مجموعة ٤٥/٢٨ "بلاد فارس. مفاوضات حول إبرام معاهدة أنجلو-فارسية؛ إلغاء المعاهدات الحالية." [ظ‎‎٧‎٦] (١٥٤/١٥٢)

2
treaty of 1857 securing most-favoured-nation treatment will be replaced by the
Commercial Treaty. In fact, according to Teymourtache, the whole field of
Anglo-Persian relations will be covered by the Tariff Autonomy Treaty, the
General Treaty and the Commercial Treaty.
9. The Arms Traffic Firman of 1897 perhaps remains.
10. The revised instructions for the control of the traffic in arms, enclosed
in Lord Reading’s despatch No. 499 of the 2nd September, contain in para
graph 4 a remark to the effect that the Persian Government would probably
repudiate the agreement if brought to their notice. This seems to me very likely,
and I would only remark that if it is even brought to their notice after discussions
ending in the conclusion of an article purporting to enumerate all former treaties
have taken place they would not only be able to repudiate it w r ith some reason,
but would be able to accuse His Majesty’s Government of mala fides as well.
11. In so far therefore as I have been able to examine the question at this
stage, I cannot see that His Majesty’s Government would have anything to lose
by accepting the Persian view of this question. But if His Majesty’s Government
continue to attach importance to the enumeration of the abrogated treaties,
I should be glad if I might be furnished with convincing arguments to support
this contention. I emphasise the word “convincing” because Teymourtache
seems at present pretty sure that our proposed procedure confronts him with an
awkward dilemma, which, I expect, would have its price.lby citing the 1919
Agreement as abrogated, the Persian Government would admit that it had had a
validity; this they could not do; by refusing to cite it, at some future date a
British Government might claim that as it had not been formally abrogated at
the same time as other Anglo-Persian agreements, it was clearly still valid.
I have, &c.
R. H. HOARE.