by Tullio Treves
Attentive observers of United Nations affairs will recall the repeated occasions since 1971 on which the United Arab Emirates, in taking the floor at the General Assembly, lament “the continued occupation since 1971 by the Islamic Republic of Iran of three islands belonging to the United Arab Emirates – Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb and Abu Musa”. They underline that this is an issue to which the UAE and other States of the region “attach great importance”, underline the illegality of the occupation and protest against measures taken by Iran on the Islands. Notes of protest are often sent and distributed by the UAE to the UN members, and so are responses by Iran. Still, no real action is taken by the UN and the status quo continues undisturbed. Seen from the UN perspective, this is a semi-dormant issue.
However, seen from the international lawyer’s perspective, the question of the sovereignty over the three islands presents all the characteristics of an international dispute. Indeed, it is a long standing dispute whose origin – whose critical date – according to this book dates back to 1887/88 or 1903 and certainly, in its present form dates back to 1971. So it is a more than century old dispute or at least almost a half a century old dispute, with roots, as the authors explain, extending back centuries longer.
This thick and intensely researched book is an attempt to present the dispute in light of the centuries-long history of the islands. History is an important factor of the work. Innumerable hours have been spent by the authors and their collaborators in archives in many parts of the world. Nonetheless, the attention of the authors is always focussed on the legal aspects of the dispute. Every fact is analysed in order to assess the relevance it may have in a legal discussion such as that which might be held before the International Court of Justice or an international arbitral tribunal.
Thus, the book belongs to a literary genre different from international law monographs on a specific subject or even from books concerning a specific case. It may be seen as similar to a memorial submitted to an international court or tribunal, a memorial, however, whose authors are well aware that in a dispute the principle of equality of the parties applies so that all arguments must be fairly presented and discussed in light of relevant international case law and scholarly debates. This is indeed the case in the present book. Only experienced international lawyers with a deep knowledge of the region, of its history, politics and legal problems could engage in this work. The two authors meet these requirements.
There are many sections of the book that are worth signalling to the attention of the reader. I will limit myself to mention one which – perhaps more than others – has the advantage of being legally important, of showing results of research on documents hitherto unavailable, and of illuminating fascinating personalities of the political and diplomatic scene of the 20th century active during the years immediately preceding the end of the British presence east of Suez, the formation of the United Arab Emirates, and the last years of power of the Shah of Iran before the Islamic revolution. The section I am recommending to the attention of the reader is the one concerning the negotiations leading to the 1971 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) concerning the island of Abu Musa, one of the key documents, perhaps the key document, of the dispute. The pages concerning this subject not only are very useful for the interpretation of the MOU and for the discussions concerning its validity, but also shed light on a subject not mentioned in the MOU, namely the legal status of Greater and Lesser Tunb. It must be stressed that some insights derive from documents of the British Foreign Office obtained by the authors, for the purpose of the research for the book, as late as 2016 invoking the British Freedom of Information Act 2000.
The discussion of the events leading to the MOU show the complex interaction between Iran, a regional power wanting to take advantage of the imminent withdrawal of the United Kingdom’s forces from the region, the United Kingdom, keen to ensure the stability of the region, mostly by fostering the formation of the United Arab Emirates, and of the Emirates, especially Sharjah and Ras Al Khaimah, whose Rulers were confronted with the need to take painful decisions which were imposed on them by Britain which negotiated with Iran. The figures of the Shah of Iran, of the two Rulers of Sharjah and Ras Al Khaimah and of the British negotiator Sir William Luce emerge indirectly from the pages and show that in diplomacy and statesmanship of the time personalities counted. It is interesting to note that among the factors that played a role in the negotiation conducive to the conclusion of the MOU, the need of Iran and of the Rulers not to lose face was of great importance and understood by the parties involved. Even more interesting is the less visible but certainly very relevant role played by oil interests as important deposits were supposed to exist – as in fact they were proven to exist – in the maritime zones of the islands. The part played by the interested oil companies would require further research to complete the history – although probably less important from the point of view of the legal questions which interest the authors.