United Nations SPECIAL POLITICAL COMMITTEE, 255th GENERAL MEETING Wednesday, 19 April1961, ASSEMBLY at 11.10 a.m. FIFTEENTH SESSION Official Records New York

CONTENTS tion. As far back as the ninth century A.D. it had Page established a powerful naval force to protect its coasts Agenda item 89: from piracy. In the eighteenth century its fleet had Question of ...... 133 been strong enough to drive the Portuguese invaders from Oman and the surrounding area. By the mid­ Chairman: Mr. Carlet R. AUGUSTE (Haiti). eighteenth century Oman had become the most power­ ful Arabian State, controlling part of the coast in East Africa as well as parts of Persia and Balu­ In the absence of the Chairman, Mr. Gamboa (Philip­ chistan. pines), Vice-Chairman, took the Chair. 3. Its strength, its strategic position on the route from AGENDA ITEM 89 to the Orient and its flourishing trade, had Question of Oman (A/4521) made it a target for British imperialism, which by that time had acquired a free hand in the area, as a result of 1. Mr. SHUKAIRY () said that in its victory over France in the Seven Years' War. The requesting the inclusion of the question of Oman in British had then launched the first of a series of military the Assembly's agenda (A/4521) the delegations of campaigns, the principal objective being to bring Oman the Arab States had presented it as a case of armed within their sphere of influence, if not to incorporate aggression by the United Kingdom against the State it into the . They had done so on the of Oman in violation of its political independence, its pretext of combating slavery and piracy, but their own sovereignty and its territorial integrity. The United record in eastern Arabia was itself one of robbery on Kingdom had, however, been guilty not only of aggres­ land, piracy at sea, and the enslavement of a whole sion, but also of denying that it was an aggressor even people. By means of armed force, intrigue and financial while it admitted that United Kingdom troops were subsidies they had finally achieved their imperialist engaged in military operations in Oman, of denying aims, successively detaching Zanzibar and , Oman's statehood, even while it asserted the existence breaking up the territory of Oman into nine separate of the so-called Sultanate of , and units and finally invading the country. of claiming that it was not a party to the conflict even 4. The factor determining the dismemberment of while it attacked the defenceless people of Oman with Oman was neither religion, language, race nor aspira­ machine guns, heavy mortars and jet aircraft. Having tions, for the people of Oman were one in all those blockaded Oman by land and sea and imposed a total respects; rather it was British imperialism. Until 1954 news blackout, it was seeking to justify its aggression the British had been content to control the puppet by claiming that it was helping to defend the rig-hts Sultanate of Muscat and the seven so-called Trucial of a who was in reality a puppet of a kind all Coast Sheikdoms while the had too familiar to peoples striving to throw off the yoke continued to be fully independent and sovereign. At that of imperialism. It had thus become the task of the time, however, oil had been discovered in Oman and delegations of the Arab States not only to draw atten­ the British had decided that they must bring the country tion to the aggression committed but also to refute the under their control at all costs. Yet they knew by distorted version of the situation presented by the experience that the Omanis would not willingly allow United Kingdom, a State which, as a permanent member themselves to be brought under British domination. of the Security Council, had a special responsibility for When the British Consul at Muscat had written to the the maintenance of peace and security. 's Deputy in 1919 threatening to cut off Oman's 2. The independent and sovereign State of Oman was trade and hinting that British troops might occupy the as old as any State represented in the United Nations. country if the Imam did not negotiate with him, the The institution of the Imamate, under which the secular Imam had refused, for he had been aware that such and religious Head of the State was chosen in accord­ negotiations led to foreign domination, as the history ance with the principle of popular election, dated back of in other parts of Asia and in Africa had to the eighth century A.D. In the intervening centuries, demonstrated. The people of Oman, with their 1200- according to an authoritative Arab historian, eighty­ year tradition of freedom, preferred isolation with all five had ruled Oman in almost uninterrupted its disadvantages to domination by a foreign Power. succession. The present Imam had been elected by his The British had therefore decided to conceal their people in 1954. The Iman as a sovereign ruler was intentions behind the fa<;ade of the puppet Sultanate of responsible for defence, the levying of taxes and law Muscat, with whom a British oil company had entered enforcement. Oman was thus a democracy in the purest into an agreement in 1953. The oil company's first step sense of the word, perhaps the oldest democracy still had been to finance the establishment of an army