'Henjam. Position and Rights of His Majesty's Government in the Island of Henjam. The Sheikh of Henjam and his Affairs' [‎62v] (6/8)

A N rin8° 927 ' Re8 * ^ Tliis ^ naval P art y> tlle valuable services rendered by which were gratefully
p P 2958 . acknowledged subsequently by the Governor of the Gulf Ports.
29. The Sheikh was rebuked by the Senior Naval Officer for his
encroachment on the territory of the concession, which was, he alleged, the
result of misunderstanding; and was reminded that he had been warned
in June 1920 that should Persia take punitive action against him he need
not look for protection to His Majesty’s Government.
30. The Customs Mudir was replaced towards the end of 1927, but
punitive action by Persia was delayed till the spring of 1928. In May of that
year an armed Persian force landed on the island and expelled the Sheikh,
who fled with his subjects to the Trucial Coast A name used by Britain from the nineteenth century to 1971 to refer to the present-day United Arab Emirates. , leaving behind certain of the
women of the tribe. He had been warned that if he sought refuge in the
British Concession he would be surrendered, and the Persian troops on
arrival were permitted to enter and camp in the concession on the ground
that it was Persian territorj 7 .
31. The expulsion of the Sheikh, and in particular the fact that he had'
been refused shelter in the British Concession, produced a serious situation
on the Arab coast (see paras 18 and 19 of the Memorandum on the Trucial
Chiefs on p. “g ). The Political Resident A senior ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul General) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Residency. , apprehensive of the effect on
Trucial feeling of the adoption of a detached attitude by His Majesty’s
Government, suggested that His Majesty’s Government might act *as
intermediaries, with a view to ascertaining whether Persia would be
prepared to accept any terms on which the Sheikh could return on
acknowledging Persian sovereignty and paying blood money. His Majesty’s
Government, in agreement with the Government of India and the Charge
d’Affaires at Teheran, decided, however, that intervention on behalf "of
the Sheikh would be likely to do more harm than good; that a local
settlement was clearly the right solution, and that if any influence was
exercised with Persia it should be both unobtrusive and local.
32. The question of action on behalf of the Sheikh, in view of the-
situation on the Trucial Coast A name used by Britain from the nineteenth century to 1971 to refer to the present-day United Arab Emirates. , where feeling, further aggravated by the
Tamb incident, continued to run high, formed the subject of considerable
discussion during August and September 1928. In September 1928 the
Sheikh of Dabai reported, however, that a Persian Envoy from Hen jam had
arrived inviting the Sheikh and all his people, except the actual murderers
of the Mudir, to return; and the Senior Naval Officer, aware of the
reluctance of His Majesty's Government to intervene, advised that the
Sheikh of Henjam must decide for himself. On 20th September the
Political Resident A senior ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul General) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Residency. reported that the Sheikh, with his men, had returned to
Henjam, where he was understood to be awaiting the arrival of Persian
officials to effect a settlement.*
3o. Matters rest at this point. Ihe Government of India had previously
suggested that the Trucial situation now made it desirable to inform the
Bahai Arabs that while His Majesty’s Government could not admit “non
amenability of Sheikh of Henjam, as a resident on soil recognised by us as
leisian, to Persian authority in respect of his Henjam holding, we are
Tel. from Viceroy to prepared to represent views of Sheikh of Dabai and Beni las tribe .’. . to
Sept ms” p 1 sue 7 S ’ 1)ers . iau Government and use our good offices on behalf [of the Sheikh of
Henjam] provided he is prepared to make full restitution for the murder
of Customs Mudir. Matter might then be dealt with in autumn negotiations
on basis of full* acknowledgment of Persian sovereignty over Henjam.
Issue of nationality should be avoided if possible, but, if it is to be raised,
capital could be made ... of status of (? Persians) resident on the Arab
coast and in Iraq, and of Persian nationality law with its recognition of
jus sanguinis.' 1
Lr. from Pol. Res.
to G. of I., June 21
1928, P. 3979.
Tel. from Pol. Res.
to G. of L, 722,
Juno 13, P. 3077.
Tel. from Viceroy,
June 1«, P. 3167.
I.O. to F.O., June 23,
P. 3176.
F.O. to Teh., 152,
June 20, P. 3383.
Pol. Res. to G. of I.,
. 386, Sept. 20,
. 6125.
Tel. from S. of S.
• for 1. to Viceroy,
2009, Sept. 20,
P. 5125/28.
Teh. tel. to F.O.,
279, Sept. 21,
P.100/28.
34. The Government of India have been asked whether their views are
affected by the return of the Sheikh to Henjam. The Charge d’Affaires,
I eh era», who had sounded the Persian Government as to the return of the
Sheikh, has meanwhile expressed the view that failing a specific undertaking
by Persia that he “ be permitted to return in full liberty, he runs a certain
risk, and we cannot accept responsibility for what may happen.”