Papers of the Interdepartmental Conference on Middle Eastern Affairs [‎143r] (285/290)

D 4
—
3
p
{
t
protests from those Powers against Ilis Majesty’s Government (if, as
was hoped, the special position of that Government in Arabia,
exclusive of the Hedjaz, had been recognised by them). Secondly,
that if the Imam was subsidised and the Idrisi was not, the latter
would complain that, in spite of his services to the allied cause, he
was not being treated so generously as a ruler who had remained
consistently hostile to the Allies throughout the war.
Mr. Shuekburgh, in reply to a question by the Chairman, said
that while the 100,000 rupees Indian silver coin also widely used in the Persian Gulf. per annum granted to the Sultan of
Muscat in 1911 might not be regarded as a treaty engagement, it
would be scarcely possible in any circumstances to repudiate the
subsidy of 86,400 rupees Indian silver coin also widely used in the Persian Gulf. per annum paid by the Government of
India since 1873 and representing the amount of the tribute formerly
paid by the Sultan of Zanzibar under an arbitration award delivered
by Lord Canning, Viceroy of India in 1861.
The Chairman read paragraph 11 of the Foreign Office
Memorandum and pointed out that all the subsidies actually in force
were being paid either through 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. or the Government
of India.
Mr. Montagu hoped that the Conference would not confuse the
Government of India with 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. . He was not altogether
convinced that India was at all interested in the Arabian Peninsula.
For his part, he would be only too glad if the responsibility for
making recommendations for financial policy in Arabia were taken
off the shoulders 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. and placed elsewhere. He did
not, of course, mean by this to repudiate any Treaty obligations
already entered into by the Government of India.
The Chairman remarked that this would be an entirely new
departure. If any such suggestion had been made when he was
Viceroy of India it would have been received with some consterna
tion. In reply to a question by Mr. Montagu as to the potential
value or danger to India of such a ruler as Ibn Sand, he said that
the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. had always been regarded as an Indian interest.
The ships sailing on the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. were almost entirely Indian
ships. The Sultan of Muscat was practically an Indian chieftain.
The arrangements for the political control of the Gulf had been
made by India. The whole position had been defined in the report
of the Welby Commission. It was true that at that date the
political control exercised by the Government of India did not
extend above Fao, but even before the war the Resident at Baghdad
had been nominated by the Government of India. Had there been
any question of relations being established with Ibn Sand when he
w'as Viceroy he felt sure that the Government of India would have
strongly objected to these relations being established otherwise than
through them. It was a great shock to him to hear the suggestion
put forward that the Government of India should now wash their
hands of Arabia except in so far as they were already bound by
Treaty. So far as he remembered, certain of the Arabian chiefs—
the Sultan of Muscat, the Sub an of Shehr and Mokalla and the
Sultans of Lahej and Socotra—had attended the Delhi Durbar A public or private audience held by a high-ranking British colonial representative (e.g. Viceroy, Governor-General, or member of the British royal family). as
Indian gun-chiefs. They would surely be horrified if they were
told that India had now lost all interest in them.
Mr. Montagu reminded the Conference that there had been
considerable controversy on the subject of a proposed Middle
Fastern Department. He had always taken the view that if such a
Department were formed it ought to take over all responsibility for
the whole of Arabia. He was aware that the Indian Government
had recently expressed a desire to retain control of the Arabian
coast of the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. , but it had been his intention to differ from
them if the question came up again for discussion.
Sir Arthur Hirtzel said that the Eastern Committee had
decided in 1917 that the whole of Arabia should be removed from
[5084] B ^