of Suez. The Italian claim that the defence of the Canal is a matter of international concern is therefore not intrinsically unreasonable and, as part of a general settlement, deserves discussion by those Powers (including France and Holland) to whose territorial possessions overseas the Suez Canal is a vital highway. PREFACE c Having said so much as to the strategical and juridical aspects of the Canal, some reference is necessary to commercial and financial developments since this book was published. Traffic through the Canal (see p. 121) has continued to increase, as the following figures show.