British objections to the proposed increase in the Ottoman customs
duties were founded in large part upon British opposition to the
Bagdad Railway and, more particularly, to the sections of the Railway
between Bagdad and the Persian Gulf. In the spring of 1910, the British
Government proposed that a concession for a railway from Bagdad to
Basra _via_ Kut-el-Amara should be awarded to British financiers,
in order that British economic interests in Mesopotamia might be
adequately safeguarded. In May of that year Sir Edward Grey wrote the
British ambassador at Constantinople, “Please explain quite clearly
to the Turkish Government that the British Government will not agree
to any addition to the taxes until this claim for a concession is
taken into favorable consideration, and also that Great Britain’s
attitude towards Turkey will depend largely upon how she meets this
demand of yours.” Upon the refusal of the Ottoman Government to accede
to this demand, Sir Edward Grey wrote to Sir Henry Babington Smith,
English representative on the Ottoman Public Debt Administration,
that England must be awarded at least a 55% participation in the
Bagdad-Basra section of the Bagdad Railway, as well as concessions for
the construction and control of port works at Koweit. In addition,
Turkey should be made to understand that Great Britain could approve no
agreement without the sanction of the French and Russian Governments.
When Djavid Bey was in London in July, 1910, he submitted two
counterproposals to Sir Edward Grey: first, that the portion of the
Bagdad Railway from Bagdad to Basra should be internationalized upon
terms agreeable to Sir Ernest Cassel and Dr. Arthur von Gwinner;
or, second, that the Ottoman Government itself should undertake the
construction of the line beyond Bagdad. The British Foreign Office
indicated that it might consent to an increase in the Ottoman customs
duties until April, 1914, upon some such terms, provided the consent of
the other Powers were forthcoming, and provided Turkey would surrender
her right of veto over the borrowing powers of Egypt. Because of the
collapse of the loan negotiations, however, nothing further came of
these proposals.
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