surviving as a State. Moreover, it had never been a nominally under the Sultan's command but actually mere vassal State but had consistently enjoyed full controlled by the British. In 1954 that army had been sovereignty, with all the attributes of statehood, and moved for training to the southern part of Muscat, had played a major role in the history of Arab civiliza- close to the prospective field of operations in Oman, 133 A/SPC/SR.255 134 General Assembly-Fifteenth Session Special Political Committee and in December of the same year the British had ment betwe~n a sovereign aand certain of his tribes. finally launched armed aggression against the Imamate. Such a claim was preposterous. The Treaty of Sib In 1957 that aggression had taken the form of the was a peace treaty concluded to end a war between large-scale offensive which had been brought to the the Imamate of Oman and the Sultanate of Muscat. attention of the Security Council. 1 The forces of the Imam had marched on Muscat to 5. In December 1955 it had been decided that the free the country from a dynasty which had brought dis­ memberment, humiliation and foreign domination to ~ult~n should impos~ his authority by force on the mtenor of Oman. Aircraft had reconnoitred Oman, but United Kingdom intervention had saved the the capital of Oman, and ground forces flying th~ Sultan ~nd had resulted in the conclusion of the treaty. Sultan's colours but led by British officers had then Under Its. terms, the t':'o parties pledged non-aggression entered the country and seized the capital. Although and non-mterference m each other's domestic affairs t~e Sultan's Fo~eig_n Minister had described the opera­ a characteristic feature of international treaties. Th~ tion as the begmmng of a war, the United Kingdom United Kingdom had in fact invoked its provisions· in had assured the world that it was a purely internal 1922 its Consul in Muscat had referred to an act of affair of the Sultanate. The Imam had retreated to the aggression "on the part of Oman along the borders of mountains to continue the fight against the British. The the State of Muscat". Furthermore, a British com­ people of Oman were determined never to surrender mander of the Sultan's forces had himself d~scribed the in the struggle for their freedom, and in July 1957, treaty as "a virtual acknowledgement of the independ­ when the Sultan's army of mercenaries had proved ence of the Imamate". Other well-informed author­ unequal to the task, the United Kingdom had been ities . had expressed the same view. Since the Treaty obliged to launch a major military operation to crush of Sib pledged the Sultan of Muscat not to interfere the resistance of the people of Oman. Ground forces in the internal affairs of Oman, he could hardly be and jet aircraft armed with cannon and rockets had regarded as the sovereign ruler of that country. For on the admission of the United Kingdom's Minister fo; the first time in two centuries, in 1955 a Sultan of Foreign Affairs, gone into action against the rebel tribes Muscat had entered Oman, under the protection of in central Oman, where the so-called rebels had been British jet fighters. ordered to leave their ancestral towns and villages. In 9. Quite apart from the provisions of the treaty it was 1958 and 1959 United Kingdom forces in the area had well established that the Sultan of Muscat hacl never been reinforced by units from Malaya and . All exercised any authority over Oman either before or sea approaches to Oman had been closed and complete after t~e signing of the treaty. Prior to the British censorship imposed. aggressiOn, _Oman _had always been independent and 6. The United Kingdom had thrown its forces against fully sovereign, while Muscat had been a British pro­ the country to win its oil, but the people of Oman tectorate or dependency; that was why the people of would continue to fight for their freedom until the Oman had constantly endeavoured to drive out the British had been driven not only out of the present British together with their puppet, the Sultan of Oman, but out of Greater Oman, which extended from Muscat. A British officer, who had travelled in Oman the mountains to the sea. The armed aggression com­ in 1836, had recounted how, on producing letters of mitted by the United Kingdom against Oman was in introduction from the ruler of Muscat, he had been flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and ordered by one of the chiefs to leave his town without the basic principles of international law. It was there­ delay. The same traveller had stated that Muscat was fore. the duty of the United Nations, as the champion the only part of Oman from which the ruler derived any revenue, and a publication of the British Royal of hberty, to restore to the people of Oman their inde­ 3 pendence and freedom under the sovereign leadership Institute of International Affairs had confirmed that of the Imam. since the previous century the authority of the of Muscat had not extended beyond the coastal areas. 