The Lyttelton Times. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1897. ENGLAND’S POLICY IN EGYPT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVII, Issue 11188, 9 February 1897, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1897. ENGLAND’S POLICY IN EGYPT.

After a long period of inaction, during which diplomacy has been at work, Lord Salisbury evidently feels himself in a position to declare his intention of satisfying those people who expect a “ spirited foreign policy” from a Conservative Government. The speech of Sir Michael Hicks Beach on the Egyptian situation has more of the “Jingo” ring about it than we have heard for many a day from a British Minister, and it is no matter for surprise to find that it has produced keen irritation in Trance. The Minister has plainly intimated that England has a forward policy in Egypt, which is to be steadily pursued, and he has made a strong statement regarding England’s commanding position in that country, with a hint that she will take steps next year to make it more secure by refusing to sanction the continuance of the mixed tribunal whose recent adverse decision on a financial question was notoriously arrived at on political grounds. The House of Commons has hacked up the Minister’s attitude by voting over three-quarters of a million for the prosecution of the Soudan campaign. It is clear that this is done out of no mere wanton desire to flout Erance and defy Eussia, but that it is a part of a settled line of policy which is considered essential to the safety of Egypt and to the development of British interests in Africa. _ It has long been known, unofficially of course, that it is the intention of England to press the advantage gained in the last Soudan campaign until the dervishes and their allies are driven from Omdurman and Khartoum and the whole country between the latter place and Cairo is reduced to a state of order, with prosperity following as a natural sequence. The dervishes realise that they have to face a decisive attack, and they are concentrating their forces at Omdurman, where they have large stores of ammunition, and a factory for making fresh supplies. The clamour of a handful of Trench Angiophobists is not going to deter the English Government from carrying out its full programme in Egypt. That programme is based upon the necessity of guarding the Suez Canal as a means of communication between England, India, and Australasia, and also upon the desirableness of establishing British influence right through the Dark Continent from Cairo to Cape Town. At Charterland in the south, Uganda near the equator, and Egypt in the north, the last-named object is being energetically pursued, and when the plans are realised England will be in a position to finally suppress the curse of African slavery and extend the sway of civilisation to places that are now the abodes of cruelty and superstition. We may rest assured that Lord Salisbury has carefully calculated the probable consequences before finally resolving to announce another Soudan campaign. He has, it is well-known, made certain of the sympathetic attitude of the Triple Alliance, and that, of course; implies a certain amount of opposition from Trance and Eussia ; hut the time is most opportune for securing the neutral attitude of these two Powers, so long as England respects Abyssinia’s territorial claims, and avoids collision with Trench interests on the upper waters of the Eiger, where outposts have been pushed forward of late with a view to break, if possible, the continuity of British influence between Cairo and Uganda, It is of interest to recall what was said by Prince Bismarck on the Anglo-Egyptian -question'some twelve years ago, when

the expedition to Khartoum was undertaken. He said that if he wear© an English Minister he would not advise the annexation of Egypt, but, recognising the necessity of England obtaining a secure position in that country, he would try to gain that position through the Saltan of Turkey,and thus avoid coming intocollisdoit with treaties. Germany, he added, would not stand in England’s way m any case, but would simply advise her to “ be cautious and to respect-treaties and the rights of the Sultan.” At the present day, when the -Sultan is virtually reduced to the position of a puppet in the hands of the great Powers, that advice is unnecessary. Lord Salisbury astutely perceives that, having secured the active co-opera-tion of France and Russia Jn, the work of curtailing the Sultan’s authority, he can pursue a bold policy in Egypt without fear of any more serious obstacle than a “protest” being raised. For political ends the Liberal leaders characterise the British attitude as an “ impudent challenge ’* to France; but we prefer to view it as an indication that France rebound, hand and foot, and that Lord Salisbury’s Government has seized iold of the psychological moment to ■proclaim an aggressive policy which at smother time might have met withactiveopposition from Turkey, France and Russia, but which cannot, now strain the firm understanding arrived at-on the Turkish question. It is a masterly stroke of policy which-may da. much to shape the history ofthe day, 1