The Daily News. FRIDAY, MARCH 12, 1920. LIQUIDATING THE TURKISH EMPIRE.

Taranaki Daily News, 12 March 1920, Page 4

The Daily News. FRIDAY, MARCH 12, 1920. LIQUIDATING THE TURKISH EMPIRE.

The landing of twenty thousand Allied troops at Constantinople and the decision to rejnforce that army to bring the strength up to fifty thousand indicate that the position of affairs there is such that the Allies are taking no risks. The terms of the treaty that Turkey will be called upon to sign have not ,yet been officially disclosed, but there is good ground for belief that Britain and France are quite in accord on this important matter. The liquidation of the Turkish Empire by means of this treaty concerns the British Empire more profoundly than it can affect any other political system. The dominant question —that concerning the opening up of the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus for free navigation has already been decided and acted upon, thus securing the keys of the East.. Free ingress and egress for the Western nations by the Bosphorus and Dardanelles is imperative to keep those nations in direct touch with all the immense territories draining into the waters of the Black Sea and the neUr, though separated, Caspian—with Constantinople itself and Thrace; with Bulgaria and Roumania; with the mouths of the Danube and its more inland plains in the heart of Europe; with Southern Russia, its ports, rivers and agricultural resources; with the Caucasus, Armenia, and Turkey in Asia. Therefore, the Turk has been dismissed from his position of doorkeeper of the Straits. The substitute regime will probably be an International Commission, ready to act as an organ of the League of Nations, and that Commission should become the chief effective authority in Constantinople, even if the Sultan is allowed to hold nominal sovereignity. 'Such an arrangement, however, would be a compromise that involves possibilities of serious trouble hereafter, owing to its bearing on the Caliphate and'the Moslem world, particularly India. That is the French view, and it would appear that Britain, probably reluctantly, has acquiesced therein, allowing the Sultan to hold Constantinople, but reducing the Turkish army to insignificant dimensions. The question arisesWhy should the beaten Turk receive better treatment, because he is a Moslem? On his merits he deserves worse, since his Armenian atrocities were the crowning atrocities of the war —and since. While Constantinople remains the political and spiritual capital no real regeneration of the Turk can ever come about. It has always been a hotbed of corruption and intrigue, and on that ground,, if

for do other, there is ample justification, for transferring the Turk, "bag and baggage," to the Asiatic side. That would be a prudent and safe policy, for to maintain the Sultan and iiis Government as the practical dominating authorities on the European side means restoring, sooner or later, the Young Turks, with the certainty that another deadly cycle of. international mischief, will begin. Expediency, however, has evidently overcome prudence, hence the decision to allow the Sultan and his Government to remain at Constantinople, though it is indisputable that the interests of Europe and Islam would be better served by a clean transfer of both the political and religious functions of the Turk to the other side of the Bosphorus. The landing of Allied troops evoked an exhibition of hostility that may yet lead to serious consequences, besides which it indicates the existence of that hatred towards Christian nations that needs but little to fan it into a flame of vengeance such as has characterised the massacre of the Armenians. It is a well known fact that Constantinople has been nothing but a curse to the general interests of Islam. For two generations many of those best acquainted with Turkey, and amongst the most devoted friends of the Turkish people, have advocated the removal of the capital to Brusa or Konia. Otherwise no real national capital, and no consolidated Turkish State, on a genuine racial basis, can ever exist, for a real national capital Constantinople can never be. The more the problem is studied, the deeper becomes the conviction that the British Government has allowed expediency to jeopardise security and obviously sane policy. Admitting that of all disorders those arising from religious fanaticism are the deadliest and most difficult to cope with, yet it would seem that instead of being fearsome of Moslem trouble in India and Egypt, if Britain had shown a bold front; and taken steps to proclaim frankly to Islam in India the real reasons for trans-

ferring the Turks to Asia, appealing to their experience of British rule in India, and emphasising how such a policy would be in the best interests of the Islamic world, the way might have been paved for the trrnsferenee of,the Turks to Asia without any resentment being felt by the followers of The Prophet in India. Unfortunately the line of least resistance lias been adopted. How soon the Allies may have no alternative but to relegate the Turk to Asia cannot be estimated. That .it will be imperative to do so appears inevitable. The one achievement which the Allies can place to their credit so far in relation to the Turk is the opening of the Dardanelles, and this will doubtless prove the chief factor in eventually liquidating the last, but by no means the least, problem they, have been called upon to overcome. The natural progress of civilisation must not be obstructed. Constantinople influences the material lives of a relatively small number of Moslems, but it is of vital concern to the interests of over a hundred million Christians in South Russia, the Balkans and the Danube basin.