'File II. IRAQ (3) Vol. 1 Shaikh of Kuwait's Date Gardens on the Shatt-al Arab. (Kuwait's relations with Turkish Govt. and Turkish demand that Kuwaitis should take out Turkish Nationality Certificates)' [‎133v] (282/636)

departure from past usage involved, constitutes an infringement of the sfahis
quo in regard to Koweit affairs which the Porte has undertaken to observe.
The Mohammerah report above mentioned, however, seems to point to hypo
thesis (i) as the correct one.
5. It goes without saying that I entirely endorse the Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. 's
view that if the main question of the status of Koweit is involved we^have
everything to lose by delaying to face the issue, and that the longer we do so,
the more difficult will it become to get it settled in the way we desire.
No. C .-40 (Conf.dential), dated Koweit, the 30 th June 1910 .
From— Captain W. H. I. Shakesprar, I.A., Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. , Koweit,
To —1 ieutevavt -Colon el P Z. Cox, C.S.I., C.I.E., Political Kesidont in the
Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. , Bushire.
I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of the correspondence covered by
your Second Assistant’s endorsements Nos. 1652 and 1668, dated 21st and 22ud
~ « - i i ' si - ' 7 | V ^
June 1910 respectively.
^ f ^ , , ,
2. I would first correct a possible misunderstanding to which the latter
p&rt of paragraph 6 of my letter No. C.-35, dated the 8th June 1910, may give
ri>e. When I said “ Turkish nationality ” I meant the sentence to apply only
to Mubarak and Koweitis for of course other nationalities such as English,
Trench, etc., are accepted, hut in the case of Koweitis, the Turkish officials will’
not accept “ Koweit 1 but insist on “ Turkish ” nationality. ^ ^
3. With reference to your letter No. 165'>, dated 19th June^ 1910, to the
Government of Indi i andjespecially to paragraph o thereof, 1 w< u d venture to
submit the following observations resulting from a thorough ‘ discussion of the
whole subject with His Majesty’s Consul at Basrah In \our letter you ft r see
the possible alternative of advisii.g Sheikh Mubarak to re-sell the property and
of having to indemnify him for any loss thereon. With ail deference 1 would
venture to deprecate any such course and for the following reasons :
(o) The Sheikh is certainly alarmed about this property, but at the same
time I am inclined to think now he is not improbably exaggera
ting that alarm for our special benefit as a means of forcing
our hand to free him from Turkish attentions.
(6) Mr. Consul Crow considers that the possiblity of the sale being
repudiated is an extremely remote one seeing that the sale deeds
bear the signatures of most of the notables of Basrah as well as
the cachet of the British Consulate.
(<?) The property is so large that a buyer would he difficult to find who
would purchase it as a single lot and there is besides the grave
objection in the advice of a re-sale of an appearance of weakness
on ourpart in sustaining the Sheikh’s claim.
4. In my humble opinkpiit would be far more advantageous to maintain the
position of our special interests in Koweit, the Sheikh’s long-cOntinued in
dependent status, whilst pressing npon the Porte that the recognition of
Koweit as a nationality should suffice for the “ Tapu ” Office, i he Porte is, I
admit, not likely to agree, but as there seems no immediate risk of the Sheikh
losing his property, it would seem worth while to state the 1 above as definin"
to some extent what is the actual status quo in Koweit.
5. The question of the status of Koweit must come up before many years,
and it seems fairly obvious that the Turkish officials have realised the powerful
lever they possess for raising that issue in the registration question, which
goes directly to the root of the matter on the point of nationality. The regis
tration of any of Mubarak’s family, whether the women or sons, would seem
undesirable as likely to admit the principle that Koweit nationality is unrecog
nisable as against Turkish. Tor the same reason the taking out of Turkish
“ Teskerehs *’ by Koweit subjects is to be deprecated, and though the Sheikh
denies it I hear from other sources that many Koweitis with 1 business or land
in Basrah have already done this. Under the new order of things this practice
is likely to grow and in a few years hence it seems to me there will be far
greater difficulty in insisting on the independence of Koweit than is the case at
present, and it is for that reason that I would urge that the question should
not be avoided.