IRAN-PAKISTAN BORDER DISPUTE: AN EVALUATION OF THE IRANIAN CLAIM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP08C01297R000500130001-4
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 26
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 4, 2012
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: September 16, 1954
• Content Type: REPORT

EWEN
I ?
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R0-00500130001-4 7/4/
? U
Intelligence
No. 6564
?SEGERT--
eport
IRAN-PAKISTAN BORDER
AN EVALUATION OF THE IRANIAN CLAIM
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of Intelligence Research
Date: Sept ember 16 1954
-.=
nveirrcvn
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4 ,
S7i]CR7IT
This report was prepared from information available through
August 13, 1954, by the Division of Research for Near East, South Asia,
and Africa.
TABLE OF CONTE7TS
Abstract
I. Introduction
II. Evaluation of Future Iranian Policy
Page
iii
1
2
A. Basis of Iranian Claims
2
B. Possible Motives for Iranian Agitation
2
0. Probable Considerations Restraining Iranian Action
Against Pakistan
3
III.
Evaluation of Iranian Territorial Claims
4
A. Delimitation of the Frontier
4
1. The Goldsmid Mission - 1871
4
2. Joint British-Persian Commission of 1896 . . . .
.
.
5
3. Agreement of 1905 Between Great Britain and Iran
?
?
5
B. Brief History of Political Control over the
Disputed Area of Baluchistan, 1700-1954
5
1. Integration into Pakistan
5
2. Relationshill of Kalat to Great Britain and
other Powers before 1947
6
3. Rise of Kalgt as Suzerain State in Baluchistan .
.
.
.
IV.
Conclusion
?
?
?
-8
srxmiT
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET
APPMDIXES
A. Agreement Between Persia and Great Britain Respecting the
Boundary Between Persia and Kelat, 1st 4th September, 1871 10
B. Agreement Relating to the Demarcation of the Boundary
Between Persian Baluchistan and Kalat, 1896 12
C. Agreement Between the Government, of His Majesty The
King of Great Britain and Ireland and Of the
British Dominions Beyond the Seas, Defender of
the Faith, EMperor of India and His Imperial
Majesty the Shahinshah of Persia, for the
Settlement of Certain Outstanding Questions on
the FrOntier of Persia and India, 1905 14
D., Treaty Between the British Government and Yusseer Khan,
Chief of Khelat, Cpncluded on the part of the British
Government by Major John Jacob, Virtue of
Pull Powers Granted by the Most Noble the Marquis of
Dal?Houpie, Kt., etc., Governor?General of India, and
by Meer Nueseer Khan, Chief of Khelat, 1854 -
16
E. Treaty Between the British Government and
the Khelat State, 1876 ' 19
This Intelligence Report is being circulated to offices additional
to those most directly concerned, as being of possible interest. When it
has Outlived its usefulness, it may be destroyed in the manner Prescribed
for CLASSIF/ED material;
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET
Abstract
iii
Late in 1953: the Iranian Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs --
acting on his own initiative and apparently largely motivated by a desire
to further his career by developing a reputation as a "true patriot" --
announced that Iran does not accept the validity of the present border
with Pakistan in the area of Baluchistan Province and advanced a claim
on behalf of his country to a slice of Pakistan territory some 200 kilo-
meters in depth. Pakistan is not prepared to make any major adjustment
in its border with Iran, although it is apparently willing to make minor
adjustments in those portions of the border which are undemarcated.
Pakistan contends that the present border became a legally-established
"international boundary" as a result of specific written agreements between
Iran and Great Britain, signed in 1871, 1896 and 1906. Iranian irridentists
in the Ministry argue that the Anglo-Iranian agreements of 1871 and 1896
dealt only with "spheres of influence" and were, moreover, extorted from .
Iran "under pressure." Neither the texts of the agreements nor the
political history of the period support this point of view, however.
In any case, available information indicates that neither the Shah
nor the government of Prime Minister Fazlollah Zahedi will permit zealous
Iranian officials in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to press this claim
against Pakistan, especially at the present crucial stage in Iran's inter-
national relations. It can be assumed, therefore, that the Iranian claim
on Baluchistan will not, at this timelbe added to Pakistan's list of major
territorial disputes -- i.e., Afghanistan's pressing demands for the estab-
lishment.of an autonomous tribal state (Pushtunistan) along the Afghan-
Pakistan border, the continuing dispute with India over Kashmir, and a
series of minor border adjustments' still pending with India.
