890G.42/53
The Minister Resident in Iraq (Knabenshue) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 27.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to my despatches nos. 1591 and 1592 of July 16 and 17, respectively, and to report that after the receipt of my note no. 791 of July 16, 1940, the Minister for Foreign Affairs asked me to call at the Ministry for a further discussion of the proposed new education law with officials of the Ministry. Consequently, on July 22nd I complied with his request. The officials delegated to discuss the matter with me were Sayid Mousa Shabandar, Personal Assistant to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Sayid Yusuf Gailani, Chief of the Bureau of Western Affairs, and Sayid Siddiq Shamshal, Acting Legal Adviser to the Ministry.
At the outset, I made it clear to these gentlemen that I was not authorized to make any specific suggestions in respect to the proposed new education law, but only to point out that the United States Government could not accept what would constitute unilateral action on the part of Iraq in the abrogation of rights which accrue to us by virtue of Iraq’s declaration to the League of Nations of May, 1932. I also pointed out again that as individual American citizens or groups of American citizens are not legally empowered to waive their own rights or the rights of other Americans guaranteed by international treaties or other instruments, the recent meeting between the heads of American schools in Iraq and officials of the Iraqi Government and the memorandum of their conversations which was signed by those taking part in it could only be considered as advisory. I stated that I had forwarded a copy of the memorandum in question to my Government for its consideration, and that pending the receipt of my Government’s further observations on the subject, I would expect the Iraqi Government to postpone promulgation of the proposed new education law in accordance with the assurances given to me in this respect by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister.
The officials with whom I was holding this discussion desired to express to me for the Department’s further information that in the opinion of the Iraqi Government the new law does not infringe upon [Page 744] Iraq’s declaration to the League. Taking up the two principal points of the new law which it is alleged provide for an interference with the free exercise of the educational activities of American schools operated by religious missions, they pointed out in respect to the first, namely, the appointment by the Ministry of Education of teachers for certain subjects in private schools as provided for in Article 27 was an essential safeguard to which the Iraqi Government felt itself entitled on moral and cultural grounds. In accordance with the assurances which had been given to the heads of American schools, the Iraqi Government would be willing to allow the American schools to nominate teachers for the studies in question from the list of which nominations the Government would make the choice.
In respect to the second feature of the law (Article 36) which prohibited Iraqi students from entering foreign primary schools, it was explained that this provision was necessary for two reasons: first, they deemed it essential for moral and cultural reasons that Iraqi children of tender ages during the early formative period of their lives should receive their primary education in Iraqi schools in accordance with Iraqi moral and cultural standards and ideals. The second reason was that because there are so many foreign primary schools (Persian and Jewish schools being meant) it was necessary to adopt a uniform law so that discrimination could not be claimed. However, as the Iraqi Government did not entertain any particular objection to American primary schools conducted in Iraq they had suggested to the heads of the American schools here that their primary schools be registered in the names of Iraqis and they agreed to permit these schools to be administered and operated as heretofore by the American personnel. It was explained that this would permit the Iraqi Government to issue permits for the transfer of such American primary schools to nominal Iraqi registration but to refuse permits for the transfer of other foreign schools in their discretion.
While the provisions of Article 27 and Article 36 of the proposed new law would seem to constitute the most flagrant interference with American schools contrary to Iraq’s declaration to the League, there are other provisions of the law which, in a lesser degree, also would seem to be inconsistent with the declaration. However, it was pointed out by the Iraqi officials with whom I was holding the discussion that obviously it was not intended by Iraq’s declaration to the League that foreign schools would be permitted to operate in Iraq without some form of control on the part of the Ministry of Education in order to protect the interest of their Iraqi students. In support of this contention, reference was made to Article 4 of the tripartite convention between Iraq, Great Britain and the United States of January 9, 1930,36 which reads as follows: [Page 745]
“Subject to the provisions of any local laws for the maintenance of public order and public morals, and to any general educational requirements prescribed by law in Iraq, the nationals of the United States will be permitted freely to establish and maintain educational, philanthropic and religious institutions in Iraq, to receive voluntary applicants and to teach in the English language.”
Thus it was pointed out that in spite of the provision which permitted nationals of the United States freely to establish and maintain educational institutions it was made obligatory that such schools comply with the general educational requirements prescribed by law in Iraq. While this latter provision was not included in Iraq’s declaration to the League, it was maintained by the Iraqi officials that the principle involved must obviously be accepted.
Although I had frequently pointed out to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and other interested Iraqi officials the impropriety of unilateral action on the part of the Iraqi Government in this matter, they have constantly maintained and still maintain that the law as drafted does not, in their opinion, conflict with their declaration to the League and they consider that on moral grounds they are entitled to protect the interests of their young nationals along the lines covered by the draft law. Their firm stand in this respect will also be noted in the enclosed copy of a note from the Minister for Foreign Affairs to the British Ambassador dated July 15, 1940.37
In view of this attitude of the Iraqi Government and the fact that the British Ambassador now informs me that he fears he can do nothing further in the matter, and especially so as the British have no schools in Iraq, and in view of the fact that the French Minister, having been given a free hand by his Government is now not inclined to press further in the matter inasmuch as the heads of French schools here seem willing to accept the law and fear that their opposition might cause further difficulties for them, it would seem that there is no practical alternative to an acceptance of the Iraqi point of view, but perhaps with certain assurances to be given by them in an exchange of diplomatic notes. I am very reluctant to recommend this action, but I fear that if we continue to oppose the promulgation and enforcement of the new law it may result inevitably in certain retaliatory measures which we could not oppose, but which would have the effect of making the continued operation of American schools impracticable. For instance, the Iraqis maintain that the law does not prohibit foreign primary schools which would be permitted to accept foreign students, but the Iraqis maintain that they have the right to prohibit Iraqi students from attending such schools. Also, at the present time Iraqi students attending foreign secondary schools which [Page 746] follow the curriculum of the Ministry of Education are permitted to take Government examinations and secure Government certificates which qualify them for appointment to Government positions. It would seem to be within the rights of the Iraqi Government, if they so saw fit, to refuse to permit students attending foreign schools to take the Government examinations and secure Government certificates. Obviously, such forms of retaliation would be effective in causing the closing of foreign schools.
It is obvious to me that the real motive behind the new law is a nationalistic one, in order to bring foreign schools more and more under Iraqi control with a view eventually to their total or at least partial eradication, following, in this respect, what has been done and is being done both in Iran and Turkey.
May I ask that the Department be good enough to telegraph me its decision in the matter.
Respectfully yours,
- Foreign Relations, 1930, vol. iii, p. 302.↩
- Not printed.↩