Al-Ahram: A Diwan of contemporary life (638)

The ambassador

In 1937 Hafiz Afifi became Egypt's first ambassador when he was selected envoy to London. Professor Yunan Labib Rizk describes what the post entailed

---

Hafiz Afifi

With the 28 February 1922 declaration, the British government recognised Egypt as an "independent sovereign state," yet with four well-known stipulations. These were securing the empire's transit, defending Egypt from all forms of aggression, protecting foreign interests and minorities in Egypt, and the Sudan issue. Not well known was another condition concerning Egypt's representation abroad and the related formation of a diplomatic corps.

Researchers have noted that following the modern, independent state's commencement in building this corps the year following the issue of the declaration, the representatives of Egypt in capitals it exchanged diplomatic representation with, held the title "ambassador extraordinaire and minister plenipotentiary" rather than "ambassador" like the representatives of independent states. This remained the case for nearly a decade and a half, precisely until the signing of the 1936 Anglo-Egyptian Treaty.

The other party, Great Britain, was behind this delay. London's government sought, after accepting the principle of negotiating with the Egyptian party in 1920, for the relationship between them to remain direct and for no other third party to enter into it. This caused it to act upon two rules in its negotiations with the Egyptian delegations. The first was not to entrust Egypt's representatives abroad with any political powers that would allow them to employ their relations to bring a third party in. The second was to not allow Egypt to join the League of Nations, which might provide a third party in the form of the League itself and to which Egypt could submit grievances.

With this understanding, pressure from the British party to enforce the first rule began with the arrival of the Milner delegation to Egypt. It issued its well known report in 1920 in which it remarked on this issue:

"We had agreed on the final resolution before discussing it with the Egyptians, and that was for British control to be limited to Egypt's political relations. As for Egypt's interests and other foreign (non-political) interests, it is better to leave them to the Egyptians. What we intended originally was for the official character of these representatives to be only consular and not political. When discussions were held in London between us and the Egyptians, they unanimously agreed that denying an official character to Egyptian representatives ruins the idea of an alliance. We found that they were right in what they said because we realised when we were in Egypt that all Egyptians, and the Sultan and ministers, wish for their country to be politically represented abroad. All of them were angry over the annulment of the post of the Egyptian minister of foreign affairs upon the declaration of the protectorate and us handing over control of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to the British high commissioner.

"We had no doubt that the members of the Egyptian delegation were expressing the opinion of their people on this issue. They told us most frankly that this is a point on which there is no hope in settling relations through an agreement... They asked us, 'Why are you afraid? You have acknowledged that Egypt has many interests specific to it in foreign countries that are better for Egyptians to undertake than others. There is no advantage for Great Britain in holding back a political character from those who are appointed to see to those interests. Add to that the fact that the number of those who represent Egypt abroad are very few, because Egypt does not want representatives except in a few countries and does not want to spend on many of them'."

Following this clarification, the famed report concluded with the following statement: "We consider granting a political character to Egypt's representatives abroad of benefit to us because if a group of Egyptians remains unsatisfied with the settlement, then Egypt's official representatives will be forced to suppress and restrict them. Egyptian representatives can only avoid, criticise and shun any action taken by their compatriots against Egypt's ally. Otherwise, they will have fallen short in their duties and will be subject to removal from their post."

With this report, it appeared that the British inclined towards the presence of Egyptian political representatives abroad. Yet what subsequently took place confirmed that the wing represented by Milner in his report regarding not leaving political relations in the hands of Egyptians won out during the few months that passed between the issue of the report and the Adli-Carson negotiations. This was made clear by the Egyptian prime minister in a report submitted to Sultan Fouad. On this issue, it read:

"As for political representation, the English government has found that the Lord Milner committee overstepped that deemed fit to be handed over to Egypt, that Egypt has the right to a Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a minister of foreign affairs as long as that minister is in close connection and tight relations to the high commissioner of England and its political representation is entrusted to England's representative. It deemed that it can appoint consuls for commercial activity and that it cannot sign any agreement without England's approval."

Following that, the 28 February 1922 declaration was issued and did not mention the nature of Egyptian representation abroad from near or afar. An "unhappy" solution appeared when Britain agreed to Egypt developing non-political foreign relations and for its representatives in the capitals in which those relations were to be established to hold the mid- rank title of "ambassador extraordinaire" and "minister plenipotentiary".

