§ THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY had given Notice that he would call attention to the decision of the Council of the League of Nations on July 4 that the proposed settlement of the Assyrian people in the Ghab area within the French mandated territory of Syria must be abandoned; ask His Majesty's Government for information as to the present position of the Assyrian people and as to the future prospects of their settlement elsewhere; and move for Papers.
§ The most reverend Primate said: My Lords, it is little more than four months since I brought the question of the Assyrian people to your Lordships' attention. I had hoped it would never be necessary to do so again, but I regret that circumstances have made this a necessity and that I am compelled once more to bring the position of this ancient and sorely-tried people to the attention of your Lordships' House, of the Government and, so far as may be, of the country. I need not now repeat the history of the Assyrian Church and nation or emphasise the claim which they have upon the sympathy and, I would add, the gratitude of this country, or the obligation which lies upon us to do all we can for their welfare. It is quite needless now to remind your Lordships of that past history, of the assistance which the Assyrians gave to us and to our Allies in the time of war, of the most brave and admirable service which their levies rendered when we had the Mandate for the Kingdom of Iraq, of the surrender of that Mandate by this country, and of the resultant deplorable massacre of hundreds of these people by the regular and irregular troops of the Iraqi Government.
§ These last events made it obvious, and the League of Nations was convinced, 289 that it was impossible for these unhappy people to remain any longer in Iraq. The result was that continuous endeavours were made to find some other home for them elsewhere. A friendly and final solution of the problem seemed to have been found, as was mentioned on the last occasion on which this matter came before your Lordships' House. There was a district known as the Ghab area on the banks of the River Orontes within the French mandated territory of Syria. An expert pronounced most favourably upon its suitability as a place where the Assyrians could live and where they could cultivate their crops and maintain their herds. The Council of the League of Nations approved; a Trustee Board under the League was appointed immediately to proceed to carry out the scheme. The financial obligations, which were large, were to be met by the promise of substantial contributions from the French Government, from the Iraqi Government and from the British Government. In the case of the last two Governments, these promises amounted in each case to £250,000. The League itself took the unusual step of offering a subscription from itself of £80,000.
§ There was every hope that this settlement would be at once begun. It brought an immense relief that, at last, it seemed that this long-tried people had found a permanent and suitable home. At the request of the League of Nations, and with the support of His Majesty's Government, your Lordships may remember that I undertook to issue a national appeal to supplement what had been given by the League of Nations and promised by the Governments. I at once proceeded to fulfil that undertaking. The appeal was launched at a remarkably successful and impressive meeting at the Mansion House, which was addressed by Mr. Eden, the Secretary of State, and by Sir Samuel Hoare. A Committee was at once appointed with Mr. Amery as its Chairman, and it began its work. Alas! all these hopes have now been dashed to the ground.
§ A letter was received from the French Foreign Office by the Council of the League of Nations on June 23, which stated that very serious difficulties had arisen and that it was more than doubtful whether they could continue their support of this scheme. On June 30 a 290 further and fuller declaration was made by the French representative to the Committee of the League. In this declaration it was plainly stated that it was impossible for the French Government to proceed with the scheme. Technical difficulties, of course, were alleged—difficulties as regards the finance of the scheme, as regards the acquisition of land, and as regards the delays which would probably be longer than had been anticipated. No doubt there was some substance in these difficulties, but it is admitted that in a short time they might have been overcome. There was no concealment of the fact that the real difficulties were not economic, but political. That was a fact definitely stated in the letter from the French Foreign Office and in the French declaration.
§
I will trouble your Lordships with a brief quotation from that declaration of the French representative where he says:
The technical difficulties would not, of course, be in any way affected; those that have made themselves felt since the beginning of the work, and which are essentially duo to causes independent of human diligence, can no doubt be overcome. The political difficulties, however, would appear in all their force under the new conditions; indeed, they would grow more proportionately acute with the withdrawal of the salutary barrier constituted by the care of a Government determined to pursue objectively the true interest of the country and to secure a harmonious balance between them. For these reasons the French Government considers that what seems likely to be the increased pace of the political development may henceforth prevent the effective execution of a scheme which, though difficult—indeed, risky—from a technical point of view, was well worth undertaking in view of the great and lasting advantages it would bring to the areas involved and at the same time to the Assyrian tribes ….
