Page 85 - The Persian Gulf Historical Summaries (1907-1953) Vol II_Neat

71
!
latitude of Safwan." The Ambassador had suggested that this should be the
“ point situated one mile due south of the most southerly palm of Safwan.” The
Political Resident objected that this would be south of a board which had long
marked the frontier and in the note presented to the Iraqi Government the I
definition proposed was the ” point a little to the south of Safwan at which the
post and notice-board marking the frontier stood until March 1939.” The board
was originally placed in position by the Ruler of Kuwait and the Political Agent
about 1923.C3) It was removed by the Iraqis in 1932. On a protest being made they
stated that they had removed it to gel it repainted, and replaced it. It was removed
again by persons unknown in March 1939. In June 1940 the Political Agent had it
replaced again in the presence of an Iraqi frontier official. The Iraqis protested
that their frontier had been violated up to a point 1,000 metres from Safwan post
and that the new board had been erected at a point far from the site of the old one
at a distance of 250 metres within the Iraqi frontier.!"4) They removed it and it has
not since been replaced. They were informed that the Kuwaiti authorities were
satisfied that the new board had been put up on its original site and that the
allegation that it had been re-erected at a point 250 metres within Iraqi territory
could not be accepted.("■') It is no longer possible to determine exactly where the
original board stood, but in September 1940 the Political Resident reported that
with Colonel Dickson’s assistance it had been ascertained that it was situated about
1,050 yards south of the most southerly palm of Safwan.(M)

47. Towards the end of 1941 the military authorities decided to develop a
port near Umm Qasr. This led to a further examination of the frontier question
and the Political Resident urged that in accordance with the correct reading of the
Anglo-Turkish Convention of 1913 the frontier should not run in a direct line from
the point south of Safwan to the junction of the Khor Zubair with the
Khor Abdullah, as proposed in the note presented to the Iraqi Government in 1940,
but that it should run in a direct line to a point immediately south of Umm Qasr
and then turn south-east to the junction of the Khors.C7) Though only a small
wedge of territory was involved a portion of it lay in the area which was being
developed as a port. It was generally agreed that the interpretation of the definition
of the frontier accepted by the Ruler of Kuwait and presented to the Iraqi
Government probably erred somewhat in favour of the latter so far as this particular
point was concerned but the Foreign Office were of opinion that it was impossible
to go back on it. The Indian Office refused to accept this view and it was decided to
leave the matter unresolved until after the war. In a long note prepared by
Mr. Wakefield,(**) an officer of the Indian Political Service on special duty at
Kuwait, it was also argued that junction of the two Khors lay about two miles north
of the point which had previously been accepted but his view on this matter found
little support. Early in 1942 His Majesty’s Ambassador at Bagdad and the Political
Resident visited Umm Qasr together and although their opinions differed about
the exact line of the frontier they were both agreed that the port would lie partly
in Iraq and partly in Kuwait territory and that it should be administered entirely
by the military authorities for the duration of the war.(8’) Arrangements were made
accordingly and the Iraqi Prime Minister was informed of them orally but in spite
of this in June 1942 a notification appeared in the Iraq Government Gazette
containing a schedule of dues and charges to be charged at the port of Umm
Qasr.f”) The Government of India and the Political Resident raised strong
objections to this notification and His Majesty’s Ambassador asked the Iraqi Prime
Minister orally to cancel part of it. The Prime Minister refused to agree and His
Majesty’s Embassy addressed a note to the Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs in
which it was stated that in view of the notification which had been issued His
Majesty’s Government thought it well “ formally to notify the Iraqi Government
that nothing that is done or has been done with regard to the port of Umm Qasr
can be held in any way to prejudice the question of where the frontier lies.”!*1)
(”) I.o. to F.O. P.Z. 4824/40 of September 6. 1940 (E 2421/309/91 of 1940).
(") Baghdad to F.O. Despatch 305 of June 27. 1940 (E 1758/309/91 of 1940).
(,s) Baghdad to F.O. Despatch 363 of August 3. 1940 (E 2682/309/91 of 1940).
(M) I.O. to F.O. P.Z. 5078/40 of September 15. 1940 (E 2421/309/91 of 1940).
<") I.O. to F.O. Ext. 1825/42 of April 24. 1942 (E 2560/134/93 of 1942).
(”) I.O. to F.O. Ext. 1128/42 of March 16. 1942 (E 1747/134/93 of 1942).
(M) Tel. from Basra to F.O. of February 25. 1942 (E 1302/134/93 of 1942).
(,0) Baghdad to F.O. Despatch 237 of August 25. 1942 (E 5436/134/93 of 1942)
(•') Baghdad to F.O. Despatch 418 of November 28. 1943 (E 7872/124/93 of 1943).
46639 L