The Daily News. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1922. EGYPTIAN SELF-GOVERNMENT.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 February 1922, Page 4

The Daily News. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1922. EGYPTIAN SELF-GOVERN-MENT.

When speaking at Glasgow recently, General Sir lan Hamilton made much of the effect of Britain’s failure to force the Dardanelles and take Constantinople, but when he attributed the present unrest in India and Egypt to the same cause as that, which produced the Indian mutiny, he is asking for too much credence in his point of view. Whether or not the present generation have forgotten (as General Hamilton asserts is the case) that the Indian mutiny followed on the heels of the Crimean victory, and was caused, not by the victory, but by repeated stories of our military weakness whieh preceded that long delayed victory, there is no sort of parallel between events then and now. That there are—and always will be—those who delight in, or make a pretence of being impelled by patriotic duty, to advertise Britain’s faults and weaknesses to the world at large, is only too true, and even those who loudly exclaim against this “minimi, .ng national obligations and exaggerating national rights,” are found perpetrating the same evil. So much is this peculiar British characteristic understood by the political leaders, and even the natives of both India and Egypt, that it no longer causes any quickening of pulse. What is taking place in Egypt .in relation to self-government is the natural outcome of the march of events, especially as regards the development of the right of all nations—large and small—to work out their own destinies, free from outside control. Egypt happens to be in that peculiar position that not only is it necessary to safeguard her interests as well as those of the British Empire. The position now is that Sarwat Pasha, who is one of the two foremost politicians in Egypt, demands the abolition of the protectorate —whieh has already been agreed upon —and practically placing all Egyptian affairs, except judicial and financial, in Egyptian hands, the question of guarantees to be a matter for discussion or negotiation. The British Government must insist on effective rights and powers to safeguard, the interests oE both Egypt and Britain until the Egyptian people have shown the capacity themselves to preserve their country from the cult of a fanatical and purely disruptive type of nationalism and its inevitable. corollary, the intervention of foreign Powers. It has not yet been made clear that the ■Egyptian people are capable of defending, unaided, even their own interests and those . of the ■various foreign communities who have taken root in Egypt. That is why the new treaty contained certain limitations in the spheres of foreign relations, national defence and finance, together with the right to move or station troops in Egypt. These. limitations have, unfortunately, been taken by the Egyptian official delegation to mean that Egypt will not be independent but will still be under subjection. Lord Allenby’s reply has on the face

of it the evidence that it eman-J ates from Lord Curzon. It explains the position from an archaic point of view, to prove that Egyptian fears of British control were groundless, painting out that until such time as Egypt’s record gives confidence in her own guarantees, the British Empire must maintain sufficient guarantees itself. In other words, that the requisite guarantees were an absolutely necessary condition that must accompany self-government. At the same time it drew attention to the fact that the progress of Egypt towards her ideals would be completely jeopardised if her people are tempted to indulge their national aspirations without sufficient regard to the ' principle which governs international life. Britain has not the slightest desire that Egypt should remain in tutelage, hut, on the contrary, is earnestly concerned in giving the Egyptians full scope to reach the full attainment of £he national ideal —to see the work of Lord Cromer’s generation completed,

not. recommenced. When the whole of this vexed question is carefully considered, it seems abundantly evident there should he no difficulty in arranging conditions that will be acceptable to Egypt. The demonstrations of the personal popularity of Lord Allenby on the occasion of his departure for London would seem to indicate that he thoroughly and sympathetically understands Egyptian aims and ideals, and it is to be hoped that he may succeed in convincing the Imperial Government as to the best and wisest course to .pursue in order to arrive at a thoroughly amicable settlement of one of the few outstanding problems that now await tish nation. t _ solution at the hands of the Bri-