The letter from the French Foreign Office of June 23 was practically in the same terms.
§ I think the reasons of these political difficulties are well known. The Government will correct me if I wrongly interpret them. The disturbances in Syria last February were due, of course, to the increased activity of Syrian Nationalists, sharing in that outbreak of nationalist feeling which is now characterising the whole of the East. This led the French Government, and rather especially the new French Government, to contemplate much sooner than it had 291 originally contemplated the surrender of their Mandate to a national State. There was the precedent always before their eyes of our own surrender of our Mandate in the kingdom of Iraq to a national State in that country. It was plain that any settlement of the Assyrians within that area, and any jurisdiction or influence of an outside body like the League of Nations, would be bitterly resented by the Syrian Nationalists, and, as the French Government appeared to contemplate within a very short time the surrender of their Mandate to these Syrian Nationalists, that Government, to quote their own words, "cannot see their way to lay so heavy a mortgage on the inheritance that she bequeathes." It is not for me to criticise or even comment upon the policy of the French Government. That is a matter of their own responsibility, but I think it is permissible to say that they might at an earlier stage have intimated that these political difficulties were likely to arise. But there is no good purpose now in offering criticisms of that kind. The decision which they have reached must, I fear, be accepted. This was the conclusion of the League of Nations. On July 4 they received and debated a full report by their Committee, and the Committee recommended that the plan of settlement in the Ghab area must be definitely abandoned.
§ It is needless to emphasise that this decision brings with it a most bitter disappointment. It brings disappointment to the young Patriarch of the Assyrians, Mar Shimun, who now realises that all his hopes, which seemed to have so strong a foundation, are shattered, and the prospects which seemed so bright of at last finding a home for his people have been blotted out. It is a bitter disappointment to all the friends of the Assyrians in this country, and perhaps your Lordships will permit me to add not least to me personally who have for years had the burden of solicitude for these people upon my shoulders. I know that this disappointment is shared by His Majesty's Government. The Secretary of State expressed this clearly at the Council of the League. But there is one other man to whom I know it must bring an even greater disappointment, and whom I wish to mention in this connection with the greatest respect and gratitude, and that is Senor Lopez Olivan, 292 the present representative of Spain in this country. He has worked indefatigably for the cause of the Assyrians. He has visited Iraq, he has superintended and encouraged every possible scheme for finding a home for the Assyrians, and now he finds that all his efforts so far have been in vain. It is perhaps permissible for me to add to this sympathy with Senor Olivan in this matter our sympathy with him in the grievous and anxious troubles of his own country. I am very glad to know—I think I have been rightly informed—that in spite of the change of his position, and in spite of all these troubles Senor Olivan is willing to continue the work that he has done for the Assyrians in the League of Nations.
§ It is quite useless to conceal the fact of this deep and grievous disappointment. Out of it two urgent questions arise, and I hope that the noble Earl, who, I understand, is to speak for the Government, may be able to throw some light upon them. The first, of course, is the present position of these harassed people. In the first place there are those who are left in Iraq at the present time. I am informed that out of about 21,500 people 14,600 are determined to leave at all costs and about 7,000 are still doubtful. I trust that we can rely upon the Iraqi Government to take every necessary measure to give security and to promote the welfare of these people who are now necessarily, I hope only for a short time, left in that country. I would associate myself, and I think with confidence, with the hope expressed by the Council of the League, that during this anxious time the Assyrians who are left in Iraq will refrain from any action which might give cause for complaint regarding their conduct. Then, in the second place, there are the Assyrians already settled in large numbers and with the full consent of the Iraqi and Syrian Governments in the area of the Upper Khabur valley. At the end of 1935 nearly 6,000 Assyrians were settled there. It was agreed that 2,500 more should at once proceed from Iraq to the Khabur. I think 2,000 have already crossed and it was expected that the remaining 500 would cross by the end of September.
