'Memorandum respecting Koweit' [‎12r] (13/14)

13
distinctly announced that he does not enjoy British ''protection;" on the other hand, we onco
made him a present of 1,000/., and promised him our " good offices," whatever that may mean.
When we made this promise we were. I feel no doubt, thinking of Koweit proper, if there is
such a thing, and not of Boobyan or other outskirts over which the Sheikh has rights of one
sort or another. We have up to the present sheltered ourselves not unsuccessfully, during our
discussion with the Turks on the one side and foreign Governments on the other, behind the
plausible announcement that we desired to maintain the status quo in regard to Koweit. But I
doubt whether any one really knows what the status quo is. We nave, at any rate in my opinion,
no right to tell the Turks that they may not move troops for the purpose of putting down
a rebellion in the Nejd region, or that they must not look out tor a suitable terminus of the
Baghdad Railway for fear of disturbing the status quo.
If matters are left as they are, we shall involve ourselves in a very unsatisfactory dispute.
And we shall, as Admiral Bosanquet has lately pointed out, be obliged to keep the squadron on
sentry go at the head of the Gulf in order to maintain the peace.
We might, it seems to me, explain (1) to the Porte (2) to the iSheikh and (3) to the foreign
Powers immediately interested the objects of our policy.
I should be inclined to say that our engagements to Koweit do not extend beyond the
district adjoining or close to the bay of that name, and to endeavour to obtain the adhesion
of the Porte and of the Sheikh to an approximate definition of that district. It may be necessary
to reconcile the Sheikh by the payment of another 1.000/.," or of an even larger sum,
I would make it clear to the Turks that we do not want to stand in the way of an arrange
ment under which the terminus of the line might be placed at some spot other than Koweit to
their advantage if they can make anything out of it.
As to the foreign Powers, I have already explained to most of them that we are not going
to oppose the railway project, provided British capital receives a share at least equal to that
of any other Power in respect of construction, management, and orders for materials ; and I have
added that while we do not grudge a debouche for international commerce in the Gulf, and have
no Avish to make it into a British lake, we shall resist to the utmost all attempts by other
Powers to obtain a foothold on its shores for naval or military purposes.
This, I take it, is the "bed rock" of our policy in the Gult^ and we shall pursue that policy,
not in virtue of ambiguous understandings with local Chiefs, but as the predominant Power in
Southern Persia and in the Gulf—the Power whose commercial interests in those regions far
exceed those of other Powers, the Power to whose efforts in the past it is due that the waters
of the Gulf are open to the trade of the world, and whose duty it will be in the future to protect
;the new trade route. If it is understood that we have to be reckoned with, whoever builds
the railway, and wherever it finds a terminus, because we are that Power, we can regard with,
indifference the local intrigues of any number of Sheikh? and Emirs.
Vide draft telegram herewith for your concurrence.
(Signed) LANSDOWNE.
Foreign Office, March 21, 1902.