| THE IRAN-IRAQ PROBLEM |
When after the conclusion of the First W orId War Iraq attained statehood, Iran 'felt she was no longer legally obligated to the past Treaties and Agreements between Persia and the Ottoman
Empire'.
l Numerous unfriendly acts along the land frontier and in the estuary compelled Iraq in 1934 to lodge a complaint with the League of Nations. After many deliberations and direct negotiations, the
Boundary Treaty of I937 was concluded between Iraq and Iran.
2 Both Iraq and Iran agreed that the Protocol of Constantinople of 1913, together with the Minutes of the Meeting of the 1914 Boundary Delimitation Commission, 'shall be deemed valid and
binding' and 'the frontier between the two States shall be as defined and traced by the Commission' (Article 1.) Under the terms of the Treaty, Iraq conceded to Iran for anchorage facilities the
sovereignty over a strip of some six kilometres in the Shatt-al-Arab opposite Abadan, by transferring to the thalweg the boundary running along the low water mark on the Persian bank (Article
2.)
Conditions in estuarine waters shows the various sections of the estuary where the boundary runs respectively along the low water mark on the Persian side, at midstream, and along the thalweg.
Many rivers and streams flow from Iran across the boundary demarcated in 1914 between the Ottoman Empire and Persia. All of these have their headwaters in Persia, thus making Iraq, which
succeeded the Ottoman Empire in this region, dependent on Iran for its water resources along its eastern boundary. In some instances, the boundary follows the medium filum aquae of the
streams, while in other instances it intersects them. With one exception no provision was entered in any of the various treaties or agreements between the two neighbouring states on the
apportionment of the waters of the streams, nor was any reference made to the rights acquired from time immemorial.
The exception mentioned above concerns the Guanguir, which is a small frontier stream. The Boundary Commission decided in 1914 that the waters of the stream 'shall be divided into two
halves, one half shall belong to Mendeli [in the Ottoman Empire] and the other half to the people of Soumer [in Persia]. It was agreed that the execution of the decision should be 'left to the local
experts'. Bearing in mind possibilities of disagreement between the two neighbouring countries over the fair application of the decision, the Commission ruled that any such .differences be
handled through diplomatic channels.
Moreover, the British and Russian Commissioners thought that their Consuls-General at Baghdad could lend their assistance in case of divergence of opinion regarding the application of this
arrangement. This clause has not been made use of in spite of recurrent difficulties in obtaining a fair distribution of the Guanguir waters.
The small plains in the region through which the present international boundary line runs have been divided between the two neighbouring countries, and the difficulties created by partitioning such
geographic regions of similar physical and social character were unavoidable. Increased withdrawal of water across the border, particularly during the low water period of the streams, is carried
out without consideration of the consequences of such action to the areas on the other side of the boundary line. Thus agricultural life is improving and being extended on the eastern side of the
boundary at the expense of the lands on the western side (in Iraq), where agricultural life and rural conditions are disrupted from time to time, and possibilities of development are seriously
affected.
Finally the occurrence of oil in commercial quantity in the Arabian Gulf, which forms a vast area of continental shelf, presents new political geographical problems to the countries bordering the
Gulf. In November 1958 Iraq extended the limit of its territorial waters from three to twelve nautical miles, so that the Iraq-Iran sea boundary, though not finally delimited at the present time, has
been extended well into the Gulf. In the past the concept of the boundary did not have the same significance which it has today, and many diverse peoples crossed and occupied for varying
periods the region where the present boundary line runs.
From the middle of the fourteenth century the political ambitions of
the Ottomans were aimed at conquests in Europe, but in 1529, at the time when besieged Vienna was relieved, Persia resumed hostilities against Turkey's eastern provinces. Here, however, the
Ottomans were victorious and Persia was invaded and Baghdad occupied in 1534.
The Ottoman and Persian empires were the two great rivals in the territories which comprise the vast isthmus extending from the Black and Caspian Seas in the north to the Arabian Gulf in the
south. Recurrent hostilities between them kept fluid the limits of the territories under their alternate occupancy. In 1639 a small section of the frontier
along the central part of the country was vaguely defined and this was reaffirmed subsequently in 1746 and 1823. Later, in 1847 Turkey's sovereignty was recognized over part of Kurdistan now
in north-east Iraq, and that of Persia over the country east of the Shatt-al-Arab, the estuary of the Euphrates-Tigris.
Religious antagonism between the two empires was never appeased. The possession by the Sunni Ottomans of the Holy Cities in Mesopotamia, which were highly venerated by Shia Persians,
was a source of continuous political friction. Every treaty concluded between the two neighbours included a clause for the safe travel and prevention of molestation to Persian pilgrims proceeding
to the Holy Cities.
Ethnic and linguistic considerations were set aside when Persia abandoned her claim over the western part of a Kurdish region inhabited by Mohammedan Sunnis and in return obtained from the
Ottomans access to the Shatt-al-Arab through a region inhabited by Arab Shias. Kurdistan was divided between Ottomans and Persians to be split again between Turkey and Iraq when the
latter achieved independent nationhood. In the delta of Shatt-al-Arab, an Arab region was divided between the two neighbours. Thus the mitigation of political antagonism was made at the
expense of ethnic and linguistic considerations.
