No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2017
The conclusion on July 7, 1965, of an Agreement between the independent sovereign states of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in relation to the so-called Neutral Zone, of which exchange of instruments of ratification was effected on July 25 of this year, is a striking illustration of the ability of the Arab States to settle by free decision, unclouded by external influence, a unique and puzzling problem involving interests of great importance. It is an encouraging expression of the policy of common sense and good neighborliness, and raises interesting questions of international and domestic law.
* A translation of the Agreement is annexed below. See also 4 Int. Legal Materials 1134 (1965). The Arabic text appears in the official gazette of Kuwait, Kuwait Al-Yoam, No. 581 (June 19, 1966).
1 J. C. Hurewitz, Diplomacy in the Near and Middle East: A Documentary Record, Vol. 1, p. 269; or 10 Gooch and Temperley, Part 2, British Documents on the Origins of the “War, 1898-1914, p. 192 (1938).
2 11 Aitchison, Treaties, Engagements and Sanads relating to India and Neighbouring Counchard H. Sanger, , The Arabian Peninsula 152 (Cornell University Press, 1954)Google Scholar.
4 11tries 265-266 (5th ed., 1933).
3 Ri Aitchison, Treaties, etc., 213.
5 Kuwait and Her Neighbours 270-278 (London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1956). See also the same author's well-known work, The Arab and the Desert (London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1949).
6 See also, in continuation of the above, the following graphic incident. ‘’ At about nine o'clock that evening there was an amazing sequel. Ibn Sa'ud asked to see Sir Percy alone. Sir Percy took me with him. Ibn Sa'ud was by himself, standing in the centre of his great reception tent. He seemed terribly upset. ‘My friend,’ he moaned, ‘you have deprived me of half my kingdom. Better take it all and let me go into retirement.’ Still standing, this great strong man, magnificent in his grief, suddenly burst out into sobs. Deeply disturbed Sir Percy seized his hand and began to weep also. Tears were rolling down his cheeks. No one but the three of us was present, and I relate exactly what I saw. The emotional storm did not last long. Still holding Ibn Sa'ud's hand, Sir Percy said: ‘My friend, I know exactly how you feel, and for this reason I gave you two-thirds of Kuwait's territory. I don't know how Ibn Sabah will take the blow.’ “
7 See text in 10 U.N. Treaty Series 100 et seq. (1947).
8 “ 1. Where an offence, as denned in Article 3 of this Agreement, has been committed in either of the two territories, and the offender has fled to the Neutral Zone, the offender shall be deemed to be still within the territory in which the offence was committed, and may be arrested and tried by the Government thereof. “ 2 . Where an offence, as defined in Article 3 of this Agreement, has been committed in the Neutral Zone and the offender escapes to the territory of the Government of which he is a national, he shall be deemed to have committed the offence within the territory of his own Government and shall be liable to arrest and trial by that Government. “ 3 . Where an offence, as defined in Article 3 of this Agreement, has been committed in the Neutral Zone, and the offender, being a national of one of the two Governments, escapes into the territory of the other, he shall be deemed to have committed the offence within the territory of the Government of which he is a national and shall be liable to extradition proceedings under this Agreement
9 El Erian, , Condominium and Related Situations in International Law 97 (Cairo, 1952).Google Scholar
10 El Erian, op. cit. above, p. 100: “Between the territories of Saudi Arabia and Koweit a neutral zone (Condominium) exists.” Issam Abdul Rahman Azzam: “The sharing of jurisdiction in the Neutral Zone by the Governments of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait suggests ‘Boundary Condominium’ as a more accurate term.” “The International Status of the Persian Gulf States,” 15 Revue Egyptienne de Droit International 54 (1959). Oppenheim: “ I n this case [Condominium] a piece of territory consisting of land or water is under the joint tenancy of two or more States, these several States exercising sovereignty conjointly over it and over the individuals living thereon… . Until a final settlement, the interested States do not each exercise an individual sovereignty over these territories but they agree upon a joint administration under their conjoint sovereignty.” 1 International Law 453-454 (8th ed., 1955). To these references may be added the following note by the publishers (The Middle East Research and Publishing Center, Beirut, Lebanon) of the late Edward H. Brown's important little volume, The Saudi Arabia Kuwait Neutral Zone (Beirut, 1963), which appears on its inside cover: “The Neutral Zone between Saudi Arabia and Kuwait is without doubt one of the world's most curious and complex legal entities. In fact, it is not strictly speaking a Neutral Zone at all but might best be described as a ‘condominium', since both countries enjoy equal rights of sovereignty over the entire territory of the Zone.“
11 One is reminded of the reply of Lord Cromer when invited to explain the status established by the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan Agreement of 1899: “ I replied that the political status of the Soudan was such as was laid down in the Agreement of January 19, 1899, and that I could give no more precise or epigrammatic definition.“
12 As to the proper qualification of this right, or its interpretation in the event of territorial changes, discussion must be left to the future. Brierly, The Law of Nations, Ch. V, The Territory of States, par. 5, Servitudes, p. 190 et seq. (1963); O'Connell, The Law of State Succession, Ch. III , Dispositive Treaties, p. 49 et seq,. and references (1956).
13 It is interesting to note that, while the Saudi Arabia Decree of Feb. 16, 1958, extends its territorial waters to twelve miles in place of the previous six fixed by the Decree of 1949, in the case of the Kuwait Decree the extent of territorial waters is not defined. In reference to the Saudi Decree, Mr. Brown (op. cit. 114) has observed: “Where this leaves the various concessionary companies in the Neutral Zone will certainly be a matter of dispute.“
* Unofficial translation supplied by the author.