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
-
. .INTRODUCTION.
,
For roughly 100 years,- disputes over the border between. Iran and .
Baluchistan -- that part OfTakietan contiguous. to Iran.-- have been a
Source of reaurrent frictiOn.between:Iran and the British Anienistration
in Indiai pr., since 1947,,between.Iran and Pakistan,. The most recent
activation of the dispute occurred in December 1953 and early 1954. This.
paper undertakes to answer two major questions: (1) Are the Iranians
likely to press their territorial claims againat. Pakistan within the next
few years? .(2)- Do the Ireniaps have-convincing'legal claims to Baluchistan
territory lying within. Pakistan?
A high Iranian official told the, US Ambassador to Iran in December
1953 that Iran has never construed the border agreements which Iran and
Great Britain negotiated,in the nineteenth century to have established a.
permanent border between Iran and India,. and that.Iran.claims territory
now lying within Pakistan to a depth. of at least 2010 kilometers (approxi-
mately 125 miles). ;When Sir tafrullah Khan, Pakistants_Foreign Minister,.
visited Iran in December 1953,. the Iranian Government reportedlyimade. .
representations to him about the border question. The timing of this
representation was probably the result of the political opportunism of the
Iranian Under-Secretary of Foreign.Affairs andupossibly Inaien agitatiOn
in Iran against Pakistan, which was then in the .process of negotiating:.
with the US for arms-aid.
Although incursions back and forth across the frontier by Baluchi
tribes are not uncommon, the only violation of the border by Iranian armed
forces: reportedin recent years occurred in 1949. At that time, Iranian
soldiers seized a Pakistan police outpost at Qila Safed near MIrjiiveh where
the railroad from Pakistan to Zahidan crosses the frontier (see attached
map). No explanation for the. Iranian action has been reported: it may
have stemmed from exuberant nationalism, originated with some local quarrel,
or been .an effort, by the local governor or commander to gain kudos in
Tehran. An agreement was reached later the same year between the Iranian
and Pakistan Governments to set up a border commission, and the soldiers
were then withdrawn. However, the agreement has not been carried out to
date due to the failure of the Iranian Government to appoint its members
to the commission.
At the time of the 'Qua Safed incident in 1949 and in the consequent,
negotiations, Pakistan indicated its willingness to discuss the border ques-
tion and acknowledged that the lack of precise demarcation in some areas
raised the possibility that rectifications in the existing line might be
necessary. If the question ever gets to the negotiation stage,. however,
Pakistan cannot be .expected to entertain claims made for territories of.
the size indicated by the Iranian official. While in Tehran in December.
1953, Pakistani Foreign Minister Zafrullah Khan told the US Ambassador.
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET 2,,
that Iran and Pakistan should settle their differences in a conciliatory
and friendly manner and that the boundary differences could be easily dis-
posed of by a joint boundary comPission on: the.basis of general boun4ary,
agreements existing prior to'thepartitiO4of);India. Re added, however,
that if Iran should take the podition'hai-it did not recognize in prin. .
ciple the pre-19117 India-Iran boundaries;SettleMent:of the question would
be difficult.
- /I.: EVALUATION OF FUTURE IRANIAN POLICY
?
A. Basis of Iranian Claims
Although' the absence of boundary markers. in some places could result
in disputes over small areas, an Iranian claift to any sizable piece of
Pakistants territory could arise only if the binding nature of the 1872
or 1896 delineation agreements were challenged..AlthoughAbdol Hoseyn
Meftah, until recently Iranian Under-Secretary for ,Foreign Affairsil.has
stated that these. agreements dealt only with the, establishment of "spheres
of influence"2 and were extorted from Iran.under British pressure; the,
texts ofthe.agreements indicate that they were intended to establish an
international boundary. /he contention that the UK. exerted.undue-preseure-
against Easr-ad.ain Shah-(l848-1896) is open to question in view of his
reputation as a strong ruler. . . ?