Owing to an unaccommodating climate the Ottoman Turks were unable to settle large colonies of their own people in the Mesopotamian plains in order to strengthen and justify their hold over
them. And this situation was aggravated by the heterogeneous population of Turkey itself, the deterioration in the administration of their vast empire, and the smallness of their numbers. Thus the
few elements which remained were gradually absorbed by the Arabs.
No economic requirements could justify either neighbour pursuing a policy of extending into and holding permanently regions which differed ethnically from it, nor was there in either case any
justification for doing so on grounds of population pressure.
Imperial ambition brought the Ottomans to the centre of Europe, thus precluding them during the height of their power from obtaining greater success in the east, which might have resulted in a
very different political map of the Near East. Persia's aggressiveness is easier to understand. Its western frontier regions, inhabited by Persians, were under direct menace from any warlike power
which settled as a neighbour, and the desire to possess the Holy Cities in the Mesopotamian plains represented a standing temptation. To counteract Persia's ambitions in this respect, Turkey
relied on militaryratherthanpoliticalmeasures
In the north the boundary follows the watershed forming the eastern limit of the Tigris basin, but in the centre and south it has no such natural basis, and on its way to the estuary it cuts across the
numerous lesser basins of the Tigris tributaries, whose headwaters are thus left in Iran. Lack of agreement between Iraq and Iran in respect of all but one of these international streams gives rise
to friction and prevents sound economic development of the many basins thus partitioned by the border line facing in opposite directions for their development.
The estuary with its complex boundary line serves the oil ports of Abadan in Iran and Fao in Iraq as well as a large region in Iran and the entire hinterland of Iraq. The limits between the
territorial and contiguous waters of the two neighbouring states are now extended well into the Gulf.
To conclude, it must be stressed that imperial ambitions and religious antagonism were for three centuries the two main causes of the recurrent wars between the two powerful empires. The
shaping of the concept of the boundary and its final demarcation necessitated another century during which the diplomacy of Great Britain and Russia played an important role with both the
Ottomans and Persians.
Land boundaries are not perfect and the present boundary is no exception. Goodwill has overcome difficulties, but what of the future? Present-day economic complexities and interdependence,
inequitable distribution of natural wealth, nationalist and racial consciousness all present problems whose solution here will continue to demand the most careful attention.
FISHER,CHARLES, EDITOR "ESSAYS INPOLITICALGEOGRAPHY" ;BUTLER AND TANNER LTD,1968. PG 219-223.
Empire'.
l Numerous unfriendly acts along the land frontier and in the estuary compelled Iraq in 1934 to lodge a complaint with the League of Nations. After many deliberations and direct negotiations, the
Boundary Treaty of I937 was concluded between Iraq and Iran.
2 Both Iraq and Iran agreed that the Protocol of Constantinople of 1913, together with the Minutes of the Meeting of the 1914 Boundary Delimitation Commission, 'shall be deemed valid and
binding' and 'the frontier between the two States shall be as defined and traced by the Commission' (Article 1.) Under the terms of the Treaty, Iraq conceded to Iran for anchorage facilities the
sovereignty over a strip of some six kilometres in the Shatt-al-Arab opposite Abadan, by transferring to the thalweg the boundary running along the low water mark on the Persian bank (Article
2.)
Conditions in estuarine waters shows the various sections of the estuary where the boundary runs respectively along the low water mark on the Persian side, at midstream, and along the thalweg.
Many rivers and streams flow from Iran across the boundary demarcated in 1914 between the Ottoman Empire and Persia. All of these have their headwaters in Persia, thus making Iraq, which
succeeded the Ottoman Empire in this region, dependent on Iran for its water resources along its eastern boundary. In some instances, the boundary follows the medium filum aquae of the
streams, while in other instances it intersects them. With one exception no provision was entered in any of the various treaties or agreements between the two neighbouring states on the
apportionment of the waters of the streams, nor was any reference made to the rights acquired from time immemorial.
The exception mentioned above concerns the Guanguir, which is a small frontier stream. The Boundary Commission decided in 1914 that the waters of the stream 'shall be divided into two
halves, one half shall belong to Mendeli [in the Ottoman Empire] and the other half to the people of Soumer [in Persia]. It was agreed that the execution of the decision should be 'left to the local
experts'. Bearing in mind possibilities of disagreement between the two neighbouring countries over the fair application of the decision, the Commission ruled that any such .differences be
handled through diplomatic channels.
Moreover, the British and Russian Commissioners thought that their Consuls-General at Baghdad could lend their assistance in case of divergence of opinion regarding the application of this
arrangement. This clause has not been made use of in spite of recurrent difficulties in obtaining a fair distribution of the Guanguir waters.
