Egyptian Sudan 67 What we believe is that the 1899 agreement does not bind Egypt for the following reasons: The reason for concluding this agreement was the interest in preventing the implementation of concessions in Sudan and protecting Egypt, even in this part of Egyptian territory, from the impact of the concession system on its sovereignty. This agreement was concluded for the benefit of Egypt, not for the benefit of England. In reality, England had no special interest in this agreement at that time because it was ruling Egypt itself. What need did it have to conclude an agreement with Egypt to administer Sudan? Was it facing resistance from the Egyptian government that it could not overcome, or did it ask the Egyptian government, regardless of any agreement – and we have the precedent in the Gordon affair – to hand over the rule of Sudan to whom? A question that can only be answered with "no." The famous Granville telegram gave the English advice the color of an order, and it presented the Egyptian government with a choice between two options: either submission or resignation. As if there is nothing preventing someone who contracted with another for his benefit from abandoning that benefit, similarly, Egypt is not legally prevented from amending the 1899 agreement, if it wished to bear the concession system in Sudan or to withdraw from it. This "word" from Cromer explicitly states in his report on the agreement that its sole purpose was to shield Egypt in Sudan from the obstacles of concessions. He then added another purpose to this, making it the primary one, which was to guarantee the administration.