B. possible Motives for Iranian Agitation
? Most of 'the recent talk about Iranian territorial claims against
Pakistan originated with Abdol Hoseyn Meftah during his tenure as Under
Secretary?for,Foreign Affairs. His preoccupation with this issue appa.;
rently'stemmed largely from-a.desire to advance his career within the
Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs by developing a reputation as a'
"true patriOt.". Meftah has been encouraged by. Indian officials in Iran
and bSr- certain deputies recently elected to the Majlis from RermanProl.
vince, whosseelc to focus government interest on the affairs of their
constituency.. Kerman Province includes:not only the Baluchistan -battier
area but alsdo.the Relmand Elver deltal.the.subject of dispute between
Iran and AfgbanUtan.
r1..-111tritah has served. n the Ministry of Foreign Affairssince 1919 and
was Under?SeCretarY for Foreign Affairs from October 1952 until May
-
1954, When he was. appointed Minister to the Hague. His replacement
in the. Ministry is Mostapha Samil, Whom the.Pakistanis have described..
? as "a more reas9n4)4s man." .,(C. Chapmants Memo of. Conversation with
Charge.W.AffairS,W1r44, July 11,.1954, CONFIDENTIAL.)'
2. D,3731.Tehran, December 30, 1953, SECRET.
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET 3
Iranian irridentism may also have been stimulated by unfavorable
comparisons with Pakistan which appeared .with increasing frequency, parti-
cularly in the American. pressr in 1953 eiqd 1954. Typical of this trend is
the following comment; contained' in a latter to the New York Times of
March 12, 1954:1 ? !f. ..
4
. A rearmed Paiiatan will not only, provide for its owr..
security, and India's., but will provide the free world, with.
a much-needed strategic-reserve. in the. Persian Gulf region,
of which z- . Turkey and Pakistan .will form twin buttresses,
propping up the weaker state of Iran .between them and provid-.
ing neighboring countries with a sense of greater security.
Iranian authorities in the frontier area of Kerman .Province haver
according to Pakitants Foreign Minister,.Zafrullah Khan, been acting in. a
petty manner. in dealing with Pakistanis who under agreement with. Iran.
operate the portion of the former Indian railway which lies between the
border and the Iranian town of.Zahedans ,It is his conviction that these
authorities view the Pakistani operation of the railroad ai an infringe-
ment'on Iranian sovereignty. c There are also reports that Indians have
been ,stirring up the Baluchi tribesion both sides of the Iran-Pakistan.
border.3
C. Probable Considerations Restraining Iranian Action Against Pakistan.
Petty squabbles between Iran and its neighbors are a familiar facet.of
the Middle Eastern political scene. Usually these squabbles are played down
? by the Shah and officials at the Cabinet level so long as they are outweighed
by more important policy considerations. At the present time, Iranian
authorities are acutely aware that (1) the US is providing financial, and.
political support to both /ran and Pakistan. in an effort to curb Soviet expan-
sion in the Middle East, (2) the US would react unfavorably if Iran should
create a serious border dispute with Pakistan, and (3) eventually Iran may
find it desirable to cooperate with Pakistan within some sort of Middle
Eastern defensive pact vis-a-vis the USSR. Another consideration which
would probably restrain Iran from pressing its more extravagant claims to
Pakistan territory at this time is its reluctance to take any action which
might result in prolonged interruption of Iranian-Pakistan trade via the
Zahedan-Mirjaveh-Pakistan railroad. This route now constitutes the prin-
ciple channel to non-Soviet markets for Iranian exports in eastern Iran;
eventual expansion of the Iranian railroad system to Kerman and thence to
Pakistan would increase this trade to the mutual advantage of both countries.
1. Written by George Fielding Eliot, newspaper commentator on military affairs.
2. D-373, December 30, 1953, Tehran, SECRET; D-390, December 31) 1953,
Tehran, Enclosure 4, page 2, CONFIDENTIAL.
3. J. M. Howison's Memo of Conversation, Tehran, ,January 22, 1954, SECRET.
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET
1117 EVALUATION 'OF IRANIAN TERRITORIAL0tAIMS
A. Delimitation of the Frontier
,
?
