§ 43. Mr. Ernest Daviesasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the nature of the reply he has received from the Egyptian Government to the protest delivered on 6th July at the firing on the British steamship "Anshun".
§ Mr. TurtonThe Egyptian Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs has now given Her Majesty's chargé d'affaires at Cairo an interim oral reply to his representations. This begins by expressing regret that a written reply is not yet ready owing to the fact that information about the incident is still being received and scrutinised by the Egyptian authorities.
The Minister said that none of the shots fired was aimed at s.s. "Anshun" and that if she was hit the Egyptian Government deplored it. He recognised that there might have been some confusion regarding signals exchanged between ship and shore. He added that, without prejudice to the investigations now being made, measures would be taken by the Egyptian authorities to review their system of signalling and warning in order to ensure, so far as they can, that no further incidents happen.
Her Majesty's Government do not regard this reply as adequate and will continue to press for a full and proper answer. They have reserved the right to claim compensation and consider that an apology is called for. They have made it clear to the Egyptian Government that incidents of this kind can only damage relations between the two Governments.
§ Mr. DaviesWould not the Joint Under-Secretary agree not only that this reply is quite inadequate but that it is 24 most unsatisfactory? It is not very relevant whether shots were fired at the s.s. "Anshun" or not, but the firing of shots in the channel is quite contrary to international law. Has that been pointed out to the Egyptian Government? Is this matter still on the agenda of the United Nations? If the blockade of the Suez Canal and adjacent waters is not on the agenda, will Her Majesty's Government see that it is placed on it for the next meeting?
§ Mr. TurtonI think that we had better wait. This is an interim reply, and I think that my description and comments upon that reply are sufficient. With regard to the other point—the question whether this action was right under international law—the answer is that the chargé d'affaires did raise the point. We hope very shortly to receive a better, fuller and more final reply from the Egyptian Government.
§ Mr. G. JegerDoes not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it would be a very good policy to ban the export of arms to Egypt until the Egyptians can learn to point them in the proper direction and fire them with their eyes open, knowing at what they are aiming?
§ Mr. TurtonI do not think that that question is relevant to this matter.