CONFIDENTIAL BRIEF FOR MR. E.M. ROSE FOR TALKS WITH IRANIANS IN ARCHYN 5ON THE MEDIAN LINE ON 8 FEBRUARY A - 9 FEB 1966 Flag A Talking Points 6 1081/21Thank you for sending us copies of your aralt. Alle havestudied this and have some comments.Title 2. I am afraid that we cannot accept the description of the Rulers of Qatar and the Trucial States as "Shaikhs of theTrucial Coast". For one thing Qatar is not, and has never been, part of the Trucial Coast. Secondly, a "Shaikh" is not necessarily a Ruler. Are the Iranians now able to accept theword "States' in the light of Mr. Weir's letter to Mr. Zelli Flag B explaining our viewpoint? If not? I suggest that the States be referred to by name, both in the title and where they occur in the text of the Agreement itself, thus omitting any referenceto "State". We should prefer also to speak of the Governmentsof Qatar, Abu Dhabi etc., since it is an inter-Governmentalagreement, rather than to the Rulers of these States.Preamble 3. Although it may be only a drafting point, we should like to know if there is any significance in the omission of the words "appertaining to". The same point arises as in the title on the reference to the States concerned.Article 1 4. The questions of "appertains to" and the reference to the States again arises. I am afraid that the line itself isunacceptable since it is bent to include on the Iranian side ofthe line 12-mile territorial waters for Sirri, which, as we haverepeatedly made clear to the Iranian delegation, is claimed bythe Ruler of Sharjah. Coupled with this is the omission ofArticle 4 of the previous draft. I can only repeat our twoproposals to overcome this problem: either that the line shouldextend beyond Sirri, not taking account of the island's /territorialCONFIDENTIAL
