WHAT OF THE FUTURE?

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 57, 4 September 1926, Page 15

WHAT OF THE FUTURE?

What, indeed, is to be the future of Syria? This present state of affairs cannot continue. A race of people cannot be held in unwilling subjection to another power for ever. All are agreed on this. All classes living in Syria— Syrian, Druse, and British subjects alike —are agreed that the day will inevitably come when Trance will have to get out. It may be in six months; it may be in six years —or sixty years. But, however far off it be, that day will come. It is inevitable. The majority of the inhabitants of Syria—irrespective of creed or class—to-day express the wish that England would come back again. They would -like to sqe ' the French go and England take over. "At least," they say, "with the British we get justice; we are treated with fairness. The English shed their blood to take Syria from the Turk. Why, therefore, was England not given the mandate instead of France?" It is impossible to convince them that the taking over of Syria is not in accordance with the English Near-Eastern policy. They will not believe that the i British policy fears the acquisition of Syria on account of the long frontier which it would give her beside Turkey. "Why should the English fear the Turk?" they ask. "Are they not immensely the more powerful of the two? Why should England hold to her alliance with France?" * And certainly there is much in what they say. England and Turkey are natural allies, and, in spite of temporary differences, history shows that they remain so. Were a close enough friendship to be formed with Turkey to-mor-row—an alliance which, in spite of obvious difficulties could easily be encompassed—England might take over the Syrian mandate without fear. A firm understanding could be brought about, and all would be smooth sailing. But the present Near-Eastern policy of England does not desire to take over Syria. It-does not desire a close friendship with Turkey. It prefers to remain firmly attached to France. However, the purpose of these articles is not to review the Near-Eastern policy of the British Government. It is Syria that has to be considered— Syria and the future of Syria. The question remains. In what way has Syria offended that she should be saddled with this mandatory Power, which she hates? It is the duty of the League of Nations. It is a sacred obligation on all free-minded and civilised nations to see this ended.