The small plains in the region through which the present international boundary line runs have been divided between the two neighbouring countries, and the difficulties created by partitioning such
geographic regions of similar physical and social character were unavoidable. Increased withdrawal of water across the border, particularly during the low water period of the streams, is carried
out without consideration of the consequences of such action to the areas on the other side of the boundary line. Thus agricultural life is improving and being extended on the eastern side of the
boundary at the expense of the lands on the western side (in Iraq), where agricultural life and rural conditions are disrupted from time to time, and possibilities of development are seriously
affected.
Finally the occurrence of oil in commercial quantity in the Arabian Gulf, which forms a vast area of continental shelf, presents new political geographical problems to the countries bordering the
Gulf. In November 1958 Iraq extended the limit of its territorial waters from three to twelve nautical miles, so that the Iraq-Iran sea boundary, though not finally delimited at the present time, has
been extended well into the Gulf. In the past the concept of the boundary did not have the same significance which it has today, and many diverse peoples crossed and occupied for varying
periods the region where the present boundary line runs.
From the middle of the fourteenth century the political ambitions of
the Ottomans were aimed at conquests in Europe, but in 1529, at the time when besieged Vienna was relieved, Persia resumed hostilities against Turkey's eastern provinces. Here, however, the
Ottomans were victorious and Persia was invaded and Baghdad occupied in 1534.
The Ottoman and Persian empires were the two great rivals in the territories which comprise the vast isthmus extending from the Black and Caspian Seas in the north to the Arabian Gulf in the
south. Recurrent hostilities between them kept fluid the limits of the territories under their alternate occupancy. In 1639 a small section of the frontier
along the central part of the country was vaguely defined and this was reaffirmed subsequently in 1746 and 1823. Later, in 1847 Turkey's sovereignty was recognized over part of Kurdistan now
in north-east Iraq, and that of Persia over the country east of the Shatt-al-Arab, the estuary of the Euphrates-Tigris.
Religious antagonism between the two empires was never appeased. The possession by the Sunni Ottomans of the Holy Cities in Mesopotamia, which were highly venerated by Shia Persians,
was a source of continuous political friction. Every treaty concluded between the two neighbours included a clause for the safe travel and prevention of molestation to Persian pilgrims proceeding
to the Holy Cities.
Ethnic and linguistic considerations were set aside when Persia abandoned her claim over the western part of a Kurdish region inhabited by Mohammedan Sunnis and in return obtained from the
Ottomans access to the Shatt-al-Arab through a region inhabited by Arab Shias. Kurdistan was divided between Ottomans and Persians to be split again between Turkey and Iraq when the
latter achieved independent nationhood. In the delta of Shatt-al-Arab, an Arab region was divided between the two neighbours. Thus the mitigation of political antagonism was made at the
expense of ethnic and linguistic considerations.
Owing to an unaccommodating climate the Ottoman Turks were unable to settle large colonies of their own people in the Mesopotamian plains in order to strengthen and justify their hold over
them. And this situation was aggravated by the heterogeneous population of Turkey itself, the deterioration in the administration of their vast empire, and the smallness of their numbers. Thus the
few elements which remained were gradually absorbed by the Arabs.
No economic requirements could justify either neighbour pursuing a policy of extending into and holding permanently regions which differed ethnically from it, nor was there in either case any
justification for doing so on grounds of population pressure.
Imperial ambition brought the Ottomans to the centre of Europe, thus precluding them during the height of their power from obtaining greater success in the east, which might have resulted in a
very different political map of the Near East. Persia's aggressiveness is easier to understand. Its western frontier regions, inhabited by Persians, were under direct menace from any warlike power
which settled as a neighbour, and the desire to possess the Holy Cities in the Mesopotamian plains represented a standing temptation. To counteract Persia's ambitions in this respect, Turkey
relied on militaryratherthanpoliticalmeasures
In the north the boundary follows the watershed forming the eastern limit of the Tigris basin, but in the centre and south it has no such natural basis, and on its way to the estuary it cuts across the
numerous lesser basins of the Tigris tributaries, whose headwaters are thus left in Iran. Lack of agreement between Iraq and Iran in respect of all but one of these international streams gives rise
to friction and prevents sound economic development of the many basins thus partitioned by the border line facing in opposite directions for their development.
The estuary with its complex boundary line serves the oil ports of Abadan in Iran and Fao in Iraq as well as a large region in Iran and the entire hinterland of Iraq. The limits between the
territorial and contiguous waters of the two neighbouring states are now extended well into the Gulf.
To conclude, it must be stressed that imperial ambitions and religious antagonism were for three centuries the two main causes of the recurrent wars between the two powerful empires. The
shaping of the concept of the boundary and its final demarcation necessitated another century during which the diplomacy of Great Britain and Russia played an important role with both the
Ottomans and Persians.
Land boundaries are not perfect and the present boundary is no exception. Goodwill has overcome difficulties, but what of the future? Present-day economic complexities and interdependence,
inequitable distribution of natural wealth, nationalist and racial consciousness all present problems whose solution here will continue to demand the most careful attention.
FISHER,CHARLES, EDITOR "ESSAYS INPOLITICALGEOGRAPHY" ;BUTLER AND TANNER LTD,1968. PG 219-223.
