The Dominion. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 12, 1907. BRITAIN AND EGYPT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 67, 12 December 1907, Page 6

The Dominion. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 12, 1907. BRITAIN AND EGYPT.

Speaking at the Mansion House, London, recently, Lord Cromer sounded a note of warning witli regard to the growth of the nationalist movement in Egypt. His Lordship, whose utterances in this connection at least must carry the weight attached ,to a profound knowledge of his subject, declared that "some of those who sought to mislead the Egyptians (in this matter of self-government, for Egypt) were the worst enemies of Egyptian progress." There 'was but on& method of dealing with the unrest injthat country, and that was to continue to do what duty demanded towards the people as a ■whole; to come down with a heavy hand upon extremists when they over-stepped the limits of the law, and not to be deterred by their proceedings from adopting such reforms as would satisfy all moderate and reasonable men. One recognises at once in this advice the strong man, and the statesman, the man who would do the ■ best possible for a subject people, undeterred by fear of revolutionary firebrands, or likely to pander to any of their unwise propaganda. But 'what, it may be asked, is this Nationalist movement which is at present agitating Egypt, a country vastly indebted to British rule for a reign of peace and general prosperity such as 'it never knew before? A writer in the " Daily Mail" explains that nationalism is simply a demand for self-government now that order .has been re-established throughout the country, and that a necessary preliminary to this must be the evacuation of Egypt by Great Britain. Nationalism in Egypt dates back to the time of Arabi Pasha, who organised the movement in the name of the native population as opposed to the Turco-Circassian element, which dominated and Oppressed it, and, in a larger sense, in the name of, Egypt against Turkey. The British occupation, however, while uniting the different races of the country, has transformed opposition to Turkey into a strong feeling of loyalty for her, thus 'providing the Egyptians with a new nationalist idea, emancipation from foreigu control as represented by British tutelage, but in no wise as represented by Turkish suzerainty. One of the first to champion the new nationalism was Mustapha Pasha Kamel, who claims that Egypt is now, and has been for a considerable time, capable of self-govern-ment, and that Britain ought to relax her control, since her work of restoring order is done. His methods of propaganda are to violently denunciate and flagrantly misrepresent Britain's motives, and to attack her local administration. His is largely a campaign of calumny, and, becausc it is so, his Arabic organ, "El Lowa," has an enormous local circulation amon^_

the natives. This paper finds its way into every village, anil the illiterate gather round those who can read, and

thus drink in its contents. The desire for independence, at one time secondary among the people to their anti-European prejudices, has come to he a growth existing for its own sake, and it is not to be looked down 011 as ephemeral, or a mere passing phase. But all reasonable persons, acquainted with the facts, admit that the Egyptians are far from being ripe for autonomy.

In the circumstances, Great Britain must remain in the country until she can be sure she has made the work of reform sufficiently complete to be permanent. This is not to say, however, that Britain may not grant certain Egyptian demands, such as those for a modified and improved system of education; for the increased employment of natives in official posts; and for an over-hauling of different departments of State which have fallen from Lord Cromer's original standard of 1 efficiency. But while doing this it is urged that she must tighten her military grip on the country, so as to guard against a sudden explosion of fanaticism, and leave no room for "unwholesome allusions" to develop among the natives that they can realise premature desires for self-govern-inent in spite of her. It is pointed out that the Egyptian army is greatly in excess of required strength, and that the money saved by reduction, here might be utilised to considerably increase the army of occupation. Above all it is incumbent on the British to put down with a high hand, such agitators as Mustapha Pasha Kamel, and put a stop to their propaganda, because failure to do so is regarded by the Egyptian native as a sign of weakness. In short,' the Egyptian question, so far as Great Britain is concerned, has entered upon

a new phase, which requires the adoption of new measures, and that speedily. Its international' sirle has been simplified by the Anglo-French convention, and the attitude of Germany, Ihissia, Austria-Hungary, and Italy', but its native side is getting more complicated. Such is the truth about Egypt, and if it is disappointing that, according to those best qualified' to speak, is no reason for refusing to strengthen the hands of the British occupation. To have raised the Egyptian masses from abject misery to wellbeing, and then to allow them to drop back into their former condition, as would certainly happen if Britain withdrew from the country now, would be both wasteful and cruel. It is to be hoped the British Government will see. the logic of this, and take Lord Cromer's advics as to being just, firm, and vigilant.