The border between Iran and Baluchistan was 'established by three
agreements entered into byIran And Great Britain between. the years 1871
and 1905. These treaties aefinealthe-entire frontier and. demarcated one
segment. The texts of the treaties and,the:accoUnta,of the work of the
boundary commissions Written by the principal British officers on the com-
missions indicate that the intention of the, parties to the agreements was
to establish an international boundary. Neither the written accounts of
the surveys nor the treaties bear out Meftah!s claim, that the agreements
dealt with.napherea.of influence." _
. 1. ,The Goldsmi&Mission -.1871.1,:The border.from-GWatar RAY on the
Gulf of Oman to the Mishkel River.-- the.Alakriin-area...or.."ABP on, the
attached D?as defined in the spring .Of 1871 by a British Commiasioner.
serving Under General Frederick J. Goldamid. Goldsmid arrived in Tehran in
the fall of 1870 under instructions to join*With:Iraniati_and Afghan.commis-
sions in 'investigating the Iranian-Afghan frontier in.' the Sistan
Because of disturbed conditions in Afghanistan, the Sistan survey proved
impossible, Whereupon Goldsmid and the Iranian CommissiOner were authorized
by the:Government2oVIndia?and the Shah to proceed, with,the.Makrfin border
survey. :. poldsMid had hoped to carry out the survey":with'a mixed Commission
consisting of the British partyi.the Iranian CommisSioner.andrepresentatives
of the'Khan of &lit, who Was the suzerain of.Makr4.4 Under .a .treaty
rela-
tinship Great Britain by which Britain .controlled kalat foreign.
affairs. ? (See below, Chapter IV.) 'Roweydr, the absence of specificinstruc,
tions from the Shah. 0; Itan.and'a bitter'disputeWhich arose between Goiaimid
and the local Iranian' Governor And the Iranian Commissioner following the ,
unexpected arrival deet, in Iranian territory of the Kalat:CoMmissionei.acooMe
paned by a sizable armed force, 104 PIO TraniamtoMmiSsiO4er.to.refuse to
join in the work Of the survey and to lodge protests .ihrTahran It iapps-
sible.thatin future discussions on the boraer4Uestion.this.episode and the
subsequent protests may be cited by Iran to support the claim that the. border
delineation was obtained under British pressure. '.However,. the Kalat Commis-
sioner itna'4iaforce.returned shortly. thereafter to Kalet.territory'and
therefore presumably did not exert any influence on the eventual boundary
settlement.. ?
14
, . . ? .
? -' obldsd'daspatChed'a British officer.to.:OopdnOt the border investiga-
tion without an Iranian counterpart and these finding:iv:serve& as the basis
1. The 'beat source tor-informationon the Goldsmid.surVey 'is in Eastern
"Persia, An Account of the Journeys of the FersianIloundery Commission,
?1870.671.:72: Edited-by Sir Frederic:John Goldsmid,(London: MacMillan.and
'
Co.), 1876. .
2. See Ibid., pp. XXIII-XXV and pp. 210213 for details of dispute.
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET 5
for negotiations in Tehran in the fall of 1871 between the UK and the Shah.
Accord could not be reached,on.the KUhak area' but in early September the
delineation of the remaining section was accepted by the Shah. (See
Appendix A for text of the treaty.)
2. Joint British-Persian Commission Of 1896. The remainder of the
border CB-D") was defined, and in part demarcated, in 1896 by a joint
Iranian-British Commission.' In the 25 years Which had passed since the.
Goldsmid Commission Completed its Work,. the Iranians had practically
settled the controversy over KUhak by occupying'the area and. were pushing
their claims. farther east. Frequent frontier disturbances, Persian expan-
sion, and disputes over the possession ofsome important date. igrovesled
the British to request that the:Shah agree to border border commission..?.
This_commiSsion demarcated about 126 miles *of the border with 12 pillars,
commencing near the northern bank of the MAshkel River and terminating on
the right bank of the Tahlib.River (point "C"). From this point northwards
the border is undemarcated but defined. The agreement' was signed by
rei)resentativeaof:Iran and Britain at Jqa, Iran, in March 1896. (See
Appendix 134'or text,of the treaty.)
?
. .
3.' Agreement of 1905 Between Great Britain and Iran. A dispute over
areas in the vicinity Of Mirjaveh led to the border agreement of 1905,,
signed in .Tehran, by which Great Britain withdrew a claim to Mirjiveh that
it had put forth in 1902. Further, the governments, agreed that "this
frontier Shall be regarded as definitely settled in acoordance with the
Agreement of 1896, and no further claim shall be made in respect of it."
(See Appendix C for text.)
B. Brief History of Political Control over the .Dis uted Area of Baluchistan,
. 170041954. .