7. In justification of its position, the United Kingdom The British commander of the Sultan's forces had said had advanced the absurd argument that Oman was not that the Sultan had authority only at Muscat and along an independent sovereign State but a of the a stretch of coast which. could be intimidated by British Sultan of Muscat and Oman. Muscat was in fact merely gun~ats. Thus the Sultan's authority had never been the principal port of Oman, which was a true Arab a~ythmg but a display of British might against the State of 1om~ standing, whereas the "ancient and respect­ nghts of the people of Oman, and the main task of the able Arab State of Muscat and Oman"2 referred to by British had always been to defend the Sultan from the the United Kingdom in the Security Council in August people. 1957, was non-existent. Two centuries ago the British had installed the antecedents of the present Sultan as 10. The authority of the Imam in Oman, on the other rulers of the town of Muscat and its surroundings. hand, resembled that of any other ruler. A well-known The Sultan was no more than a cat's-paw of the British British traveller had reported in 1950 that the Imam in their quest for oil. In his name, they had now invaded was recognized as ruler of inner Oman by both the Oman and had driven out the Imam, its Head of State. s~ttled tri?e.s and t~e r:omads, and that his representa­ tives admimstered JUStice and collected taxes in every 8.. The statehood of Oman was amply borne out by, group of villages. James Morris, recounting his journev inter alia, the Treaty of Sib of September 1920, which to Oman with the Sultan,4 had confirmed that the local the United Kingdom had been instrumental in bringing officials were all appointed by the Imam. and that the about. Although the agreement had been signed through Sultan's troops and officials had no writ there. That the mediation of the British Consul in Muscat, the testimony was significant, since it indicated the actual United Kingdom had claimed that it was not an inter­ authority of the Imam immediately before the British national treaty between two States, but merely an agree- • '(he Middle East: a political and economic survey (Royal ' 0 fficial Records of the Security Council, Twelfth Year, In;btute of Int~rnational Affairs, London, 1950) p. 137. 783rd meeting. James Morns, A Sultan in Oman (Faber and Faber Lon- • Ibid., para. 54. don, 1957). ' 255th meeting-19 April 1961 135 aggression. It was a well-known rule of English law force was entirely prohibited except in self-defence in its that the facts immediately before the crime constituted widest sense and in collective action sanctioned by the the most incriminating evidence. United Nations. The question before the Committee, 11. The United Kingdom, fearing that to deny the therefore, allowed of no compromise; either the United independence of Oman might not be sufficient justifica­ Kingdom was entitled to take military action in support tion for armed aggression, had resorted to a second of the ruler of Muscat, or it was not. line of defence by claiming before the Security Council 12. From the standpoint of international law, the that military action by United Kingdom forces had question had been answered by Sir Hartley Shawcross, been taken at the request of the Sultan to assist him in a former Attorney-General of the United Kindom, who restoring order in the face of a revolt against his author­ had said that it was a well established principle in ity which had been encouraged and supported from international law that intervention by a foreign Power outside. That was an outrageous plea by a permanent was inadmissible even at the request of a Government member of the Security Council. He questioned whether engaged in suppressing an armed insurrection or in it would be legitimate for any great Power to intervene pursuance of a treaty alleged to provide justification. in the present insurrection in Cuba by helping Castro 13. Mr. JUARBE Y JUARBE (Cuba) having ex­ against the people or the people against Castro. Under pressed the desire to exercise his right of reply in view the United Nations Charter only the Security Council of the misleading reference to an "insurrection" in Cuba was entitled to take action to keep the peace and check on the Saudi Arabian representative's statement, Mr. aggression, and the United Kingdom could not usurp SHUKAIRY (Saudi Arabia) requested him to post­ the functions of the United Nations or assume the status pone his observations until the following meeting, by of a guardian of world peace and security. A threat to which time he would have an opportunity to consult peace could be averted only through collective action, the text of the Saudi Arabian statement. and it was a total negation of the United Nations for the United Kingdom to take military action against 14. The CHAIRMAN assured the representative of Oman, whether the latter was an independent state or Cuba that he would have an opportunity to exercise his not. Even if military assistance were permissible, it right of reply at the afternoon meeting after the rep­ should be given to the people against malevolent rulers resentative of Saudi Arabia had concluded his state­ and not to a puppet regime fighting against the cause ment. of freedom. The provisions of the Charter relating to the use of armed forces were quite clear; the use nf The meeting rose at 1.10 p.m.

Printed in U.S.A. M-9507-June 1961-2,000