‘Persia – especially Seistan’ [‎146v] (291/949)

Hauzdar tracts. If the Afghans irrigate Tarakun, the Persians will undoubtedly
claim water for the Hauzdar tract. One-third of the Helmand has been shown
sufficient for both these tracts. By giving one-half of that to Persia, she would
become entitled to ^rd plus ^th=£ of the whole river.
The simplest solution of the whole water problem would appear to be to
define forthwith the Persian right to one-half of the whole Helmand at the
point where it enters Seistan. The decision of this question depends largely
on political aspects of the case. In regard to these, the Government of India,
on whom the task of enforcing the award will chiefly fall, are the best judges.
Draft Awards.
75 . I attach four drafts of water award for consideration. Each consists
of two parts, i.e., Preliminary remarks, and the Award itself. Each draft, in
succession, exceeds the previous one in general scope.
76 . Draft A .—The preliminary remarks of this draft form the bases of
those in all the other drafts. Paragraphs 1 to 7 are common to all four drafts.
Draft A is framed to deal with present conditions only, and does not specifically
provide for various future contingencies. All the five Articles of this award
are common to the other drafts.
It does little more than add the Secretary of State’s ruling, of 1873 , to Sir
Erederick Goldsmid’s award. It leaves things, otherwise, much as they are at
present, but provides for future disputes by the appointment of a permanent
arbitrator.
77 . Draft B— This goes further, and defines the amount of water requi
site for Persian requirements, based, however, only on the present inhabited
portion of Persian Seistan irrigable from and below the Band-i-Kohak. It
allows for extension of present cultivation, and gives Persia the right to Jrd
of the Helmand.
78 . Draft C .—This goes still further, and provides for the possible future
irrigation of the Tarakun' and Hauzdar tracts. The right of Perisa to a
requisite supply of water {i.e., Jth of the Helmand) for her share of those
tracts is recognised and provided for, but only in the event of their being here
after brought under irrigation.
79 . Draft D —Tackles the whole question boldly as a whole, and gives
Persia one-half of the Helmand forthwith, whether the Hauzdar tract is brought
under irrigation or not.
80 . Great care has been taken to avoid unnecessary details in each draft,
and especially those which might create unnecessary suspicions, give rise to
needless objections or quibbles, or be unnecessarily distasteful to one or other
party.
As an instance of this, it will he observed that in all four drafts no calcula
tion of water is expressed in terms of cusecs [vide paragraph 69 ( 16 )]. Nor
again are the proportionate shares of the Helmand, now used by either side,
stated in the awards. To do so, would only give Persia a pretext for claiming a
share of water based on custom, quite ignoring her own condition that the
Goldsmid award is not to be departed from.
81 . I have fully recognised the fact that, in the ratio that Persian rights
are more and more definitely defined in each draft, the Afghans, with their
exaggerated ideas of their own rights, will express the greater dissatisfaction.
I have tried to reduce the chance of this to a minimum, but the task is not an
easy one.
82 . Even an Afghan, however, must acknowledge, when it is brought
home to him, as it should be, that any settlement which restricts Persian right
to water to certain limits is in the present case a distinct gain to Afghanistan
who has hitherto taken off only ^ths of the whole river from Budbar down
wards, while the Persians have taken ^ths. Any deferred settlement of the
question might have to recognise the Persian right to what custom may have
entitled them to, and not, as in the present case, to their requisite supply of
water only. This argument will be made the most of in the official commu
nication conveying my formal copy of the award to the Afghan Government.