'File 73/7 V (D 38) Status of Kuwait, Anglo-Turkish Convention' [‎15v] (43/216)

142
What Prince Lichnowsky said about in" the eonstruction contracts " if any."
VVnat rrmce ijiouu y „ expression not less than 20 per
our willingness to agree tirely cen t." is retained merely to confuse the
participation of pe ^ Gov _ Gerinan public into believing that there
maintained, bu e j eatest i m - is a parallel between article 2, clause (i),
portance hiT particSar lording. and Lticle 4, clause (6) but it is explain-
ana I would Strongly recommend ed that Germany is still willing in point
ana i wuuka & j ^ {act to | et us have 40 per cent. His
its acceptance. Majesty's Government gave good rea
sons for asking for a 50 per cent, parti
cipation in their note of the 18th Sep
tember. If now His Majesty's Govern
ment agree to 40 per cent, they might
well only do so on condition of British
participation in the port of Bagdad as
well as in that of Basra. Lord Inch-
cape considered participation in Bagdad
valueless ; but the point merits fresh con
sideration as opportunity for such parti
cipation now arise .3 again, and in any
case His Majesty's Government should
stipulate against discrimination as
between vessels of different nationality
at the railway port of Bagdad.
The last paragraph beginning with It is true that this is not primarily a
" any " and ending with " commis- ™tter for an Ang o-German convention ;
sion could be left out. It is con- but there is, nevertheless, some advantage
tained in the Anglo-Turkish Conven- m securing the German Government s
tion, and will be confirmed in the agree- assent to sue a s 'pu a ' ori a ^ n or 18
ment between the Bagdad Railway reason ^ seems we o re am i .
Company and the Turkish Govern
ment.
In article 3, clause (c), the Imperial ^ no ^ ye can safely agree to
Government would like to see the g eo g ra pl llca ^ definition, even if the
words " within the provinces of Mosul Aleppo-Meskene question is settled. We
and Bagdad " replaced by "in Otto- could hardl y mortgage the future as re
man territory east of Aleppo," and g ar( I s an y ^ ne f r( >m the ^Mediterranean
after " Bagdad Railway Company's to Lower Mesopotamia ; and, as it is, 1
lines " interpolated or " in contradic- think we should attacl1 to the
tion with that Company's existing tion a map showing the limits of Bagdad
rights." & ? ' n( I Mosul. As reg ,rds tha words '' or
in contradiction with that Company's ex-
The first alteration is based on the isting rights," I think we might agree to
belief that the wording proposed in them subject to a satisfactory settlement
the British counter-draft would not of the Mesopotamia!! oil question,
sufficiently protect the Bagdad Rail
way interests against the possibility
of a competing line from sorre point
of the Mediterranean to Lower Meso
potamia being supported by His
Majesty's Government. It is hoped
that the plan of constructing a line
from Aleppo to Meskene can be suc
cessfully dealt with during the Franco-
German negotiations about railways
in Asia Minor.
Article 4, clause (b), asks for a 20
per cent, participation in the shares
of the River Navigation Company.
I his is the irreducible minimum we
must ask for, and nothing less but
As 20 per cent, is the maximum we
could agree to as regards German parti
cipation in the river navigation [article
4, clause (6)] it seems undersirable and
indeed deceitful to adopt the wording