An examination of the activities of those who held this title, particularly in the major capitals of London, Paris, Rome and Washington, indicates that their powers were limited to patronage of Egyptian students in those countries, studying affairs related to trade relations, and executing royal orders and requests. This final activity was particularly true concerning Fouad I's fears of moves made by Khedive Abbas II in an attempt to reclaim the throne, and to explain his domestic policies to London's government when his relations with the high commissioner's headquarters in Cairo grew complicated.

Matters remained thus until the signing of the 1936 Anglo- Egyptian Treaty, whose second article stipulated, "From this date forward, ambassadors authorised in the customary manner will represent His Majesty the King and the Emperor in the court of His Majesty the King of Egypt and will represent His Majesty the King of Egypt in the Court of Saint James."

On the British side, this article guaranteed that the king of Great Britain would be "the first foreign king to be represented in Egypt by an ambassador, and in following, British ambassadors will have seniority over all other authorised political representatives to the court of His Majesty the King of Egypt." On the Egyptian side, this article ended the status quo that had been in place since 1922 in terms of not allowing genuine Egyptian political representation abroad. Those playing this role became actual diplomatic representatives, and the first "ambassador" made an appearance. The first person to hold this post was Hafiz Afifi in the British capital. For quite some time, he remained the only Egyptian ambassador abroad, a fact that deserves some attention.

HAFIZ AFIFI WAS NO STRANGER to Bute House, the headquarters of the Egyptian diplomatic delegation in the British capital located at 75 South Audley Street. He had previously held the post of ambassador extraordinaire and minister plenipotentiary in this capital for four consecutive years (1930-1934), and had been the most successful of those who had held this post. The person who had held the post longest prior to him, also for four years, Abdel-Aziz Pasha, was not able to leave any mark on the history of Egyptian-British relations, or even on Bute House itself.

Afifi left his post following a crisis with King Fouad I, a crisis whose causes were enumerated by British documents. The most important of its reasons was that he was not a satisfactory implementer of King Fouad's wishes, being the first ambassador extraordinaire to attempt to play a political role. This fact conformed with his history prior to assuming the post, for he himself told a number of his English friends of some of the reasons leading to his poor relations with the palace. He mentioned that he often opposed Fouad's policies of paying monies to British newspapers to promote His Majesty. In Afifi's opinion, these articles backfired, particularly in the press of the Liberal Constitutionalists Party, and that it was not the job of an Egyptian minister in London to enter into press battles.

At the same time, Ahmed Aboud Pasha, a powerful economist, approached palace circles in an attempt to persuade the king that he was able to employ his relations with British financial circles to influence the policies of London's government, and that one of his friends, Mr Dudley Duker, had persuaded him that he had the British minister of finance in his pocket. The king believed him, and was thus convinced of the shortcomings of Afifi.

A campaign of harassment was launched against Afifi, the slightest of which was not permitting him to take a vacation when he requested one in the winter of 1934 to avoid the poor weather conditions in the British capital. He understood the message and submitted his resignation.

The British party accepted the event with evident tepidity, a reaction expressed by the English papers that heaped praise on the resigned ambassador extraordinaire. One of them, The Evening News, wrote that he and his wife were among the prominent personalities in the life of West End, and that "he put on the finest of parties held by a states' political representative in London. He showed us in the legation's headquarters that he was a genius in gathering together the prominent and great persons of London at these parties, and that he was able to maintain their splendour in a way that no other member of the political corps was able in recent years. The dance hall of those soirees was a scene that reminded us of the grandeur of the parties held prior to the war. They brought together emirs of the East with the most powerful consuls in London and the most beautiful women."

For nearly seven months, this important post remained empty, until a royal order was issued to appoint a new ambassador extraordinaire in London, Hassan Sabri Pasha, one week following the formation of the Tawfiq Nessim government. He was agreed upon by all except for the nationalist movement, which made it a virtually temporary appointment. It was not long before King Fouad fell ill and then passed away, and elections were held that returned the Wafd Party to rule. This was followed by negotiations with the British that ended in the signing of the 1936 Anglo-Egyptian Treaty and the changing of the situation of Egypt's political representative in London. Once again Hafiz Afifi was selected, this time to be the first Egyptian ambassador abroad.

