THE ANGLO-RUSSIAN DIFFICULTY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXII, Issue 7319, 4 May 1885, Page 6

THE ANGLO-RUSSIAN DIFFICULTY.

TelegbafhinO on March 6/the St. Petersburg correspondent of the London Times aays:—"Englishmen must not nurse the fallacious idea that General Komaroffs forces in the Trans-Caspian are all the. men that Russia could pnt into the field in that region within a reasonable space of time, or that Russia is poor and not prepared for war. Russia is always prepared fro war ; and, sis General Skobeletf remarked to me at Constantinople, in 1878, she is not likely to be again eo easily turned from heir purpose by mere naval demonstration and tmpty threats. For the last two years Russia has persistently worked out her definite polioy in Central Asia, while we, having no definite polioy, have done nothing else but write and talk against her. These, at least, are the ideas with which many of the late hero's disciples have flattered themselves into believing that England's present attitude is only an evanescent outbreak of Kuisophobia, like her former fits of passing indignation at Russian advances in Central Asia.

An article in the St. Petersburg Viedomostiis muohdisoussed in official circles in Europe, the relations of this journal to the Russian Foreign Office being a -matter of notoriety. The article says:—" As long as Abdurrahman Khan is an independent ruler, England is as little justified in remonstrating with Russia concerning the movements of Colonel Alikhanoff as Russia would be in lecturing England on the movements of the small force with Sir Peter Lumsden, At all events, our detachments have the same right as tbe English army to be in Afghanistan, so long as the meeting at Rawul Pindi yields no practical result." The Times of Maroh 11 says :—"Russia, of course, may be deliberately bent on war; and, in truth, if she has not cast aside the alternative of a peaceful settlement, it is difficult !to understand her .movements ; creeping from point to point within the die-' puted territory, anticipating by acts of force the arbitrament of the Commission to which she had agreed to refer the question of the frontier. But, if her aim is war, the precautioDs of Sir Peter Lumsden will at least secure the Ameer and his ally, the British Government, the advantage of time ■ for completing the work of defence, and, should the necessity arise, for preparing measures of retaliation. Russia may pause at the points to which she has already advanced, or may go to the extreme limit of her present pretensions. She may meet the incontestably just demand of the British Government that her troops should withdraw to the positions they occupied when the question of the disputed frontier was referred to the Mixed Commission with cynical assertion of the doctrine Beati possidentee; but, if she docs so, it will be at the peril of war with the Ameer, founded on a legitimate casus belli, which this country could not, consistently with our solemn . pledges and our imperial interests, refuse to sustain."

Professor Vambery, the weil known orientalist and traveller, writing to the Times regarding the Russian, claioi on .Penjdeh, says ;—" From the various reports in the papers I see that the Russians claim Sariyazi (i.e., the Yellow Plain) as their own, declaring this station on the road to Penjdeb, as well as the last-named place, to be an integral part of the Turcoman district of Merv. In order to End a legal basis for this assertion they pretend that Penjdeh, aa well as the whole tract of country extending from Marchah to the oasis of Merv, waa formerly incorporated by the Khan of Khiva into the Turcoman country, and that consequently the Russians, as the aotnal possessors of Merv, have the right to look upon Penjdeh aa their own property. Suoh an assumption in utterly false, and could easily lead to great misunderstandings. The fact is simply this. In the time of the Knivan ruler Allah-Kuli Khan (1826-1841) the Usbegs of Khiva had succeeded in extending their forays from the Turcoman country to the Upper Murghab, and had forced a large portion of the Djemshidis, then subjects of Afghanistan, to migrate to Koktcheg, in the Khanate of Khiva. On that occasions the Usbega had penetrated even beyond Penjdeh, as far as Bala Murghab, but they returned at onoe to Merv without retaining any of the said places. The same happened in the time of Mahomed Emir Khan (1843-1855); and, since foraya or temporary inroads in a country cannot be taken for a permanent conquest, the Upper Murghab—neither Penjdeh nor even Sariyazi—cannot be looked on as belonging to the Turcoman country, i.e., to Merv; and the Russians are again drifting into one of those dilemmas which are based upon the principle 'My will is my right. . As far as I know, the boundary of the Merv oasis towards the south never extended beyond Baba-Gombez and Yoloten, and this may be proved by the Persian saying current among the Djemahidis, ' Guzesht er Yoloten,' viz. i 'He is. gone beyond Yoloten'—».<J., he is fallen into the captivity of the Turcomans. Similar —nay, much graver doubts exist aa to the claims of Russian territory east of Herat; and if the Government of St. Petersburg, in spite of all this, should, persist in defending those or other boundary claims, based merely upon the coyetousnesa of her, military agents in the outlying districts of Central Asia, I am afraid the danger of a collision in the near futures will be hardly avoided, for it would be simply a political suicide if your Government should give in ( :» Russia in that respect, and place the key of India in the hands of your insatiable rival."