"ملف ٨/٦٤ III علاقات السلطان مع القبائل التابعة له" [و‎‎٣‎٣] (١٥٠/٦٥)

you have pointed out, lead to the following results:-
(a) facilitation ooil operations; •
(h) safeguarding of communications; and
(c) promotion of agricultural development*
In addition it v/ould prevent the extension of ling Ibn
Saud’s influence.
12 . I have already agreed in paragraph 8 above to the adop
tion of this policy in respect of the tribes of Group (i).
In the area of the tribes of Groups (ii) and (iii) the most
important advantage to His Uajesty’s Government is probably
the facilitation of the oil Company^ operations. The other
two results v/ould only be of advantage to His Uajesty’s
Government in so far as they themselves helped to facilitate
these operations, since His Majesty’s Government have no
specific obli ation to sponsor the development of this
area and no other sufficient material reason for doing so.
13. As against the adoption of a ’’forward" policy there are,
in the first place, the arguments you give in paragraph 5
of your Despatch To* 83. These objections a ear to me to
be considerable. I am doubtful whether th< Llities
in this area in return for which subsidies could be paid,
since any air facilities required are available either at
Sharjah o_* at unseat and the Oil Company would themselves
pay, in the form of royalties and down-payments, for any
benefits to be derived from oil exploitation. There would,
however, be certain inevitable adminstrative expenses
involved in any policy for the extension of influence, for
/hieh there would be no direct return. I agree that the
danger of accusations of ’’imperialism” may not be very great,
but there would probably be criticism from Persia, Ibn
Saud and the Sultan. These objections make it difficult for
me at present to endorse a policy of which the direct advan
tage to His Majesty’s Government is doubtful and which v/ould
inevitably involve His Ilajesty’s Government in certain
financial and administrative commitments*
14 . I have been interested to learn of the enquiries made
by Sulaiman bin Himyar and of Muhammad bin Salimin about
the commencem nt of oil operations in their territories,
^-as reported in your letters Hos. 378 / 78 / 30 G of 14 th
December and 342/3/30 of 19th December to Mr. Purlonge.
The facilitation of oil operations would, as I have stated
in paragraph 11 above, be the greatest advantage for His
Majesty’s Government of the adoption of a M forward” policy
and the enquiries ma&d by these two Shaikhs indicate that
they might be prepared to accept such a policy as v/ell as
to establish direct relations with His Majesty’s Governme .
I agree, however, with the view you have expressed in
d_.your letter ko. 1383/2/31 of 12th January to Hr. Purlonge,
since to deal separately with these Shaikhs v/ould be
inconsistent wit a the policy stated in paragraph 9 above,
and with the conclusion I have reached in paragraph 12 .
Squally, it would be unwise to encourage the Gil Company
to attempt to negotiate direct with the Shaikhs since,
apart from offending the Pultan and in the absence of any
extension of His Majesty’s Government’s influence in this
area, the Company could not be assured of the necessary
security or continuity for their operations even if their
negotiations were successful.
13- Since th ref ore I am not at present in favour either
of establishing separate relations with the Shaikhs of
Central Oman or of pursuing a ’’forward” policy beyond the
/areas