§ I was reading only yesterday a letter from a former officer of the Assyrian levies, to whom this country is so deeply indebted, describing his arrival in this region and the impression he formed. It 293 was an extraordinarily hopeful letter. He described in the most roseate language the way in which these people were settling down to the cultivation of their crops, and there seemed to him as he wrote every prospect of even this part of the settlement proving to be more successful than was supposed. What is to be the position of these people? I cannot think that they will have to be disturbed and sent back. I think the consequences of that would be unfortunate, if not disastrous. Yet their position is necessarily a precarious one. They are on the borders of the Iraqi and of the Turkish Governments, they are surrounded by many hostile tribes, and what I would like to secure from His Majesty's Government this afternoon is the assurance that they will make every endeavour possible to secure the protection of these people as long as they remain where they are. I would suggest that the present friendly relations between this Government and the Turkish Government furnish a very happy opportunity for obtaining some such assurance. Certainly we cannot bear to think that these 9,000 people should now be uprooted, at least until some new home for the whole people has been found.
§
The second urgent question then, is, what is to be the future of these sorely tried people? We cannot possibly, in any mood, however natural, of cynical impatience or weariness, leave them to their fate. The Council of the League has instructed its Committee to continue its efforts, to undertake a general study of the situation and to inform the Council, if possible in September, whether any settlement is practicable. The Secretary of State expressed determination so far as the British Government are concerned to continue their efforts. It may be perhaps permissible to quote his actual words:
We must concentrate on the future and on making yet another effort to find a lasting and satisfactory solution of what has rightly been referred to as a 'work of appeasement and humanity.' In the opinion of His Majesty's Government the solution of this problem can only be found through the League on a collective basis, but the necessity for such a solution remains as urgent as ever in the interests both of the peace and tranquillity of the Middle East and of affording to an ancient and sorely tried people, the victims of the World War, the opportunity to make a new start in the best possible conditions. I need hardly add that His Majesty's Government in the
294
United Kingdom will continue their close collaboration with the Committee and will spare no effort to give it every assistance which lies in their power.
I earnestly hope that we may receive an equally clear assurance from the noble Earl to-day. Indeed, I would go further and hope that he may assure us that the Government will not only act as a Member of the League of Nations but will feel that they must take a leading place in the work of the League. I trust that we may hear that inquiries will at once be made of the authorities of our Dominions and Dependencies as to whether within the sphere of our Empire it may not be possible for us to have the privilege of finding a lasting home for the Assyrians.
§ So far as my own appeal is concerned, it must of course remain in suspense until the future is more secure. The Committee are eager and ready to continue their work and are relying upon what the Government may say this afternoon as to their future action, in the hope that they may be encouraged to continue their efforts. What I dread is that in the present confused, restless situation in the world, with anxious and insistent problems pressing in on every side, there may be a disposition to say that really at this present time we cannot any longer be troubled with the tiresome affairs of this little community. The obligations of honour cannot be limited by the number or importance of the persons who make a claim upon those obligations. It has always been the boast of this country that whenever any of its own nationals are in trouble they are entitled to the protection of their own country. It cannot be maintained, of course, that these Assyrians are in any sense our nationals, but equally it cannot be denied that we have a most real and special measure of responsibility for them. I submit that we cannot in this country, without dishonour, either belittle the reality of that responsibility or refuse to make every possible effort even now to secure for these unhappy people a haven where they may at last live in security and peace.
§ LORD LLOYDMy Lords, I am indebted to the courtesy of the noble Lord who leads the Opposition for allowing me to precede him as I have to leave the House presently. I want to say only a very few words to reinforce the most eloquent and comprehensive plea which 295 the most reverend Primate has made on behalf of this unhappy community. I did not know until five minutes ago that this question was being raised at this moment in your Lordships' House. It is unnecessary for me to remind your Lordships of the support which the Assyrians gave us in the War, the wonderful work which they did for us after the War, the loyalty of their levies, or the value of this community not only to us but to any country which has the good fortune to enlist their services and their affections. They have had, as the most reverend Primate told us, almost the most tragic history in recent years of any of the unfortunate peoples left adrift out of the storm of the Great War. The most recent troubles they have been in on account of the difficulties of the Mandated Power in Syria are not the least of the disappointments they have suffered.
I have had opportunities both in their country and outside it for many years of following their destinies, and it so happens that recently I have again been in Turkey and have had an opportunity personally of observing with great happiness the improved relations between ourselves and our old Allies, the Turks. I have also had an opportunity of conversation with the distinguished head of that Government on this and several other questions. Whilst for several years past it has been difficult for some of us to understand the full nature of the difficulties which seemed to prevent the Turkish Government accepting the settlement of the Assyrians, yet to-day I feel very much encouraged by what the most reverend Primate has hinted to us about our improved relations with the Turkish Government and their known desire to help the Assyrians if so be they can do so with justice to their own nationals. I hope that His Majesty's Government can be persuaded to reopen the question of the settlement of the Assyrians in the Hakkiari area, an area, I should remind your Lordships, which is entirely suitable in every way: it is very nearly empty to-day and its peacefulness, though perhaps new, is now complete.
