Letter from Sir Frederic Aarthur Hirtzel, India Office, to the Under Secretary of State, Foreign Office, dated 13 Sep 1922 [‎2r] (3/10)

o
o
ENCLOSURES.
ENCLOSURE Xo. 1:— Telegram from Secretary of State to 'Viceroy, 2lst March 1022.
1220. Colonial (Mice have pointed out that Article 132 of Treaty of Sevres leaves
le^al status of Arabia except Hedjaz undefined pending an agreement between
Principal Allied Powers, and that prospects of conclusion of such an agreement as
was contemplated at time of signing of treaty are now doubtful. Colonial Office
therefore recommended that while Kamaran should .perhaps be placed under British
suzerainty, independence of Arabian Peninsula should be recognised in the treaty,
leaving His Majesty's Government to rely on their international position for
predominance, and that all reference to a future agreement should be omitted.
Foreign Office in reply state they are prepared, while retaining Article 132 of the
treaty, to endeavour to secure insertion of an Article on the following lines :—
" Turkey hereby renounces in favour of the independent Arab rulers concerned
all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning anj-
territories in the Arabian Peninsula which are not otherwise disposed of in the
present treaty."
As regards Kamaran, Foreign Office are reluctant to invite counter-claims and
controversy by proposing any new provision giving special advantage to His Majesty's
Government and suggest that existing position of His Majesty's Government will
probably remain unchallenged if no specific mention is made of Kamaran in revised
treaty. Do you wish to offer any observations ? Please reply as quickly as possible.
ENCLOSURE No. 2 :— Telegram from Viceroy to Secretary of State, '21th March 1022.
38.1 S. Your telegram of the 21st March, 1226. We are not clear as to the
implications of the Colonial Office suggestion that Kamaran should be placed under
iiritish suzerainty. But if the idea is that it should be treated as part of Hedjaz, we
are definitely opposed to it, for British suzerainty over any part of Hedjaz would be
open to the strongest, possible objection. Politically and strategically, the arguments
in favour of our continued occupation rest presumably, not on value of Kamaran to
ourselves, but ou the necessity of keeping Italy or other Power out. Would inter
national control bo open to serious objection ? From quarantine point of view there
would clearly be advantage in transferring it, say, to Health Section of League of
Nations in view of international character of pilgrimage, cost involved over necessary
(? improvements) and possible odium attaching to collection of dues, if such
transference is otherwise unobjectionable and could be arranged, it would seem well
to provide for it in the treaty. If not, we agree with Foreign Office as to tactics.
We agree also with their general formula provided that Turkish renunciation is
confined specifically to " temporal " rights or some such phraseology. What Ave are
anxious for is that the language used should not stultify our recommendation
regarding the suzerainty of the J loly Places, or seem incompatible with the declaration
that the Khilafat question is one for Moslems themselves to decide. For the same
reasons we urge insertion of u temporal" in Article 98.
ENCLOSURE No. 3:— Telegram from Secretary of State to Viceroy, loth April 1922.
1542. Your telegram of 27th March, 381. With a view to revision of Treaty of
Sevres, it seems necessary to define precisely what is meant by Sultan's religious
suzerainty over Holy Places. 1 am not aware of your interpretation of term
suzerainty in this connection and should be glad to receive it. Also to know whether
Indian Moslems limit suzerainty to Holy Places or whether that limitation represents
all that you are prepared to support.
Particular amendment suggested in your telegram above quoted would apparently
have effect of imposing on independent rulers irrespective of their assent whatever
spiritual authority was previously exercised by Sultan, and as explained by my
predecessor in his telegram of 0th March, this is not possible. When we know
exactly what we want to secure, best means of securing it would perhaps be clause
to effect that nothing in this treaty shall prevent Turkish Government from arranging
it with rulers concerned. I should like your views on this also.