CHAPTER XIX
AN INTERVIEW WITH THE GHAZI MUSTAPHA KEMAL PASHA
The Ghazi M. Kemal Pasha granted me the following interview just after the conference at Lausanne had assembled.
“To what extent, if any, has the attitude of the Grand National Assembly been responsible for setting public opinion against the Turks?” I asked.
“Our attitude has never changed. All reports of inconsistency are false, and circulated by the clever propaganda of our enemies. The Government has to render account of itself not only to a Chamber of Deputies, but to History; and no responsible or self-respecting Ministry could act with such disloyalty to its own principles, the very spirit of its being, as the Press has accused it of revealing. All these false reports come from those Englishmen, some of them official, who are working to prolong the war, a crime no one can lay on our shoulders. You know of the untiring efforts we made for peace, and you know the result. In any case, though personally accused, I am not responsible. I am only President of the Assembly. The Assembly is not one man.”
“Do you think that a really sincere entente can be established between Turkey and Great Britain?”
“I do not think, I am certain, that we shall eventually return to the old traditional friendship. There are no reasons against, and so many in favour of, that course. We make no demands beyond respect and honour for our independence. We have sent away our Sultan to secure greater freedom, and to prevent all risk of danger to our independence.”
“Do you think that the Conference will produce good results?”
“Eventually there can be no doubt that, however heated and however prolonged the discussions, it will bring peace. Unfortunately, we cannot wait for ever: The Powers should recognise now, what they must ultimately admit, that we could not accept terms which would deny us that liberty for which we have sacrificed so much and fought with such stern resolve.
“For every reason, we desire peace; a settlement that will enable us to get on with the vital work of reconstruction. Details must take time, but the essential question should have been arranged before this.”
“The papers accuse Angora of arrogance and zenophobia,” I reminded him.
“The charge is invented for propaganda. Is it arrogant to stand out for our just and logical rights ? Of ‘zenophobia’ I know nothing! My whole life, in every action, is proof that I do not hate Europe. I never fought for hate, but to save the truth. The same inspiration guides and controls our politics.
“I could never myself keep on hating a nation for the mistakes of its Government. I fought against the Bulgarians, who are my greatest friends to-day.
“And towards the Greeks I feel the same. I am confident that we shall soon be great friends, friends as we were before the Powers intervened. As they were led away by false flatterers, they will be the first to see their mistake and repent.”
“Have you banished the Christians, or are they leaving Anatolia in mere panic?”
“We have taken no steps in this matter, but left them absolutely free, to go or stay. They have been terrified by propaganda, largely American, directed by religious animosities. While they followed the Greek army in thousands, and are still flying, many others are coming back. To-day you can see two long streams of refugees among us, one leaving, the other returning. They know that all Christians, whether our own subjects or foreigners, will always enjoy, as they have always enjoyed, the full liberties accorded them in every civilised country.”
“Are you satisfied with the situation in Constantinople?”
“We shall keep faith to the promise we made at Moudania. Meanwhile it is unnatural to see foreign troops in Constantinople, and they should be taken away as soon as possible. Their presence involves abnormal conditions, which have made it necessary for us to administer that villayet from the Assembly at Angora—an indignity which should not be prolonged.
“While conversations are maintained in Lausanne, and since everyone knows we must keep Constantinople, the Powers should not insist on the armed guarantee.”
“Do you congratulate us on having secured a Conservative Government?”
“It is early days, surely, to speak! If they will help us to friendly relations with England and the other Powers, that is all we ask. Your parties are not our business. We are, generally speaking, against all policies of expansion, because they lead nations into the abyss; and, in our judgment, such policies are impolitic.”
“What are your views on the Freedom of the Straits?”
“Like the delegates at Lausanne, we want real freedom, not freedom in the hands of one Power. We are ready to discuss the problem with all who have any interests in that quarter. There can be no freedom till Constantinople and the Sea of Marmora are secure.
“We must have national frontiers; that is, all territories peopled by Turks. We accept for boundaries or limit the enemy-lines as they were when the Armistice was signed. Is that an unreasonable claim in return for all we have given up from the old Ottoman Empire?