' 1. Intecration into Pakistan. The large area of Baluchistan in Pakistan
is presently divided into two major subdivisions: (i) the Baluchistan
'States Union, composed of the former tribal states of Kalit, Makrin, Khirin,
and Las Bela;g and (2) ?Baluchistan Province, consisting of the districts
which prior to 1947 were part of British India and directly administered
by the British, and the tribal districts which have a special status and
are administered by the provincial authorities. Baluchistan Province became
part of Pakistan at the time of the partition of the Indian subcontinent in
August 1947; the area now constituting the Baluchistan States Union acceded
to Pakistan early in 1948 after negotiations with the Pakistan Government.
1. The chief British representative on this commission,. Colonel Sir T.,.;
Hungerford Holdich, has briefly discussed the survey in his boa, The
Indian *vderlandt 1880-1900 (London: Matiillen and Co.), 1901.
2.' The Government of Pakistan has recently announced its intention to
-intwat6 the Baluchistan States Union into the BaluchistanYrovince.
SECA7.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET
Before partition in 1947, India was composed of British India and
the Princely States (including. the autonomous tribal states) which recog-
nized Great Britain ,as the paramount.powerAs 'a general rule, the UK
managed the Princely Statese defense;:fornaffairs, and communications,.
and in local matters the. advice. of the British official who was frequently,
stationed in the State had a' considerable influence, although the princely
rulers had :scrim Measure of Meal autonomy. ?When British rule terminated,,
the princes of the states were advised Wthe'departing British Officials
to accede to one, or the other of the new. Independent statesvbasing their
decision on contiguity and religious composition?. Almost-all of 'the States
acceded to one or the ether'in a very short perled,..bUt a few -- the best
known of which are Kasbnir and Hyderabad indiCated'a desire to remain.
independent; another was karat, the suzerain tribal*State'in.BOIUchistan.
Whether the Khan of Kalat wad motivated by' the desire ...to) bargain .With :
Pakistan for 'the reacquisition of some territorie,previously leaSed to
the British. or for increased subaidies from P4kistan 9r by an actual .
desire for independence is.not c1ear but at any rate the Khan announced.
in 1947 his intention of -remaining independent.,.He'agreed with Pakistan
in August of 1947 to a Standstill Agreement by. which neither party would
take any action which would prejudice the question-0 independence or
accession.
The -press of other affairs in the first months of independence.pre-
vented the Pakistan Government from concerning ftrielf with Kalat but in
February '1948 Mohammed Ali Jinnah, then Governor General of Pakistan,"
visited Baluchistan and held discussions' about the status of the states.
At this time, the Khan of Kalgt stated his desire to refer the question of
accession to his council of tribal leaders. Among 'this group, a number
wished to sign a treaty giving 'Pakistanc.eontrol of defense, foreign affairs,
and communications -- in essence the same position formerly occupied by
Britain -- whereas others wanted merely a treaty of alliance and friend-
ship. In the meantime, the heads of the states of Makran, Kharin, and
Las Bela, who ,had. been under the suzerainty of"Kalat for many years,
claimed to be inde?endent and asked for accession to PaCiistan. The Pakistan
Government held conversations with the representatives of these states --
partly to exert pressure on the Khan of Kslat -- and in March. 1948 acCepted
their requests foraccesaion. The Khan of Kalat protested that this action
was contrary to the Standstill Agreement; however, he in turn acceded on.
March 31, 19484 At no time during the seven months from August 1914.7-March
1948, as far as Is' known, was, there any discussion on the Part of Baluchistan
leaders of acceding to Iran rather than Pakistan. Neither has 'there, been,..
evidence' of any local indigenous movement among the people favoring acces-
sion to Iran. The issue was the nature of the new relationship with
Pakistan.
"
! Relationship of Kalat to,Great Britain and other Powers before .1947:
Although Kalat became the suzerain power over much of the Baluchistan area,.
it in turn from the period of its rise in the mid-eighteenth century to
?: ?
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET 7
its accession to Pakistan in 1948 was never fully independent. At various
times in the last severarcenturies, Kalgt has been under some degree of con-
trol by the Moghul Emperors, Iranian emperors, Afghan kings and, finally, the
British. Parts of Baluchistan'came under the Safavid,dynasty of Iran (15027..
1736), and the-Iranian emPire of Nadir Shah (d.1736-1747).included nearly
the whole territory of Baluchistan. .Since the breakup of the Iranian
empire at the death of 444ir,Shah, the r4ers sitting in Tehran have held
sway over only small portions of present Pakistan-Baluchistan territory.
?