It seems to me that that would be the best solution. It always would have been the best solution: that area of Hakkiari is their own country and their own climate, and they will be among their own peoples. I have 296 always hated the idea that this splendid community should be given to any other people. I have indeed wished we could have retained them ourselves. But here is a community—I vouch for it—who will be as loyal to a civilised and reformed Turkish Government as they would be to any other government. They will be a source of no difficulty. On the contrary, the Assyrians will be a source of as great strength to the Turkish Government as they would have been to the French Government if they had been able to go into French territory. I hope that His Majesty's Government will not tire in their representations to the Turkish Government but will once again take up the question of the Hakkiari area, and that the most reverend Primate's noble and eloquent appeal will find a successful issue in that solution.
§ LORD MARLEYMy Lords, I desire to intervene for a moment or two only. It is not always my fortune to find myself almost exactly in line with the most reverend Primate, but on this occasion I can unhesitatingly support the appeal he has made. Hoping that he will not take amiss this word from me, I will venture to exhort him to greater faith in this matter. I think he was extremely pessimistic in his outlook. I believe that the point of view put by the noble Lord, Lord Lloyd, is a very hopeful line of advance, and I venture to suggest that there are other hopeful lines that might be pursued by the representatives of the Government, with the most reverend Primate's immense influence and support, when the matter is being considered as a whole.
In the first place I want to suggest that we have not explored the possibilities of settlement in Iran. I noticed, when this matter was discussed in connection with the Armenians at the League of Nations in, I think, 1928, the then Persian representative who spoke on that occasion pointed out that Persia had helped enormously in connection with the settlement of the Armenians, and indicated that they had always found a refuge there and had lived happily and prosperously. As the northern part of Iran is so close to the Mosul area, where the Assyrians with whom we are concerned are situated, and as there are chances of industrial development on the shores of the Caspian which might demand an increase of settlement, it 297 would be to the advantage of the Iran Government if that line were pursued. In this connection, I had considerable dealings with the Iran Government in connection with the settlement of a certain number of German refugees. I found that Government most helpful, and eventually a considerable number of these refugees—admittedly specialists—were accepted by the Persian Government and are now occupying various positions in that country. Possibly that line might be worth pursuing in addition to the suggestion of the noble Lord, Lord Lloyd, and of the most reverend Primate, that we should exploit the increased friendship between this country and the Turkish Government in an effort to make possible better treatment for the Assyrians.
I want to dwell for a moment upon another point. To us the problem is a comparatively small one when we consider the terrific problem of the Armenians in the past. While, of course, it is true that several millions of them, or however many it may have been, were massacred, which is unfortunate, nevertheless the settlement of the remaining Armenians offers great hope if we try to explore the same sort of line and the same type of avenue. Let me remind your Lordships that, so far as the Armenians were concerned, all hope was abandoned in 1922 when the late Lord Curzon—speaking in this House, I think, though I am not certain—said that the proposal to settle the Armenians in Erivan was quite hopeless because Erivan was utterly poverty-stricken and already overstocked. The League of Nations, however, did not give up hope, and the following year they reopened this project and appointed Dr. Nansen to examine the possibilities of Erivan. Dr. Nansen came back and pointed out that with the irrigation of the Sardarabad area it would be possible to settle 50,000 of these people. He could not, however, raise the money.
I think appeals were launched in practically every country, and in this country the Lord Mayor's Armenian appeal was, broadly speaking, a complete failure as far as Erivan was concerned. The British Government at that time were not prepared to accept the guarantee by the Erivan Government of the principal and interest on loans, and explained that they were not prepared to put any money into 298 this irrigation scheme of Dr. Nansen's because they had already given so much money to the Armenian problem elsewhere. As the result of this action the whole business came to an end, and we became as hopeless concerning the Armenians as we are perhaps feeling now as regards the Assyrians. But what happened? In 1928 complete hopelessness; nothing could be done, nobody had any idea, nobody could make a single suggestion. Yet four years later we found that, after the peoples of the world had failed to contribute any money to this great scheme, the Erivan Soviet Government themselves adopted the recommendations of Dr. Nansen and Sir Murdoch Macdonald, who had been out to report on the scheme; carried out the whole work on their own, and settled in that area without any further question more than 20,000 Armenians.
