The Evening Star TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1947. NEGOTIATIONS END.

Evening Star, Issue 26011, 28 January 1947, Page 4

The Evening Star TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1947. NEGOTIATIONS END.

It is a case of “as you were ” in regard to the revision of the treaty between Egypt and Britain. Mr Ernest Bevin has announced the ending by the Egyptian Government of further negotiations, and the position now is that the 1936 treaty applies as it did before the negotiations were begun. In the.inatters of the presence of British troops in Egypt, the future of bases held in that country by Britain, and in all but one of all other relevant matters between them, complete agreement and understanding had been reached by the negotiating countries. The Egyptians, however, through some misinterpretation of the agreement between the former Prime Minister, Sidky Pasha, and Mr Bevin considered that even that one point had been satisfactorily disposed of and that they would automatically be granted their desire of sovereignty over the Sudan. This was not Mr Bevin’s intention, and throughout the negotiations he had repeated that there could be no change in the status of the Sudan “ until the Sudanese had been consulted . through constitutional channels.” When Nokrashy Pasha succeeded Sidky he maintained that the Sudan question had been settled and that the Sudan would be united under “ the Egyptian Crown for ever.” Nokrashy doubtless was sincere in his viewpoint, particularly as the British Government took no steps to dispel the Egyptian misunderstanding of 'the. Sidky-Bevin agreement. Possibly Britain did not take Nokrashy’s minority Government too seriously, but the fact remains that -it was only when it was too late that Britain appreciated the harm caused by the misunderstanding; that the whole treaty negotiations were in jeopardy through the Egyptian refusal to concede a mistake, preferring to consider developments as British perfidy. Now Nokrashy intends laying the case before the United Nations, a move which Britain has warned she would consider an unfriendly act. The matter hardly seems one for United Nations intervention, though it could be one for the International Court of Justice. Egypt’s action, however, means the case will have to be discussed by the United Nations, and Russia will be given one of those opportunities she is not slow to seize of further attacking Britain in world councils.

Although the plain fact . of the matter at the moment is that Egypt is not prepared to give the Sudan the right of independence which she herself is seeking, the Egyptians like to view theinselves as having been badly let down by the British Government. Unfortunately there is evidence that the Egyptian interpretation of the agreement and British slowness in correcting, the error have created something of a similar sentiment among the Sudanese. They feel that Britain has allowed, or is about to allow, them to become subjects of the Egyptian Crown without their having the Eromised voice in the matter. This as _ been good propaganda for the Ashigga, or orthodox Moslem Party, which favours a limited union with Egypt and is bitterly opposed to the Umma, or unorthodox Moslems, who want complete independence, and are pro-British. The Ashigga do not desire to come under complete Egyptian domination, although the Egyptians conceal that, aspect. ‘ The Economist 1 writes: “Two facts emerge from the welter of detail. The first is that the British Foreign Secretary has made a grievous mistake. Either he has sold out a people who (unlike the Egyptians) actually fought and died beside the soldiers of the Commonwealth ,in the war, or else he has bungled in not at once making his position clear. The ground lost to Britain in Sudanese estimation in recent weeks will not easily be recaptured. Bitterness has taken root. The'second fact is that the Egyptian Government, in listening only to the Ashigga, and in letting its King’s personal ambitions run away with it, is laying up for itself a bad neighbour. Its policy is as unwise as it is unnecessary. Egyptians will live to regret if.”