"ملف 29/6 العلاقات البريطانية مع خزعل، شيخ خرمشهر" [ظ‎‎٣] (٢٨/٦)

4
Conf. 8410,
Pfo. 150
Conf 8436,
No, 105
Conf. 9302,
No. 99
Conf 9302,
No 205.
Conf. 9307,
No 168.
Conf. 9307,
No. 197
Conf. 9535,
No. 274.
Conf. 9535,
No. 426 *
by the Rais-et-Tujjar to His Majesty’s Vice-Consul at Mohammerah in February
1904; the Sheikh expressed his thanks and stated that the Persian Government
had not yet taken sufficiently decided 1 action as to render the intervention of
His Majesty’s Minister necessary, but that he would let His Majesty’s Minister
know shoufd circumstances arise to justify such assistance. Later in the year,
however, the Resident in the Persian Gulf reported that the Sheikh was chafing
at the difficulties and uncertainty of his relations with, and position undter, the
Shah’s Government, and was at heart dissatisfied at the limited measure of
support which the British Government had been able to promise him.
Renewals and Amplification of British Assurances, 1908-10.
7. In the years following the British assurances, Sheikh Khazal appears
to have suffered little serious interference from the central Government, who,
in their weakness and in the chaotic situation in the country generally, appear
to have been content to allow the Sheikh to rule undisturbed over his territories :
in fact, the Sheikh actually complained to His Majesty’s Consul at Mohammerah
in October, 1907, that, while the Persian press and the Majlis were attacking
him on various counts, he was being left to his own resources in policing the
Shatt-el-Arab and suppressing disorders amongst the Persian tribes. He
expressed a similar view to the British Resident in January, 1908, complaining
that he was left to defend the frontier against Turkey, and had to meet heavy
expenditure which should have been borne by the central Government; (actually,
although Turkey was making trouble further north, she had not extended such ^
activities to the Sheikh’s territories).
8. At the meeting with Major (afterwards Sir Percy) Cox in January, 1908,
the Sheikh, influenced partly by recent assurances given to the Sheikh of Koweit
(with whom he was on terms of close friendship) and by the advent of constitu
tional government in Persia, raised again the question of the British assurances,
saying that it was vital for him to know what would be the policy of His Majesty’s
Government, as far as he was concerned, in the event of {a) the break-up of
Persia, or (b) an attempt by the Majlis (as opposed to the former absolute govern
ment of the Shah) “ to reduce him to nothing ”; he asked for an assurance in
writing which should apply not only to himself but to his heirs, in return for
which he offered to bind himself to the British Government in any way considered
feasible. In reporting this conversation, the Political Resident expressed the
opinion that the Sheikh was primarily sincere in his protestations that his hopes
and interests were centred on the British Government, but that he was never
theless mainly prompted by the dictates of self-preservation and that, failing
satisfaction from us, he might turn to the Germans for support. The Foreign
Office took the view that the Sheikh, by reason of the geographical situation of
his possessions and by his considerable local influence, was in a position to hinder,
or even prevent, the prosecution of any foreign enterprise in the country watered
by the Karun, and that it was very desirable to secure his absolute adherence
to British interests in order to ensure that his power might always be exercised
in their favour by opposing any schemes which might be distasteful to His
Majesty’s Government; they were, therefore, disposed to repeat the previous
assurances, applying them to the Sheikh’s successor and amplifying them by a
form of words which would include the continuance of the Sheikh’s existing
state of autonomy.
9. After consultation with the Government of India, the Political Resident
received instructions to address a written assurance to the Sheikh, which he did
in a letter of the 1st December, 1908, the text of which is given as document No. 3
in the annex.
10. These renewed and amplified assurances failed to satisfy the Sheikh,
who, in March, 1909, complained to the Political Resident that they safeguarded
him only as long as Persia remained a sovereign State; he wished the guarantee
to be extended in such a manner as to make it effective in the event of Persia’s
being occupied by foreign Powers or ceasing to be an independent State as a
result of foreign intervention; above all he wanted an assurance to the effect
that, provided he and his heirs and tribesmen continued to show themselves
amenable to British advice and faithful to British interests, their possessions
would be guaranteed to them. In addition, he asked for advice whether to side
with the Royalists or Nationalists, both of which parties had been calling upon
him to throw in his lot with them, declaring that he must inevitably take one
side or the other and expressing his fear that, if he came to a decision without
our advice, we might withdraw our guarantee on the ground that his decision
was unsatisfactory to us. Lastly, he appealed for a loan, saying that, if we could