This was a most remarkable development, renewed hope arising suddenly out of hopelessness all over the world. In 1932 no less than 8,000 were settled, and the number reached the total of 20,000 by 1934. The story is extraordinary. The Erivan Government took charge of these people from the moment they landed in Batoum, gave them free railway passes up the Sardarabad valley, let them in without any Customs duties, exempted them from military service and gave them free land. The Greek Government paid the cost of transport across the Black Sea for most of them, and, although the Bulgarian Government were unable to help, private enterprise in Bulgaria and elsewhere came to the rescue and provided clothing and the necessary doctors' services. These people are now settled. Moreover, the matter is not concluded, because only on May 9 this year nearly another 2,000 of them left Marseilles, arriving in Erivan three weeks later. And, oddly enough, The Times correspondent, who visited Erivan a few days ago, writing in The Times on the 21st of this month, pointed out that he had seen these newly repatriated Armenians, whole families, who had been refugees in Greece and France, building their own flats, running their own silk factories, and constructing their own canals from the central canal built by the Government, and boasting that next year they would have canals and silk factories twice as big. In other words, out of the utter hopelessness of the position a few 299 years ago there had emerged this successful and hopeful scheme.
In Erivan there are not only Armenians but some Syrians, and I wonder if it might not be possible, considering the limited extent of the problem—considering how few are these people—that we should try to make easier the settlement by dividing the problem among different areas. If we got Erivan to take a few, and Iran to take a few, and if by agreement with the Turkish Government we could get a settlement for the remainder, the problem would then become of much more manageable proportions. I hope therefore that the most reverend Primate will not close down his efforts but will continue the good fight—for it is a good fight—and not only bring pressure to bear on our representatives at Geneva but, through them, on Geneva itself, so that the office may seek with renewed hope these new possibilities, and bring us to as successful a solution for the Assyrians as that which we so largely owe to the Soviet Government in regard to the Armenian problem.
§ THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (EARL STANHOPE)My Lords, I too shared with the most reverend Primate the hope that when we discussed this matter in February last it would probably be one of the last debates that we should have on the subject. The only expectation I had of any further debate was that the most reverend Primate might at intervals ask for a progress report, and that a satisfactory reply would be possible on behalf of His Majesty's Government. Unfortunately, our hopes have been dashed, as he said. I know how bitter a disappointment it is to him after the hard work that he has done, and no less so to members of His Majesty's Government, to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State, and, I might even add, to myself, who has had some share, however small, in this question. In particular I would like to associate myself with what he said with regard to Senor Olivan, who as President of the Assyrian Committee has worked so strenuously on this question. I understand that Senor Olivan will continue in his present position with regard to that question, and it is a matter of congratulation, because we know how much he has the subject at 300 heart. It will be satisfactory to know that his duties as Ambassador here will not prevent him from continuing this work in the future.
As the most reverend Primate knows, I cannot go so far as he goes with regard to the obligations of this country towards the Assyrians. As I said before, we had many allies in the last War, of which the Assyrians were one portion, and if we are going to have such obligations as the most reverend Primate suggests in regard to every one of those allies our obligations will tend to become overwhelming. We, of course, attempted to assist the Assyrians after the breakdown of the Russian front, and we have spent several millions in an endeavour to put them on their feet. We also, partly for our own protection and partly to assist them, put, some of them in the levies that we raised in Iraq. Although I entirely agree with what was said by Lord Lloyd with regard to the services which they have rendered in Iraq, I do not want to say that our obligations in that connection are more than those of very sincere friendship for this small people, or that we should feel that we have obligations which transcend the obligations which we owe in other parts of the world.
