Page 410 - The Arabian Gulf States_Neat

344
IHF-. I.EGAl. STATUS OF THE ARABIAN GULF STATES
documents and hundreds of maps and charts”, they submit the
following conclusions.1
1. The island of Abu Musa “has certainly from the earliest recorded date
belonged to the Rulers of Sharjah” who have sovereignty over it “This title
is based on the uninterrupted possession of the island by the ruling
Qawasim family of Sharjah over a long and continuous period, whioh is
established by international jurisprudence as the element essential for the
constitution of sovereignty”.
2. “The records of the British Residency at Bushirc from the end of the
18th century up to 1935 illustrate the exclusive right to Abu Musa frequently
asserted and exercised on behalf of the Qawasim of Sharjah”. The British
authorities in the Gulf “defended Sharjah's title and have done so for at
least 100 years. The flag of Sharjah has flown over the island since 1903,
tended by a representative of Sharjah...”
3. “Since 1898 rulers of Sharjah have granted mineral concessions in and
around the island to third parties; and research has not revealed any protest
made by Iran at the working of these concessions other than that made in
1970, about the working of an oil and gas concession. There is also evidence
that pearlers and others using Abu Musa paid annual dues to the Ruler of
Sharjah at least since 1863”.
4. “The first assertion of an Iranian claim to Abu Musa arose out of the
incident in 1904, referred to above. Since that time no submission in support
of the Iranian claim to Abu Musa is to be found in the records”
5. The assertion by Iran that during the period 1878-1887 the
Qawasim Ruler of Lingeh administered the islands of Tunb, as well
as Abu Musa, on behalf of Iran, finds no support in the records.
“Abu Musa (unlike Tunb) was before, during and after this period of nine
years, clearly subject to the sovereignty of the Ruler of Sharjah, not the
Ruler of Lingeh. It is wrong to assume or suggest that the case of Tunb
(which seems to have been subject to some form of joint administration
from Ras al-Khaimah and Lingeh) and the case of Sirri (which was occupied
by Persian forces in 1887) are the same as that of Abu Musa, which has
always been in the exclusive possession and administration of the Ruler of
Sharjah in his own right”.
6. The Iranian argument on the basis of the map presented, in
1888, by Britain to the then Shah is also rebutted:
“Of the many maps and charts inspected most give no indication of
territorial allegiance, either Arab or Iranian, of the Islands; the majority of
the others indicate (all by colouring or by inference, never explicitly) that
Abu Musa belonged to Persia. But the risks of inaccuracy in the drawing
and engraving are obvious, particularly where there are many small islands
in differing ownership... ” Moreover, the British Government argued in this
regard that “the error (in the colouring of the map) in no way prejudiced the
case of the Trucial Rulers whose consent had not been obtained .
obtained”.
The British counsels conclude their submission by saying:

1. See Coward Chance’s Interim Report, op. cit.