Following Nadir Shah's demise, Kalat acknowledged the suzerainty of
the Durrani rulers of Afghanistan until 1854 when the British Government'
assumed
assumed the role as suzerain. The relations of Kola and the' Government.
of India until 1947 were governed by the Treaties of 1854 and 1876., (See
Appendixes D and E for full2 textS.) The UKpin return for proyiding an
annual subsidy and protection to Kalat,,became the paramoUnt power in the
area by gaining several important.powers: (1) Kalit was "to act in sub- ,
ordinate co-operation" with Great Britain, which was to control.the state's
foreign relations. (It was under this authority that great Britain nego-
tiated the boundary arrangements with Iran.) (2) Britain had the right to
station tioopd in any part of the territory. (3) British Political Agents
were to be stationed at the Court of the Khan. (4) If any dispute between
the Khan and his Sirdara (chiefs) should arise, the Political Agent was to
offer. his good offices; if he failed to settle the controversy4 the *UK
Goiernment was to-act as arbitrator.
3.. Rise OfXalat as Suzerain State in Baluchistan. At the' time of.
the partition 'of the Indian subcontinent in 1947,, the Khan of KalU was the
head of a loose group.tne of tribal states, includingIalit,. Makrin,..Kharan
and Las Bela, in which each of. the states exercised considerable local ,-
aUtcnomy.:, The control of these areas by Kalit had always been uneapyi.and
frequently throughout, the nineteenth century there were' revolts, by the
tribal leaders subordinate to the Khan. The Khan's formal Suzerainty over'
the states.was .howeverl, recognized by the Government of India.
The present' ruling family of KalAt first assumed the Khanship over
much. of the statets'area early in the seventeenth century: Under. Nasir I,
who ruled from about1750. to 1793, Kalatts suzerainty 'overterritories to
the west and east was extended and in.:.the following decades much of .what is
now the Baluchistan 'States Union and some tribal districts presentlyadminis-
tered by the province of Baluchistan came under the nominal suzerainty of
"
a. Makri7m. Under the agreement made with Nasir Khan I, the ruling.
chief of MakrAn retained local self-rule but on condition of paying to the
Khan of Karat half of the state's revenues, The leaders of Makran apparently
mide. frequent efforts to overthrow. KalAtvs.control, briefly succeeding early
in thenineteenth century, but by another agreementin 1833 Makrin again
affirmed its obligation of paying half of its revenues to Kalgt, The Khan
: 2
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET
8
of Kalit supervised Makrld thrOugh an agent or governor (Nib). whose primary
functionwas `to receive the 'revenue from the.,NaIwn Chiefs. Following a
period, the ? India. in 3.853., appointed a
British officer to administer : area on behalf , of Kali
and. to actin general as .:a this point, *train re-
mained nominallY.:,Under:.the Khan Of 'Wit who???COntinued to appoint :a. governor,
but the influence of thi..poyetiinietiv:a:!Ipii4 through: the British : Political? ?
Agent at Kalat wee. predominant. ? -? : ' ':.? ?
?
? b. KhEirin: ? ? The control :or .1tharan by Kalit has teen. ?:larise3,5r
Nesir . Khan .17W:7M) of :Kalrkt was the first to. exercise any sWay. over. .
Khilr4n but this was slight.** in approximately the: next 100 years the
leaders of K1.rn StrOye:ifiegnentlY for full independence :froth.ticallit...:In
this .period Khrn al.dO?Pdf.d homage' Itci'.the Afghan kings from : whom Icargn.
received .an; annual subsidy. In '1833, the ruler of Wein ended his... suzerainty
to Afghanistan aliCaoknovitedged the 'Eintire.macieif the Governments of India and
KalAt. ..Shortly was arranged. that Writ deal directly .witk. ?
the British Political. Agent at Kalat 'rather than :through :the.,Athanoff,.14.tat ;
and receive .;an.lalicy*106 frpm the Britigh in lieu of that :formerly given by
the. Afghan ,kings.? &Weyer; Kharan nominally ?remained a'fendatory.9f,.!ISaliit?
?..
. ? .
