“There are three points,” continued Mr. Balfour, “which ought not to be
lost sight of by the House when trying to make up their minds upon this
problem in its incomplete state. They have to consider whether it is or
is not desirable that what will undoubtedly be the shortest route to
India should be entirely in the hands of French and German capitalists.
Another question is whether they do or do not think it desirable that
if there is a trade opening in the Persian Gulf, it should be within
the territories of the Sheik whom we have under our special protection
and with whom we have special treaties [_i.e._, the Sheik of Koweit],
or whether it should be in some other port of the Persian Gulf where
we have no such preferential advantage. The House must also have in
view a third consideration with regard to a railway which goes through
a very rich country and which ... is likely after a certain period of
development to add greatly to the riches of Turkey, and indirectly,
I suppose, greatly to the riches of any other country which is ready
to take advantage of it. Whether the British producer will be able to
take advantage of it is not for me to say; but the House will have to
consider whether he is more likely to be able to take advantage of it
if English capital is largely interested, than if it is confined to
French and German capital. The House will have to calculate whether ...
it will be prudent to leave the passenger traffic in the hands of those
two nations, France and Germany, with whom we are on the most friendly
terms, but whose interests may not be identical with our own.”[6]
Mr. Balfour’s presentation of the case was hailed in Berlin as
eminently lucid and fair. The _National Zeitung_ and the _Vossische
Zeitung_ of April 8 expressed the hope that British participation in
the Bagdad Railway would be approved by Parliament and the press,
in order that the German promoters might have the opportunity
to demonstrate that no political ambitions were connected with
the enterprise. The Russian attitude of refusing even to discuss
internationalization, on the other hand, was roundly denounced.
The London press, however, saw no reason for enthusiasm over the
Prime Minister’s proposal. _The Times_, the _Daily Mail_, the _Daily
Telegraph_, the _Pall Mall Gazette_, and the _National Review_ let
loose a torrent of vituperation against German imperialist activities
in general and the Bagdad Railway in particular. The _Spectator_,
forswearing any thought of prejudice against Germany, constantly
reminded its readers of German unfriendliness during the Boer War and
suggested that the Bagdad negotiations offered the British Government
an admirable opportunity to retaliate.
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