§ 54. Sir WILLIAM DAVISONasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the total sum which has been paid by the British Government to Ibn Saud, King of the Hejaz and Sultan of Nejd; and what were the terms and conditions attached to such payments?
§ Mr. AMERYI have been asked to reply to this question. The total cost to the British Government of the subsidies paid to King Ibn Saud during the years 1917 to 1923 was approximately £542,000. No subsidy whatever was paid before the year 1917 or after the year 1923. The subsidy was given in the first instance in consideration of assistance in the war against Turkey. The later payments were made subject to the following conditions, namely:
- (i) That Ibn Saud refrained and restrained his adherents from aggressive action against the Hejaz, Koweit and Iraq;
- (ii) that he afforded co-operation in the matter of the Haj by maintaining the safety of pilgrim routes to his territory;
- (iii) that he consented to be guided generally by the wishes of His Majesty's Government in regard to his foreign policy and to co-operate with them in promoting their own policy which had for its object the maintenance of peaceful conditions in Arab countries and the promotion of the economic interests of both parties.
§ Sir W. DAVISONIs there no provision for repayment of part of this enormous sum of money in the event of the conditions of the agreement not being kept?
§ Mr. AMERYI am afraid that my hon. Friend has not entirely understood my answer. No subsidy is being paid now. It was paid during the War and for a short period after the War, during which time the conditions were kept.
§ Mr. CRAWFURDArising out of the right hon. Gentleman's first answer, can he give the House any information as to the proportion of this £542,000 which has been expended in the purchase of arms from this country, and now being used in Iraq?
§ Mr. AMERYNo, Sir; I doubt whether I could. If the hon. and gallant Member will put a question on the Paper I will see, but I doubt whether I could retrospectively ascertain that fact.
§ Lord APSLEYWas the subsidy paid in gold or in paper?
§ 55. Mr. NOEL BUXTONasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the evidence that Ibn Saud is directly responsible for the invasion of Iraq is conclusive; and whether attempts to get in touch with Ibn Saud and ascertain the grievances which have occasioned the invasion have been successful?
§ Mr. AMERYThere is no evidence that Ibn Saud was directly responsible for the recent raids by Akhwan tribes into Iraq territory which, however, it would be scarcely correct to describe as an invasion. As regards the second part of the question His Majesty's Government have been in frequent communication with King Ibn Saud. As long ago as last December they suggested that a meeting should be arranged at a convenient spot between His Majesty and the British Resident in the Persian Gulf to discuss any matter in dispute. That suggestion has been repeated several times since, but the King has not so far seen fit to avail himself of the opportunity offered him for a full discussion of outstanding questions.
§ Mr. BUXTONIs diplomatic contact chiefly maintained at Bagdad or Cairo?
§ Mr. AMERYNo, Sir. It is maintained chiefly at Ibn Saud's own headquarters, and there are also opportunities of diplomatic contact at Cairo and at Jeddah.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Wahabi declare that the first raids came from our side of the frontier, and will he have the matter investigated; and is he also aware that this is the national sport of the tribes in that part of the world and their only sport—to raid each other?
§ Mr. AMERYI would be the last to interfere with their sport in their own territory. I have made the investigation which the hon. and gallant Member would like me to make, and the result does not confirm the view that the raids were begun on the Iraq side of the frontier.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYSix of one and half-a-dozen of the other!
§ 56. Mr. TREVELYANasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has been in negotiation with Ibn Saud 1498 as to the sources of the threatened hostilities on the Iraq frontier; and, if so, whether he can give any information as to such negotiations?
§ Mr. AMERYI have nothing to add to the reply which I have just made to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for North Norfolk (Mr. Buxton) and to my replies to the hon. and gallant Member for Chippenham (Captain Cazalet) on the 29th February and to the hon. Member for Southwark, Central (Mr. Day) on the 5th March.
§ 57. Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, at the time the British plenipotentiary negotiated the treaty with Ibn Saud, the King of the Hejaz, he was instructed to intimate that, providing His Majesty, Ibn Saud, desired to purchase arms and ammunition from the manufacturers of this country, His Majesty's Government would make no objection to his doing so?
§ Mr. AMERYI would refer the hon. and gallant Gentleman to the Paper presented to Parliament last year (Cmd. 2951). He will find on page 6 of this Paper the text of the Note which Sir G. Clayton addressed to the King of the Hejaz, by the instructions of His Majesty's Government, in regard to the supply of arms and ammunition from this country.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYAre we still bound by that note, and does that mean that we can put no obstacle in his way as to the purchase of arms here?
§ Mr. AMERYNo, Sir. If there is any evidence of arms supplied being used against us, we can very properly and rightly complain.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYWill the right hon. Gentleman in future discourage our negotiators from inserting such clauses in treaties for the sake of the commercial dealers in munitions in this country? It is absolutely disgraceful to wait until our men are shot down.