On 9 January 1937, before the regency council, the first ambassador took his legal oath. Al-Ahram welcomed this event in the editorial of its issue the following day, titled "Our new ambassador and his mission." The editorial opened by saying that Afifi was no stranger to either the diplomatic corps or to London. "He was a minister of foreign affairs, and was the ambassador extraordinaire of Egypt to London for four years. His Grace was greeted with pleasure in Egyptian, English, and foreign circles."

On this occasion, Al-Ahram attempted to distinguish between the mission of an ambassador and that of an ambassador extraordinaire. It noted that it was a difficult mission and required keenness of the mind and suavity. "The treaty has placed upon Egypt responsibility for domestic and foreign consequences that require constant mutual understanding between the Egyptian and British governments, and this mission is the responsibility of the ambassador."

Yet Al-Ahram exaggerated when it fancied that the Egyptian ambassador in London must enjoy the same advantages as his British counterpart in Cairo in terms of ranking before all other international representatives. The paper held that such a scenario would compensate him, for "the Egyptian ambassador is among Egypt's most prominent politicians with experience in the negotiations, who participated in the signing of the treaty, and played a role in bringing perspectives closer to one another."

The newspaper concluded with the statement that the city of London was an international political ground of no like due to the expansive territories of England's empire and the British state's influence in the world of international politics. These facts led states to select their "most extraordinary men to represent them in the Court of Saint James. Moreover, the English are known to be distinguished in politics, the good handling of matters, the solving of problems, and the treatment of predicaments."

The first step the new ambassador made following his taking the oath was to resign from his membership in the Council of Representatives. His resignation was accepted by the council after its president, Ahmed Maher, expressed the deep sorrow of all its representatives, although this sorrow was "mixed with great joy over the role everyone anticipated him playing in his new post. His assistance had a genuine influence in dissipating many of the difficulties that accompanied the recent Egyptian-British negotiations."

It seems that the appointment of the first Egyptian minister abroad encouraged some European states to think about upgrading their legations in Cairo to the rank of embassies. This led Al-Ahram to send one of its reporters to someone described as a "top foreign diplomat" to ask about the veracity of this. He replied saying, "If states wish to appoint ambassadors, they must discuss it with the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and learn whether it is prepared to appoint Egyptian ambassadors abroad. This matter is related to the policy and budget of the ministry and it is not a matter of a state or two wishing to establish embassies, because other states may take offence in not following this example." The newspaper concluded that talk of this issue was premature.

Afifi left for the British capital, and the first difference between him as an ambassador and as an ambassador extraordinaire were the rituals of protocol he had to perform. Shortly after his arrival, he had to submit the papers of his authorisation to King George VI in a procession and formal celebration that Al-Ahram was intent on providing a detailed description of in its 12 March 1937 issue.

The previous morning, three shining coaches bearing the royal insignia on their doors had arrived at the doors of the Egyptian embassy. "Each was pulled by two noble horses whose saddles were ornamented with gold figures and the royal crimson colour. Each was driven by a driver wearing a top hat with a gold sash and a long crimson coat. Standing behind each were strong drivers each over six feet tall. During all this, many gathered outside the embassy building, drawn by this procession they were not accustomed to seeing in South Audley Street, which is usually quiet."

The master of ceremonies specific to political delegates of states descended from the first coach and approached the office of the Egyptian ambassador, where Hafiz Afifi Pasha was awaiting him "in clothes adorned with gold and across his chest a blue sash, a band representing the Nile. The two men rode the first coach, while top officials from the embassy rode the other two, and they proceeded until they reached the outer courtyards of Buckingham Palace."

After the Egyptian ambassador entered the palace, he turned to the central hall on the first floor known as the "arch hall." It was spread with a carpet "that brought together white, gold and crimson, with precious instruments on the room's flanks and some furniture of black ebony inlaid with mother-of- pearl."

After a short time, the doors to the hall opened wide and the king entered in his official nautical attire. Mr Eden, the minister of foreign affairs, stood near him, and he shook hands with Hafiz Afifi who submitted his authorisation papers to His Majesty. After a brief conversation, the embassy's employees entered and were introduced by the master of ceremonies. Afterwards, the ambassador and his entourage returned to Bute House in the same procession, and he thus began his work as the first Egyptian ambassador abroad.

AFIFI DID NOT TAKE LONG to activate the wide powers brought by being ambassador in compensation for the limited powers he had practiced when he had been ambassador extraordinaire and minister plenipotentiary in the same location. The first thing he did in this regard was to seek to impose the authority of the embassy on all departments related to the Egyptian government present in the British capital. This was revealed by a memorandum he sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs shortly after assuming the duties of his post.