The most reverend Primate was wrong, I think, in one small detail which he gave, and that was with regard to the time when it was proposed to give up the French Mandate in Syria. It was not the present French Government but their predecessors, the Sarraut Government, who proposed that, and, as the most reverend Primate said, of course, the circumstances came to a head with tremendous rapidity, as happens in Eastern affairs. There was the strong nationalist sentiment which began to arise. When the matter was discussed in this House on February 11 the French Government and the League Committee, and therefore of course the British Government, had reason to believe that the French Mandate was going to continue for a considerable period—the French Government thought for at least five years. That would have got us through a great part of our difficulties—particularly the question of getting hold of temporary land on which we hoped to place the Assyrians while the big engineering works in the Ghab Valley were being 301 carried through and completed. We hoped to get 8,500 hectares of land for a period of five years for a total rent of 450,000 French francs. When nationalist sentiment began to pile up and come to a head—I speak from what I heard from representatives of the French Government at Geneva at the beginning of this month—others came forward to redeem mortgaged land, and the whole situation was completely changed. At one moment the League Committee was faced with the position of having to try to find accommodation for these people on 300 hectares of land. The best the League Committee could do was to receive promises for only 4,000 hectares of land, but at a price which was more than three times as great as that suggested for the original area. Of course the whole of the budget for the transfer of the Assyrians from Iraq was thereby rendered much more difficult.
But, as the most reverend Primate quite rightly pointed out, it was not the financial difficulty, or the engineering difficulties or the like, which have brought the scheme to an end. It was solely the political difficulty. The French said that if they had been holding the Mandate for the whole period when the settlement was being made, then they could have controlled the whole situation, they could have got the engineering works finished, and the Assyrians put on temporary land pending settlement in their permanent home. They could have got them established and in the position of being taxpayers and assets to the area, in which case no Government would have felt inclined to break up that asset and bring it to an end.
On March 1 the French High Commissioner announced publicly that the French Government were prepared to consider forthwith the conclusion of a Franco-Syrian Treaty on the lines of our Treaty with Iraq in 1930. That was almost immediately followed by representatives of the Syrians going to Paris to discuss with the present French Government a plan for setting up self-government by the Arabs in that area. And in the talk that I had at Geneva at the beginning of this month a representative of the French Government described to me how the country was going to be divided into three portions, and how the Arab delegation in Paris, who of course had no authority from anybody in Syria to 302 form a Government, would return to Syria, hold an election, as a result of which a Government would be formed, and proceed to draw up a treaty, which would be signed. Although of course there would be some inevitable delay in bringing that to a conclusion, it is quite obvious that the French control over that territory would last a very great deal less than five years. That being so, the French Government, as we think with great frankness, came forward at the Committee of the Council and said that they really felt that under the new conditions they could not think that there was any real chance of success if the Ghab scheme were proceeded with.
The present situation is that the Committee has been requested by the Council of the League to continue its work, and the Committee has definitely decided to do so. Our view is that, although this is a very serious set-back, it is a check and not an abandonment of the whole scheme. His Majesty's Government feel—and I think the Council of the League still feel—that the situation cannot be allowed to rest where it is. We have to make a real effort to settle these unfortunate people in some area other than Iraq. It has been suggested, I think by the noble Lord opposite, that we might consider further the question of Iraq, but the difficulty there is, as he knows, that there was very serious trouble some two years ago, and therefore neither the Syrians nor the Iraqis look with any friendly eye on the Assyrians continuing in that country.
As regards those who are left there, I think I can assure the most reverend Primate that we can be fairly satisfied with the situation at the present moment. As he knows, the Iraqi representative at the Council of the League gave a definite pledge in that respect. He used these words:
It is needless to repeat what my predecessors have always asserted, that until such a satisfactory solution has been found the Assyrians in Iraq will continue to enjoy full security, and will find the Government as concerned about their wellbeing as it has ever been.Both His Majesty's Government and the League Council have every hope and belief that that pledge will be most faithfully observed. As regards the Assyrians in the Khabur area, to which the most reverend Primate also referred, I was rather puzzled about his reference to an appeal from this country to Turkey 303 because, as he knows, the Khabur area is in Syria.
