File 87/1926 Pt 2 'Arabia: Bin Saud: Relations with H.M.G. Revision of Treaty.' [‎537r] (761/840)

41
any time to take measures for the protection of those routes, but I
could assure His Hig-hness that the Government of Trans-Jordan,
as such, would not fortify Azraq or use it as a military centre. Any
military measures that mig-ht be taken would be purely for the pro
tection of Imperial air or car routes and would not in any way be
directed against His Highness. At the present time, however, as
far as I was aware, there was no intention of any such measures
being taken and if any were taken they would only be adopted at the
instance of the British Government and not by Trans-Jordan.
Ibn Sa‘ud replied by thanking me and saying that it afforded him
extreme satisfaction that agreement had been reached on the points
discussed. He feared at first that agreement would not be arrived
at, and he had felt compelled to make sacrifices in order to come to
an agreement and thus to give proof of his goodwill and intentions
towards Great Britain.
I said that I greatly appreciated that spirit, and that when my
report was written I would not fail to explain His Highness’
attitude, which I felt sure would give great satisfaction to the British
Government.
Ibn Sa‘ud then said that with regard to the Agreement he wished
to ask a question or two merely for information and elucidation of
certain points. I he first was the question of the fortifications which
were forbidden at Kaf. He wished to know exactly what he could
not fortify. For instance, would he be allowed to build barracks
lor soldiers; could he build a wall round the place as a protection
against marauding tribes, and could he place a machine gun or two
on that wall without such precautions being considered as consti
tuting fortifications.
I answered that I did not consider the building of barracks or the
taking of reasonable precautions against raiders and for the preser
vation of order could be considered fortifications. The British
authorities would doubtless interpret that clause liberally.
Ibn Sa‘ud said it was not the British Government’s view that he
feared so much as what Trans-Jordan would say, and perhaps other
countries. He then proceeded to his next question, which concerned
the system of transit, and asked how the regulation would affect a
tribe who wished to cross into Syria, not for trading purposes. How
would the inspection be carried out. They might possess 10,000
camels, and camels require untouched grazing ground. There was
also the question whether they would be allowed to carry personal
weapons and ammunition.
I replied that the case he mentioned appeared to be covered by the
travelling clause. The provision regarding inspection had to be
inserted in the Agreement, because it touched matters dealt with by
international conventions, such as traffic in forbidden drugs, etc.,
and when movements of tribes took place through the territory of
another Government some system of control was necessary. In
that particular part of the country, however, there were in fact no
posts of examination at present and might not be until further con
versations on detailed matters concerning trade, customs, etc., had
taken place between the Governments concerned. With regard to
personal weapons, I did not think this would present any difficulty.
An Arab’s weapons were almost part of his dress and in the open