Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, MAR. 24, 1926. IRAK AND MOSUL.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVI, Issue 97, 24 March 1926, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, MAR. 24, 1926. IRAK AND MOSUL.

The Arab kingdom of Irak or Mesopotamia is one of the creations of the Great War. It was freed from Turkish rule by AngloIndian and British Dominion troops, who were assisted by the Arabs in their operations against the Turks. The Liberal Government, under Mr Asquith, now the Earl of Oxford, pledged Great Britain to set up an Arab Government in Mesopotamia (now known as Irak) and to support it as an independent State, until it was strong enough to stand by itself. Lord Curzon, speaking at Lausanne on January 23, 1923, summed up the position by stating that “the British Government arc under a definite pledge, first of all to the Arab nation to whom they promised that they should not bo returned to Turkish rule; secondly that to the Arab kingdom should be annexed the whole country, including Mosul, and with whom we have entered into an obligation ; and thirdly to the League of Nations, without whose consent we cannot abandon our mandate over large portions of mandated territory.” Mr Lloyd George, when Prime Minister, said in the House of Commons on March 20, 1923: “The intention was not merely to conquer Mesopotamia and hand it over to the Arabs, but to conquer Mesopotamia, found an Arab State and uphold it by British support.” British troops had occupied the greater part of Irak when the war came to an end, and, in accordance with the terms of the Armistice, they occupied Mosul itself. From that time onwards Irak has been, within the present frontiers, which were accepted by the then Turkish Government in the Treaty of Sevres, signed in August, 1920, regarded as a unit. In 1923, however, a crisis arose, and the situation in Mesopotamia became graver than at any time before or since. Turkey was flushed with victory over the Greek debacle in Syria and a new state of affairs arose in Irak. In face of that situation Mr Bonar Law, who had succeeded Mr Lloyd George as Prime Minister on the downfall of the Coalition Cabinet, had to ask his colleagues to face the whole situation from the beginning. Any immediate withdrawal from Irak was seen to be not only costly but, from a military point of view, difficult of achievement. It would involve the downfall of the kingdom of Irak, and consequently be regarded throughout the Eastern World as a breach of faith towards Irak, and it was further felt that such a measure would inflict irreparable damage on British honour and prestige throughout the East. The Treaty, signed by the Coalition Government in 1922, was one of 20 years, and the military and financial agreement attached to jt and extended to the 'same

period stipulated expressly that Irak should, at the earliest possible date, accept full responsibility both for the maintenance of internal order and for the defence of Irak from external aggression. But, on the other hand, no definite date had been laid down, within the 20 years currency of the Treaty, for the fulfilment of these essential conditions. The Bonar Law Cabinet could not and would not repudiate the Treaty. They were bound by it and pledged to the defence of Irak as an independent Arab kingdom. And Turkey grown more confident as the result of the successes over the Greeks was, in more or less bellicose terms, demanding the readjustment of the Irak boundaries and the return of Mosul to Turkish rule.

THE 1922 TREATY MODIFIED

The Bonar Law Cabinet came to the conclusion, however, that the treaty should be' supplemented by a protocol, terminating the main provisions of the treaty, and more particularly Britain’s military and financial obligations, within a much shorter period, but which at the same time expressly provided that negotiations should be entered into for the conclusion of a future treaty embodying the permanent relationships between the two countries, when they should become relations of mutual assistance and help, and no longer a purely qne-sided dependence on the part of Irak upon Great Britain. The decision thus come to was announced by Mr Baldwin (then Chancellor of the British Exchequer) in the House of Commons on May 3, 1923, in the following terms :

Both parties being equally anxious that the commitments and responsibilities of His Majesty’s Government in respect of Irak should be terminated as soon as possible, it it considered that the period of the treaty in its present form can be coveniently shortened. ... It is understood . . . that the present treaty shall terminate upon Irak becoming a member of the League of Nations, and in any case not later than four years from the ratification of peace with Turkey. Nothing in this protocol shall prevent a fresh agreement being concluded with a view to regulate the subsequent relations between the High Contracting Parties, and negotiations for that object shall (not “may”) be entered into between them before the expiration of the above period.

In further explaining the position in the House of Commons on December 21 last, Mr Baldwin pointed out that the protocol, which was to bring the existing treaty to an end in 1928, definitely pledged Great Britain to endeavour, before 1928, to replace it by another treaty for the future. “And,” said Mr Baldwin, “we believe we can substantially fulfil our intentions in this respect, but neither the Government of which I was the head in 1923, nor the Labour Government which succeeded us, contemplated that the special connection between ourselves and Irak should or could come to an end in 1928, either in our relationship towards Irak, or in our relationship towards the League of Nations, unless we were able, before that date, to prove that Irak had reached a position of stability in government which would justify her admission into the League of Nations.” When the Treaty of Lausanne was signed by Lord Curzon, he undertook to accept the award of the League on the boundary question, and that undertaking was renewed by the Socialist Government, which after spending some months in the vain endeavour to arrive at a direct settlement with Turkey referred the matter to the League in Septebmer, 1924, and pledged itself to accept its judgment, the Turkish representative also agreeing to accept the League’s decision. On the strength of these assurances the League sent out its commission of three to investigate and that commission reported that the province of Mosul naturally belonged to Irak, and that its people wished to remain united with it. The commission also found that it was the wish of all sections of the people that British influence and guidance should remain associated with the Government of Irak; hence they coupled with their recommendation that Irak should remain intact a stipulation that the present influence and guidance upon the course of Irak policy should continue for a long period of years.