"ملف (19/191 IV (C 103 مطالبة الفُرس بالبحرين" [ظ‎‎١‎٧‎١] (٦٨١/٣٤٥)

E. 2181/76/34,
1935.
The Times,
4th April,
1935.
E. 2334/4/91,
1935.
T.9850/9850/
378, 1933.
T. 62/62/378,
1933.
E.3680/139/
34.
T.7979/79/
378.
T.4849/1049/
378.
Treaty Series
No. 7? (1936).
E.3922/16/25,
1936.
E. 6193/16/25,
1936.
E.2837/2837/
25, 1937.
xyii.—1934h46
Establishment of Naval Base at Bahrein
158. Early in 1934 His Majesty's Government had bought sufficient land at
Bahrein to provide for a combined naval and air base to take the place of the
naval establishments at Hen jam and Basidu, which it had been decided to
relinquish. On 2nd April, 1935, His Majesty's Minister at Tehran handed a
note to the Persian Minister for Foreign Affairs announcing this decision and the
fact that the naval stations were being moved to Bahrein. In his reply M. Kazemi
referred to '' the right of the Imperial Government in connection with Bahrein,
both for the present and for the future," but qualified his reservation by stating
that he did not wish at that juncture to embark on a discussion of the question.
At the same time M. Kazemi indicated that his Government might recognise the
"independence'" of Bahrein in return for assistance and concessions by His
Majesty's Government in other matters. He also said that Bahrein was of no
interest to Persia, though, on account of public opinion on the subject, the Persian
Government could not abandon their claim without some return.
159. On 3rd April, 1935, the Persian Minister in London wrote a letter
to The Times commenting on a leading article on naval changes in the Persian
Gulf, in which he stated that the Persian Government had never recognised a
British protectorate over Bahrein, over which Persia had never relinquished
sovereignty. In reply to a subsequent question in Parliament Sir John Simon
stated that His Majesty's Government, who had been in close treaty relations
with the rulers of Bahrein since 1820, did not regard, and had never regarded,
the Persian claim as possessing any validity whatever.
Persian Government's refusal to recognise visas and endorsements for Bahrein
160. In 1933 the Persian Government began to refuse to visa passports
which were endorsed for Bahrein and Kuwait, and a form of retaliatory action
was taken by His Majesty's Government in consequence, although this was soon
dropped owing to the complications which it involved, and specific endorsements
for Arab States in the Persian Gulf on British passports were abolished.
In May 1934 His Majesty's Ambassador at Tehran made representations on
the matter to the Persian Government, but Mirza Baghir Kazemi alleged that the
endorsement "Bahrein'' on British passports was something new which was
naturally not recognised by the Persian Government. Persia visa regulations
issued in March 1934 contained (Chapter VI—Prohibitions) an instruction to
refuse a visa for entry to Persia on passports " endorsed as valid for the journey
to Bahrein or which bear a visa for Bahrein." No satisfaction was received as a
result of the representations made to the Persian Government, and the difficulty
was overcome by the issue for journeys to Bahrein of a temporary passport
without the endorsement or visa for Bahrein.
Owing to the possibility of a harmful effect upon prospective treaty negotia
tions of continuing the argument on this subject, m 1934 it was allowed to lapse,
and the practical success of the device of the temporary passport has precluded
the necessity of raising the question since that date.
Agreement between His Majesty's Government and the Saudi Arabian
Government regarding Transit Dues at Bahrein
161. In a note dated 30th May, 1936, the Minister for Foreign Affairs
protested against the agreement between His Majesty's Government and the
Saudi Arabian Government regarding Bahrein Transit Dues, which had been
concluded in November 1935 and published in this country in May 1936. The
Note stated that the Persian Government regarded the action of His Majesty's
Government as a denial of Persia's indisputable rights, and stated that he must
make all possible reserves in respect of present and future rights and interests
of the Persian Government. A copy of this Note was sent by the Persian
Government to the Secretariat of the League of Nations and to the Government of
Saudi Arabia. A Note was addressed to the Persian Government in reply on the
1st October, reminding them of the views previously expressed by His Majesty's
Government in the matter, and a copy of this Note was sent to the League of
Nations for circulation to members. This called forth a rejoinder from the
Persian Government, dated 6th May, 1937, which referred to the " indisputable
rights " of the Persian Government, and stated that the arguments of His
Majesty's Government were not regarded as convincing, and could not shake the