THE ANGLO-TURKISH CONVENTION.

Temuka Leader, Volume 2, Issue 124, 26 February 1879, Page 3

THE ANGLO-TURKISH CONVENTION.

(From the Russian ‘Golos.’) Before In's departure from Berlin, Lord Beaconslield, in an interview with one of our special correspondents, “ expressed his gratification ” that all misunderstanding between England and Russia had disappeared. “ Let us forget the past.” said the English Premier, 11 and occupy ourselves solely with the improvement of the relations between two great nations, in their mutual interest and in the interest of peace and civilisation. You may be assured that the policy of the English Government will henceforth be directed to the impressing of this conviction upon the Russian people.” In those words of Lord Beaconsfield a correct view of the situation is mixed up with a very incorrect interpretation of facts which are we 1 ! known to ail, and the signification of which is patent to every hod 3 T . The head of the British Cabinet was perfectly right in saying that all “ misunderstanding between England and Russia has disappeared ” since the Congress of Berlin. There is, in point of fact, no room for misunderstanding. All has been made clear, open, and intelligible. England has freely acknowledged that she was unable to annul any considerable part of the results of the RussoTurkish war, and to “ fear into shred” the treaty of San Stefano, as the more ardent partisans of Lord Beaconsfield boasted. Such an acknowledgment must have but one of two results either a complete reconcilement to accomplished facts and their probable consequences, or else, on the other hand, concession being unavoidable, a desire to employ the first opportunity that offers to recover what bas been lost.

Hie Cabinet of St. James has chosen the second. It has concluded a defensive treaty with Turkey, and the object ol this alliance could not be better characterised than in the approving words oi the ‘Morning Post’ a newspaper well known as the special organ of Lord Be aeons field “ England has given Russia warning that if in the course oi a single century it makes one single step beyond Kars and Bntonm, England will declare war against Russia. We do not conceal that the aim of the AngloTurkish Convention, is to oppose with bayonets every new advance of Russia towards the Mediterranean. We repeat, there is no longer room for any kind of misunderstanding.' We know that henceforth Russia encounters in England a declared enemy in every complication that may arise in connection with Eastern affairs. More than this ; we are warranted in expecting that, depending on her alliance with England, Turkey will make an attempt to recover for herself something of what she has lost by the Treaty of Berlin, and that in the event of such an attempt we will find ourselves face to face not only with the Turkish forces, but also with their English allies. In reality the Convention of 4th June is a conditional declaration of war against us by England. There is no one who docs not clearly understand this, merely in Russia, but in the whole of Continental Europe, not to speak of England. It is difficult to seehow, inthepresence of such circumstances, Russia can “forget the past.” It is impossible to admit that Russia may now employ herself in improving her relations with England ! No, Lord Beaconsfield is mis taken. If he were a Russian he would advise us quite differently. England having publicly entered into alliance with Turkey, wo must with equal openess declare that we understand the significance of this alliance, and are firmly resolved to make suitable precautions against its consequences. The formation in the Black Sea of a fleet sufficiently powerful to prevent the appearance of English war vessels in those waters, the concentration in our Central Asiatic provinces of military forces sufficient to threaten the English possessions in India—this is the only possible, worthy response of Russia to the Convention of 4th June. This iswhat is now necessary, if we wish effectively to “improve ”onr relations with England —that is, to take up such a position that the British people may understand that it will be no profit to them to adopt a policy of open distrust towards Russia, and of barefaced slander against the Russian Government and the Russian nation. It may he well that, in view of the impression ] reduced in Continental Europe by the occupation of Cyprus, Lord Beaconsfield may reckon it expedient to terminate the “ official” Russopliobia which has hitherto formed the substance of his foreign policy. But he is mightily mistaken if he imagines to “ hoodwink” Russia by a sudden access of friendliness and of kind intentions towards us. No ; we do not forget the past, and we will endeavour to derive from itinstruction for the future, having learned from it that an end has been put to misunderstandings, and that England has taken off her mask of defender of the common interests of Europe.