ملف ١٩٢٨/٢٠٠ الجزء ٥ "بلاد فارس: العلاقات الأنجلو-فارسية، مفاوضات بشأن المعاهدة" [ظ‎‎٥‎٥‎٤] (١١٣٢/١١١٣)

7. The point made by His Highness in the fifth paragraph of his left
to be reasonable. While the treaty of friendship may, it is hoped be n ^ a ^ ears
Persian Government can hardly be expected to include in such a' tre
a limited duration His idea is that such art.iolpe wKim i . ^
the
± cibicui uruvuimiitjnu ocin iidiuiy ut; expected to mciucie m such a treat , c me
a limited duration. His idea is that such articles, while possibly bein ^ a ? lc ^ es °f
in the general treaty, should form protocols to the treaty " ^ re ±erredi:
fn the sixth paragraph His Highness enquires what is the nosit^ ,
ns in regard to this treat.v T tnlrl Uii-n ^ of the
Dominions in regard to this treaty. I told him yesterday that thet ° f
accordance with the preamble, was to be made on behalf of Hi s Maiest
ment in Great Britain and the Government of India, but that I nresn^Lc erD '
fir’cf oonfo-nr>o n i r>l a 1 n-P ^ „,"U J , h UlQed tll9.t the
m
first sentence of article 1 of the treaty, in which it is statedlhatTC! TV,
re frienrlshio hefwA«n fUa be
perpetual peace and sincere friendship between the high contractino-!! e u
their successors would so far ns WA wa-pa AAr,AA^.a parties and
their successors, would, so far as we were concerned, include all ttrhP Cl an(i
whether they lived in England. India or any of the British Dominions tT"*
that, tP that, wna pr»T»r , AAf Ua ooxir -r\r ' -r o muils - hie said
that, if that was correct, he saw no particular necessity so far as P ^
concerned, for the adherence of the individual Dominions. ’ rSla Was
9. You will observe that His Highness suggests an alternative tn ft*
paragraph of article 1. I shall be glad to learn whether you consider fe???
proposal is considered sufficiently comprehensive. It is certainly both 1 ,
simpler than the wording of the draft. ^ r ^ er an ^
10 ' that it; seemed t0 me that ^ point raised in
paragraph 8 of his letter was unnecessary, and that even should either of rl„. G
contracting parties cease to be a member of the League of Nations the engaiS
would remain in force. If this were your view, he replied, he was quite satisfied
H. We then came to article 3, and, as foreshadowed in my despatch No 426
is Highness, as will be seen from his letter, flatly refuses to agree to the second
paragraph; m fact, he is only prepared to include this article up to the words
consacre par 1 usage international habituel,” although he has no abiection to the
most-favoured-nation treatment, provided this is of limited duration. This mold
if necessary, he said, be mentioned in a protocol.
then P roceeded t0 amplify the remarks made in para
graphs 11 to 15 of his letter on the subject of equal rights, perfect reciprocity &c
He insisted that he had no wish to limit the activities of His Majesty’s ships m the
Guii, they were always welcome in Persian ports when they wished to come; but
they must ask permission to do so in accordance with international usage. He said
that he was prepared to go as far as possible to meet us; for instance, ships wishing
to oil at Abadan would be allowed to call there without reference to Tehran, as the
Governor would be authorised to. give the necessary permission. Similarly, in the
case of Bushire, should the Resident (he was always referred to throughout the
conversation as His Majesty s consul-general) urgently require to be transported
acioss the Gulf by one of His Majesty’s ships, he was prepared to arrange that the
Governor should be authorised in exceptional cases to give permission for one of
His Majesty s ships to call without reference to Tehran, but no reference to this
could be made in the treaty.
13 As I am convinced that His Highness will not give way on this point, I
am inclined to suggest that I might be authorised to propose to His Highness an
exchange of notes on the subject, wherein the Persian Government will give me an
assurance that the Governors of Bushire and Abadan—and any other port that you
may consider necessary—would be authorised in urgent cases to give immediate
sanction to the visit of one of His Majesty’s ships without reference to Tehran.
•’ ^ r ° U observe that the Minister of Court has submitted a counter-draft
regarding Hen jam in the form of a brief article in the treaty with an additional
protocol. After discussing the matter with His Highness yesterday, I consider
that he is being far more amenable over this question than was anticipated last
autumn during the meetings of the Persian Gulf Sub-Committee. There are four
mam points on which his draft differs from ours : (a) He offers twenty years’ lease
instead of fifty; (b) he refuses the postal facilities, as I anticipated; (c) he requires
a certificate to be handed to the quarantine officer at Hen jam in every case; (d) he
asks for a sum to be fixed by mutual agreement in payment of the lease.
15. Regarding (a), I asked him why he suggested twenty years. He said
fift y. years was too long, and he remembered that we had suggested twenty years
continuation of most-favoured-nation treatment in the draft commercial treaty, and
therefore he himself suggested twenty years for the lease. I did not discuss the
matter further, but said that I should refer the matter to you. I anticipate that
we should have little difficulty in getting a twenty-five years’ lease, and it might be
to g et
i»p chc
H Po r t!
|sure for d
Us, I iinag in€
Jug adeqm
'J officers am
iteprep ard
ie I nterna
fc formst ;
jathiaddre.
jod which
aid, that a 001
e was not
customs o
pessary, a
Jed in as s(
leer was the.
gable to extra
nominal rent
to make
9 tas £1.000
ilatever rent
jaucial settle
16, Sega
Ejected to thi
it were handi
| sat the cemet
Wd a ref ere
me a year o:
17. ' Wei
fioposals
irein (
temwitt
tbselve
makin
if give r
itook t
4 The
iicheqr
feian
were
Mainly be ac
J settling the
I understood 1
fainly did
Question ol
paragraph
Mde Persh
m a s