Page 140 - The Arabian Gulf States_Neat

[
m

; 78 THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE ARABIAN GULF STATES
the international position of the former North African protectorates
was defined by international tribunals, no such tribunals have ever
defined the position of the Shaikhdoms. Moreover, the position of
the Shaikhdoms and the exact legal nature of their relations with the
British Government appears to have always remained anomalous.
This is because of two reasons: in the first place, the Shaikhdoms’
treaties, which are couched in rudimentary terms, do not expressly
or formally declare the establishment of a British Protectorate over
1 any of the Shaikhdoms. These treaties, moreover, do not define the
legal nature of the relations between the Shaikhdoms and the British
Government. They may perhaps be described as unilateral declara­
tions made on the part of the Rulers (to which are affixed the seals of
1 British representatives) pledging themselves not to do certain things
without prior consultation with the British Government.1 Secondly,
:
1 although the United Kingdom has referred to the Shaikhdoms as
:: J ‘British protected States’, she has made no attempt to define, in detail,
their international status and the legal nature of their relations with
the Crown. However, it seems necessary to mention that the British
Government has, in official statements made from time to time,
described the Shaikhdoms as ‘independent States under British pro­
tection’ or as ‘independent States in special treaty relations with’
Her Majesty’s Government..2 When in 1959 the British Foreign Secre­
tary was asked to explain ‘the precise nature of’ Her Majesty’s Govern­
ment obligations to the Government of Kuwait he replied: ‘The
Shaikhdom of Kuwait is an independent State which Her Majesty's
Government are under an obligation to protect.’3
It should be observed from the above statements that the Shaikh­
doms are either referred to as ‘independent States’ under British pro­
tection or as ‘States in special treaty relations with Her Majesty’s
Government’. And in both cases there is a specific reference to them
as ‘States’ or as ‘independent States’.
The fact that the Shaikhdoms are very ‘loosely’ tied up to the Crown
is described in the following remarks made by Hurewitz:
1 See Chapters 2-5.
2 See statement by Sir B. Eyres, House of Commons Debates, vol. 388, cols
973-4, 18 April 1934; Article 6 of the Treaty of Jiddah of 20 May 1927, Treaty
Series, No. 25 (1927), Cmd. 2951.
The British Foreign Secretary, Mr Sclwyn Lloyd, described his Government s
existing relations with the Shaikhdoms in the following terms: ‘Her Majesty’s
Government have a Treaty obligation to protect Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar. A
similar obligation is implicit in the Perpetual Maritime Treaties of 1853 to which
all the present Rulers of the seven Trucial States . . . have adhered. There is in
addition an explicit undertaking to the Ruler of Fujairah that his State is under
British protection.’ See House of Commons Debates, vol. 574, Written Answers,
CO» House9o/commons Debates, vol. 599, Written Answers, col. 75, 4 February

1959.