Coll 17/10(4) 'Internal: political situation; relations with HMG' [‎297v] (594/1031)

8
35. I have made no mention of the British aircraft which passed daily over
Bagdad for scouting and demonstration purposes, to drop pamphlets or to bomb
military targets in the neighbourhood. There is no doubt that this air action
had a very salutary effect, not only on the Iraqi authorities, but also on the
population of Bagdad, which might otherwise have got out of hand and
constituted a serious menace to the British community.
36. The week between the 6 th and 13th May passed without noteworthy
incident, except for an oral request from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs for
permission to take away the forty-line private internal telephone exchange which
the Telegraph Department had put into the embassy only a few days earlier.
It was represented that this was urgently needed elsewhere, and I consented to
its removal on condition that it should be replaced by another which would be
adequate to ensure the maintenance of telephone communication inside the
embassy premises. My condition was accepted and the exchange amicably
carried out.
37. Late in the evening of the 13th May I received a note from the Ministry
for Foreign Affairs stating that they had learnt that Iraqi prisoners of war were
being kept at Habbaniya, and asking that, in accordance with international
practice, they should be removed to places of safety. They added that if this
were not done the Iraqi authorities would be obliged to act in a similar manner.
I sent to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, for transmission to you, an en clan
telegram summarising this note, and informed them that, as I was denied the
right to send cypher telegrams, I could take no further action in the matter.
The information contained in y our telep‘am No. 467 of the 20th May that Iraqi
captives would be removed from the Koyai Air Force cantonment as soon as
possible was communicated to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs on the 23rd May.
38. Between the 15th and 20th May the Ministry for Foreign Affairs were
again active. On the 16th May they asked me to convey a protest to His
Majesty’s Government against the bombing of a military hospital at Fallujah on
the 3rd May, and the bombing of military ambulances on the 12th and 13th May.
They gave warning that the continuance of such attacks would “absolve the
Iraqi forces from all responsibility if they acted in a similar manner." A second
note protesting against the machine-gunning of a motor ambulance on the
13th May was delivered to me on the 19th May. The purport of these notes was
sent to you in my telegrams Nos. 448 and 453. Air Headquarters, in commenting
on these allegations, admitted that a stick of bombs aimed at another target had
fallen into Fallujah. but denied that ambulances had ever intentionally been
attacked. They pointed out, on the other hand, that Iraqi shells had hit three
churches in Habbaniya, and had also fallen in the hospital grounds. Moreover,
on the 16th May, six German aircraft had deliberately machine-gunned: two
British ambulances clearly marked with the Red Cross.
39. The next day it seemed possible that the demand made earlier for the
expulsion of Iraqi servants from the embassy precincts would be revived (see
paragraph 28). The head of the Protocol Department telephoned in the morning
to say that, in view of the Iraqi Government’s proclamation of the day before,
the authorities desired all Iraqis remaining in the embassy to leave at once. He
added an assurance that no harm would be done to them. I assumed that he
was referring to a proclamation which had been referred to in the bulletins
broadcast by the Bagdad Radio Station, warning all Iraqis in the service of the
British Government that, unless they left their posts within seven days, they
would be condemned to death and their property would be confiscated. I did not,
however, know the full text of this proclamation, nor was it clear to nie that it
was necessarily intended! to apply to Iraqi servants in the embassy.
40. I accordingly caused a semi-official reply to be sent to this message
pointing out that it was contrary to accepted diplomatic practice that pressure
of any kind should be brought to bear to compel the servants of a diplomatic
mission to leave its service, and that, if the proclamation had been made requiring
Iraqis to leave the service of a foreign Government, it could! not properly be
applied to the employees of a diplomatic mission. The reply also asked that, if
the Iraqi authorities decided to proceed further.with the matter. I should be
furnished with the text of the proclamation to which reference had been made,
and’ I gave warning that, if the demand for the expulsion of the embassv’s Iraqi
servants were pressed. His Majesty’s Government would no doubt take similar
action against all Iraqi diplomatic missions and consulates in territories under
their control.