'F 80 File 82/34 I APOC Concession' [‎59v] (117/436)

cancellation of the iVnglo-Persian Oil Company's concession. He had read them
yesterday morning and had definitely gained the impression that the Russians
must really be behind the Government's action. That impression was strengthened
by a visitor who came to see him yesterday. At any rate he wished me to note the
various points which led him to believe that Russian influence was at work.
(1) In Taghi Zadeh's speech mention was made of the principle that when
two persons make a contract, one being weak, and that person subsequently
becomes stronger, the former engagement is not binding upon him. This was a
Bolshevik doctrine. >
(2) In Muhtashim-us-Saltaneh's speech, at the end, a hint was plainly given
(" the Government will have to perform its duty at the right time ") that there
was an intention to give the concession to some other company (presumably to the
highest bidder).
(3) In Fahimi's speech the ignorance and indifference of the Government
thirty-two years ago were stressed—the same point as mentioned under (1) above.
(4) In Dashti's speech (though the speaker was well known for pro-Russian
sympathies) details were given of the treatment of the pro-Bolshevik discontent
in the oilfields three years ago, which gave ground for thinking that the
information was derived from the Russians. Mention is also made of the fact
that " all revolutionary Governments in the world have abrogated all of the
agreements and contracts signed and concluded by their predecessors, and Persia
has to follow the lead, for no nation should be compelled to starve.'' This has the
true Bolshevik flavour.
(5) Rahnema gives a number of details (such as the story of the priest who
stole the D'Arcy Concession), which his Highness knew must be derived from
Bolshevik sources.
Vossuk also alluded to the blow which recent arrangements made by
Sir John Cadman, Sir W. Deterding, and other oil magnates concerning price
policy and control of supplies had dealt to the Russian oil interests.
His Highness also mentioned the well-known avarice of the Shah, and the
political bias of Teymourtache towards Russia. It would be easy for the Russians
to come to an understanding with Teymourtache and to use him as their inter
mediary with His Majesty.
Vossuk therefore thought that everything pointed to the following :—
The Russians had put it into the Shah's head that the British Government
were finished, would not pay their debts, and could not strike a blow in their own
defence. The Shah would readily believe that from recent history. They had
then suggested the cancellation of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company's Concession
and the eventual formation of a mixed company similar to the fisheries organisa
tion in the north, the Persians to supply the land, foreigners the capital and
expert assistance, the net proceeds being divided equally. The Shah would receive
a large sum of cash and also a suitable number of shares in the new concern.
Perhaps he was wrong, but that was how he interpreted the situation. He,
of course, deplored the whole matter, and was aghast at the bad effect which the
cancellation would have on Persia's credit. In the circumstances the only thing
which the British Government could do would be to maintain their rights first of
all by all possible peaceful means, and if these failed, to protect their oil by force.
That would very likely mean the end of the present regime, but the new couldn't
be much worse than the present. It might not mean the disintegration of the
country; the Shah was very clever and might still keep his throne.
His Highness mentioned on several occasions the story that the Anglo-Persian
Oil Company had themselves engineered the cancellation, having previously
signed a new agreement; on my assuring him that this was not so he said that the
story must have originated through people being unable to believe that the Persian
Government would take such a step on its own initiative. This brought him back
to his original argument.
I thanked Vossuk for his friendly communication and said I would
communicate it to His Majesty's Minister, who I knew would be very grateful.
He said that in truth he always has been, and remains, a friend of the British,
but he was a friend of Persia first of all.