'Mosul Question, Lausanne 1922-1923 and after - Papers, despatches, speeches - Hotel de la Mer at Lausanne - Correspondence about oil' [‎227v] (453/501)

6
10 ' west of the true longitude. The mapping of the Turco-Persian Boundary
Commission, which was also used in the compilation of the “ Maunsell ” sheets, suffers
from a small error of longitude in the opposite direction. Errors of latitude are not so
serious. As a result of these errors, the actual and proposed boundaries traced on the
photographic map cannot be considered reliable. The “ present administrative frontier ’
(marked in Sir Percy Cox’s map in green) has also, in the light of better information,
been found to be incorrectly drawn, even upon the assumption that the maps were
correct. The true old administrative boundary of the Mosul Vilayet is slightly north
of the green line on Sir Percy Cox’s photographic map. and as the district of Nerva is
west, not north, of Raikan, there is no such Nerva salient as is shown upon the
photographic map. The boundary up to which the Irak Government now administers
or controls is again, in the main, north of the true old administrative boundary. On
these considerations I have caused to be compiled, from the information collected up to
date, a new map on a ^--inch scale of which a copy is attached. My sources of
information are—
(a.) The ^-inch surveys, as far as these have been completed (including the Arbil
and Rowanduz districts, as far north as latitude 36° SO’, the Akrah district
as far as the Greater Zab, and the Zakho and Amadia districts between the
Hazil and the Zab) ;
(b.) Sketch maps made by Mr. Jardine, an Administrative inspector of the Irak
Government; and
(c.) The “ Maunsell ” sheets.
I am indebted to Mr. Jardine’s expert knowledge for most of the facts set forth in
this despatch.
I also attach as an appendix a corrected description of the northern boundary as
now administered, and I have shown this boundary by red dots on the ^-inch map
attached. I have shown the true old administrative boundary by a continuous red line.
II -—Retention of the Assyrian Country and of Amadia.
In the despatch to which I have already referred Sir Percy Cox went fully into the
question of retaining Amadia and the Assyrian country beyond it. For reasons with
which he was unacquainted, but as he shows, contrary to the views of the Acting Civil
Commissioner based on local knowledge, the Treaty of S&vres specifically excluded
Amadia from the Irak. It is possible that this decision was influenced by the incorrect
drawing on the map attached to the Sevres T reaty of the chain-dotted line purporting
to define the boundary of the Mosul Vilayet. The origin of the error appears to date
back to a period some twenty years ago, when Amadia was temporarily excluded from
the Mosul Vilayet. Alter a two years’ trial the arrangement was found unworkable,
and accordingly cancelled by the Turkish Government. Sir Percy Cox observes
“ The high ground on which Amadia is situated overlooks the low-lying
disti icts of Dohuk and Akrah to the south, as well as the valley running west to
Zakho, and it commands the roads radiating to these places. With Amadia in
the hands of a hostile force, and with the facilities for propaganda which the
frequent intercourse of the local tribesmen with Mosul would provide, adequate
military protection of the northern frontier would involve insuperable difficulties.
In any event, the existence of Amadia as a supply and road centre, and so as a
“ potential base of hostile operations, for which the inevitable intertribal disturb-
“ ances would offer a ready pretext, would be a constant source of anxiety to the
“ Irak Government.” J
Regarding the Assyrian country to the north of Amadia, Sir Percy Cox wrote
_ “ The pre-war boundary of the Mosul Vilayet at this point was not satisfactory,
m that it separated from Amadia the summer pastures of a number of Assyrian
“ an d Kurdish tribes who were and are economically dependent on that town and
“ Mosul. This fact, which was unimportant when the boundary was merely one
“ between two provinces, may be the cause of serious difficulties if the ‘same
“ boundary is adopted between Turkey and Irak. The inclusion of the country in
“ Irak would facilitate the repatriation of those now prevented from returning by
their fear of the vengeance of the Ottoman Government, from which we are under
“ moral obligations to protect them. The Assyrians whose homes were thus
“ included in Irak would become Irak subjects, and therefore eligible for enrolment
“ in the Irak levies.”

'Mosul Question, Lausanne 1922-1923 and after - Papers, despatches, speeches - Hotel de la Mer at Lausanne - Correspondence about oil' [‎227v] (453/501)

Transcription

About this item

Copyright: How to use this content

'Mosul Question, Lausanne 1922-1923 and after - Papers, despatches, speeches - Hotel de la Mer at Lausanne - Correspondence about oil' [‎227v] (453/501)

Transcription

About this item

Use and share this item

Copyright: How to use this content