;.; .c. Las Bela. From about ? 1742; ?c.ihen..:'the..: authority ? of Ka1.t was ., first
estaplished; _has- Bela :had a 'dependent 'relatiOnshig with Kalt. At 41-1r0).4,
Bela paid half of its reVenUes to. kalat; ? later,- when this ?? obligation Was
terminated, Las Bela was ? expetted.? to provide military aid:to:the .Khan of
iCalit. in the event of liar.., At various times thert;'were??intermarriages..,*1.7.0n
the ? rulinglfdthily of ?Kalat and that of .Las Bela. In the 1860180...three unsuo-
cessfnl'atteMpts: were tRaer1;.:.:447, Las .Bela 'to overthrow the ?:
dependency .and.' seiZe ,the..1rhanship of ka1t fo' hizneeaif. In l876 then Jam - of
Lab Bela 463:0-'aoknoWledged the .snzerdinty .of the lhan,br.kalat: .in accordance
with ancient usage. The Government vflidiat's paramountcy' in Kalat after
3.816? ? fed: it to take'ari:'actiVe *role. in Las 'Bela affairs and to iptpr,-4e:. to .
settle inter-fatil disputes over succession. At the time: of: the rOyal;.. :
successions in .1899 and. .1962 in Las Belk; the ',Ted agreed: to !!cp.p.ducX,. the, ,
administration of Las' Bela State.:iii..accOrdance gith the.-adviCe.:of Agent to
the Governor ',General" .,(political agent .of the Government Of '
a. Chagai,In the latter..*irt..."of the .eighteenth,centnry0...dnring?..
the 'reign. of Vasir ?first gained control of .the
,areas. At: beet; the. authority Of Kalit tenuous ? throughout . the :?next
several aeCades and in ? the latter part of the 'nineteenth century Afghanistan
took pOiseseion of the ?1,..,Teitern part known as :the-t.4n4ers,ni: area.
Under the, Afghan-Baluchistan boundary 'agreement between Afghanistan encl.; great
Br1ta4.n .of 1893 (The .Du../..ancl.,. Line) Afghanistan relinquished to Britain its
poeseeeiOn. of this region.' 'The 1Nehki':area reuiaineda su,ierainty. Of
? until,1899 when it. was. lea'sed' With an. ..rights' by.Xalat. to tfie.'0K-,on an
annual.: 9ui.t.. ient .? neva ." and, Nushki- becanie' pert : o.f 'Baluchi province. , in
. ? ,?? . - .
.?? ? ?
?
sEcEPr,
..?
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET 9 t.
British India and were incorporated into Pakistan in August 1947 as part of
the original cession. .
' ?
IV. CONCLUSION
%Although borderSquabblestetween Iran and its neighbors are endemic
to the area, responsible Iraniati:OffiCitaa'at-the Cabinet level probablSr
will continue to give such disputes secondary emphasis in cases where the
larger national interest might be endangered-by Pressing exaggerated *claims.
At the present time, the Shah and. the Government apparently- regard the
development of greater- confidence. between Iran, and its non-Soviet neighbors,
especially Turkey and Pilkistani as More important than-IrlInts tenuous. claims
to_ the Baluchistan, border area of Pakistan... As long as the Iranian Govern.!.
menthaa'any thought of eventually joining the Pakistan-Turkey mutual'con-
sultation agreement,.. it is unlikely that the border. question will be per-
mitted.to assume the proportions-Of a'major controversy. -Certainly neither-
the Shah nor Prime Minister Zahedi has-indicated any intention Of raising
territorial claims against Pakistan.
. .The issue, however, is one that gives opportunity to irresponsible "
extreme nationalists to play to the crowd by appearing as the protectors Of.
Iranian.territorial.integrity. If. left in the hands of such 'persons, the
border dispute.could.develop into a serious source of friction between the
two states and impede Or' even' perhaps. prevent,Cooperation.in area defense.
Because of the lack of preciseness of much of the border delineation,
Iran ma3'r have legitimate claims to Small tracts of land; however, Iranian
claims to sizable Pakistan territories do not appear to have any legal
validity. Various Iranian Shahs, along with many other rulers in the area,
have controlled large parts of Baluchistan but any Iranian claims based on
historical considerations must go back to the middle of the eighteenth
century and would seemingly have been relinquished under Iran's border agree-
ments with Great Britain. These agreements were signed by the Shah of Iran
and there is no evidence of duress, although it is probably true that Iran
had no great interest in fixing' the frontiers at that time and acceded to
British importuning. There is no pressure on the part of the people of
Pakistan-Baluchistan for integration with Iran.
