"المصالح البريطانية في ساحل الجزيرة العربية والكويت والبحرين وقطر" [و‎‎١] (٤/١)

t
British Interests on the Coast of Arabia, Koweit,
Bahrein, and El Katr.
The following extract from a letter of the 5tli January 1903, from the
Government of India to tlie ^ra\al Cornmander-in-Cliiet, gives a sue met
statement of the political geography of the Arabian coast of the Persian
Gulf. The places named are marked in the attached copy of Curzon's map.
" From Koweit to Katif town Ottoman rule has long been recognised, and,
in fact, though this has never been explicitly admitted, it would he
difficult to dispute Turkish claims to exercise jurisdiction as far as,
and inclusive of, Ojair. South of this place, and on the El Katr
peninsula, His Majesty's Gevernment have declined to recognise
Turkish sovereignty, though the Turks actually have a garrison at
El Bidaa . xi m • i
tt and inclusive of Odeid eastward, the coast belongs to the i ik i tl
Chiefs as far as Ras-el-Kheima. Thence, starting from Rams south
of Tibba, round the Musandim promontory, to Dihba, the country is
in the occupation of the Shihooh tribe. Claims ha\e been put loiwaid
bv the Sultan of Muscat to exercise jurisdiction over this tract, but it
has been held that his ascendancy is so indeterminate that it need not
be considered.
" From Dibba southward to Khor Kalba, the Batineh coast is regarded as
part of the territory of the Sheikh of Shargah. The local Sheikhs
have from time to time invoked the assistance of the Sultan oi Muscat,
but the Government of India have decided that no interference by
Muscat can be admitted; that this portion of the coast is subject to
the maritime truce; and that the Sheikh in power is bound by the
terms of the agreements which have from time to time been concluded
with the Trueial Chiefs."
The British Government has treaties with the Sheikhs of Koweit and
Bahrein, and with the Trucial Chiefs mentioned in the Government of
India's letter quoted above.
The Koweit Treaty (23rd January 1891)) provide? that the Sheikh shall
not receive the Agent or representative of any Foreign Power without the
consent of the British Government, and shall not ^scl', loa^e, moitgagt 1 , oi
rlM give for occupation/any portion of his territory to any Foreign Power or the
subject of a y Foreign Power. Simultaneously with the signing of the
Treaty, the Resident wrote to the Sheikh promising him the good offices of
the British Government, and impressing on him a> a condition of the Agree
ment that it should be kept secret and not divulged without our consent.
The Treaty was accompanied w T itli a gift of lis. 15.000.
The treaties with Bahrein and the Trucial Chiefs are on the same lines;
but provide not only that the Chief shall receive no representative of any
Foreign Power, but that he shall not enter into any agreement or hold any
correspondence with any loreign Power. And, as regards tiie cession of
territory, these treaties provide that the Chief will not sell, lease, &c., any
territory except to the British Government. These treaties contain no
promise of protection or good offices.
It may be added that we have a treaty w r ith Muscat (of 1891) by which
the Sultan agrees not to cede, sell, mortgage. &c., any portion of his
territory save to the British Government, and that along the southern coast
of Arabia, west of Dhofar, where Muscat territory ends, we have agreements
with the Sheikhs, along the coast as far as Aden and the lied Sea, binding
them not to hold correspondence or enter into agreements with Foreign
Powers. This stipulation in the majority of cases is accompanied by one
precluding the Chief from parting with territory.
Koweit.
Koweit has no immediate and direct relation with the question of the
policy to be pursued on Ihe coast south of Ojair where Turkish sovereignty
S. S. 4.