Treaty of Sèvres (1920); World War, 1914-1918 -- Territorial questions -- Turkey; World War, 1914-1918 -- Turkey
Then, resorting to the policy of compromise which bore such bad fruits
in the course of the Peace Conference, Mr. Lloyd George, in order not
to shut out the possibility of reverting to the opposite opinion, added
that if it was proved that the Allies’ control weakened the power of
the Sultan in Asia Minor, it would always be possible to consider the
question afresh—but he hoped that would not be necessary.
As to the question of Asia Minor and the distribution of the mandates,
he declared:
“If America had accepted the responsibility for controlling
Armenia, the French, who, under what is called the Sykes scheme,
had Cilicia assigned to their control, were quite willing to hand
it over to American control. The British, French, and Italians are
quite agreed on the subject, but we have not yet seen a sign. We
have only received telegrams from America, asking us to protect the
Armenians; we have had no offers up to the present to undertake the
responsibility.... We are hoping that France will undertake that
responsibility, but it is a good deal to ask of her. We have also
got our responsibility, but we cannot take too much upon our own
shoulders....
“With regard to the Republic of Erivan, which is Armenia, it
depends entirely on the Armenians themselves whether they protect
their independence.... I am told that they could easily organise
an army of above 40,000 men. If they ask for equipment, we shall
be very happy to assist in equipping their army. If they want the
assistance of officers to train that army, I am perfectly certain
there is no Allied country in Europe that would not be willing to
assist in that respect.”[26]
Finally, with, respect to Mesopotamia, Mr. Lloyd George urged “it would
be a mistake to give up Baghdad and Mosul.”
“I say that, after incurring the enormous expenditure which we have
incurred in freeing this country from the withering despotism of
the Turk, to hand it back to anarchy and confusion, and to take
no responsibility for its development, would be an act of folly
quite indefensible.... They have been consulted about their wishes
in this respect, and I think, almost without exception, they are
anxious that we should stay here, though they are divided about the
kind of independent Government they would like....
“We have no right, however, to talk as if we were the mandatory of
Mesopotamia when the treaty with Turkey has not yet been signed.
It is only on the signing of that treaty that the question of
mandatories will be decided, but when that time comes we shall
certainly claim the right to be the mandatory power of Mesopotamia,
including Mosul.”
In its leading article, _The Times_, criticising the attitude Mr. Lloyd
George had taken in the debate on the Mesopotamian question, wrote on
March 27:
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