HL Deb 23 July 1930 vol 78 cc753-61

LORD LAMINGTON asked His Majesty's Government whether any advance has been made in making a treaty with the Imam of the Yemen, and if not, what further steps it is proposed to take to arrive at an understanding; and moved for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg leave to refer again to a matter with which for several years I have troubled your Lordships' House as regards our position in the Aden Protectorate. There are two points to which, as I have notified the noble Lord opposite, I particularly want to draw attention. I want first to ask whether the trade routes from the Yemen to Aden are at present open, and I would also like to know what is the present condition of the trade of Aden. I should like further to know what are the present relations of the Imam of the Yemen with other foreign countries.

I am told that a certain number of Russians have settled in Hodeida and also in Sana, the capital. They have been there, I understand, for some time. I do not know whether the noble Lord has had his attention called to a statement made in the French newspaper Le Matin. In the last week in May there was an article by M. Bessedowsky on Soviet efforts in the Far East. That gentleman said that the Soviet Government had sent an envoy to Sana in the hope of stirring up the Yemen to make war against us, but the Imam declined to embark upon such an enterprise. He did sign a commercial treaty, but this was kept secret for fear of causing an outcry in Britain. It was published, however, by the indiscretion of the editor of a Soviet paper and in consequence he was sent for five years into exile. According to this M. Bessedowsky several thousands of dollars have been spent on propaganda in that part of Arabia. I am not prepared myself to substantiate this statement as accurate, but it appeared in Le Matin.

Although it is stated that Russians have established themselves at Hodeida and Sana, no Britisher, as I understand, is allowed at present to be there. I am not sure whether Britishers are even allowed to go into the Yemen, but certainly they are not allowed to settle as these Russians are said to have done. I understand that so far as there are any relations with the Yemen they are rather more satisfactory than a year ago. In another place a Question was asked on July 9 as to our relations with the Imam. Dr. Shiels, who replied to the Question put by Mr. Malone, did not give much information, but he did say— …the countries which have already recognised the Imam are Italy, Germany and the Soviet Union. The delay in concluding a treaty between this country and the Imam is due to his reluctance to give an adequate assurance against his encroachment on districts under the protection of His Majesty's Government. I should like to know whether any document can be produced showing the terms in which his refusal to give an adequate assurance was couched. I do not know whether the noble Lord is prepared to give me any information on that, point. I have never heard anything about that.

I have expressed my view in this House before now, that whilst I should not derogate at all from the position of the boundary that has been established since 1904 or 1905, still there are perhaps some very minor adjustments which might be made which would perhaps meet the Imam's views. This Question may appear a trivial matter to those who are not thoroughly acquainted with that part of the world, and I may say that I am no champion of the Imam. On the contrary, for three or four years I was the only person who moved in the matter of trying to get him to withdraw his forces from our Protectorate on which he had so unwarrantably encroached. I was always opposed to his desire to bring protected tribes under his jurisdiction. Therefore it must not be thought that I have any particularly tender feeling towards him. But I do want to see justice given to him. I am sure it is in the interests of all parties that we should come to a friendly understanding if possible. I understand that he is most anxious to arrive at some understanding.

I will not use the word "treaty," though of course a treaty might be very desirable, because I do not wish it to be thought that we want to make a treaty giving away anything of our position. What I want is that we should try to meet what we may consider to be his prejudices. One fundamental difficulty, of course, is his wish to have some recognition of what he terms his historic rights. I should have thought it was quite within the ingenuity of my noble and learned friend opposite, and of the Colonial Office, to devise some terms which would not in the least degree impair our authority at Aden or our Protectorate. The historic rights which the Imam claims he dates back about 1,000 years. Could we not admit that 1,000 years ago he had jurisdiction, but point out to him that in succeeding centuries Egypt ruled the Yemen, and then Turkey, and that for at least 200 years the Imam has had nothing to do with Aden? Could not something be done on those lines to meet his views?

What I feel is that every opportunity should be taken to satisfy Moslem feeling at the present time. We know what difficult questions there are in different parts of the Near East and Middle East in regard to our attitude towards Mahomedanism, and though the Yemen may seem a very far away corner and very unimportant, it must not be forgotten that the echoes reverberate very speedily throughout Arabia and the Near East. I do consider that respect ought to be shown to the Imam's feelings and that, notwithstanding what has happened in the past, he should not be harshly or rudely treated. Therefore I think we can, perhaps, put our official pride on one side and be more lenient in our attitude towards him.

