HC Deb 13 July 1909 vol 7 cc1827-31
Dr. RUTHERFORD

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any representations from the Government of Turkey regarding the military expeditions of Russia into Persia; and whether he can say whether the young Turks are in active sympathy with the Persian Liberals in their struggle for constitutional Government?

The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Edward Grey)

No representation has been addressed to us from the Government of Turkey, and I cannot say what has passed between the two Governments directly concerned, and I cannot undertake the responsibility of expressing the views of political parties in other countries.

Mr. J. C. FLYNN

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether a large Russian force, including artillery and cavalry, have now marched——

Mr. SPEAKER

That does not arise out of this question.

Mr. FLYNN (for Mr. Dillon)

asked the Secretary of State when he will lay upon the Table of the House further Papers on the affairs of Persia?

Sir E. GREY

Owing to the necessity of referring the papers to His Majesty's Minister at Tehran, it will not be possible to lay further papers on the affairs of Persia for a few weeks, but there will be no unnecessary delay. It has been necessary to communicate with Tehran by despatch about them, and this takes some time.

Mr. FLYNN (for Mr. Dillon)

asked whether the British representative in Tehran expressed any opinion on the terms demanded by the Nationalist leaders; if so, whether His Majesty's Government was consulted before that opinion was expressed; whether His Majesty's Government have condemned those demands as unreasonable; and, if so, on what grounds?

Sir E. GREY

His Majesty's Minister at Tehran informed the Sipahdar that only two of the Nationalist demands were such as could be pressed by the two Legations on the acceptance of the Shah. His Majesty's Government were not consulted beforehand, but as the hon. Member is aware from the answer which I gave to a supplementary question asked by him on the 8th instant, they share Sir George Barclay's view on the subject. I do not think I have hitherto expressed an opinion upon the demands generally, and I do not see why I should go beyond what has already been said.

Mr. FLYNN

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these demands include the formation of a Liberal Cabinet which would meet with the acceptance of the Persian people?

Sir E. GREY

They include the formation of a Cabinet, chosen by local assemblies over Persia.

Mr. FLYNN (for Mr. Dillon)

asked whether, in view of the constant communications now passing between the Russian Government and the British Government on Persian affairs, and of the fact that the British Government has by approval made itself jointly responsible for the advance of Russian troops into Northern Persia, he can now see his way to suggesting to the Russian Government the withdrawal of all Russian officers from the service of the Shah; whether Colonel Liakhoff and his fellow officers are still Russian subjects; and whether any injury inflicted upon them would be accounted by the Russian Government as an injury to their subjects, justifying an advance on Tehran?

Sir E. GREY

The withdrawal of the Russian officers from the service of the Shah is not a matter in which we are concerned. These officers are still Russian subjects, and I am unable to say what view the Russian Government would take of their obligations towards those subjects if the case supposed by the hon. Member were to arise. That is a question for the Russian Government themselves to decide. Nor can I admit that the fact that the two Governments inform each other of the measures which they may think it desirable to take for the protection of their interests in different parts of Persia implies that each is responsible for the actions of the other. Any such assumption is entirely erroneous.

Mr. FLYNN

Is it not a fact that these are Russian officers on active service, are Russian subjects, and do they not come within the purview of the Anglo-Russian Convention?

Sir E. GREY

No, Sir; I do not see how they do. Perhaps the hon. Member will refer to the Convention and see under what Article they would come.

Mr. H.F.B. LYNCH

May I ask whether as the Nationalists have scrupulously refrained from engaging foreign officers, the right hon. Gentleman will represent to the Russian Government the desirability of withdrawing their officers?

Sir E. GREY

I must confine the action of the Foreign Office as far as possible to British interests.

Mr. GEORGE GOOCH

asked whether the Russian troops now in Persia have been sent exclusively for the protection of the subjects of European Powers; and, if so, why such a large force has been des-patched?

Sir E. GREY

I can add nothing to the explicit declarations of the Russian Government themselves, which have already been made public. I am unable to state what considerations determined the number actually to be sent, or to express any opinion as to the strength of the force which would be necessary to deal with the situation.

Mr. LYNCH

Do not the two Governments who are signatories to the Anglo-Russian Convention consult one another as to these military matters?

Sir E. GREY

I have already stated that communications have passed between the two Governments, who keep each other informed as to the steps they may think it right to take in their own interests, but there is nothing in the Convention that would make one Government responsible for the action of the other. I entirely disclaim any such proposition.

Mr. LYNCH

rose and asked a question which was inaudible——

Mr. SPEAKER

Will the hon. Member kindly speak up, so that he can be heard?

Mr. LYNCH

The question I was about to ask was this: The right hon. Gentleman has told us that the two Governments consult one another as regards the despatch of troops to Persia. May I ask whether, when the Russian Government informed His Majesty's Government of the despatch of these troops, any opinion was expressed by His Majesty's Government as to the adequacy or excess of the force in question over those required for the protection of life and property?

Sir E. GREY

I did not say that the two Governments consulted each other. I said they kept each other informed of the steps that they thought it necessary to take in advance. I expressed no opinion as to the strength of the force required.

Mr. MacNEILL

Are we to understand that so far as Great Britain is concerned Russia has a free hand to do what she likes in Persia?

Sir E. GREY

It is very misleading for the hon. Member to attempt to draw from my answers a general statement of that sweeping kind. Our object is to protect British interests in Persia. When we consider these interests are affected we shall take suitable measures. It is quite unfair to draw from any statement I have made a general statement of that kind, which goes far beyond anything I have said.

Mr. FLYNN

asked the Secretary of State if he can state what is the strength of the Russian force now in Northern Persia; has he seen the statement of the responsible Nationalist leaders that their forces are commanded not to fight unless forced to do so, and their desire to secure a real and not a paper constitution; and what is the justification, under these circumstances, of the military occupation of Northern Persia by the Russian troops?

Sir E. GREY

About 4,000 men are understood to be at Tabriz, and about 1,700 on their way to Kazvin, and about 600 more are distributed at other places in the north of Persia, besides the ordinary Consular guards. The troops are stationed at the various places for the protection of foreign lives and property from the possibility of danger, and are to be withdrawn as soon as that possibility no longer exists. A statement such as that described in the question was addressed from Kazvin to the foreign legations at Tehran, but there have been occasional statements from Nationalist sources of a different character.

Mr. FLYNN

Can the right hon. Gentleman say that this force which has been reinforced to-day is necessary for the sole purpose of the protection of lives and property of non-belligerents in Tehran; and does it not rather point to its being used against the Persian popular forces?

Sir E. GREY

I have already stated twice this afternoon that I am not in a position to express any opinion as to the strength of the force that would be required.

Mr. MacNEILL

Is it not the general policy to make Tehran a little St. Petersburg?

Mr. J. D. REES

Is the Government in a position to decide who are the responsible Nationalist leaders?