مجموعة ٢٨ /٦٥ "بلاد فارس. العلاقات التجارية الفارسية-السوفيتية." [و‎‎٢‎١‎٠] (٤٨٢/٤٢٠)

THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTaTjr
rtmnf
MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT
PERSIA.
3428
May 10, 1933.
CONFIDENTIAL.
1935 ,
i. ■ ■ —
Section 1.
[E 2433/21/34]
No. 1.
Mr. Hoare to Sir John Simon.—(Received May 10.)
(No. 185.)
Sir,
Tehran, A'pril 22, 1933.
’ I HAVE the honour to report that on the 13th April the oriental secretary
to this Legation had a conversation with Mirza Hamid Khan Sayyah, the head of
the Russian section of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs on the subject of Soviet-
Persian relations.
2. Mirza Hamid Khan Sayyah immediately embarked on a long dissertation
on the evils of the Bolshevik regime. He referred to the Moscow trial, and said
that it showed how the Russians had to stage such trials to draw off attention
from their own failures.
3. Mr. Trott asked how negotiations about the commercial impasse were
proceeding. Sayyah said that no negotiations were at present in progress. It
remained to be seen whether the new Ambassador (whose name he gave as
Pastukhoff) would arrange a new treaty, or at any rate fulfil the old.
4. He knew that the Russians were reducing their staffs in various
consulates. He could not give him details; the Protocol Department knew all
about that. But he knew that what was wrong with the Russians now was their
desperate lack of “valuta ” ; they had no spare money for use abroad.
5. On the 20th April Mr. Trott had the chance to revert to this matter with
Mirza Farrukh Khan Braghon, the “chef du protocole,’’ who professed to have
no idea when the new Soviet Ambassador was likely to arrive.
6. As for the closing of Soviet consulates in Persia, Farrukh Khan said
that the only two which had been definitely closed were those of Maku and
Muhammadabad (Sarakhs) on the northern frontier. In other posts such as
Isfahan it was true that acting consular officers were in charge, but no post other
than the two quoted had been closed.
7. Farrukh Khan confirmed the statement that the reason for economising
was the lack of foreign exchange. The same difficulty was also causing the
Persian Government to close some of its consulates in the Soviet Union. During
the first part of the Soviet regime consular officers had been authorised to buy their
requirements from the local co-operative. This was stopped a year or two ago,
and now Persian consuls were obliged to pay in foreign exchange for their
purchases at the Torgsin shops. Apart from that, in the old days the
200,000 Persians in Russia used more or less to maintain the Persian consular
establishments in Russia. But now, all the remaining Persian nationals weie
very poor and nothing could be extracted from them. The result was a serious
budgetary problem for the Persian Government, who were gradually deciding to
cut down their representation. .
8. Apart from the consulates referred to above the Soviet Government are
represented at Ahwaz, Astarabad, bhiraz, Isfahan, Kermanshah, Meshed, Resht,
Tabriz and Pahlavi. There are also trading organisations at some other places,
such as Bushire and Muhammerah.
9. I am reporting separately upon the possibility of a denunciation ot the
fPerso-Soviet Commercial Treaty. , ^ A ^ .
10. I am sending copies of this despatch to the Foreign Secretary to the
Government of India.
I have, &c.
R. H. HOARE.
[803 k—1]