File 345/1908 Pt 1 'Mohammerah: situation. British assurances to Sheikh.' [‎147r] (298/416)

i
/
y
/33 &
Departments are requested, if they suspect that there is any mistake
immediately with the Private Secretary to the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State.
Pi
in this telegram, to communicate
'■ .<'
■, ■ ’
ufO-'
COPY OF TELEGRAM.
From Yi
Dated
Received at London Office 1 r Cf~fT*
From Viceroy, 10th July 1908.
Foreign Secret. Relations with Mohammerah and the Bakhtiari Khans.
Your telegram of 12th ultimo. We have consulted Cox, who has replied as
follows, dated 4th July, No. 71, Shiraz
“ With reference to Government of India telegram, S. 379, 16th June.
As regards protection of Mohammerah against external aggression, communi
cation proposed in telegram from Secretary of State seems to he sufficient.
As regards maintenance of present status of Sheikh, I suggest that we might
remind him that relations between himself and the British have been close
and sympathetic m the past, and intimate that as long as he and his
successors adhere to these traditions and show themselves ready to promote
legitimate interests of British commerce and enterprise in their jurisdiction
we shall continue to regard maintenance of their prosperity and present
status as being important in our own interests, and that he may therefore
rest assured that we shall be disposed to give him and his successors the
utmost support compatible with strict loyalty on their part to the Persian
Government, and with our own engagements to respect integrity of Persia.
If possible I would add that in return for such assurance we ask bheikh to
undertake on behalf of himself and successors to take private friendly counsel
with us before committing themselves in connection with concessions, loans,
or other engagements to Foreign Powers or nationals.
Should Consul at Mohammerah make special suggestions they will be
sent as soon as received. . . .
As regards Bakhtiaris, 1 have been waiting to communicate with
Lorimmer. He thinks idea mooted in 1904 in connection with tribal levies
will not be practicable under any conditions compatible with present status
of Bakhtiaris and our own engagement to respect integrity of Persia and, as
he thinks that Khans aim at complete independence, he anticipates that any
definite undertaking or agreement would be frequently appealed to by them
for their own purposes. As far as any definite pledge is concerned I agree ;
but on the other hand, we have now to consider that the apparently bright
prospects of the oil industry, and the possibility of profitable irrigation greatly
emphasize importance to us of strengthening our own position m the region
in question, and of keeping the influence and enterprise of other Powers at
a distance. In the circumstances, I do not see why we should not give
Khans a verbal assurance on the lines above suggested m the case of Sheikh
of Mohammerah, adding the warning that such assurance applied to duly
constituted representatives of the Bakhtiari tribes, and not to individual
Khans with whose family dissensions we are not concerned. It does not
seem that such assurance would be opposed to terms of convention with
Russia.”
We agree with Cox as to Mohammerah. We think that it would be
unsafe to enter into negotiations with Bakhtiari Khans, and would not give
verbal assurances proposed by Cox.
w . SluN* (p ? ^
\