Coll 17/15(2) 'Relations with Persia: Persia-Iraq frontier; Persia's claim in the Shatt-el-Arab' [‎444r] (898/1010)

■HMfflBBHnai
[11283]
aU
M4)
v-istante ” the reference to a de facto situation, which had proved the stumbling-
block to agreement on a report and resolution ever since the negotiations began.
This' new draft was not communicated to the Iraqi delegation. A copy reached
1 pritish delegation, who seem to have been given to understand that the Iraqi
delegation had accepted it. (Even at the present date I have no copy of this
^^21. Immediate steps were taken to have the reference to the May session
■ mended and to secure the removal of the words £C situation existante.” The
gecond paragraph was therefore omitted entirely, and the report in its final
form is attached, for convenience of reference, as Appendix L.
22. There is evidence tending to show that the rapporteur did intend to
rush through a report to which the Iraqi delegation had not agreed, and that
tho Persians were aware of this intention. The draft of Kazimi’s last speech
was returned by the translation section in error to the Iraqi delegation : it
contained ready prepared a paragraph replying to an anticipated objection by
y ur i pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. to the words ‘ ‘ situation existante ’ ’ !
■)
Appendix A.
Brief Resume of the Turco-Rersian Frontier Question.
(Communicated to MM. Aloisi and Madariaga on January 12, 1935
Persia and Turkey were in an almost chronic state of war from the 16th to
the early 19th century. The first recorded treaty between them, tong
frontiers, was signed in 1639. The boundaries there defined were rea ime
further treaties, concluded after renewed wars, in 1746 and 1327.
A series of frontier incidents between 1833 ana 1842 a g^ in f • ndlv
Empires to the verge of war. Great Britain and Russia o ere . ,
mediation, and in 1843 a mixed commission, composed q repres -p m -
principals and British and Russian mediating commissioners met at Lrze^ ^
the result of their labours was the Treaty of Erzeium o ,
modern history of the boundary question begins. seventy
This treaty was continuously acted upon and invoked for he next
years until 1914, when the boundary was finally demarcate surV eyed the
1848. A TlpllrMtnHnn Gommission, set up under its provisions, surveyeu^
years until 1914, when the boundary was finally demarcate surve yed the
1848. A Delimitation Commission, set up under lts ^
frontier zone, and suggested a boundary one m cei am ^ and delayed
The preparation of the maps was interrupted by _ mneluded a convention
by other technical difficulties. In 1869 the ^overnmeffis colluded a^co^ ^ ^
for the observance of the status quo obtaining n logg y „ the following
commission of 1849-52. The maps were comp ^ e „ , mec |i a tjng Powers,
years Persia made further appeals .f° r the in p' reached a deadlock. Mediating
A Turco-Persian commission met m 1874. Considerable progress had
commissioners then joined the commission in ’ Ben the Russo-Turkish war
been made towards the fixing of the boon A , and t j ie treaty of Erzerum
of 1876 again interrupted w T ork. ? ncl ^ e ^- s C ^ ^nno-es that followed. In 1912 a
was frequently invoked in the diplomatic the boundary line, basing
commission met, charged with the task o T A n-i q the assistance of the
their work on the Treaty of ^ rzerun ^' d an d signed, giving a detailed
mediating Governments, a protocol was g „ P a delimitation Commission to
description of the boundary and provi ^ dll i v completed the task in 1914.
demarcate it on the ground. The commis ^ va ii d ity of the treaty, the PJ >0 ^° ( P
The Persian Government dls P ute ^- ion of 1914; it further alleges that the
and the work of the Delimitation Commission^t ^ ^ nav i g able river of the
boundary laid down was inequitable par J k and not the median line
Shatt-el Arab, where it follows the left oi Perwa
or thalweg. . . . f Ipa-al arguments, and it is not necessary
The matter of validity is one & i ■
touch upon it in this brief summaiy- no t Persia, has the righ o co 1 P
The Iraqi Government feels that . e ^ p ers i a has a coast line of nea >
of the boundary on the ground of ^ d J In the Khor Musa, only 50 kilorm
2,000 kilom., with many ports and anchorages b 2