WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1920. A BACKSLIDE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10522, 25 February 1920, Page 6

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1920. A BACKSLIDE

The decision of the Allies to bolster up the Turkish rule in Constantinople is a disgraceful backslide. In this matter the British Government has been divided by two party aims,—ono voiced by Lord Cnrzon, the other by Air Montagu. The point between these parties is the effect on the Indian Mohammedans *of adverse treatment of the Sultan. Lord Cnrzon, who governed India for years, is able to speak with authority; Air Alontagn, who raced through India to outline a constitution for India, is not. Lord Curzon’s opinion that Indian Alohammedanism will not bo affected by the just punishment of the Sultan is supported'by tbo great fact that the Mohammedan population supported enthusiastically the war, in which great forces of Indian Mohammedans fought to destroy the Sultan’s Empire, and helped manfully to destroy it. Air Montagu’s opposite view is supported by nobody but agitators, whose ono object is to put the British Government in the wrong. The Government being without backbone enough to resist certain foreign predilections, took advantage of these differing opinions to make the most disgraceful backslide in history, deciding against the logic of history and their own repeated declarations.

The opportunity for making good their professions was unique. For centuries the voices of freedom, Christianity, and expediency were raised in united protest against the dominance of the Turk, and all agreed on the salutary policy of “bag and baggage” as the only policy for restoring humanity in the once fertile regions of the Turkish Empire. The only obstacle was Russia. As the Czars were bent -on seizing Constantinople, .tho only ice-free port within their reach, and tho ideal seat of truly commanding Empire, European diplomacy felt bound to sustain tho Turk in his bad government of his own Empire for fear of grave consequences to the rest of tho world. To cover this policy tho Turk promised reform, and whenever he got the opportunity ho kept his promise by murdering Christians. Extinction of Christians was his idea of reform; the world know it; but tho Turk continuod to murder with impunity. When tho great war broke out ho turned with insolent ingratitude against tho Powers which had kept him alive. During the war ho flouted them, with murder on a scale hitherto unknown. They informed him that he must bo held responsible for the murder of a million Armenians, three-quarters of a million Greeks, and Syrians, both Christian and Arab, without number. They smashed his Empire, and had him at their mercy. While they debated on his fate, lie murdered again, vilely and awfully. Russia was down and out; the opportunity was unique as it- was great. But they decided to let tho Turk keep

his disgraced throne, and infcrrntially determined that for Armenians, Greeks, and Syrians, both Christian or Arab, to be seen “in Turkey is a capital crime, to bo punished by Turkish and Kurdish massacre. They also decided that the rule which had made deserts'of tho fairest regions of tho earth shall continue unobstructed. It is tho most disgraceful backslide in all history. It is below the level of tho old diplomacy, of which the glib condemnation is so often on the lips of tho men responsible.

This question concerns u s of tho overseas closely. Wo of the overseas have been granted, before the world, tho status of nations. Therefore arc our names on tho Peace Treaty under which tho earth is to be governed. This strong position wo have earned by pouring out our blood and our money in the great cause of righteousness, with which the Imperial existence of the Turk at Constantinople is incompatible. We did not help to open tho Dardanelles, but wp helped by our attack to smash the Turkish Empire. Tho ease is well put by a recent writer, an Australian who fought against the Turk and the German ;

Although tbo campaign ended in failure it achieved very important results. It practically" criupjod the Turkish armies on the .Egyptian. Mesopotamian and Caucasian fronts. It held down -100,000 of their troops, including many of their picked regiments. They were compelled to keep on Gallipoli greater forces than the Allies had, and immense-reserves on the adjacent coasts. They certainly lost iu killed and wounded more than the Allies did.

“The glory of ‘Anzac,’ ” he writes, “will remain imperishable.” It was augmented very greatly. “These scarred warriors,” ho goes on to chronicle, joined in tho great attack from tho Land of the Pharaohs. “With their glorious companions in arras, the evcr-victofious warriors advanced,” wrested the Holy Places from tho Paynim, “sweeping on until tho humbled remnant of the once proud armies of the Crescent surrendered to these dauntless drusaders—the greatest and the noblest of them all.” Then ho tells tho deathless story of the fighting of the overseas men on the Western front, never checked until they stood in the line of victory on the great day of the Armistice. Ho concludes: “Our heroic dead gave their noble lives gladly to restore to mankind tho irresistible boon of freedom and justice. Their names are not engraven on brass or marble, but in j;ho hearts of mankind.” But the rehabilitation of tbo Turk stultifies tho loss of these gallant lives, and must tend to obliterate, if anything can obliterate, the names of our gallant dead from the hearts of mankind. The occasion is supremo. It calls at the very outset of tho new Imperial arrangement for tho raising of the overseas voices in favour of rescinding the infamous Constantinople decision.