The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1929. BRITAIN AND EGYPT.

Hokitika Guardian, 21 December 1929, Page 4

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1929. BRITAIN AND EGYPT.

The discussion in the House of Lords last wcck with regard to the Labour Government’s policy in Egypt resulted in the adoption of a resolution expressive of regret at the precipitation with which the policy had been entered upon and at it entailed to the security of Imperial communications. The Conservative Party is distrustful of the Government’s treaty proposals, and no doubt prepared to agree with much of the destructive criticism passed upon them by Lord Lloyd, who was relieved of his office as High Commissioner in Egypt by the present Administration, and has not been sparing in his denunciation from Ins seat in the House of Lords of the effect of the concessions to Egyptian nationalism that are in contemplation. The contention of the Government, remarks the Otago Times, is that the vital interests of the British Empire represented by the reservations attached to the British declaration in 1922 of the sovereign independence of Egypt are met by the treaty proposals. There are some clear-cut differen es of opinion on this point. Lord Lloyd, who knows Egypt better than any member of the Government, and yet may not in the present circumstances be a perfectly dispassionate witness, has relentlessly condemned the projected removal of the British troops from Cairo, this being the only place, in his judgment, from which the Canal can be economically and adequately defended. Lord Thomson’s reply is that the Government has paid most scrupulous attention to the opinion of the military experts concerning the risk to the security of the Imperial communications. It is interesting and rather unexpected, it may he suggested, in view of the Conservative attitude, to note that The Times gives at least a general support to the Government’s policy which it regards as in the direct line of descent from that of its predecessors. While that is no doubt the case, the criticism which the Government is facing is based largely on the view that it is disposed to move too hurriedly in relation to Egypt, and agree to concessions for which the time is not ripe, even though they fall short of the demands of the extreme Egyptian Nationalists. The provisional and temporary character of the British intervention in Egypt was affirmed at the time of the occupation. and has been frequently re-affirm-ed since that time. But the apprehension that the Labour Government is going beyond what is expedient in relation to Egypt at tin' present time may not be groundless. The Times admits that there are points in the draft treaty to which exception can rightly he taken, and others upon’ which judgment must lie suspended. That might in the upshot leave little room for immeidate approval of the proposals involved. It seems doubtful 1 whether there is anvt.hing adequately reassuring about Lord Thomson’s statc-

meat respecting the maintenance of law and order by the Egyptian Government should the provisions of the draft treaty come into operation. The oversea Dominions are all more or less interested in the general situation, from the fact that the Suez Canal is the maritime highway to the East, and greatly serves trading and commerce. The whole situation is therefore one of general concern, and in view of the differences of opinion by those in high places, the outcome of the latest' action will be awaited with special interest.