File 930/1912 'Mohammerah - Khoremabad Railway' [‎165r] (336/396)

I
35
Memorandum communicated by Mr.
Huth Jackson, 29th November 1910.'
Pol. 4383-5/10.
from His Majesty’s Charge d’Affaires at St. Peters-
which the Acting Minister for Foreign
Affairs (M. Sazonow) had described the project as a
counter-move to the Bagdad Railway and a comple
ment of the Anglo-Russian Agreement of 1907.
A little later some further particulars as to the
irans-t ersian Railway scheme were communicated
to the foreign Office in a memorandum by Mr.
Huth Jackson, dated the 29th November 1910.
Inter alia it appeared that a right was hoped for
' t to 1 make . a branch line to Char bar or to some
other point on the coast.”
Russo-9-erman Negotiations regard
ing linking of Tehran with Bagdad
Hallway, &c.
* Russia, it maj be remarked, lias an
Agreement with Turkey, dated March 1900,
by which the construction of railways in
Northern Asia Minor is reserved exclusively
to Russians among foreigners, under the
same conditions as govern the construction
of the Bagdad Railway. See Sir G. Low-
ther’s Despatch No. 57, 27th January 1909.
Pol. 3078/09.
Secretary of State’s telegram to Govern
ment of India, 30th December 1910.
Pol. 4383-5/10.
Mr. O. Beirne’s Despatch No. 461, 24th
November 1910.
Provisions as to Russian sphere in
Draft Ru iso-German Agreement.
Secretary of State’s telegram to Vice
roy, 14th J anuary 1911.
Pol. 2840/11.
40. The Despatch of the Secretary of State
regarding the Trans-Persian Railway had not been
long in the hands of the Government of India when
news was received of an important agreement in
course of^ negotiation between the Russian and
German Governments as the result of the visit of
M. Sazonow to Potsdam, providing (1) that the
Bagdad Railway should not be opposed by Russia;
(2) that Russia should link up Khanikin and
lehran with the Sadijah-Khanikin Railway; (3)
that Germany should not build lines between the
Bagdad Rad way and the Persian frontier north of
Khamkin , and (4) that Germany should recognise
Russia’s special interests in the north of Persia, and
not seek concessions for railways, roads, navigation,
or telegraphs in the Russian sphere.
The information was telegraphed to the Govern
ment of India on the 30th December, and they were
further informed that (according to a statement
made by M. Sazonow to Sir G. Buchanan) the
Russian promoters of the Trans-Persian Railway
were now favouring an alignment by way of Tehran,
Ispahan, \ ezd, and Kerman, though the Russian
Government themselves preferred a route from
Tehran south-east to Kerman “ to avoid possible
risk of ^ eventual German line intersecting at
“ Ispahan,” a prospect that had not been con
templated by His Majesty’s Government.
41. On the 14th January a further telegram was
addressed to the Government of India informing
them that for the purposes of the draft Russo-
German Agreement the southern limit of the Russian
sphere had been made to run from Kakh to the
Afghan frontier at the latitude of Gazik, and that
the draft Agreement had been modified in the sense
that Germany would not seek concessions in the
Russian sphere without first coming to an under
standing with Russia. The result was practicallv
to hand over the whole of the neutral section of the
Afghan frontier to Russia and Germany.
In reply the Government of India expressed the
view that the extension of the Russian zone, in the
manner above described, was an advantage rather
than the reverse, inasmuch as we should have the
E 2