Coll 29/104 'Appointment of an Indian to the Tehran Legation (First Secretary or Trade Commissioner)' [‎67v] (134/243)

Minute.
The Government of India’s telegram No.5302 of July 8 th
last put forward a proposal for the appointment of an Indian
as (additional) First Secretary at H.M. Legation, Tehran.
V/hile they apparently contemplated that the functions of the
new post would, at any rate ostensibly, be mainly of a
commercial nature, the first paragraph of their telegram
indicated a number of other directions in which they
considered it might be useful. They made it clear, however,
that their proposal was actuated largely by considerations
of principle; since they felt that the emergence of India
towards dominion status would inevitably be reflected in a
demand for her fuller representation abroad, particularly
in the countries of the Middle East where she has special
interests. They added that they had provisionally selected
Major A.S.3. Shah for the post.
2. The Government of India had consul^tted H.M. Minister
at Tehran, who had apparently discouraged the proposal on the
grounds that (a) arftj^ Indian First Secretary would probably
be unable to achieve much result, and (b) objections were to
be anticipated from the Persian Government. Exactly what
objections are to be expected has never been explained to us,
but it was surmised here that they would be directed either
against the appointment of an Indian as such, or against the
appointment of a representative of a country which is not
fully self-governing. It Should be possible to overcame the
second objection by explaining to the Persians that the
r official status of the post would be in no sense that of a
representative of India, but simply that of a member of the
Legation under the orders of H.M. Minister.
3. The Government of India’s telegram was forwarded to
the Foreign Office under cover of a letter No. Ext.3620/42
of July 30th, which strongly supported their proposal.
The Foreign Office reply, dated August 31st, said that the
^ Government of India’s proposal had been submitted to Mr.
Eden, who did not feel able to consent to the appointment
of an Indian First Secretary ;at the Tehran Legation so
long as the Government of India already had one of their
officials there with the local rank of Counsellor (viz.,
Mr. Squire of the Indian Political Service The branch of the British Government of India with responsibility for managing political relations between British-ruled India and its surrounding states, and by extension the Gulf, during the period 1937-47. ). They
observed that the appointment in addition of an Indian
First Secretary ’’would mean that two of the highest posts
oft Bullard’s staff would be held by the Government of India’s
nominees”, and they did ’’not feel able either to accept such
a position or to regard it as likely in any way to satisfy
the future India”. Their letter, in fact, gave the impression
that they suspected the Government of India of a disingenuous
attempt to flood the Legation with their officials in order to
Qbfc&kti the control over our policy towards Persia which they
had unsuccessfully endeavoured to secure last year. On the
other hand, they offered to examine further, in consultation
with Sir R. Bullard, the desirability of appointing to the
Legation an Indian Coramercial Secretary ’’with the functions
/O^Uckthe title implies”.
4-. It ■'was considered here that although the Foreign Office
counter proposal was unlikely to satisfy the Government of
India, they might possibly accept it as the thin end of the wedge
- hoping that they would be able gradually to enlarge the scope
of the Commercial Secretary* s functions in the direction of a
more general representation of India. The Foreign Office
views and counter proposal were therefore put briefly to the
Government of India in the Secretary of State’s telegram No.lolob
of September 14-th.
5 . The Government of India's express letter below makes it
/clear