One point that I have made repeatedly in your Lordships' House is that he should be invited to send a representative or emissary to this country to try to negotiate. I think his son was sent to Rome when he made a treaty with the Italian Government. Why should we not pursue the same course and invite him? If he refuses, no harm is done. The noble Lord, Lord Lovat, who was once connected with the Colonial Office, supported this view only last year, and he knows a great deal about this question. I think my noble friend Lord Stanhope took the same view. After all, the Imam rules in the portion of Arabia which is the most fertile and has the bravest soldiers. At the same time it is very isolated, and therefore, perhaps, he may be regarded as having an exaggerated view of his own importance. I quite admit that he may, and that he is so isolated that he can hardly realise his position or compare his country with other countries in the world. That is all the more reason for treating him gently.

To ask one who regards himself as an important and historic Sovereign to treat with Aden, however distinguished our representative there may be, is as if we had some discussion with Germany and the German Government said that we must negotiate with the Commander of Heligoland. That would be something like the same principle. To judge from all the information that I can get—and I get a good deal of information to that effect from various quarters—it certainly might go a long way towards meeting his views and coming to some friendly agreement with him, if not actually a treaty, if we took the course that I suggest. I hope, therefore, that, having once again troubled your Lordships' House, I may obtain a more favourable reply than I have hitherto obtained from His Majesty's Government.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (LORD PASEFIELD)

My Lords, with the spirit of the noble Lord's speech I find myself in entire agreement, but, after all, this is a question of the manner in which the negotiations with this potentate have to be carried on, and I can assure your Lordships that the matter is not quite so simple and so formal as the noble Lord made out. As a matter of fact, our relations with the Imam at present are exceedingly friendly, everything is going on all right and we are hoping that the present détente may lead in due time to a very real entente, which may very well take the form of a treaty. It does not at present seem to be any use hurrying the proceedings. The noble Lord knows very well that with Oriental peoples hurry is not a good practice. As things are at present, we are going on very nicely. We have made it quite clear to the Imam that His Majesty's Government fully and completely recognise his independence and have every desire to be on friendly relations.

The difficulty is that all the communications from the Imam indicate a reluctance to express in any form an acknowledgment of the position of His Majesty's Government at the Settlement of Aden and in the Protectorate of Aden. We cannot afford to enter into a treaty or anything of that kind except upon the condition that the rights and jurisdiction of His Majesty's Government over all the people of Aden and the independence of the Chiefs of the Protectorate of Aden are recognised by the Imam. We recognise to the fullest extent his independent sovereignty over his own territory, and it really is necessary that he should recognise the sovereignty of His Majesty's Government over Aden. It may be that his claims are a thousand years old, and so on, but when we find this reluctance to give that recognition—a reluctance which, I venture to think, we understand at the Colonial Office—it is necessary that we should proceed slowly before entering into a treaty, until a disposition has been shown by the Imam to make that recognition.

With regard to the place at which negotiations should be carried on, I do not feel that there is any reason to object to the suggestion that, at the proper time and in the propel manner, if it is found that the Imam attaches any importance to it, he should be invited to send an emissary to London; but that would be in order to conclude a treaty. At the present, time we cannot find that the Imam has any desire to conclude a treaty under the only condition on which His Majesty's Government could conclude a treaty—namely, that there should be a bilateral recognition of each other's sovereign rights. It is for this that we are waiting. The noble Lord asked me whether it was true that the Imam had refused to give an adequate assurance on that point. I should say that he has not refused, but his last letter was couched in terms which avoided giving that assurance and which indicated a deliberate avoidance.

It is that position which it is so difficult to meet. We cannot go on negotiating so long as there is avoidance of that point. It is not, I think, a question of little adjustments of the boundary. That, of course, as the noble Lord said, ought to be considered in a spirit of reasonableness and give and take, if necessary. That is not a question which is at all between us. The question between us is the apparently deliberate avoidance by the Imam of any recognition of the right of His Majesty's Government to be at Aden at all, or of the protection which the Government must necessarily exercise over the whole of the territory which we claim as a British Protectorate. So long as the Imam appears to be unwilling to give that recognition. I am afraid the détente must continue. Possibly we can turn it, by good feeling and good relations, into an entente, but we cannot possibly get to the point of a treaty-for some little time.

