'File 4/9 I Anglo-Kuwait Relations' [‎82v] (173/436)

Resident .... so far as may be practicable, on each specific occasion, and subject
to the further restriction that there shall be no question of establishing a
'permanent base in Koweit territory. As the result of considerable further
interdepartmental discussion, the Air Officer Commanding was authorised on the
25th September, at his discretion, to carry out occasional reconnaissances over
Koweit territory, both by air and car. “ His Majesty s Government are anxious. >'
however, that-—
( 1 ) These reconnaissances shall be carried out as infrequently and in as
unprovocative a manner as possible, and
(2) That the Sheikh shall be given no ground for supposing that responsi
bility for the defence of Koweit has been assumed by His Majesty’s
Government, or that he himself has been relieved of his obligations
in this respect. These considerations should be borne in mind by the
Air Officer Commanding in acting under the authority now given
him.” (Colonial Office telegram to Bagdad, No. 306, dated the
25th September, 1928.)
3. Approval was subsequently given in view of a threatened Akhwan raid
over the border, to the concentration, subject to the approval of the Sheikh, of
armoured cars in Koweit ££ for protection of Iraqi tribes for so long a period
as one month.” (Colonial Office telegram to Bagdad, No. 76, dated the
23rd February, 1929.)
4. In April 1929 the question of the policy to be adopted by the Sheikh of
Koweit in the event of Nejdi tribesmen taking refuge from King Ibn Baud in
Koweit territory arose, the air authorities suggested that the Sheikh should be
asked to concur in the use, if necessary, of military force, the nature and extent
of which should be determined by the Air Officer Commanding. Iraq, for the (
purpose of preventing any such refugees from entering or remaining in any
part of Koweit territory. On the 8 th May, 1929, the India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. , in a letter
to the Colonial Office, remarked : £ £ Viscount Peel gathers that the attitude of
the Sheikh is no longer in question and that he has already promised to endeavour lfh\
to prevent refugees making use of Koweit territory. As regards the question
of giving the Sheikh military assistance for this purpose, the Secretary of State
remains of his previous opinion that it is undesirable to extend in any way the I * ,
general liability hitherto accepted by His Majesty’s Government for the defence if 1
of Koweit territory, if this can at all be avoided It would, on the whole,
be preferable, if possible, to avoid asking the Sheikh to concur in the use of h
military force, but if ... . such a request is still essential, he is prepared to agree |'
that the Sheikh should be asked to concur ” The other Departments regarded ;
it as essential to make a request in the sense referred to of the Sheikh and the
necessary instructions were sent to the High Commissioner on the 11 th May.
5. The view held as regards our liability for protection of Koweit during
the operations of 1928-29 is perhaps best stated in the India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. letters of the
wnn i ^ u £ ust, 1928, and the 8 th May, 1929, quoted in paragraphs 2 and 4 above. M
mie our precise liability for protection was not investigated in any great
detail, tne course of action adopted in dealing with threats to Koweit territory
appears to have been generally consistent with the construction of our liability
111 P ara g ra P h of Bushire despatch No. 1365-S of
the 25th October, 1933.( x )
India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. , February 6 , 1934.
J. G. LAITHWAITE.
(h [Note.—T he paragraph referred to runs as follows : —
TurZ E g ,?v rnent states , that in r « tum for the Sheikh’s co-operation against the
Thi! nnHV m Sh E 1 be 1 rec °g^® d as an independent principality under British protection.’
the word Of 60 , °&N r ,° the previous agreements, is a most categorical assurance, and
resnonsibilitv of rV r ^ ^ i bein & used > would seem definitely to place the
Personal!v^T ° f the Koweit Sh eikhdom on His Majesty’s Government.
• on b r 8 VieW i3 U ? ted m P ara g ra P h 15 of the India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. note, that
Koweit hm tW wo 8 ° Ur f lm n a y C ° U . d be confined to the protection of the town of
mh in ’the nolo t e to protect K °weit as a whole.’ It is true, as pointed
ar to h- ’ P aia g ia P b lb ( d )> that neither the present Sheikh, nor his predecessors,
rewduhmm onr 'hf V" thl ®, a 8 r “ meI > t ‘o His Majesty's Government, but that hardly
ment's obliratilnl reWn \T S '«t, T u‘n <1 ° eS T’! ! mply ' of oourse . thf >t Hi s Majesty’s Govern-
ent s obligations relieve the Sheikh completely of the responsibilitv of his own defence.
SulfS itftTssw' 7 b Y Ue l° t al ' Tith any --aids across his frontiers, and
incursions - Tht ,n f„c 1 “ ° m * Government in the case of more senoos
of S tthenthe Shribb presumab iy th e attitude taken up after the Akhwan operations
wh chiere mounted n tbf eno °; ,ra « ed lo purchase half-a-dozen Ford vanettes, Lewis guns,
when some o ' his men received