"ملف 4/13 II‎ الزبارة" [و‎‎٢‎٤‎٣] (٥٤٣/٤٩٣)

I.2.4&80/37.
(!.4062/8382/91)
Foreign (jX£lQe 9 3,rt m l
15tii July f 19^7.
J4y dear clauaon,
With reference to your letter I•^•4470/37 of tlie 10th July
a ..out the Sheikh of ^iraln c e cl* ia to Zuh&ra and sovereignty
over the haim trice we concur, ae 2 tioned on the telephone
to-div , in the inoU'uotiona which the India Office are
proyoain^: to telegram to Fowle^
£ # jieckett takes the view that the dispute is one between
two nritish protected elates - two entities which from the
international point of view are really inside the hrltlsh
Empire* It is analogous to a dispute between two E&lay
states and clearly it is the very essence of the position
which we maintain with regard to them under which we eland
between them and foreign powers, that hie Majesty’s
Uovermnent must when neceesary decide disputes between them
and can permit no jnecourse to ary outside autxicrity at all*
3* ?ie also consider it very important that we should be
careful not to do or say anything which might imply that we
recognised any claim by the Sheikh of Bahrain on the
mainland for tlie reason, apart from anything else, that if
the iheikh made good claims on the malnl&nu we should
greatly weaken our case for maintaining the integrity of
the ntar *.©ni aula against Xbn Saud*
4* Incidental ly the Article in the Aoglo-flurkieh
oonveation of 1913, by wiUoh die Majesty’s Government
undertook to prevent the hieikh of baiu*ain from intex'ferin,;
in any way on the foainlund of uitar, is still relevant as
showing our policy with regard to this matter at the tiioe,
even taough it is no longer in force as a treaty
obligation with Turkey*
Toui'S sincerely,
(Sd*) r.V.Breimu.
U*J*ciauson Ksq*