Afghan Wars; Crimean War, 1853-1856; Egypt -- History -- British occupation, 1882-1936; India -- History -- Sepoy Rebellion, 1857-1858
The views on this important question which I had formed and published
years ago, were fully confirmed in 1887 by Sir West Ridgeway, who was
our representative at the Joint Commission, which, between 1885 and
1887, finally marked out the northern frontier of Afghanistan; and
who, from his position and the accurate knowledge he obtained of the
country, was able to give an authoritative opinion. He wrote: 'If any
Russian general were so reckless as to attempt the invasion of India,
and, relying on the single line of lightly constructed rails which
connect the Caspian with the Oxus--and which are liable in summer to
be blocked by the moving sands of the desert, and in winter by the
falling snows of heaven--if, relying on this frail and precarious base,
he were to move an army through the barren plains bordering the Oxus,
and, leaving in his rear the various hostile and excited races of
Central Asia, he were to cross the difficult passes of the Hindoo Koosh
and entangle his army in the barren mountain homes of the fanatical
and treacherous Afghan, then indeed our fortunate generals may well
congratulate themselves that the Lord has delivered the enemy into
their hand. The same objection applies to an invasion of India by the
Herat road. Imagine the plight of the Russian army when it arrived
before our entrenched camp at Candahar, connected, as it would be, by
railway with our immense resources in India. The Russian army would
find itself in a country stripped of supplies and carriage, with a
powerful enemy in its front, and fanatical tribes waging a guerilla war
on its flanks and rear.'[111] Sir West Ridgeway also bore testimony to
the beneficial rule of Russia in Central Asia, and that her officers on
the frontier were conciliatory, moderate gentlemen.
If the foregoing statements and the opinions which I have offered upon
them are sound, then it is evident that our general line of policy
towards the people of Afghanistan is simple and clear. They hold
important outworks, as it were, just outside our frontier; and, whilst
not interfering with their independence, we should do all in our power
not only to maintain the authority of their ruler, the Ameer of Cabul,
but also to keep on friendly terms with the tribes, many of whom,
especially those along our frontier, are more or less independent. Our
policy should be one of conciliation and of subsidies; and although
in dealing with half-civilised, turbulent chiefs and tribes the
beneficial results are achieved slowly, still, year by year, a patient
and forbearing policy will bear good fruit, and indeed is now doing so
in a marked degree. It is important to note that in our dealings with
the Ameer, and in granting him subsidies and arms, we only claimed
in return that his foreign policy should be under our guidance. Our
principle for years past had been that Afghanistan should be strong,
friendly, and independent.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account