Foreign Relations of the United States, 1946, The Far East, Volume VIII

845C.00/12–1646: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Consul General at Rangoon (Packer)

secret

Washington, December 20, 1946—4 p.m.

314. Following for your information only. Deptel 7614 London Nov 8 requested Emb ask: (1) What is program Brit for transforming April 1947 legislative council to constituent assembly? (2) Do Brit expect make pre-election statement re this program? (3) In interim will Burma policy parallel India policy in matters like Governor’s restraint veto power, defense, foreign affairs and finance?

London’s 10137 Dec 18³⁴ reports long conversation Dec 17 with F.W.H. Smith, Acting Asst Under Secretary for Burma.

1. MacDougall was sent London convince Burma Office deterioration political situation and urge prompt action telescoping April elections with formation constituent assembly. Ranee suggested either (a) Burma cabinet mission similar last spring’s India mission or (b) dispatch London Burmese delegation headed by Aung San. Sir Gilbert Laithwaite left quietly last week. Brit Cabinet prefers second alternative. Burma office not certain but hopes Burma’s leaders can arrive London Jan.

2. Burmese politicians believed eager discuss Indian parallel and right opt out of Commonwealth. Smith considers such points suitable discussion along with status tribal areas and Burmese representation abroad. Burmese not preparing for diplomatic representation now because urgent press other matters. Re Deptel 306 Dec 16³⁵ Smith considers idea exchanging commissioners sound in principle.

3. Re questions Deptel 7614 Nov 8 London Smith replied: Question (1) Program may be worked out with Burmese leaders London next month. Burma Office prefers telescope the two. Question (2) Publicity attentive [attendant?] Burmese leaders coming London and results conversations would be widely distributed. Question (3) Brit India policy not good parallel with Burma. Governor exercising lightest possible rein on Council and problem is negligible. Governor can not legally abrogate heavy responsibilities without Parliamentary authority. Brit Treasury would disfavor Governor’s failure retain financial veto while Treasury retains responsibility. This problem will also probably be discussed Jan meeting.

4. Emb reiterated US concern and interest re Burma particularly re peaceful transition self-govt.

5. Contents urtel 502 Dec 16 Sec 1³⁶ put to Smith with full protection source. Smith said Burma Office has these points very much in mind. Outstanding problem now being considered London conditions which Burmese leaders attach to going to London and extent to which Brit govt can accept these conditions.³⁷

Byrnes

34. Not printed.
35. See footnote 29, p. 11.
36. See supra.
37. In telegram 10194, December 20, 1946, from London, the statement read by British Prime Minister Clement R. Attlee that morning to the House of Commons in regard to Burma was quoted in full. It mentioned that Burmese leaders were to be invited to London to consult about implementing proposed changes for Burma. “It is for people of Burma to decide their own future but we are certain that it will be to their interest as it will be to ours if they decide to remain within the Commonwealth.…” (845C.00/12–2046)