Page 146 - The Origins of the United Arab Emirates_Neat

I I 2 The Origins of the United Arab Emirates
followed suit a few weeks later with a two-year option and 500
rupees a month. Umm al-Qaiwain was temporarily ignored, in
view of the ruler’s refusal to discuss terms for an option on the
basis of a private agreement he had with Shaykh Sultan of Ras
al-Khaimah; the shaykhdom was small and unimportant, and little
attention was paid to it. Thus, by February 1936, Petroleum Conces­
sions was responsible for negotiating concessions, within the period
stated in the various D’Arcy options, with five of the Trucial Coast
shaykhs.
In October 1935, after consultation with the Foreign Office, the
Admiralty, Petroleum Department and the Air Ministry, and on
the basis of suggestions put forward by Fowlc, who was then in
London,17 the India Office officially approved the transfer of the
D’Arcy options to Petroleum Concessions. Although French, Dutch
and American interests in the company were strong, it was the
most British company available, and as such was authorised to
obtain concessions. The India Office made certain stipulations about
the conduct of the negotiations, and explained them to J. S. Skliros,
Managing Director of IPC from 1934 to 1949: any geologist or
employee who visited the Coast had to be British; any surveying
party had to have the guidance of the Political Resident; the
ruler in whose shaykhdom a surveying party wished to explore
had to give a written guarantee promising responsibility for the
safety of the party; permission from the British Government was
necessary before the opening of negotiations with a ruler; and
the concession would be subject to the approval of the British
Government.18
Having established a preliminary working basis with Petroleum
Concessions, the India Office next—before negotiations for concessions
could reach an advanced stage—turned its attention to the question
of the shaykhdoms’ boundaries. An interdepartmental meeting was
held in February 1936 during which the extent of the problems
of defining boundaries was fully realised. Not only were the shaykh­
doms’ boundaries with each other disputed, but, in addition, their
boundaries with the neighbouring states, Saudi Arabia and Muscat,
were extremely vague, especially in desert areas. Much depended
on tribal loyalties and on the extent of each tribe’s grazing lands—an
uncertain yardstick in bedouin society.19 The meeting did little to solve
the predicament, which was temporarily shelved with the conclusion
that, for the purposes of the concessions, ‘it would be sufficient to
define the areas in question as “the territories of the Sheikh”\20
The Foreign Office alone wanted to tackle the intricacies of the
situation as soon as possible; since 1934, it had become involved in a
dispute with the Saudi Government over boundaries with Muscat,
Abu Dhabi and Qatar, and it knew only too well the dangers of