‘Seistan Persia & Seistan’ [‎269v] (546/617)

Your Lordship, with a full consciousness of our responsibility in so saying
S difficult as we find it in existing circumstances to meet the financial and
ttiat ciimcim a r tlie ever increasing proximity of Russian
power r upon a the northern and north-western frontiers of India from the Pamirs
to HerTwe could not contemplate without dismay the prospect of Russian
neighbourhood in Eastern or Southern Persia the meltable consequence of
whi’ch must be a great increase of our own burdens; while the maritime
defensibility of India would require to be altogether reconsidered, were the
dangers of a land invasion to be supplemented hy the appearance of a possible
antagonist as a naval power in waters contiguous to Indian shores.
49 We cannot pretend to divine the future, or to say whether any
European Power, and if so which, will at any time push her advance to the
point of claiming a maritime outlet in or near to the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. . r lhe fate
of Mesopotamia lies beyond our ken: audit may be that in the collapse of
the Ottoman Empire, some stronger Power may one day exercise dominion
at Baghdad, may occupy Basrah, and may demand access for its vessels
to the neighbouring waters of the Gulf. Such a consummation, it is in
our opinion, & in the interests of British policy, as long as may he possible, to
postpone. But upon the question of allowing any European Power, and more
especially Russia, to overrun Central and Southern Persia, and so to reach the
Gulf, or to acquire naval facilities in the latter even without such territorial
connections, we do not conceive that any doubt whatever can he entertained;
and we imagine that it will he accepted as a cardinal axiom of British policy
that no such development would be acquiesced in by Her Majesty’s^ Government.
We would arrive with the greater confidence at this conclusion, since we were
lately informed hy Your Lordship that on April 15th of the present year, Lord
Salisbury communicated to the Persian Government with reference to rumours
of the cession of a port in the Gulf to Russia, that “ Her Majesty’s Government
felt it to he their duty to renew the intimation that it would not he compatible
with the interests of the British Empire that any European Power should
exercise control or jurisdiction over the ports of the Persian Gulf”.
50. Such being the existing situation in Southern Persia, and the prin
ciples of policy accepted hy Her Majesty’s Government being as already stated,
we pass to a consideration of the manner in which these principles should be
translated into action, and of the steps which should, in our opinion, be
taken at the present juncture for the protection of the common interests of
Great Britain and the Indian Empire.
51. We are aware that, more than half a century ago, there were
exchanged, and have more than once since been repeated, certain explicit
assurances concerning the integrity and independence of Persia between the
Governments of Great Britain and Russia. The first of these assurances were
entered into by Lord Palmerston and Count Nesselrode. The former in a
despatch, dated. September 5th, 1834, placed on record that “ the Governments
of Great Britain and Russia are acting, with regard to the affairs of Persia in
the same spirit, and are equally animated by a sincere desire to maintain, not
only, the internal tranquillity, hut also the independence and integrity of
Persia ”. Count Nesselrode, in despatches, dated October 20th, 1838, and
January 29tR 1839, reiterated these pledges on behalf of his Government.
gam in 1873 the continued existence of these mutual assurances was referred
to with satisfaction hy Count de Brunnow, as reported in a despatch hy Lord
GranviUe, dated July loth, 1873. Einally, on March 12th, 1888, M. de Giers
in itna e , ijoug i M. de Staal, to Lord Salisbury that the Russian Government
in n ° ° ° P ac ^ n £> a S a i n on record that their views on this point are
, » rr f 1 ?* . an( ^ a c P mrQU11 i ca ^ on fo the effect that the engagements
intpn P mlh?Af B rv! al S a “ d t0 res P ect aild promote the integrity and
was aeemffin^l th ® Pe . 1 ' slai ? bmgdom had again been renewed and confirmed,
was accordingly made by Sir H. 1). Wolff to the Shah.
are still in'^pvistpn.T. 8 '" that these pledges, so frequently renewed,
ill m existence, and while we have no desire to infer that they are

‘Seistan Persia & Seistan’ [‎269v] (546/617)

Transcription

About this item

Copyright: How to use this content

‘Seistan Persia & Seistan’ [‎269v] (546/617)

Transcription

About this item

Use and share this item

Copyright: How to use this content