Coll 28/67 ‘Persia. Annual Reports, 1932–’ [‎16v] (32/644)

30
of specific instructions to the contrary, that authorisation had been sought through
the diplomatic channel and should raise no objection to the visit. At the same
time he invited Teymourtache to re-examine the question with a view to accepting
simple notification.
157. In reporting this conversation to the Foreign Office His Majesty’s
Minister expressed the opinion that neither Teymourtache nor anyone 61^^
attached any real importance to the removal of the Residency An office of the East India Company and, later, of the British Raj, established in the provinces and regions considered part of, or under the influence of, British India. from Bushire arr
that, if this were the case, it might be possible to secure both Hen jam and the
Bushire Residency An office of the East India Company and, later, of the British Raj, established in the provinces and regions considered part of, or under the influence of, British India. , thereby saving an outlay of some £150,000, and settle Bahrein,
if, in addition to the concessions already made, His Majesty s Government would
remit the whole of the war and post-war debt, the payment of which they had
long ago ceased to expect, accept an arms traffic agreement, which would cost
nothing, and possibly agree to some limited expenditure (certainly less than
£150,000) in assisting the Persian Government to buy arms or machinery in
England.
158. No final decision had been reached on these points, when on the
27th November the course of the negotiations was dramatically checked by the
note from the Minister of Finance to the Resident Director of the Anglo-Persian
Oil Company announcing the cancellation of the D’Arcy Concession.
IV.—Special British Interests.
(A) Persian Gidf.
General.
159. In August a storm in a tea-cup arose over a foolish article upon British
interests in the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. by “A Special Correspondent of the Morning
Post. This article expressed regret that, after the war, Great Britain,
“ exercising the rights of a conqueror,” had not annexed the Persian coast from
Bushire to Mohammerah, and the hinterland from there to Masjid-i-Suleiman
(the oil-fields); and then went on to show that this misplaced restraint had placed
modern Persia in the position of being able to pin-prick the Anglo-Persian Oil
Company, build a navy which would probably be used for an attack on Bahrein,
interrupt the air route to India, flout international practice in regard to visits
by warships and built at Bandar Shahpur a deep-water port which could deflect
from the Shatt-el-Arab much of the traffic upon which the port of Basra, a
British institution, relied for its revenue.
160. It is unlikely that there are any subscribers to the Morning Post in
Tehran, and the article was undoubtedly communicated to the press by the
Ministry for Foreign Affairs, together with the general line which they were to
take in reply. The consequent articles were to the general effect that Persia had
always known that Great Britain regarded the countries around the Gulf as
parts of her Empire, and it was all to the good that this should be officially stated,
as they now knew where they stood. The complaints of Persian obstruction were
then examined in detail, and all possible capital made out of various misstate
ments by which the writer The lowest of the four classes into which East India Company civil servants were divided. A Writer’s duties originally consisted mostly of copying documents and book-keeping. had unwisely left himself open to attack. The articles,
which continued for some days, also insinuated that the views expressed were
those of His Majesty’s Government and the whole affair inspired by the Anglo-
Persian Oil Company.
161. His Majesty’s Minister protested vigorously to the Minister for
Foreign Affairs against the two latter insinuations, which were even less
justifiable if founded on genuine belief, than if adopted as a matter of political
tactics, and took him to task for provoking a quite unnecessary outburst, the object
of which could have been quite well attained by enquiries in London. Feroughi
admitted that the whole thing was regrettable, but said that he and his colleagues
had been genuinely shocked by the suggestion that Great Britain, whom they had
always, regarded as the chief upholders of Persian independence, from motives
of selfi-interest as well as benevolence, cast covetous eyes on parts of Persia, and
that the poor little Persian flotilla was a menace to the greatest fleet in the world.
162. The storm died down as rapidly as it had begun and left no visible
trace on Anglo-Persian relations.