The memorandum commenced with a report on the fact that the Egyptian government had various departments of several ministries in England, including the department of delegations and the department of purchases. "There is also another department that promotes Egypt and works to encourage tourism. The Egyptian government has technical advisors, among which I will mention the advisor on irrigation matters and another on oil matters. These departments carry out their missions without the ambassador having any contact with them."

As these departments were in need of the ambassador's advice, he saw that the relevant ministries should officially ask the department heads to "inform me, one by one, of the important issues they are concerned with so that I can express my opinion on them at the appropriate time." On the other hand, some of the Egyptian ministries had requested from English non-governmental agencies to guide them with the names of some Britons to undertake posts in Egypt. This took place without the knowledge of Egypt's representative in England "and I believe that the consultation of Egypt's ambassador in London on issues such as this is necessary."

The second step Hafiz Afifi took was entrusting himself, in his capacity as the ambassador, to speak on political issues, which he saw as forming an essential component of his mission, unlike in the case of the ambassador extraordinaire. He had only been in the British capital a few days when he began to issue political statements. Among them was a speech related to the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty and The Capitulations, as well as preparations for the conference in Switzerland which would review them, and a visit King Farouk was preparing to make to a number of European states.

With regard to the first case, he made mention that treaties concluded out of choice were always friendly settlements that did not give either party 100 per cent of what they want. As for The Capitulations, he asserted that it was a system of no like elsewhere in the world, and that no sane person would defend if for it made foreign minorities in Egypt an independent cadre. Finally, with regard to King Farouk's visit, he stressed that it would be a factor that would strengthen friendly ties with the countries on his tour.

The ambassador attended all Egyptian gatherings in Britain, particularly those related to students. A man like Hafiz Afifi did not suffice with mere attendance, however, and often gave long speeches in his capacity as an experienced politician.

Among these gatherings was the English-Egyptian student conference held in Birmingham a few weeks following his arrival in the British capital. There he gave a long speech in which he defended the treaty in his capacity as being one of its architects, although he admitted that like any human endeavour it had its strong and weak points. He then spoke on the duty of students abroad, and was not traditional in his treatment of this issue. He urged them to seek knowledge of everything that catches their attention, whether related to education, social life, sports, or political affairs, and to learn from the English people maintaining order and their ability to disagree without inciting feelings of hatred and animosity. He urged them to learn to use their right to vote by being cognisant of the political views of those running in elections.

There is no doubt that Afifi was assisted in this by his extensive familiarity with the nature of British society. He had studied medicine in Scotland, and had authored a substantial treatise, "The English in their country". It was nearly 500 pages and outlined the British constitution, the formation of public opinion, financial affairs, education in Britain, the English judiciary and the British Empire.

Among the ambassador's other activities was an attempt to activate the role of his assistants in the embassy. This is noted in news of meetings held by the military attaché, Maj Hamed Niyazi, with officials from the British Ministry of War to implement the treaty in terms of Britain supplying the Egyptian army in its new era with the weapons it required.

It occurred during the term of Hafiz Afifi in this unique position that the Montreaux Convention took place and ended The Capitulations system. The Egyptian delegation, led by El-Nahhas Pasha and which included Minister of Foreign Affairs Wasef Ghali and Minister of Finance Makram Ebeid, went on a tour in which it visited London and Paris. In the discussions held with British officials in London, the ambassador played an active role, of which Al-Ahram 's special correspondent wrote many details.

Yet near the end of the year, after the political crisis flared up between Abdin Palace and the Wafdist government led by El-Nahhas Pasha, Egyptians were surprised to find that the ambassador had returned to the homeland. This led to the spread of rumours about the reasons for his sudden return. Some believed it was related to the crisis at the time.

Al-Ahram refuted that, claiming there was no validity to such statements. Yet the days that ensued proved the newspaper wrong. When Afifi submitted his resignation on 22 March 1938, he had not been the ambassador in London for more than a year, contrary to the case when he had been an ambassador extraordinaire and had spent a great deal of time in the same location. It seems that his resignation came as a surprise, for some time passed before another ambassador of Egypt was appointed to Britain. It was none other than the palace ally, Hassan Pasha Nashaat, who had left the country in 1925 to serve as an ambassador extraordinaire in Madrid and then Berlin, and from there to Bute House in London to become the second ambassador in Egyptian history.