With regard to the specific questions asked by the noble Lord, I am advised that the roads are open, and while I should not like to guarantee that all the roads at all times are as safe as Piccadilly, still, in the phraseology of the East, the roads are open and intercourse is going on. I am asked about the state of the trade of Aden. Your Lordships will know, of course, that Aden, like other ports, is suffering from the world depression in trade, and this has affected goods in transit from all parts. Generally speaking, trade at Aden cannot be said to be good at the present time. The trade with the Yemen is, of course, only a very small part of the trade of which we are talking. Then the noble Lord asks what are the present relations of the Yemen with foreign countries. Italy, Soviet Russia and Germany have recognised the Imam, and treaties between the Yemen and Italy and Soviet Russia are merely, as I understand it, expressions of good feeling one towards another, and of willingness to enter into trade relations, including a recognition in most cases of the sovereignty of the Imam. No question arises of course in those cases of recognising the sovereignty of the other party. In our case, I am advised, we should have to insist upon it, and that constitutes the difficulty; but, as a matter of fact, those treaties do not take the respective Governments very far.

It is true we are aware that there is a tiny colony of Russians settled there, and there has been a persistent attempt on the part of Soviet Russia to create trade between Soviet Russia and the Yemen. I can quite believe that a quite perceptible amount of money has been spent by the Soviet Government in that operation. Our information is that trading attempts have been particularly unsuccessful, and amount to very little at all, except that in Oriental countries everybody is willing to receive presents, and there has been a good deal of money spent by the Soviet Government in attempting to open up trade by that ingenious but not always very profitable procedure. As regards propaganda, I think I can assure the noble Lord that there has apparently been no sign of it, and we do not believe that even the Soviet Government would expect to get any return from propaganda in the Yemen. The money has been spent to foster trade, which is a quite legitimate desire, and all I can say is that it does not appear to have been very successful.

I think the noble Lord put his finger upon the difficulty when he said that the Imam was anxious to have his historic rights recognised. That is the difficulty, because the historic rights of the Imam connote, if they do not denote, sovereignty over the Moslems, perhaps in all Arabia, and at all events over the Moslems in our Aden Settlement. I do not propose to enter into a discussion upon sovereign rights, because at the present day we cannot entertain any question of doubt as to the sovereignty of His Majesty in our territory. That is the difficulty. If the noble Lord will let us go on, I can assure him that every attempt is being made by the Colonial Office, and by the very experienced and competent Resident at Aden, not only to secure the best relations with the Imam but to go further towards a very definite treaty as soon as it can possibly be effected. But I must ask your Lordships to take up the attitude that in matters of that kind you must trust the Executive Government. We want to attain the end which the noble Lord desires, and we think we are getting on to it, but the particular way in which negotiations must take place, and the particular time at which every step is taken, must, I am afraid, be left to the Executive Government. I can only assure the noble Lord that he may be quite certain that we are doing our very utmost to arrive at the end which he, together with ourselves, has in view.

I have had to speak carefully. We do not want to publish any Papers at the present time, because the publication would rather harden matters than enable us to go on. I ask the noble Lord to trust me when I say that it would be injurious to the end which he, and we, have in view, if we had to put down in black and white, and publish to the world, the various letters which have passed. We do not want to keep the Imam to what he has said. We want to leave it open to him to take up an attitude which would be more in accordance with the common desire to get a friendly treaty, and for that reason I ask the noble Lord not to press for Papers. I can assure him we are doing our very best to arrive at the end which he has in view.

LORD LAMINGTON

Of course, after the appeal which the noble Lord has just made I should not press for Papers, though it is a long time since we had anything clear before the public in connection with this question. He said that all proceedings with the Imam were going on very nicely. I am very glad to hear it, and accept his assurance that the Government are doing their best to come to friendly terms with the Imam. I do not press for the specific treaty, and therefore I cannot quite appreciate the argument of the noble Lord when he said that it would not do to invite the Imam to send a representative unless a treaty was clearly in view. I should have thought it would have enlightened that sovereign as to the importance of relations with the world outside the Yemen. The noble Lord will perhaps consider the matter. I was not quite sure whether I understood the noble Lord to say that all the troops or forces of the Imam had been withdrawn from occupancy of the tribal areas for which we are responsible. He seemed to imply that there were districts in which the Imam had his troops or forces, and it would be desirable to make that clear. I should, of course, deprecate any appearance of giving way in regard to our position at Aden.

LORD PASSFIELD

I believe that the districts which were occupied by the Imam's forces are no longer occupied by those forces, but I should like to avoid giving a definite answer as to whether, within the area width we claim as our Protectorate, there is any district which is at present more or less occupied by the Imam. Certainly the specific districts which were occupied two years ago have been vacated, and so far as I know no part of the actual Protectorate is actually occupied by the Imam's forces. At the same time I should not like to tell your Lordships that arrangements are quite satisfactory there on that point. I cannot say anything more precise on that point, except that a great deal has been done towards clearing up that difficulty. I am not prepared to say that everything is now cleared up.

LORD LAMINGTON

With the leave of the House, I beg to withdraw my Motion.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.