Page 317 - The Arabian Gulf States_Neat

IRAQI CLAIM TO KUWAIT 255
The abortive treaty of Sevres of 1920, and the treaty of Lausanne of
1923: following her defeat in the First World War, Ottoman Turkey
negotiated and signed the peace treaty of Sevres on 10 August 1920.1
By Article 94 of this treaty ‘Mesopotamia’ and Syria were recognised
‘as independent States, subject to the rendering of administrative
advice and assistance’ under Article 22 of the League Covenant. It
was also agreed that the boundaries of the former Turkish possessions
were to be determined subsequently by the parties concerned. But the
treaty made no mention of Kuwait as being one of those Turkish
possessions. Although this treaty was not ratified, it could, neverthe­
less, be regarded as forming valuable evidence as to the actual status
of the boundaries of the then newly born State of Iraq. At any rate,
with the conclusion of the Treaty of Lausanne of 24 July 1923,2 which
was a ratified treaty, the renunciation clauses of the treaty of Sevres
were embodied, in a revised form, in the former treaty. By Article 16
of the Treaty of Lausanne, it is stated:
Turkey hereby renounces all rights and titles whatsoever over or respecting
the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty
and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised
by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled
or to be settled by the parties concerned.
The above Article clearly shows that Turkey had renounced her
rights to all Turkish possessions lying outside the frontiers of modern
Turkey. The renunciation applied to Kuwait as being part of the
former Turkish Wilayat of Basrah. Accordingly, by the Treaty of
Lausanne of 1923, ‘Turkey clearly had renounced all title to territory
south of that prospective boundary’.3 Furthermore, Article 27 of the
treaty embodied provisions similar to those of Article 139 of the
abortive treaty of Sevres respecting Turkey’s renunciation of all
‘rights of suzerainty or jurisdiction’ over nationals of territories which
later came under the sovereignty or the protection of the foreign
Powers which signed the treaty with Turkey. Consequently, it seems
unwarranted to invoke the principles of state succession in support of
the Iraqi claim to the territory of Kuwait, since Iraq, as a successor
to former Turkish territories, was legally bound by the limitations
imposed upon Turkey by the Treaty of Lausanne. In other words, if
it is assumed that Ottoman Turkey had a sovereign title to Kuwait,
Iraq could not have succeeded to that title because it was already
1 Hurewitz, II, pp. 81-2; U.K.T.S., No. 11 (1920), Cmd. 964.
* Hurewitz, II, pp. 119-20; U.K.T.S., No. 16 (1923), Cmd. 1929.
3 Wright, Quincy, The Mosul Dispute’, A.J.I.L., 20 (1926), p. 455. As a result
of the settlement of the Iraqi-Turkish dispute over Mosul, the northern and
southern boundaries of the new State of Iraq were definitely settled. See P.C././.,
Scr. B, No. 12, 21 November 1925, and U.K.T.S., Miscellaneous, No. 17 (1925),
Cmd. 2562.