Goldsmith border agreement and its socio – security effects

Lost Water
Along with the rise of the Qajar dynasty in Iran a set of changes happened in Europe, which led to increase of attention of the colonial governments to Iran and the intensification of their competition between over our country. Since the beginning of the reign of Fath Ali Shah in Iran, he was undesirably involved in conflicts between France, Russia and England, and this was while he did not have enough ability, knowledge and facility to deal and cope with it. As a result, the face of these states resulted in many other losses including infamous contracts in which large parts of the North, North East, East and South East of Iran were separated from Iran during treaties such as Golestan, Turkmenchay, Akhal, Paris and Goldsmith and thus it caused many problems.
In this paper we examine the Goldsmith treaty that during an arbitration by the UK not only parts of Sistan in Iran are separated, but also there is injustice in the distribution of water from the Hirm and Iran's rights from the River and it turned the Sistan region, which was once as the granary of Iran, to arid area.
during the late 50 years, by help of US companies, the Afghan government has built dams and channels on the Helmand River and its branches regardless of treaties between the parties that even it can be said that Sistan's ecosystems has changed, so that in the late 50 years, 5 to 6 recent severe drought occurred in Sistan that the most difficult ones were in the years 1349- 1350 and 1379-1380. In these years Hamun Lake dried up and pastures and the surrounding environment is faced with a serious danger. The consequence of these droughts was migration and leaving homes by considerable number of inhabitants in 1350.
(Arbitration) Contract of Goldsmith
With the defeat of Napoleon from Russia, British people, who were released from possible attack of France to India after twenty years, changed their political obstacles associated with Iran and in order to avoid a possible Russian attack on India they sought to isolate parts of the East of Iran. The purpose of this was to create safe and supervised regional borders in India. To implement this policy, first Britain separated Afghanistan from Iran by signing the Treaty of Paris (1273 AH / 1875 AD) and then in 1870 during the commission with participation of representatives of the Iranian government and the province of Kalat and Goldsmith, he set Goldsmith as agent of restricting Balochistan's border. Goldsmith identified borders between the two countries from the Gulf of goiter to Kuhak and took the map to Naser al-Din Shah and he agreed that a part of the present borders of Iran and Pakistan are from above borders. Nasir al-Din Shah to avoid interruptions of Afghanistan in the area repeatedly asked the British government to consider the provisions of the Treaty of Paris, especially its sixth season, which says "The Iranian government accepts mediator of the United Kingdom in the event of a dispute between Iran and Afghanistan", so that England do mediation to ask for its refund from the Afghans. However, the British government replied that they do not recognize the reign of the Shah of Iran in Sistan, and therefore, Iran cannot intervene in this matter. After the task was to determine the borders of Balochistan was clear, the British government announced that it is willing to accept arbitration in the case of Sistan, and General Goldsmith was determined as the verdict. According to Goldsmith's view in 1872, Sistan and was divided into two foreign and main sections, and the main Sistan in the north of the state original to Melk Siah Kuh, an area located in a region in West Helmand River, was ceded to Iran, and foreign Sistan, which is the area located in East Helmand, was given to Afghanistan.
After the end of arbitration commission, the Iranian government seized Kuhak because in fact, General Goldsmith determined eastern borders of Iran from the Guatr Gulf to Kuhak and then from Molk Siah Kuh to the north of Sistan, and between the areas there was a desert in South of Sistan called Dasht-e Hashtadan, which was five hundred kilometers, and there was disputes for it, too.
Capturing Kuhak was contested by England and the differences between the two countries over the Kuhk and Hashtadan plain continued about twenty years until in 1889, he agreed to another arbitration committee with the government by the efforts of England plenipotentiary minister, Radramendolf, in Tehran. The Mentioned commission was headed by Gen. McNeill of British and in it the idea of the year 1309 AH (1891 AD), which determined border between Iran and Afghanistan, was restricted with the installation of thirty nine signs border and formed a triangle against Iran's benefits in which a part of Hashtadan plain was given to Afghanistan ny injustice.
