File 4535/1928 Pt 8 ‘ – PERSIAN GULF – QUESTION OF ESTABLISHMENT OF PROTECTORATES OVER KOWEIT, BAHREIN, MUSCAT, TRUCIAL COAST.’ [‎89v] (172/194)

10
idr
JU$u*Jr
When this tribe finally left Bahrein in 1923 they were given shelter by Ibn Sand
m Dammam Persian question again arose over the “^^ f^pXTian
In June of that year the British consul at Bunder Abbas reported
passport officials at Lingah, the port at which the British-India ^ ip ^ p ersian
Bahrein, had ruled that Bahreinis were Persian subjects and should be g B hrein
passports. They seized two British certificates o 1 Y t i nsa h that this
subjects, but on representation orders were issued from Tehran to &
action was not to occur again. m • i Pnif tn irpat
In 1923 the Persian Government instructed its ofrcials in the G
Bahreinis as Persian subjects, and the Persian consul at Nejef issued a notice
the effect that Bahreinis should register at his consulate as R .• d the
In the previous year, 1922, a postal conference was held ^ “o ffice
[ Persian delegate while not for the moment pressing for the Bahrein Post umce,
intimated that his attitude was without prejudice to ^““^“^demanding
At the same time a press campaign was started in the Persian papers, demand g
the return^of Bahrein in London began to take a strong line ^g^mg
the conditions prevailing in the Government at Bahrein and °n the 7 th Decern
of that year addressed the Government of India in the following terms
“ I am to express the earnest hope that steps may be taken forthwith for
the introduction at Bahrein of reforms tending to ensure the equitable treatment
of Shiahs.”
Colonel Knox, the acting Resident, protested against action being pressed too
strongly. ^ replying to the Secretary of State the Government of India, in their
telegram dated the 14th May, 1923, stated .
“Knox overlooks the fact that the Foreign Office consider the time has
come to face the direct issue with Persia, and that should Persia appeal to the
League of Nations misrule would be the only serious flaw in our case. Pub y
is a°new factor that cannot be ignored. Developments are likely to have
unsettling effect on Ibn Sand. Prompt action in Bahrein is imperative, a
Knox should be given authority to take it at his discretion. . . We de
only to put ourselves right in the eyes of Bahrein and the wor .
65. In first pressing these reforms, the Government of India stated
“ Nothing should be done to encourage the idea that the sheikh is introducing
the reforms at Government dictation.
66. The question of these reforms and our interference m internal affairs is
dealt with in mv accompanying despatch No. 295—S of to-day s date
67. The international aspect of the case is then that I ersia, depen [i ng u po
her possession of Bahrein up to 1783, on the agreement of Captain Bruce m ^^a d
SmsChcr However, in Foreign Office letter, dated the 31st December, 1926,
addressed to the Under-Secretary of State, India, it is stated .
“ On nolitical grounds it is of great importance to avoid any action which
would result in the re-awakening of the controversy as to the sovereignty of
Bahrein.”
68 In 1922 however, we stated, as quoted above, that Colonel Knox was
“Asr s? s wssfe s-”sssps
ss srn: »
... .r.bnffifhave no hesTtation and no difficulty in disposing of her very illusionary