مجموعة ٦ / ٦٧ (١) "حدود جنوب شرق الجزيرة العربية وقطر". [و‎‎١‎٢‎٧] (٧٩٤/٢٥٨)

P"
THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT
EASTERN (Arabia).
October 18, 1934
CONFIDENTIAL.
Section 1.
:J 3 4 j
HT 1 IM T .. . hit- -K>' i ' - •^ort***' ** هذه التواريخ تقريبية
[E 6371/279/91]
No. 1.
Sir John Simon to Mr. Calvert (Jedda).
(No. 375.)
Sir,
Foreign Office, October 18, 1934.
WITH reference to my despatch No. 368 of the 11 th October enclosing a copy
of a record of a conversation held on the 3rd October with the Saudi Arabian
Minister in London regarding the eastern and south-eastern frontiers of Saudi
Arabia, I have to inform you that on the 15th October Sheikh Hafiz Wahba called
again at this Department to discuss this subject.
2 . He said that he had communicated to his Government the views which
had been expressed to him on the occasion of the conversation referred to above
and that he had now received King Ibn Sand’s reply, which was as follows.
3. King Ibn Sand’s claims in South-Eastern Arabia were to the whole of the
inland desert as distinct from the more or less settled coastal belt. The King
had no desire to encroach on the settled, or even the nomadic, coastal areas, and
had always maintained the friendliest relations with the coastal rulers. But the
frontier which he proposed, i.e., the limit of the desert as distinct from the coastal
belt, had always been the de facto boundary, had always been accepted by all
the parties directly concerned and had never in fact been questioned. All the
nomadic tribes in the desert area had always owed him allegiance and accepted
his sovereignty, as was evidenced by the fact that they regularly paid him zikat
tax. Their allegiance to him had never been disputed. On being asked whether
this meant that King Ibn Saud claimed the whole of the Rubai Khali, the
Minister explained that King Ibn Saud’s claim was not specifically to the Rubai
Khali, but to the “desert” generally as distinct from the coastal belt.
4. Sheikh Hafiz Wahba was warned that many of these statements could
hardly be accepted by His Majesty’s Government. Moreover, a claim of this
general nature was likely to lead to a number of special difficulties. So far as
the information at present available went, there appeared to be very little in
South-Eastern Arabia that was not desert, and indeed barren and uncultivated
areas often extended to the coast. It would be necessary, therefore, m the first
place to arrive at a satisfactory definition of the term desert, in the sense^ in
which it was now being used, and this might be a matter of very consideraole
difficulty. . ,
5. During the general discussion which followed, the Minister emphasised
that King Ibn Saud was anxious to settle this question on a reasonable basis. It
proved impossible, however, to obtain from him a closer definition of the King s
claims It was suggested to him that King Ibn Saud might at least have given
some further indication of the particular tribes over which he claimed over
lordship Mention had, for instance, been made by Fuad Bey Hamza o± the
Murra tribe, about which it was possible that there might be no very serious
difficulty. On the other hand, the Manasir had also been mentioned and this
tribe it was understood, had long owed a certain allegiance to the Sheikh of
Abu Dhabi. The Minister admitted that certain tribes, whose wanderings took
them over the desert, might properly belong to the coastal belt, but he did not
puisue Wahba was told that his communication would have to be
betore Sir ixnarew xyyaii icxi, xyi. : : u -u ^ i
reaching an early agreement—or, indeed, perhaps any agreement at all by local
negotiation were likely to be very greatly increased.
JOHN SIMON.
[231 s—1]