Arbitration of Makmahun
Helmand River and its main branches were from the central mountains of Afghanistan (Hindu Kush). In southeastern Sistan in Iran's border and Afghanistan, this river is diviede into two rivers of Parian Moshtarak and Sistan River. Parian Moshtarak (the joint river) is the main branch of Helmand and forms a part of the common border of the countries, and Sistan River is the major water supply for Sistan that both finally flow into the Hamun lake. In 1896, due to severe floods, Helmand River was distorted to the west from its main conduit that was a part of the border between the two countries and much of the Helmand River flowed to Helmand Lake through another dehydration and following the event severe drought in 1902 intensified the difference between the governments of Iran and Afghanistan, prompting the parties to refer the matter to the British government's arbitration again. In this period that Britain's attention was towards friendship with Afghanistan, they sent a delegation to the area headed by Makmahun in 1905 in which the contract was signed that reduced Iran's share of the Helmand River to one-third. This is while, in the Goldsmith contract the water share of the Iran from Helmand river water was half. In addition, they gave a part of Iran's land to Afghans, too that the Iranian government declined to accept it due to its failure to comply the vote with the facts and gave his reasons for the rejection of the arbitration decision in written form to the British Embassy. Despite written complaints of Iran, the British government did not pursue the issue and the matter remained virtually silent.
From Makmahun arbitration to contract of 1317
Due to longing the negotiations in order to avoid spreading discord and for settling matter of division of water of the Helmand River, in 1315, following government's efforts and attention to the issue of the borders, temporary protocol was made between the two parties whereby the water of Drband Kamal Khan was divided equally (i.e., 50 percent for Iran and 50 percent for Afghanistan).
The end
A review on what happened makes this fact clear that the dispute between Iran and Afghanistan over the Helmand River has been created since the date of the division of Sistan, and basically the main reason for this difference, like other differences between Asian and African countries, was colonialism and world capturing by European countries in the 19th century. According to the arbitration of Goldsmith, McNeil and Makmahun, British Generals, who determined border areas of Iran and Afghanistan, they left controversial and sensitive issues such as determining precise water of Helmand unresolved by purpose so that occasionally differences between the two neighboring occur, and there will be always pretexts for creating discord and conflicts. Now that Third World countries have reached political development, they should be able to find a solution to this dispute; it is well evident in the Helmand River issue that in the historical process of resolving the issue of Helmand and transferring its solution to foreigners, and their involvement has been always against interests of Iran, and Afghans have given more points to foreigners consciously or unconsciously. In other words, these conflicts damaged the two sides and always a third party has benefited in this regard. In fact, the difference is based on a number of political, psychological and historical factors, which each one in turn can cause the hardiness of Afghanistan government in adopting a rigid approach against Iran, as it has been in the past.
The main objective of England from interfering in relations between Iran and Afghanistan has always been to achieve the following purposes:
1. the gradual demise and weakening of Iran's influence in areas such as privacy area of India such as Baluchistan and Sistan.
2. Russia and France greed to India and fear of England of Iran's cooperation with these countries to attack and conquer India.
3. Denying close cooperation between the two communities with common history, culture and destiny and exacerbating pessimism atmosphere between these two in order to cut off any relationship between Afghanistan and foreign countries and keeping it in isolation to protect and sustain British interest and East India Company.
4. The combination of these factors led to continue cooling the relations between Iran and Afghanistan, from the second half of the 19th century until recent years, so that even after the emergence of fundamental changes in the principles and purposes of the old colonial, the dispute will still remain as colonial inheritance between the two countries' relations.
5. Taking a look at all the signed treaties between Iran and Afghanistan to exploit the Helmand River, Iran was in a position of weakness, and none of the treaties concluded between Iran and Afghanistan over Helmand was not in accordance with international regulations and without defect, and if possible, it is necessary that last agreements to be reconsidered and new agreements should be prepared in which the two countries' regional and natural realities are noted so that first, it is provider of our national interest, and, secondly, it can provide increasing water demand of Sistan region's people.