891.014/10–2847: Telegram
The Ambassador in Iran (Allen) to the Secretary of State
1044. Two prominent members of Majlis have called on me to discuss question of Bahrein.
Mohammad Ali Massoudi, editor of leading newspaper Ettelaat, member of opposition who is pro-American and bitterly anti-Soviet [Page 973] but who supports fully Iranian efforts to recover sovereignty over Bahrein, says he feels that Iranian rights to Bahrein are indisputable and that in simple justice its restoration to Iran should be assisted by nations like US which have supported Iran’s sovereign rights so strongly in other respects. He thinks energetic Iranian action would be in America’s own interests because it would show USSR that Iran was equally determined to protect its national interests in all directions and might thereby avoid Soviet aggression against Iran over refusal of Soviet oil demands. This would consequently avoid situation which might lead to world war III.
I told him I could not concur in Iranian claims to sovereignty over Bahrein on any grounds whatsoever, adding that I thought it would be cardinal mistake for Iran even to raise the question. I pointed out that Bahrein was neither geographically, economically, ethnologically nor even historically a proper part of Iran and that any neutral person would view question in same light. I said any attempt by Iran to extend its control to Bahrein would be regarded by world as aggression and that Iran, which itself had appealed to UN for support against aggression, should be most careful not be [to?] become vulnerable to accusations on the same score. As regards his historic claims, I said Iran had more recent claim to Baku than Bahrein, and asked whether he proposed to lay claim to Afghanistan and India conquered 200 years ago by Nadr Shah, the last effective Iranian ruler over Bahrein. Historical argument might find Iran on losing side, vis-à-vis Russians who had been in occupation of various parts of Iranian territory from Peter the Great to 1946. I reminded him that numerous Iranian spokesmen had recently shown great enthusiasm over British evacuation of India because the people who lived in India were Indians not British and asked whether Iran could justify its domination of the Arabs of Bahrein. I emphasized that I spoke as a friend of Iran anxious to help Iranians avoid losing much sympathy not only in the US but the world.
Salman Assadi, leading Qavam supporter, called I suspect at Qavam’s suggestion, to express views similar to those of Massoudi. He said Iran might request UN to appoint commission to examine Bahrein question and said he felt confident Baku [sic] would support Iran’s case. He added that Iran would naturally assure US in advance that existing petroleum concessions in Bahrein would be respected. He said recovery of Bahrein would give Iranian people tremendous lift they needed, apparently to overcome their present inferiority complex, and would be first important step toward rebirth of nation. He referred to British admission of Iranian sovereignty over Bahrein in [Page 974] 1876 (Embassy’s despatch 49, dated June 11, 19461) and said Iranian action regarding Bahrein would be directed against Britain and not US.
I repeated views already expressed to Massoudi, adding view that Iranian efforts to recover Bahrein would be directed more against local Arab inhabitants than anyone else, that all Arab states would certainly carry fight in UN against Iran’s claims and that I did not believe Iran would find single supporter in UN. As regards so-called British acknowledgement of Iranian sovereignty over Bahrein, I said I had read the document and did not consider it conclusive in any way.
We will hear good deal of talk about Bahrein and newspaper this morning reports that a bill is already being prepared on the subject. I do not think however that we need to pay any great attention to it. Although all Iranians from Shah down would like exceedingly to regain Bahrein and are most eager to obtain some encouragement from US I do not believe many of them expect to succeed in bringing the island under Iranian control. Their chief purpose in raising question is to give appearance of neutrality as between USSR and West.
Sent Department 1044, repeated London 140, Jidda 40.
Department pass to Moscow 125.
- Not printed.↩