‏"ملخص الأحداث والتدابير الرئيسية التي اتخذها سمو نائب الملك اللورد كرزون من كيدلستون، نائب الملك والحاكم العام للهند في إدارة الخارجية. ‏I‏. يناير ١٨٩٩-أبريل ١٩٠٤. ‏II‏. ديسمبر ١٩٠٤-نوفمبر ١٩٠٥. المجلد IV. بلاد فارس والخليج الفارسي." [و‎‎١‎٠‎٨] (٣٨٦/٢٢٠)

Ill
55 . Unfortunately in later years whether on account of changes in the course
of the main stream, or by reason of strained relations, between the two parties,
the amicable settlement of water difficulties became no longer possible. A series
of small, and in themselves unimportant, water questions arose between 11)00
and 1902, which caused mutual misunderstanding and increased ill-feeling, until
matters were brought to a crisis by disputes arising from abnormal deficiency of
water in the Helmand in 1902. This led to the matter being referred to the
arbitration of the British Government.
56. The condition under which the arbitration had been agreed to by the
Governments of Persia and Afghanistan was that the award should be in accord
ance with the terms of General Golrlsmid's award, the relevant portions of
which will he found on page 103, paragraph 28. The award provides that
Persia has a right to a requisite supply of uater for irrigation and the main
question for consideration was what amount of water fairly represents a requisite
supply for Persian requirements.
57. While the boundary award was yet undelivered, Colonel McMahon had
been studying the water question and by the end of the summer of 1904 be bad
collected all the data necessary for forming definite conclusions on the subject.
In September 1904 be submitted a detailed memorandum setting forth
the salient points in the past history of the Ilelmand river, the disputes which
bad arisen regarding it, the results of local enquiries and bis observations and
conclusions. He also forwarded drafts of awards based on conclusions derived
from the above data. In framing each draft, endeavour had been made to meet
the fair requirements of Persia and Afghanistan but, at the same time, to provide
variations in the general scope of the award, so as to enable Government to
select that which might appear the most suitable. After careful consideration
by the Government of India in consultation with His Majesty’s Government
and His Majesty’s Minister, Tehran, it w r as decided to accept, w T ith certain
modifications, the draft award which had been drawn up so ns to exclude the
idea that the Persians had any claim to extend irrigation by channels to he con
structed through Afghan territory. This draft was considered to he the one most
in keeping with. General Goldsmid s award, to the terms of which Colonel
McMahon’s arbitration had been restricted, and further, it did not give either
party the right to cut canals in the territory of the other. The decision was
communicated to Colonel McMahon on the 30th December 1904 and he was
authorised to deliver the award whenever he considered it advisable to do so.
He, however, considered it expedient to defer delivery of the award for the reason
that the Mirjawa and other questions on which the departure of his mission from
Soistan depended w r ere still under discussion between the Government of India
and His Majesty’s Government. The delivery of the water award would mean
the final conclusion of Ids duties as His Britannic Majesty’s Arbitrator, and his
status as such might, therefore, be considered to cease. In view of possible
further delay of his mission in Seistan, he feared that tl is might give rise to
difficulties regarding the continuance ot the various diplomatic privileges
conferred upon the mission by the Persian Government, on which, in the past,
several attacks had already Veen made by those who desired to injure the
prestige and frustrate the work of the mission. Colonel McMahon also con
sidered delay desirable in order to discuss the water question formally with the
Persian and Afghan Commissioners.
58. On the water as on the boundary question, the views of the Persian and
Views of Persian and Afghan Govern* Afghan Governments were diametrically
ments on water question. opposed. In the boundary question, the
Persians based their claims on the Goldsmid award and ignored his map, the
Afghans based theirs on the map and ignored the award. The Persians, moreover,
contended that only water and no boundary questions were in dispute. Similarly
in this matter, the Persians claimed rights in the Helmand to which no interpre
tation of the Goldsmid award, however favourable to them, could reasonably
extend. They demanded that Afghanistan should he forbidden to erect any
lands or obstructions to interfere with the natural flow of the river from Rudhar
to Kohak. The Afghans, on the other hand, claimed sole possession of the
Helmand up to Kohak, and, while admitting the boundary to he in dispute,
had asked what there was left to settle regarding water.
59 . 'With two parties thus opposed in principle, it was obviously
no use to expect to arrive at any settlement by mutual discussion or mutual