Treaty of Sèvres (1920); World War, 1914-1918 -- Territorial questions -- Turkey; World War, 1914-1918 -- Turkey
After a long debate on Eastern affairs and on the questions raised by
M. Millerand’s communications, the Commission for Foreign Affairs,
seeing things were taking a bad turn, and the situation of France in
Syria, Cilicia, and Constantinople was getting alarming, decided on
June 15 to send a delegation to the East to make an inquiry on the spot.
At the first sitting of the French Chamber on June 25, 1920, M. Briand,
who three months before had made a speech in favour of the 1916
agreements which were being threatened by English ambition, though he
considered the Turkish bands “went too far,” and our policy “played
too much into their hands,” felt it incumbent on him to say:
“When we leave a nation like Turkey, after a long war, for over a
year, under what might be called a Scotch douche, telling her now
‘Thou shalt live,’ now ‘Thou shalt not live,’ we strain its nerves
to the extreme, we create within it a patriotic excitement, a
patriotic exasperation, which now becomes manifest in the shape of
armed bands. We call them bands of robbers; in our own country we
should call them ‘bands of patriots.’”
In the course of the general discussion of the Budget, during a debate
which took place on July 28 in the Senate, an amendment was brought in
by M. Victor Bérard and some of his colleagues calling for a reduction
of 30 million francs on the sums asked for by the Government, which
already amounted, as a beginning, to 185 million francs.
M. d’Estournelles de Constant then expressed his fear that this Eastern
expedition might cause France to make sacrifices out of proportion to
her resources in men and money, and asked how the Government expected
to recuperate the expenditure incurred in Syria.
M. Victor Bérard, in his turn, sharply criticised our Eastern policy.
M. Bompard, too, expressed his fears concerning our Syrian policy, and
M. Doumergue asked the Government to consent to a reduction of the
credits “to show it intended to act cautiously in Syria.”
But after M. Millerand’s energetic answer, and after M. Doumer,
chairman of the Commission, had called upon the Senate to accept the
figures proposed by the Government and the Commission, these figures
were adopted by 205 votes against 84.
M. Romanos, interviewed by the _Matin_,[31] and soon after M.
Venizelos, at the Lympne Conference, maintained that the treaty could
be fully carried out, and the Greeks felt quite able to enforce it
themselves.
As the Allied troops were not sufficient to take decisive action, and
as a large part of the Ottoman Empire had been assigned to Greece,
England herself soon asked why the latter should not be called upon to
pay for the operation if she insisted upon carrying it out.
About June 20 the situation of the British troops became rather
serious, as General Milne did not seem to have foreseen the events and
was certainly unable to control them.
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