and the beginnings of British policy 39 The Annexation of Sudan and the Imperial Communications Route Egypt, Sudan, the Suez Canal, Palestine, Iraq, and Iran are essential for England because it is the route to India, as Lord Curzon says, and the deputies applaud his words and the eloquence of his argument (4). And if Egypt says: Sudan is mine, and I am its life, and it is from me alone that its life came. The English writers exclaimed: What heresy and what injustice is this?! England continued to undermine Egypt and devour it until it seized the opportunity of Arabi's revolution against the government, to transfer power to the people, which destabilized the country and consequently the security in Sudan. So, if it has the world: Egypt, it revives it. Sudan, until it made it a company between itself and Egypt. This company was dissolved by an order from England, an order that disregarded law or custom, as the Manchester Guardian stated. And Turkey ignored the protests of the rightful owner regarding the separation of Egypt from Sudan. The Times suggests that Egypt is one nation and Sudan is another. And in all this, it is weakened by the fact that if Sudan is lost, Egypt will lose its strategic depth behind Sudan, and from there the waters of the Nile will be diverted from Egypt. As the book says: They do not realize and ignore that Uganda was part of Egypt, even though they claim to have annexed Sudan. Egypt's independent life began in 1841 with treaties between the states and with firmans based on those treaties. These firmans placed Egypt under the administration of Muhammad Ali and his successors – that is, a humiliated Egypt with its prince and viceroy – a land of plunder, Darfur, Kordofan, and their dependencies.