BRITISH ACTION

Hokitika Guardian, 30 December 1932, Page 5

BRITISH ACTION

IN OIL DISPUTE HER INTERVENTION CRITICISED. .United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) LONDON, December 28. The British United Press correspondent at Teheran states that, in an exclusive interview, the Foreign Minister, Alikhan Foroughi, reiterated that Britain’s intervention prevented an amicable Angio-Persian oil revision, which Persia was still willing to discuss. Teheran was the only possible venue. I

Meanwhile, Persia refused to withdraw the cancellation of an “idiotic*' transaction, under extremely one-sided, unfavourable, conditions.” There was n 0 ill-will, prejudice, nor unfriendliness to Britain.

The suggestion that Soviet, American, or other interests were behind Persia’s action was merely a baseless endeavour to poison world opinion of Britain, by invoking Article Fifteen of the covenant, brought the controversy into the category of disputes which might lead to a diplomatic rupture.

He regarded this as an instance of Britain’s unfriendly attitude to Persia, who appreciated the company’s pioneering, but wanted a duo share of the profits,

NEW PERSIAN GUNBOATS.

ITALY SECURES CONTRACT.

LONDON, December 28.

In the absence of an explanation there has been a tendency to assume that the placing of an order with Italy for six Persian gunboats reflects the ill-feeling over the AngloiPersian oil dispute, hut the Persian Legation discloses the interesting fact that Persia recently asked Britain to allow four hundred Persian officers and ratings six months’ training in the British navy. The request was rejected for reasons of policy, thereupon Italy was appryoached, and assented. “So the orders for the gunboats automatically went to Italy,” said the Legation official.