It will be observed that the Foreign Office undertakes to
“communicate to the United States Government for their information
copies of the actual assurances (to be given to the League of
Nations by Iraq as a condition precedent to the termination of the
mandatory régime as from Iraq’s admission to the League) as soon as
it is possible for them to do so.” This would appear to constitute
notification after action, rather than acknowledgement of a right to
[Page 674]
prior consultation
regarding the conditions under which Iraq is to be administered upon
the cessation of her mandatory relationship with Great Britain, as
the assurances in question will presumably define those
conditions.
[Enclosure 1]
The American First Secretary of Embassy
(Cox) to Mr. C. W. Baxter of the Eastern
Department, British Foreign Office
Dear Baxter: As I told you today in our
conversation, the Department of State is of the opinion that
although by the terms of Article 6 of the Tri-partite Convention
of January 9, 1930, between the United States, Great Britain and
Iraq, the United States waived its right with respect to
consultation regarding the termination of the “special
relations” between Great Britain and Iraq, it nevertheless
retains the right to demand consultation with respect to the
conditions under which Iraq is to be administered upon the
cessation of the mandatory relationship.
Since the termination of a régime in a mandated territory
necessarily involves the “disposition” of the territory and
affects the interests of American nationals therein, the right
of the United States to be consulted with respect to the
conditions under which the territory is subsequently to be
administered is on precisely the same basis as its right to be
consulted with regard to the establishment of a mandatory
régime.
The Department of State has learned of the likelihood that the
Council of the League of Nations would not consult the United
States in the case of Iraq but would assume that Great Britain
as mandatory Power had already done so or would do so and would
see that all interests in the Iraq mandate, whether inherent,
expressed or implied, were properly considered.
The Department of State has asked the Embassy to inquire of the
Foreign Office as to whether the United States Government is
correct in assuming that it is to be consulted by the British
Government with respect to the conditions under which Iraq is to
be administered upon the termination of the “special relations”
between that country and Great Britain. I should be grateful if
you would let me know the views of the Foreign Office in this
matter in order that the Embassy may communicate them to the
department of State.
Yours sincerely,
[Enclosure 2]
The Head of the Eastern Department, British
Foreign Office (Rendel), to
the American First Secretary of Embassy (Cox)
No. E 1431/9/93
[London,] 1 April,
1932.
Dear Cox: In your letter of March 1st
to Baxter you raised the question of consultation with the
United States Government regarding the conditions under which
Iraq is to be administered upon the cessation of her mandatory
relationship with Great Britain.
In our opinion Articles 6 and 7 of the Tripartite Convention
signed in London on January 9th, 1930, set out quite clearly
what the position of the United States is in connexion with the
termination of the mandatory régime in Iraq. Article 6 reads as
follows:
“No modification of the special relations existing
between His Britannic Majesty and His Majesty the King
of Iraq, as defined in Article 1 (other than the
termination of such special relations as contemplated in
Article 7 of the present Convention) shall make any
change in the rights of the United States as defined in
this Convention, unless such change has been assented to
by the Government of the United States.”
Under this Article the assent of the United
States is required before the rights of the United States, as
defined in the Convention, can be affected by any modification
in the special relations existing between His Britannic Majesty
and His Majesty the King of Iraq, but the termination of these
special relations, which is the case now under consideration, is
expressly excepted from the provisions of this Article, and
dealt with in Article 7.
Paragraph 1 of Article 7 then provides that the termination of
these special relations shall cause the Convention of 1930 to
cease to have any effect, and the second paragraph lays down
what is to be the position when this event happens. Paragraph 2
of Article 7 reads as follows:—
“On the termination of the said special relations,
negotiations shall be entered into between the United
States and Iraq for the conclusion of a treaty in regard
to their future relations and the rights of the
nationals of each country in the territories of the
other. Pending the conclusion of such an agreement, the
nationals, vessels, goods and aircraft of the United
States and all goods in transit across Iraq, originating
in or destined for the United States, shall receive in
Iraq the most-favoured-nation treatment; provided that
the benefit of this provision cannot be claimed in
respect of any matter in regard to which the nationals,
vessels, goods and aircraft of Iraq, and all goods in
transit across the United States, originating in or
destined for Iraq, do not receive in the United States
the most-favoured-nation treatment, it being understood
that Iraq shall not be entitled to claim
[Page 676]
the treatment which is
accorded by the United States to the commerce of Cuba
under the provisions of the Commercial Convention
concluded by the United States and Cuba on the 11th day
of December, 1902,5 or any
other commercial convention which may hereafter be
concluded by the United States with Cuba or to the
commerce of the United States with any of its
dependencies and the Panama Canal Zone under existing or
future laws, and that the United States shall not be
entitled to claim any special treatment which may be
accorded by Iraq to the nationals or commerce of
neighbouring States exclusively.”
To put it shortly, it provides for two things,
(a) for the commencement of
negotiations between the United States and Iraq for the
conclusion of a treaty in regard to their future relations, and
the rights of the nationals of each country in the territory of
the other, and (b) subject to certain
conditions, for the grant of most-favourednation treatment in
Iraq to the nationals, vessels, goods and aircraft of the United
States, pending the conclusion of such agreement. While,
therefore, it appears that the rights of the United States in
this eventuality are fully defined and safeguarded by the
provisions of Article 7 of the Convention, and that these
provisions do not confer on the United States any rights to be
consulted as to the obligations which the League of Nations may
require Iraq to undertake as conditions of the termination of
the mandatory régime, and of her election as a member of the
League of Nations, I am authorized by the Secretary of State to
let you know that His Majesty’s Government will be happy to keep
the United States Government informed of the progress of events
in regard to the termination of the mandatory régime in Iraq.
Let me first explain exactly what is at present under
consideration. It was the belief of His Majesty’s Government
that the mandatory régime would automatically terminate with the
admission of Iraq to membership of the League of Nations. They
regard present conditions in Iraq as justifying the termination
of the mandatory régime and have therefore declared their
intention of supporting her candidature for membership of the
League at the Assembly of the League in September next.6 The Council of the League have ruled,
however, that, before the candidature of Iraq for membership can
be considered by the Assembly, it is for the Council to decide
whether the mandatory régime can in fact be terminated. To
assist it in coming to this decision, it asked the Permanent
Mandates Commission of the League to advise, first as to the
conditions which
[Page 677]
must
in general be fulfilled before a mandatory régime can be brought
to an end, and afterwards as to the application of those general
conditions to the special case of Iraq.7 On the basis of the reports by the Permanent
Mandates Commission8 the Council on January 28th last
declared itself in principle prepared to pronounce the
termination of the mandatory régime as from the date of Iraq’s
admission to the League, provided that Iraq first gave certain
assurances.9 The
purpose of these assurances is solely to discharge the
responsibilities of the League, as trustee, towards racial,
linguistic and religious minorities in Iraq and towards
legitimate foreign interests in the country. They are still in
process of elaboration by direct negotiation between the Council
of the League and the Government of Iraq on the basis of the
reports of the Permanent Mandates Commission to which I have
already referred. Copies of those reports together with a copy
of the Resolution adopted by the Council of the League on
January 28th last are enclosed herein, and His Majesty’s
Government will be glad to communicate to the United States
Government for their information copies of the actual assurances
as soon as it is possible for them to do so.
Your Government are already aware of the terms of the Anglo-Iraqi
Treaty of Alliance which was signed on June 30th, 1930 and of
which a copy as published in the Treaty Series (Cmd. 3797) was
communicated to your Embassy on March 2nd, 1931. The Treaty will
of course only enter into force when once Iraq has become a
member of the League of Nations.
Yours sincerely,
