The Suez Canal

Issue

;B G

IMFFERENC WE HAVE SOME do

about the news rele: which was published yes day and which carried statement that "vocatio training would be an adv. tage if information of requirements of jobs t would be available was giv children about to lea rchools."

SUITING what material available to requiremen

can be only an expedient. rY:ay lead to the insertion many a square peg in a roun I ole.

ONE may be pardoned, ther fore, for looking askanc

at the theory that vocation 1rining would be an adva tage if information of th requirements of jobs tha would be available was give ,children a b o u t to leav, schools.

WE would be more incline' to agree with the propo

tion that information of th requirements of jobs tha would be available would b useful to children about t leave school.

such a case the informa- tion of requirements of jobs

would enable children about to leave school to determine whether any of those jobs appealed to their imagination and inclination. That would be paving the way for a good start.

AND it is only when such a start is made that one can

expect to get workers: who are really interested in their jobs and who will have a natural pride in what they do —the twins that signify SUC-CESS.

IF he is not to be just anothe drifter on the ocean of Life

a man's work must be a voca tion for him. To discover th -vocation his aptitudes must recognised and develope The requirements of the j must be more related to -h s 'biIity and choice than t e 'her way about.

country cannot progress ii±h mrtdincritvat a 'ore-

Two main issues - control and nationalization - seem to be involved in the Suez Canal crisis.

On the question of control, it seems that Britain has reversed her former - position. The truth is iat for a long time Britain re-

fused to ratify the Convention of 1888 because it feared that the Convention might lead to in-ternational control.

In other words, so long as Britain imposed on Egypt a pup-pet government and an army cf occupation following the de-feat of the Egyptian forces at Alexandria in 1882, it wanted no international control, but firm control in its own hands. B'.t now -hat Egypt, without a foreign army of occupation, is pursuing P vehement anti-colonialistpolicy, Britain and the West want in-ternational control.

The Suez Canal Company is an Egyptian Company, governed by Egyptian law and itherefore as Prime Minister Nehru argued, nationalization is within the

province of the Egyptian Gov- ernment. - President Nasser has promised

to pay compensation to the former shareholders. It should not be forgotten that nationalisation has merely antedated the time by 12 years when the waterway would under the 99 year agreement of 1856, automatically pass over to Egypt. - The Egyptian Government's

share of total profits of the Com- pany is relatively small. For 1955, in direct and indirect rev-enues it obtained only £3,400,000 as compared with Thé - täi 5rbf1t (dividend and reserve) df 16,500,000. If Egyptianxes ere as high as Britain's, Egypt

would have got at least £6 mil-lion more.

For 1955 alone. Britain's share in dividends would be about £2,900,000 after deducting Egypt-ian taxes for 353,404 .thares (out

fa-661800 000 chaies) which vèiê purchased for £3,976,582n 1875. Already by 1928, the Brit-ish Government had been paid back eight times over.

Additionally, the Company has huge reserves, estimated at end of 1954 at £40 million.

S

1'

e S

S

bt se

he al

e at

At the 1919 Peace Conference, the British Government opposed the internationalization of the Canal. A Foreign Affairs Memo-tandum to the British represen-tative at the Conference stated:—

S Other Powers ...w ished to sub- S :titute international for British t -ontrol .... the British Govern- f nent would agree to no form of

international control likely to stand in the way of its lending its independent support to Egypt,

- if the security of the Canal re-quired it. Its policy was to leave to the territorial powers and in the first place to the Egyptian Government the supervision and enforcement of the regulations."

If internationalisation of a major watemay is good in prin- iple. then the same should apply to other such important t "aterways - the Paaama Candi, a which is owned and controlled -xclusively by the U.S.A.; the <ael Canal in Germany, the $traits of Gilbraltar, the Darda-nelles, etc.

What must be remembered in this period of heat and excite- ment is that President Nasser 'c has undertaken to maintain the ° same freedom of transit as ex-isted before nationalization, has rot abrogated the Suez Canal Convention of 1888, which safe- 'tards the'use of the canal by dl nations.

Yours sincerely, - Cheddi Jaga.n. 199 Charlotte St., Georgetown.

''I'' 'DItJlflJ

P. y nc te ot

ti

tI-I

Cl di