"مسقط. تساؤل حول إمكانية إنشاء قاعدة بحرية لتستخدمها سفن بريطانيا في خور قوي أو في مكان آخر في أراضي مسقط يتوافق مع الاتفاقيات الدولية الحالية لحكومة بريطانيا". [و‎‎٦] (١٢/١١)

11
42. On this assumption, the questions for settlement appear to be—
(a) the extent to which, and the conditions on which, H.M. Government are
at liberty, having regard to the construction whioh has been placed on
the Declaration of 18(^, to acquire rights in respect of the use of a site
in Muscat territory for naval purposes;
(h) whether such conditions are capable of fulfilment.
43. As regards the first of these points, it would be open to a British subject in
liis private capacity (as distinct from the British Government) to acquire land for
use as a harbour or a station under the terms of Article 3 of the British Commercial
Treaty of 1891. H.M. Government themselves suggested to the French in 1899
that the difficulty which had arisen over Bunder Gisseh should be solved by the
acquisition of a site for a coaling shed by a French subject, and the suggestion
was rejected at the time by the French Government professedly only because it
would not have been consistent with their prestige to accept it in the light of the
relerences which had been made to it in the English Press. There are, however,
in any event, obvious difficulties about the acquisition of an area which would in
practice be used only or even predominantly for naval purposes by any private
individual.
41. If, on the other hand, rights acquired are acquired by Government and not
by a private individual, the construction of the Declaration of 180^ at once becomes
material. The construction placed on that Declaration in the discussions of
1899-1900 described above was that neither signatory of the Declaration can,
consistently with its terms, obtain a lease or cession of Muscat territory; that
no action is permissible which would be an infringement of the independence of
the Sultan (compare on this point the opinion expressed by the Law Officers in a
different connection in 1899, paragraph 28 above) ; and that in these circumstances
to acquire territorial or sovereign rights over property which they use in Muscat,
to fly the national flag, or to erect defensive works, on such property would be a
violation of the terms of that Declaration. (The coal sheds which H.M. Government
have held in Muscat since 1874 have accordingly been held on sufferance only ; the
national flag has not been flown, defensive works have not been erected, and no
territorial or sovereign rights in the area have been conveyed. The coal sheds held
by France from 1900 to 1920 were held on the same basis. Of the other sites at
present occupied by H.M. Government, the use of the site of the civil aerodrome
at Gwadur has been granted by the Sultan, who will receive an annual rent in
return; its use is not confined to British subjects or aeroplanes ; the British flag
is understood not to be flown ; and liability for protection rests with the Sultan.
The position in regard to the strategic aerodromes is not clear; but it would appear
that the Sultan, while retaining full sovereignty, has granted the use of the sites in
question rent free, the British flag not being hoisted, and defensive works not being
erected.)
45. It is open to question, in the second place, whether, on the construction
placed on the Declaration in 1899, H.M. Government are not committed to
recognising that either signatory can claim rights under the Declaration
corresponding to those which may be acquired by the other. H.M. Government
felt unable in 1899 to plead the Exclusive Agreement of 1891 against the French;
that Agreement has at no stage been officially communicated to the French
Government (and a French statement to the Sultan that it is inconsistent with the
Declaration of 1862, and cannot be recognised, remains on record); and
H.M. Government urged in the course of the discussions that France has no right
to any privilege which England has not also a right to possess (paragraph 3l3 above).
The point is of some importance because of the risk that the French, for reasons
of prestige or from a desire to embarrass, either now or at a later stage, might
advance a claim to a corresponding concession which (despite the provisions of
the Exclusive Agreement of 1891) it might be difficult for the Sultan or for
H.M. Government to resist.
4(). From the above it would appear that H.M. Government might reasonably
•claim to be entitled, consistently with their existing international engagements,
to acquire rights in the Khor Quwai from the Sultan of Muscat, so long as those
rights were without prejudice to the sovereignty of His Highness, conveyed no
territorial or sovereign rights, and did not involve the flying of the national flag
•or the erection of defensive works. There need be no question of any acquisition