# Problems of Empire/The Egyptian Question

* related portals: Egypt.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Speech at Boscombe, November 1898
THE EGYPTIAN QUESTION.
Speech at Boscombe, November 10th, 1898.
The favourable attitude of France on the Fashoda question.We have all been glad to read in our newspaper this morning that the conduct of the French Government in deciding to withdraw from Fashoda was allowed to pass unquestioned in the French Chamber, and has not been unfavourably criticised by the French press. The Fashoda incident may be described as closed, but the Egyptian question is not yet settled. I am one of those who believe that it is high time to put an end to our equivocal position in Egypt; and I hope you will not take it amiss if I attempt to review to-night the history of the Egyptian question, and to consider what bearing that question has on British interests in other parts of the world.
British intervention in Egypt in 1882.The rebellion of Arabi Pasha, which led to British intervention in Egypt, broke out in 1882. We asked the French to co-operate with us in putting down that rebellion. M. de Freycinet, who was then Prime Minister, proposed that the French should co-operate by sending 4000 infanterie de marine to occupy the line of the Suez Canal. The Senate, like the Chamber, rejected the Government proposals, and the French fleet withdrew from Alexandria. We were left to put down the Arabi rebellion single-handed, and we have been responsible for the administration of Egypt ever since.
​The policy of pin-pricksThere is not the least reason to doubt that the mass of the French people were exceedingly mortified at the decision of the French Chambers. The Paris newspaper, Le Matin, frankly acknowledges that 'From time to time we' (the French) 'inaugurated the policy of pin-pricks on Great Britain, a policy which had no definite object, and which was bound to turn out badly. We now find ourselves confronted by people who have at last been exasperated by the continual pricks we have given them.' What are the pricks here alluded to? Among them are the demands for the evacuation of Egypt, when Egypt was manifestly unable to stand alone; when, if we had left the country, either France would have stepped into our place or Egypt would have been overrun by the Mahdi's hordes; the obstacles which were thrown in our way in the reform of administration, and the refusal to allow the Egyptian Budget surplus to be used for the alleviation of taxation or the development of the country; the refusal by the French representatives on the Caisse de la Dette to allow funds to be used for the expedition which gave back to Egypt the Province of Dongola. I need not dwell on French action in Tunis, in West Africa, or in Madagascar, where they have established the protective duties usual in French Colonies, in defiance of their pledges, but Lord Rosebery's words at Epsom, on October 13th, are well worth quoting:—
Lord Rosebery at Epsom.'There has been a disposition in the last two or three a years to encroach and impinge on the rights of England in various parts of the world in a way which is not gratifying to Englishmen, and which I do not think is calculated to promote those cordial relations with other Powers, which it must be the wish of a great ​commercial Empire like ours to cultivate. The present Government has shown no want of conciliation; some may think that they have gone too far in the path of conciliation in various parts of the world; but it is no part of my province to discuss that question to-night. All I wish to say is that Great Britain has been conciliatory, and that her conciliatory disposition has been widely misunderstood. If the nations of the world are under the impression that the ancient spirit of Great Britain is dead, or that her resources are weakened, or her population less determined than ever it was to maintain the rights and the honour of its flag, they make a mistake which can only end in a disastrous conflagration.'
Fifteen years ago, after the suppression of the Arabi Rebellion, we might have declared a protectorate over Egypt. That was Mr. W. E. Forster's view; and this step might have been taken with little opposition. The Egyptian question would then have been settled for all time. But the step was not taken, why, it is hard to explain, and we were more than once very near evacuating Egypt.
What the British occupation has done for Egypt.In spite, however, of our equivocal position, we set to work with a handful of Englishmen to reform the administration of a country which was almost bankrupt, and the people of which were suffering from years of oppression and misrule. Sir Alfred Milner tells us in his admirable book on England in Egypt how that work was accomplished. It is a work of which Englishmen may well be proud, and which is, from some points of view, almost more remarkable than our administration of India. With very small available funds the material resources of the country were ​developed by the construction of irrigation and drainage works, thousands of acres being thus added to the cultivated area. The administration of justice was purified, and official corruption was gradually stamped out. The finances were reformed; much oppressive taxation was remitted; and, as the taxable resources of the country increased, more would have been accomplished in the same direction but for the senseless and irritating opposition of the French representatives on the Caisse de la Dette. Then, again, what is more remarkable than the change which has taken place in the character of the people of Egypt themselves? The despised fellaheen, who, twelve years ago, in the battles on the shores of the Red Sea, threw themselves on their knees, to be slain by Osman Digna's dervishes, have become, under the leadership of a few British officers, the soldiers who have won, or assisted in winning, the battles of Toski, Abu Hamed, the Atbara, and Omdurman. The work done by England in Egypt gives her a claim to a position in that country which no other nation can share; and that work is not yet completed.
