Download - Winston Churchill

low-cost settlement could not be achieved.2. British policy was in fact successful in achieving itsgoal. Relying on support from air power, a relatively stablegovernment friendly to British interests was maintainedin Iraq for as long as Britain needed it. If not byIndian independence in 1947, then certainly followingthe Suez episode of 1956, Britain no longer had eitherthe need or the inclination to sustain the Hashemitegovernment. It had served its purpose, and the Britishcould justly claim that thirty-five years was quite longenough to expect the Hashemites to have establishedthemselves or face the consequences. The Hashemitemonarchy established at the same time in neighboringJordan, after all, survives to this day.3. The 1920 Iraq uprising came as Britain was in theprocess of reducing its troop commitments. ProfessorDodge correctly notes that it was a troop increase thatended the rebellion, but frames this in a negative context.Surely the troop “surge” is what gave Britain theopportunity to establish its low-cost solution? (The additionaltroops, by the way, came from India.)4. Bonar Law’s statement about reducing commitmentsin Mesopotamia can be misinterpreted. The settlementworked out by Churchill—with the support ofBonar Law’s Conservatives, who made up the majority ofLloyd George’s Coalition government—enabled thereduction of British troops stationed in Iraq. This wasalready in place when Bonar Law made his remarks. Hewas simply pledging to carry out the policy.5. League of Nations scrutiny of Britain’s policies wasintended, but the United States never joined the League.The Mandate under which Britain governed Iraq wassupervised by the League Council, made up of Britain,France and other imperial powers holding Mandates. Inshort: the Mandate holders were policing themselves.Churchill’s solution met the obligations Britain hadacquired during and after the First World War and continuedto work for as long as it was needed, after whichtime it was abandoned. Realpolitik? Perhaps, but itworked, and that is the point at issue here. Most likelythe only real similarity between the situation in Iraq thenand now is the unchanged nature of the populace. ,Correspondence on Iraq, 1922WINSTON S. CHURCHILL AND DAVID LLOYD GEORGEWSC to DLG (Churchill papers: 17/27)1 September 1922I am deeply concerned about Iraq. The task youhave given me is becoming really impossible. Our forcesare reduced now to very slender proportions. TheTurkish menace has got worse; Feisal is playing the fool,if not the knave; his incompetent Arab officials are disturbingsome of the provinces and failing to collect therevenue; we overpaid £200,000 on last year’s accountwhich it is almost certain Iraq will not be able to paythis year, thus entailing a Supplementary Estimate inregard to a matter never sanctioned by Parliament; a furtherdeficit, in spite of large economies, is nearly certainthis year on the civil expenses owing to the drop in therevenue. I have had to maintain British troops at Mosulall through the year in consequence of the Angora quarrel:this has upset the programme of reliefs and will cer-Reprinted by kind permission from the official biography, Winston S.Churchill, Companion Volume IV, Part 3, starting at page 1975.“Wee Free” may refer to the Asquith Liberals, who were “free” of theLloyd George Coalition. An August 1920 letter along the same lines(“There is something very sinister to my mind in this Mesopotamianentanglement”) was written but not sent; see Companion Volume IV,Part 2 (Heinemann, 1977), 1199. In 1921 Churchill became ColonialSecretary and went to Cairo to settle Middle East boundaries.tainly lead to further expenditure beyond the provision. Icannot at this moment withdraw these troops withoutpractically inviting the Turks to come in. The small columnwhich is operating in the Rania district inside ourborder against the Turkish raiders and Kurdish sympathisersis a source of constant anxiety to me.I do not see what political strength there is to face adisaster of any kind, and certainly I cannot believe that inany circumstances any large reinforcements would be sentfrom here or from India. There is scarcely a single newspaper—Tory,Liberal or Labour—which is not consistentlyhostile to our remaining in this country. The enormousreductions which have been effected have brought nogoodwill, and any alternative Government that might beformed here—Labour, Die-hard or Wee Free—wouldgain popularity by ordering instant evacuation. Moreoverin my heart I do not see what we are getting out of it.Owing to the difficulties with America, no progress hasbeen made in developing the oil. Altogether I am gettingto the end of my resources.I think we should now put definitely, not only toFeisal but to the Constituent Assembly, the position thatunless they beg us to stay and to stay on our own termsin regard to efficient control, we shall actually evacuatebefore the close of the financial year. I would put this >>FINEST HOUR 135 / 35