Coll 17/15(1) 'Perso-Iraq Relations: Persia-Iraq frontier; Persia's claim in the Shatt-el-Arab' [‎383r] (777/961)

correspondence between the two Governments, the volume of water allowed to flow
into Iraqi territory was, on occasion, actually increased, but onlv for a short time
after which the water supply was cut off again. Thus the Mandali gardens and
plantations have been ruined, only a very small section of them remaining.
The same is the case with Zarbatiya waters. The Persians first hegan to
exploit the Kunjan Cham River in 1930. Later on they constructed dams, part of
which fall within the frontiers of Iraq. The Persian argument in defence of the
cutting-off of the water of this river was that the water belonged to the Persians;
that the latter were entitled to take all their requirements from it, and that the
Iraqis might benefit by such portion as was left. Thus have the gardens and
plantations of Zarbatiya been ruined.
4. Diyala Liwa.
The Persians demolished frontier pillars in the west of Jabal Maimaik and
constructed a post at Xi-Khidr. Following prolonged discussions with the Persian
Government a body of experts was sent out by the Ministry of Defence. This
body drew up a technical report, in the light of v 7 hich was drafted the note of our
Legation at Tehran dated the 23rd September, 1933. After a number of
reminders had been addressed to them, the Persian Government sent out their
above-mentioned reply, refusing to recognise the Frontier Protocol as
an instrument determining the frontier line between the two States.
5. Suleimanieh Liwob-Qadha of Halabja.
The following are the more important questions at dispute :—
{a)
There is in the Qadha of Halabja a village called Biara-Nard, the water
supply of which flows down from the Persian village of Hani-Kramlah
and accumulates on the Iraqi border. The Persians claim that the
locality where these waters accumulate is Persian territory, whereas
it is actually Iraqi territory. Acting upon their contention, the
Persians are continually violating the frontier at Biarah and breaking
through the water dams, although they are unable to benefit from these
waters, which only flow into the valleys uselessly.
They (the Persians) have seized a plot of land in the village ot Banawa
They U have prohibited the Iraqi natives of the village of Tawila passage
into the woods belonging to that village and from which the villages
obtain their wood.
The latest information reports activities on the part of the Persians with
a view to making such use of the waters of the Alwand a fll nV l0r !ties
adverse effect on Khanikin; also activities on the part o e n p ar A on the
in connexion with the enlistment of bandits and the distur a ■ j p
borders of Suleimanieh. . , ^ • -j-tUg /U von
The above is a summary of the more important frontmr mcidente^ ^
are aware, there are many subsidiary incidents arising r .ig jigsem-
such as the violation of the Iraqi frontier, the distur anc P ’ £ rom
ination of propaganda among Iraqi tribes, &c., regar i g
time to time furnished you with information. +r ,™ n ki P onrl will involve
A continuance of these activities will give cause f T ° t r Z motive
the Iraqi Government in considerable expenditure. oGniration to a modifi-
behind this conduct of the Persian Government is P r™ ^ave alreadv
cation of the frontier in conformity with I^eir owm ^ -p rontier p ro tocoi,
in the past alluded to the injustice sustained by th Persia did not possess
pointing out that the latter was drawn up at a time when Persia P
a strong constitutional Government representative o . rece j vec | f r0 m the
The following are extracts from two notes on this subject receneo
Persian Legation, Bagdad :—
(a) From note dated the 20th September 1931 '^^delimitethm of the
Frontier Delimitation Agreement ^^“S^sed nevertheless ”
frontier with Iraq has not been officially recognised, nev