§ EARL STANHOPEYes, it is on the borders of Turkey, but it is quite definitely in Syrian territory, and therefore, unless there was some actual aggression on the part of Turkey, the matter of course would not arise. I know what the most reverend Primate was referring to. The Turks have raised an objection to having Assyrians close to their borders, and so also have the Iraqis, but I hope that the situation now is not quite so serious as it was in that respect. There is every reason to believe that objection will not be raised to the Assyrians remaining in that area, at any rate until some other is found. The suggestion made by the noble Lord opposite that we might get this difficulty more reasonably settled if we were able to divide up the Assyrians is one with which I entirely agree, but unfortunately it is one with which the Assyrians entirely disagree. They insist upon being kept together, if possible, as one people, and the one thing that they would object to more than anything else would be to being divided into packets amongst various countries. I think it may well be possible that with the more friendly feeling that Turkey is showing towards other peoples, and in particular with her friendship to this country, possibilities now arise which would have been quite out of the question a few years ago.
My noble friend Lord Lloyd spoke about the possibility of the Hakkiari area being reconsidered, and I entirely agree with him that in many ways that would be the most suitable if it is possible. It is not very far from the mountainous country in which those Assyrians who have left the question as to whether they should remain inside Iraq or not to their tribal chiefs, are at present living. These tribal chiefs, we understand, are rather opposed to moving from their present areas in the extreme north of Iraq, and therefore if the remainder of the Assyrians did succeed in finding a home in the Hakkiari area it would perhaps be not so far distant as to cause any grave doubts among the Assyrians as a whole that they would be split up and divided into fractions. That is a matter which the Committee of the Council will have to consider, as also 304 the possibility of placing them in and around Erivan. We have really to comb the world for suitable sites, and they are not so very easy to find. These are a people accustomed to a mountainous area. They probably would not thrive in a tropical area such as that of which a large part of our Empire consists. They are very fine soldiers but do not get on with everybody. Altogether it is not a very easy question.
As regards numbers, as the most reverend Primate said 2,000 further Assyrians have moved into the Khabur area, making a total now of 8,000, and there are the further 500 of which he spoke, which are coming over with their flocks and herds round about the month of September—because that is the best time for driving the herds over the desert. That will make a total of 8,500. Apart from them there are about 12,000 who have opted to move to the Ghab area and these 7,500 of whom I have already spoken who left the question of transfer to the heads of their tribes. Whether there would be as many as 12,000 or more than 12,000 if it were some other area than the Ghab it is impossible to say. But I understand that very few people among the Assyrians opted to remain in Iraq, apart from those 7,500, and therefore it could not be very much more than 20,000 if some other home were found. The situation is eased in Iraq because those who have already moved to the Khabur area were those who were most indigent, and who were the unemployed among the Assyrians. Those who are left behind are somewhat more prosperous, and that has made the situation easier in Iraq.
The most reverend Primate asked that we should take the lead on the Assyrian Committee. He will not dispute my remark that perhaps we have taken the lead throughout. I know that those who represent us on that Committee have worked extraordinarily hard, particularly so at the beginning of this month, and we have not the smallest intention of doing any less in the future than we have done in the past. I am afraid I cannot go further than that because, as the most reverend Primate knows so well, these matters are still under consideration. There are many problems in front of the Committee. I can only say that His Majesty's Government are most anxious that a satisfactory solution shall be found. Although we fully appreciate the necessity at this 305 moment of holding up the appeal which the most reverend Primate was so good as to make, we hope it will not be closed down, because I have every belief that some satisfactory place will be found and I am afraid that money will be necessary from private sources in the future as it has been in the past. I have no Papers to lay, but I hope I have answered the most reverend Primate's questions.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYMy Lords, may I say first of all how grateful I am to the noble Lord opposite for the generous and sympathetic speech which he made about these people? I think the only misreading of their feelings that he made was the one to which the noble Earl has alluded—namely, the great desire of this community, for special historical reasons, to remain as far as possible in the unity of their one headship and one religious allegiance. That is what makes it difficult merely to scatter them about in one place or another. I am very grateful to the noble Earl for what he has been good enough to say. I have no doubt of his own interest in the matter nor indeed of the interest of His Majesty's Government, and I am very glad to hear that they will make every effort to find a solution. I noted that he did not rule out as quite hopeless the possibility of negotiating about the recovery of Hakkiari as a possible area. That is a sign of hopefulness which I cherish, though I am not quite so hopeless as the noble Lord opposite seemed to think. I did not want to appear to be too hopeful lest His Majesty's Government should be too remiss, but as we have heard from the noble Earl that the Government and the Council of the League of Nations will, so to say, comb the world till they have found some place for the Assyrians, I am very grateful and certainly have no intention to press my Motion for Papers.
§ Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.