ملف ٧٢٥١/١٩٢٠ الجزء ٣ "الجزيرة العربية: الوضع والسياسة؛ جدول أعمال اجتماعات اللجنة المشتركة بين الإدارات" [و‎‎٢‎٨‎٤] (٢٦٨/٢٠٥)

■mmimw
<P 7564)
4302
I
From Hi()li Commissioner, Baghdad, V3th October 1920.
(Repeated Simla.)
(Received 15th, 12 noon.)
12388. Simal. Your telegram No. 1303, dated 1st October. I have not yet
received full account of proceedings and results of meeting between Ahmed Ibn
Thunaiyan’s party and King nor have I received full text of draft agreement to be
taken to Bin Saud by Ahmed. Bin Saud promised to send me copy of latter on
receipt together with his views thereon.
In these circumstances I find it difficult to express a considered opinion on
Foreign Office proposal for meeting Arabian Chiefs with which, however, I agree in
principle if there proves to be ground for hope of arrival at a satisfactory under
standing regarding the points in dispute. In this connection Baco’s telegram No. 931,
of 23rd September, does not sound very hopeful, as little good can come of it if King:
insists on boundary between East Khurma and Turaba as sine qua non condition of
arbitration. Would suggest, therefore, that question of meeting should be held over
for consideration until we are in possession of full details of arrangements arrived at
at Jeddah. At the same time I am of opinion that meeting should be between
principals and no delegates who are scarcely likely to be invested by any parties with
full powers.
As regards suggestion that Commander Hogarth should act as arbitrator, 1 am ol
opinion that he has been too intimately concerned with recent politics of Arabia and
has. expressed too definite opinions in past to be regarded as wholly unbiassed or
impartial. If meeting could be arranged to take place at Bombay, I think that no
one would be more capable of tackling the problems involved or carry more weight
both by reason of his position and knowledge of affairs of Aiabia than 8n Ceorge
Lloyd if he would undertake the task. If Bombay is impossible I imagine Sir George
Lloyd would not be able to do so, in which case I would suggest Mr. Dobbs if he is
able and willing to act. Failing both these alternatives, I can think of no one more
adequate to the task than Col. W. G. Gray who is at home and so far as I know has
no reason to be anything but impartial. His exceptional knowledge pf Arabs and his
former experience of Arabian politics constitute strong recommendations m his lavour.
On the other hand, I am strongly of opinion that arbitrator should be as big a
personage as practicable, and I would recall arbitration of Lord Canning between
Muscatcircums^nces militate against such a meeting and recent Mecca conversations
prove devoid of result, it seems to me that only possible contribution that His Majesty s
Government can make towards settlement of disputes outstanding between the Km|,
Bin Saud, the Idrisi and Imam is to offer to send a Boundary Commission to delimit
their respective frontiers by arbitration on the spot, and to convey at the same time to
all narUes a clear warning that so far as His Majesty’s Government are concerned
refusal of good offices thus volunteered by any party will involve ex parte rejection of
tha party’fclaim and acceptance of present de /acto frontiers as final. Any party
thereafter transgressing these frontiers will render itsel liable to be deprived of such
financial assistance as ft now received from His Majesty’s Government.