The Times of Saturday affirms that Russia is influencing Persia
to harass the new route of our trade, a trade of 2120,000 a year, between Quetta and Meshed, called the " Quetta- Nushki " route, and that Russia desires to extend her railways through Persia to Bandar Abbas, on the Persian Gulf. It therefore solemnly warns the nation that it must decide either to retreat before Russia in Persia, and so lose Persian trade, or to "gird ourselves for fight." We might, it adds, in 1898, by insisting that Persia should borrow in London instead of St. Petersburg, have obtained the control of Persian customs, which are now in Russian hands. This advice is repeated on all kinds of occasions, from all kinds of quarters, and seems to us hopelessly unsound. Russian goods cannot be sent to India by the " Quetta-Nushki " or any other route without Russians taking Indian goods in return, and if trade is developed, what does the route -matter ? As to Bandar Abbas, if the Russians can turn that place asm railway terminus into an important port they must improve our trade, and, moreover, offer us an important port as hostage for their own conduct. Russia once on the open water is assailable, which she is not now. If we were going to conquer Persia it would be different, but as we are not, we are simply, in resisting Russian development of Persian resources, playing the old part of dog-in-the-manger, the very part which makes Russians so hostile to our policy. As we point out elsewhere, our policy towards Russia and Persia is certain to end in humiliation if it is to be governed by a timorous jealousy.
Previous page