GENERAL ISMET PASHA.
Minister for Foreign Affairs.
First Turkish Delegate at the Lausanne Peace Conference.
p. 176
“Towards ‘minorities’ we stand by the National Pact, confirmed by the recent Treaty with France, signed at Angora. We are fully prepared, nay anxious, to recognise all such rights as have been given to minorities in the different treaties between the Powers—since the war. It must, however, be clearly understood that foreign control, inconsistent with the absolute independence we demand, is impossible.
“Nor can we grant any special privileges for Capitulations to the subjects of foreign nations who may choose to live in Turkey. They are welcome to precisely the same rights as our own subjects enjoy, but we will never recognise any such privileges to foreigners as are unknown, for instance, in France, England, or America. Those who would still challenge our claim to the complete independence that we are determined to secure will have to find means to exterminate all Turks now inspired by that ideal. But I am confident that such a slaughter would not be permitted by the civilised world. Civilisation, on the contrary, will soon learn that our Turkey has her place in the future. She will help, and not hinder, civilisation. Civilisation must, therefore, be interested in, and support, her independence.”
On December 22nd, the Morning Post printed the following leading article about this interview:
The interview which Mustapha Kemal Pasha has given our Correspondent emphasises the one supreme result so far reached at Lausanne, namely, that the new rulers of Turkey are willing and indeed anxious to resume friendly relations with this country. The compromise which is apparently on the point of being reached at Lausanne concerning the Straits and the demilitarised zones may not survive the touch of reality and the sharp breath of war. But that is no reason why we should deplore or despise such a settlement, for it is at least a sign of goodwill, an offer on the part of Turkey to come to an agreement with the Western Powers, who, by the strange irony of fate, are the real friends of Turkey and yet were forced in the Great War to call themselves her enemies. The Lausanne Conference has dealt with and perhaps settled the Thracian boundaries, the protection of minorities, and the guardianship of the Straits, and there remains for it now to secure an agreement regarding the capitulations, the Patriarchate, and the future of Mosul. But the real importance of Lausanne lies in the fact that the world now realises that Kemalist Turkey is not the cat’s-paw of Bolshevist Russia, that the Turkish Nationalists did not defeat one invader in order to put themselves at the mercy of another, and that the ambitious plan of Moscow for using Turkey as a pawn in the great game of destroying British dominion in the East is in all probability doomed to failure. It is too early yet to say that the Bolshevicks have been outwitted, but both in their silences and their speeches there are evidences of chagrin. They have found out that Lausanne is not Genoa and that, if we may thus describe him, Curzon libre is a very different person from Curzon enchaîné. Chicherin had his Rapallo. Perhaps it was his final triumph.
Kemal, in his interview, said: “I am certain we shall eventually return to the traditional friendship between Turkey and Britain. I can see no obstacle thereto.” With the fall of the Coalition Government, the last obstacle has gone. Lord Curzon has been firm with the Turks, but not venomous, frank but not insulting. He can afford to leave rude harangues and offensive imprecations to the congress of fallen angels now assembling at Algeciras. Indeed, all the declarations of the Foreign Secretary go to show that he is sincerely anxious to reach a durable and friendly settlement with the emissaries of Angora, and that if he is determined to uphold the rights of the British, he is equally ready to acknowledge the independence of the Turkish Empire. We are glad to see that Kemal is anxious to reciprocate, and therein he shows himself to be not only a soldier but a statesman. For his task is not yet ended; indeed it is only beginning. He has saved his country from the Greek; he must now save it from the moth and rust of economic decay. In that great task he will find Great Britain his best friend. Fethi Bey has doubtless made it clear to him how much Europe can contribute to the economic reconstruction of Turkey, and a recent statement of Mr. Morgenthau should convince him that the United States will be a reluctant and difficult lender. In the long run he has to choose between free co-operation with Great Britain and an enslavement at the mercy of Bolshevist Russia. He seems already to have chosen the better course; for the sake of his country, and ours, we hope and believe that he will persist in it.