Coll 6/4(2) 'Asir: Relations between Saudi Arabia and the Yemen.' [‎122v] (251/796)

4
paragraph 5 of note No. 350 of the British Embassy, is perfectly aware of the
difference existing in the situation in which the British Grovernment found itself
in regard to the dispute between Ibn Saud and the Amir Abdullah. However, if
the British Grovernment is not in a position to exeicise its influence on both
parties, the possibility exists that such influence might be exei cised m a parallel
manner on Ibn Saud and on the Imam.
In effect and in the same way as the pressure exercised on the Imam b-
the Italian Government, the British Government has renewed its pressure
on Ibn Saud as is shown bv note verbale No. 265 of the 26th October last, and
by the aide-mdmoire of the 30th October, and by the note verbale No. 372 of
7th November. , , , t
4. The Royal Government holds that parallel hnghsh and Italian action on
the Imam and on Ibn Saud should continue to be exercised with a, view to avoiding
the further deterioration of the grave political situation existing to-day in the
Arabian Peninsula, and the interruption of the direct relations which still
exist between Ibn Saud and the Imam resulting in armed conflict between the
two States. . . ...
5. The Royal Ministry for Foreign Affairs notes with interest what the
British Embassy communicated in their note verbale No. 372 of the 7th November
last regarding the attitude of Ibn Saud and his point of view in regard to the
existing disputes with the Imam. From this communication it results that
the principal objects of Ibn Saud are to assure—
(a) The recall of the forces of the Imam from the de facto frontier existing
before the outbreak of the present conflict (Ibn Saud evidently refers
to the occupation on the part of the Imam of the territory of
Nejran).
(b) An agreed delimitation of this frontier.
(c) The confirmation of preceding agreements.
While not wishing to discuss the merits of the Saudi point of view, the
Royal Ministry for Foreign Affairs cannot refrain from observing that, while it
does not appear that the occupation of the territory of Nejran by the Imam
violated any existing rights of the Saudi Kingdom, no statement was made by
Ibn Saud regarding the territory of Asir, which he evidently considers as an
integral part of his kingdom, but which, in fact, constitutes the principal subject
of dispute between Ibn Saud and the Imam. It is, indeed, a positive fact, in
regard to which, in spite of the uncertainty of the available evidence
(“ Fincertezza degli elementi disponibili ”) that it was Ibn Saud who changed
the de facto and de jure situation existing in Asir by annexing it definitely to
the Saudi Kingdom.
6. The Royal Ministry for Foreign Affairs is replying separately to the
note verbale of the British Embassy No. 384 of the 20th November last.
Rome, December 1933 (XII).
Enclosure 3 in No. 1.
Note verbale from the Italian Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
(Translation.)
THE Royal Ministry for Foreign Affairs have the honour to acknowledge
the receipt of note verbale No. 384 of the 20th November last, in which the
British Embassy informed them that the London Government, appreciating
the desire of the Italian Government to eliminate all possible points of friction
between the two Governments and to co-operate in assuring the re-establishment
of pacific relations in South-West Arabia, accepts the proposal of the Italian
Government to hold a meeting of experts in Rome, but adds at the same time
that it desires to know in advance more precisely the proposals and, if possible,
the programme which the Italian Government has in mind. It adds that the
London Government is, for its part, forced to state that it is not in a position