Our position on the Upper Nile.What is our position as regards the Upper Nile Valley and the Egyptian Soudan? The dream of extending British territory from the Cape to Cairo originated in the brain of that great empire-builder, Mr. Cecil Rhodes. He, in South Africa, has done his share of the work. Sir Harry Johnston, in Central Africa, has done his. A few English capitalists, under the leadership of Sir William Mackinnon, preserved for us a portion of East Africa, and secured a route for British commerce, free from the protective duties of French or Germans, into the heart of the great Continent, a grateful country repaying them for their patriotic ​services by buying them out at ten shillings in the pound. What those services are worth, future generations of Englishmen will realise. The regions to which I have just alluded were generally recognised as lying within the British sphere of influence in the partition of Africa which took place in 1890. Moreover, the British sphere of influence was specifically acknowledged to extend over the Nile Valley, by agreements made in 1890 with Germany and with Italy. It was similarly recognised by the agreement made with the Congo Free State in 1894, under which a lease was granted to the Free State for the life-time of the present King of the Belgians. We have always maintained that the Nile Valley and the Egyptian Soudan, including the provinces of Kordofan, Darfur, and Bahr-al-Gazal, though temporarily lost to Egypt by the Mahdist Rebellion, still remained Egyptian territory. A few years ago, the French Foreign Ministers of the day were fond of pointing out (I suppose when they feared that we might seize it for ourselves) that the Khedive and the Sultan were still the supreme rulers of the old Egyptian Soudan. Lately, however, they have taken another line, and have tried to maintain that Egyptian claims have lapsed, owing to the non-exercise of Egyptian authority.
Arbitration in respect to Delagoa Bay.An exactly parallel case can be quoted against this contention. In 1873, Portugal and Great Britain submitted their dispute with regard to Delagoa Bay to arbitration. Portugal claimed rights of sovereignty, as existing since the discovery of the bay by Portuguese navigators in the sixteenth century. Great Britain claimed under treaties concluded in 1823 between Captain Owen and certain native chiefs, whom he ​believed to be independent, contending that any earlier rights which Portugal might have possessed had been allowed by her to fall into abeyance. Marshal MacMahon, then President of the French Republic, acting as arbitrator, disposed of Great Britain's plea as follows: 'Whereas, if the accidental weakness of the Portuguese authority in these parts were able in 1823 to lead Captain Owen into error, and cause him to consider in good faith, as actually independent of the Crown of Portugal, the native chiefs of the territories, now in dispute, the acts concluded by him with these chiefs were none the less in violation of the rights of Portugal.'
Our claim to Nile Valley maintained.Whatever may have been the bearing of Marshal MacMahon's award in the case just referred to, we have never admitted the claim of any other Power to a position in the Nile Valley. In March, 1895, Sir Edward Grey, in his much-quoted speech in the House of Commons, pointed out that 'The advance of a French expedition, under secret instructions, right from the other side of Africa into territory our claims over which have been known for so long, would be not merely an inconsistent and unexpected act, but it must be perfectly well known that it would be an unfriendly act, and would be so viewed by England.' On the 10th December, 1897, M. Hanotaux, the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, was expressly informed that Her Majesty's Government adhered to the language of their predecessors.
It is unnecessary to dwell upon the fact that the exertions which have culminated in the reconquest of the Soudan were ours. We have not expended the blood of British soldiers and the money of the British ​taxpayer in order that half of the fruits of our victories may be reaped by others. But for the pressure of the Anglo-Egyptian forces on the Khalifa's army from the north, Major Marchand would either never have reached the Nile Valley, or would have been annihilated as soon as he got there.
Upper Nile key to irrigation in Lower Egypt.No just appreciation of the whole Egyptian question is possible without considering the value to Egypt of the possession of the Upper Nile Valley. Egypt depends absolutely for its prosperity on irrigation from the Nile. Neither the cotton crop worth—10,000,000l. annually—nor rice, nor sugar, could be grown without summer irrigation, which practically requires the whole water supply of the Nile, that water supply being derived from the great lakes and the Bahr-al-Gazal. Should any extensive system of irrigation be established in the Upper Nile Valley or in the Bahr-al-Gazal, Lower Egypt would probably be ruined. Therefore the power which is responsible for Egypt must control the sources of its prosperity.
