SOUTH EAST ARABIA (Hansard, 26 October 1955)

§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY)

My Lords, with your Lordships' permission, I should like to intervene to make a statement on the situation in South East Arabia which has been made by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister in another place. Your Lordships may recall that on July 28, 1954, my noble friend Lord Reading reported that agreement had been reached with the Saudi Arabian Government to submit the Buraimi frontier dispute to arbitration. My noble friend expressed the hope that this Agreement would enable us to resume the traditionally friendly relations between Her Majesty's Government and the Saudi Arabian Government. I am sorry to have to tell your Lordships that these hopes have been disappointed. The proceedings before the Arbitration Tribunal at Geneva have broken down and the British member of the Tribunal and its Belgian President have resigned. The reasons for these events were explained in detail in a statement issued by the Foreign Office on October 4. Her Majesty's Government have just learnt that Dr. Dihigo, one of the two remaining members of the Tribunal appointed as a neutral, has also resigned.

For many years, Her Majesty's Government sought to reach an agreement in these matters by negotiation with the Saudi Arabian Government. These efforts led only to steadily increased Saudi claims against the territory of two Arab Rulers, the Ruler of Abu Dhabi 46 and the Sultan of Muscat. Finally, in August 1952, in the region of Buraimi, the Saudi official, Turki bin Ataishan, after passing through the territory of the Ruler of Abu Dhabi, invaded the territory of the Sultan of Muscat and established himself in a village belonging to the Sultan. Despite this provocative act, Her Majesty's Government continued to seek a solution by peaceful means, and dissuaded those local leaders who wished to meet force by force. For two years Turki remained in Buraimi, seeking to extend Saudi influence in the area. In 1954, Her Majesty's Government advised the two Arab rulers to submit their case to arbitration. An Arbitration Agreement was drawn up which it was hoped would lead to a settlement and to more friendly relations.

The Saudi Arabian authorities have systematically disregarded the conditions of arbitration which were agreed upon. The "police" group which they were permitted to keep in the Buraimi Oasis for the sole purpose of maintaining law and order was, in fact, led by political officers who persistently exceeded these functions. Bribery and intimidation on a wide scale has taken place in the disputed areas, with the result that it is no longer possible to estimate where the loyalties of the inhabitants lay before Turki's armed incursion. The Ruler of Abu Dhabi and the Sultan of Muscat have scrupulously observed the conditions of arbitration which Her Majesty's Government in good faith recommended to them. They have had to stand by and watch their subjects being suborned, and the outcome of the arbitration itself being gravely prejudiced in advance. A fair and impartial arbitration is not possible in such circumstances.

These facts, combined with the conduct of the Saudi Government in relation to the Tribunal itself, have led Her Majesty's Government to conclude that the Saudi Arabian Government is no more willing now to reach an equitable solution by arbitration than they were previously by negotiation. Their actions and conduct amount to a repudiation of the Arbitration Agreement and have made a continuation of the arbitration impossible.

Her Majesty's Government have, therefore, felt obliged in the exercise of their duty to protect the legitimate interests of the Ruler of Abu Dhabi and the Sultan 47 of Muscat, to advise them that the attempt to reach a just compromise by means of arbitration has failed. The forces of these Rulers, supported by the Trucial Oman Levies, have accordingly this morning taken steps to resume their previous control of the Buraimi Oasis and areas to the west of it. My latest intimation is that the Saudi force has been evacuated from the Buraimi Oasis, their only casualties being two men slightly wounded. They are being cared for by our forces.

Her Majesty's Government and the Rulers concerned have no doubt that, as a matter of law, they would be entitled to regard as a fair frontier between the Ruler of Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia the line known as the 1952 line, claimed in their recent Memorial before the Tribunal. However, while fully reserving their legal rights in that respect they have decided, in order to act in as reasonable and conciliatory a manner as possible, to declare and uphold a line which is more favourable to Saudi Arabia. In 1935, when the present dispute may be said to have crystallised, a line, which is known as the Riyadh Line, was put forward by Her Majesty's Government. It involved substantial concessions to the Saudi Arabians. This line was further modified in 1937 in favour of Saudi Arabia and it is this modified line that we are now declaring.

The Saudi Arabian Government are being informed of these decisions. My right honourable friend deeply regrets that this step should have been necessary. But as negotiations and arbitration have both failed, we have no other means of honouring our obligations and standing by our friends. I hope that in time the Saudi Arabian Government will accept the solution that we have had to declare. Her Majesty's Government are ready at all times to discuss with the Saudi Arabian Government any minor rectifications of the line which may seem convenient in the light of local circumstances.

§ EARL JOWITT

My Lords, I am sure the whole House is grateful to the 48 noble Marquess for making this statement of such extreme importance. At the same time it was a lamentable statement that he was called upon to make. I wish I could think of some method of pouring oil on these troubled waters, but the fact may be that there is already too much oil in the sand of this particular area. When we think of the friendship which we have had with Ibn Saud and the great admiration in this country that there is for his work, it is a lamentable pass to which things have come. I am bound to say I do not like taking what is called a strong action as against a legal action, but it seems to me that the Government are right in saying that in these circumstances arbitration has really become farcical and impossible. At the same time, you do not and cannot get finality by taking action of this kind. Indeed, the question of the 1952 line is still left open. I would suggest that Her Majesty's Government should make it quite plain that they are perfectly ready to explore and stand by other methods of dealing with the problem: for instance, either referring it to the World Court at The Hague or else perhaps bringing it before the United Nations. I am sure that we all, on both sides of the House, dislike intensely having to resort to force, because we stand for the rule of law and would be most willing to try to find some method whereby we could make the rule of law apply.

It seems to me, however, that this particular method of arbitration is, in the circumstances, impossible. I cannot think that Her Majesty's Government were wrong, therefore, in holding the position by going to this modified line. At the same time, having gone to the modified line I hope they will continue to make it perfectly plain that they are very ready to have legal consideration of this problem. Of course, we should have the right to claim the old 1952 line. The whole matter would then be once more under the law, which is the proper place—I am sure the Government will agree with me I entirely there—for it to be.