Page 80 - Su'udi Relations with Eastern Arabi & Uman (1800-1870)

sort of sovereignty over the island, waited for the opportunity to put their
claims into practice. Sa‘Id b. Sultan, ruler of Masqat, traced his claim back to
1811 when, according to his version, the ‘Utub of al-Bahrayn sought asylum in
Masqat and surrendered their country to him.578 It was under such an
assurance that Sa‘Id went forth with his fleet and army, attacked the Su‘udl
force, and restored the island to Al Khalifah.579 Sard’s repeated attacks on
al-Bahrayn were aimed at enforcing this contract, which, in his view, had been
violated by the ‘Utub of al-Bahrayn, who had joined the ranks of his
enemies.580
The Persians, on the other hand, claimed that al-Bahrayn had never ceased
to be part of the Persian dominions after 1783, and that the Al Khallfah’s
shaykhs, on more than one occasion, had acknowledged Persian influence and
solicited aid from the Persian government.581 Both Masqat and Shiraz
renewed their claims and efforts to control al-Bahrayn during the British
expedition against the Qawasim and at the conclusion of the peace treaty which
followed immediately thereafter.582 At this stage, the British government had
no definite policy towards al-Bahrayn. The ‘Utub were not considered pirates,
and therefore the commanders of the expedition had no authorization to
proceed against the island.583 However, they did dispatch a naval force to
al-Bahrayn to search out some QasimI boats which happened to be there; after
the boats had been handed over, they were immediately destroyed.584This
extension of British power brought mixed feelings of hope and fear to the
shaykhs of al-Bahrayn, who feared being isolated and further exposed to
Persian and ‘UmanI plots. On the other hand, the shaykhs were inclined to
follow the steps of the coastal chiefs by voluntarily attaching themselves to the
British government, in the hope that such an attachment would protect their
position and frustrate enemy attempts to take over the island. They first
dispatched their envoy, Sayyid ‘Abd al-Jalfl, to General William Grant Keir,
the commander of the expedition at al-Shariqah, to sign a preliminary
agreement forbidding the sale, in al-Bahrayn, of property procured by plunder
and piracy and promising the liberation of all Indian prisoners then in their
possession.585
Later on, the shaykhs themselves signed the General Treaty of 1820 for the
pacification of the Persian Gulf and came to be the legitimate rulers of al-
Bahrayn and Qatar; the British would subsequently negotiate with them in
matters relating to these places. The General Treaty, however, held no
guarantee that the British would offer assistance to the shaykhs of al-Bahrayn in
response to any possible threat to their independence. Consequently the shaykhs
reached a settlement with Sa‘Id b. Sultan of Masqat in order to avert the
proposed joint attack on al-Bahrayn by Masqat and Shiraz. The shaykhs of
al-Bahrayn were bound by the settlement to recognize Sa‘Id’s overlordship and
to pay him an annual tribute amounting to $MT 30,000.586 Sa‘Id, in return,
promised to release the ‘Utub detained at Masqat and to restore the Bahraynl
vessels and property in his custody.587 However, Sa‘Id’s burning desire to take
over al-Bahrayn was not to be appeased by such an arrangement.
In 1828 Sa‘Id made extensive preparations with the object of conducting a
surprise attack on al-Bahrayn.588 When rumours of his intentions began
circulating in the Gulf in the summer of that year, Sa‘Id tried to delude the
rulers of al-Bahrayn by denying such rumours and by sending them presents as
a token of his dissimulated friendship.589 The shaykhs did not, however, have
76