Value of the SoudanAs to the intrinsic value of the Soudan, a few words must be said. The country more immediately to the north of Khartoum is a desert, and therefore valueless. The valuable parts of the Soudan are in the Provinces of Kordofan, Darfur, and the Bahr-al-Gazal. Of this latter district, Slatin Pasha, who was Govenor of Darfur, says: 'It is a most fertile district, extending over an enormous area, watered by a labyrinth of streams. The soil is exceptionally good, producing quantities of cotton and indiarubber. There are cattle in abundance, and I estimate the population at between five and six million.' The Province was brought under the Government of the Khedive by Gessi Pasha. He ​was succeeded by Lupton Bey, who, defended his Province long after the Mahdist Rebellion had cut him off from all communication with Khartoum and Egypt. In 1883, he was able to boast that he was the only one of the Soudan Governors who could give the Egyptian Government a clear profit of something like 60,000l. for that year. In the course of his advance to the Nile, Major Marchand has established several French posts in the Bahr-al-Gazal, and has proclaimed French sovereignty over places which were centres of Egyptian authority in the pre-Mahdist days. That is why, although the Fashoda incident may be closed, the Egyptian question is not yet settled.
Need of a Protectorate over the Valley of the Nile.The British people are not satisfied with the equivocal position in which they stand in Egypt. I have shown you what are our rights, what are our claims, and what are our responsibilities. The time has arrived when we must declare, in unmistakable terms, a Protectorate over Egypt and the whole of the Valley of the Nile. We have refrained from taking this step, which, as I have already pointed out, we might have taken fifteen years ago, more out of consideration for the susceptibilities of the French than for any other reason, and the result has been endless friction and irritation between the two nations ever since. It is good for neither that this state of things should continue, and it can only be put an end to by our accepting in name the position which we have long held in fact, viz., the position of the protectors of Egypt.
An Egyptian ProtectorateAre we strong enough to take the step which I am urging? We are stronger at sea to-day than we have been for years past. I stated here in the spring that we were strong enough to meet the navies of any two, ​possibly of any three, other Powers. Not only for this reason is the present time favourable for declaring a protectorate over Egypt. Russia for the moment has all she can digest in the Far East. She showed no sympathy with France over the Fashoda incident, and she will, for the next year or two, be sufficiently occupied with the Trans-Siberian railway and other operations in the same part of the world. The Czar's rescript was honestly enough intended on the part of its author, but considered in its general relation to Russian policy it is simply an effort to gain time. How, indeed, can any sensible man look upon it in any other light, when Russia has just decided to spend 10,000,000l., outside the ordinary estimates, on the Navy? With Germany our relations are much more amicable than they have been for several years past. With Italy and Austria, especially the former, we have nearly always been on friendly terms. No opposition need be expected from either of these Powers, and in the present internal condition of both countries they would not weigh much in the scale. There remains France, and with France, even if backed by Russia, we are competent to deal. Under all these circumstances I am of opinion that a protectorate must be declared in Egypt. The risk of war is small; the gain to the future peace of the world would be great.
China.Though Egypt is naturally uppermost in our minds just now, we must not allow our attention to be diverted from the Far East. The China question is of infinitely greater importance to the future of the Empire than any question affecting Egypt and the Soudan. The population of China is commonly estimated at 400 millions, or nearly one-quarter of the ​human race. The governing classes are hopelessly effete and corrupt, but the commercial classes stand high, and Gordon showed that the masses of the people contain splendid fighting material when led by European officers. The Chinese Empire is tottering to its fall. On the occasion of the recent palace revolution at Pekin, the friends of progress were decapitated, thrown into prison, or degraded. Whatever Power controls these 400 millions of people in the future will control the destinies of Asia, if not of the world. Russia has already got a grip on Manchuria; her Cossacks are patrolling the treaty-port of Newchwang. She will soon have her hand on Pekin, and unless stopped in time will overrun the whole of the interior of China. I condemned the policy adopted in our dealings with Russia earlier in the year as unwise. We should have cordially acquiesced in Russia's advance in the North—which we were in a position to stop—in return for recognition by Russia of British spheres of influence in Central and Southern China. It will be more difficult to obtain such a recognition now; but the attempt should none the less be made.
Critical condition of British export trade.The questions we have been discussing to-night are of vital interest to the masses of the British people, Our ex p Or trade is declining, and year by year the country is less able to support itself. Did foreign countries pursue the same liberal policy in their colonies as that adopted in our own, there would not be so much need for us to peg out claims for the future. But we have to take things as they are; and we must jealously watch the extension of foreign dominion over regions from which we know that our own people will be excluded by every possible means.