.Pakistan is clearly prepared to make minor concessions but will take.
the position that its border with Iran was permanently determined by the
British-Iranian treaties. It is probable that Pakistan would even refuse
to discuss any major Iranian claims.
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET
? Appendix A
AGREEMENT B "ERIkAN GREAT BRITAIN
RESPECTING THE BOUNDARY 'BETE PERSIA AND KELAT1
?1st Ath ? SEPTEMBER :1871 ?
f
10
?
Note addressed on the lit September 1871 by the Britishlanistrs.
Alisen) to the ers.iati Minister.for Foreign Affair.. . , . . .
?
..,..' The undersigned, Eat Britannic?Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary and
Minister Plenipotentiary of the court of. Persia, acting on the Part. of.!
hid :government, had the honour to submit, for the approval of His_ Majesty.,_
the .8hahl a map in which .the boundary line between'Itelterritories.posseesed
tn,Balutchistan by Persia, and the territories forming the exclusive prop-
erty
,ofthe independent Aate of Kelat, is delineated. -
. , .
'This line, may be described: commencing from the northern point,
or that. which. is furthestlrom the sea, the territory of.Kelatiis bounded to
to '*e. West by the large. Perzian.district?of dizzuk, which is composed..of
manay dehd?orminors districts, thOse-on the frontier. being.Jalk and. ,
Kallegam. ? Below these two last named, is the small district of,Kohuk4.t.'il
which together with Punjghurvcomprising_Parum and. other dependencies-
iv .
is on the Kelat side of the frontier, whicon the Persian side is BaLpaiht.
. *low Pupjghtr, the frontier possessione.pf:Kelat to the?seatre.. -
Boleida, including ?amiran and pther:,dependencies Mund_and'Dusht.'
the_Per4en line of. frontier are' the villages or, tracts belonging to.Sirbaz:
and.tabutastiari. The. boundary?of:Dught.is-marIced by along line.drawn?-:.,
through. :the Drabolshill,.situated.betwPen;the Rivers Bahu and Dusht, to.?
the sea .in the. Bay of Gwetierr ?
To summarize, Punjghur and Parum, anc1other?dependencies
KohUki Boleida, including Zamiran and,other.dependencies; Mund,,including
Tump, Nasperabad, Kedji-and all districts, dehs? and dependencies to the.:.
eastward; Duaht, with its deppndencies.aeJar as. sea. -These naMesf,...
exhibit the line of actual possession of Kelat, that is to say; all tracts
to,the:eadt_of the frontier of actual Persian. possession, which: frontier
comprises-Dizzuk?andBumpusht, Sirbaz and,Peshur, Beh.and
, . ? ? " ,..???: !,? ?
The undersigned proposes' with the,Concurence Governed.
ment that for the purposes of future reference and identification he shall
obtain the services of an experienced English officer of Engineers, who
1. Recueil Ds Traites as L'Empire Persian -avec Les Pays Etran era,
Par Motamen-ol-Molk, 1908, pp. &VIII-XX.
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET
muanleet an officer duly appointed by. the Government :of Persia and an
Officer from the Kelat state, so as to lay, down ,the more prominent land
marks and features of the actual line agreably 'to the above description
and make a careful survey thereof for: record. . This subordinate Commis-
Sion should meet as early aa:PracticabL:in Gwetter Bay and proceed upward
from .the boundary terminus betueep'.thel*era Belau .and Dinaht to jalk or
the neighbourhood, sUbmiting the 'result ,of :their work in the form of a
map to the representative of Her Majesty', s Government and the Persian .
- - -
Government at Tehran.
The intersigned begs to 'a offer his sincere Congratulations to.
the Government of the Shah on the happy .termination .of this troublesome
.question and on the .consequent removal of ,thode seridus causes Of trouble
and anxiety which disturbed ,the harmonious. relations' which it is do. desir-
able to cultivate between the authorities of 'great Britain and Persia :and
be .has the honor to -renew to 114.s'EXCe4enc the Minister for 'Foreign
Affairs the assurences ,of his high 'consideration;
?
L. S. Alison.
SECRET
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
A
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/11/21 : CIA-RDP08001297R000500130001-4
SECRET
Appendix 73
? AGRIMIUNT 11.'...LATIG.,TO Tic..DirkiaRC:LTIOr.: OP TRE
. BOUNDARY,. B77.3,TalfiAP12161`0-.:B..-IIITCliISTAic.' :AND.htLT
," .,