501.BC Kashmir/9–448: Telegram
The United States Representative on the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistani (Huddle) to the Secretary of State
442. Comkas 33. Busy week concluded with commission’s proposals under consideration by Pakistan and Zafrullah proceeding quietly over weekend to lay them before Jinnah. After much urging Foreign Minister promised might be possible give oral reply Sunday afternoon. Commission considered urgency increased because Nehru advised us Thursday he proposed expose Kashmir situation Indian parliament before its adjournment fifth. This implied publication commission’s proposals before Pakistan response received and to save Pakistan any possible embarrassment commission has endeavored persuade Nehru delay and sent Belgian representative with personal message.
Intimation has been given to Pakistan of possibility Nehru’s action. They know commission has India’s answer. I suspect however, Pakistan is not much concerned about India’s reception proposals and [Page 375] that their decision will not be particularly influenced by that consideration and my belief was partly confirmed by their seeming indifference when informed possible developments.
Pakistan effort during whole week of almost continuous conferences has been to obtain either modification of proposals or explanation which would convey meaning other than that actually stated and intended. They particularly endeavored obtain commitments re administration and maintenance law and order in territory under Indian control which we know India would not accept and are determined to find some means whereby they could infiltrate to expand their activity and influence. But they insisted most on commission adding to proposals commitments regarding plebiscite which commission could not consistently undertake. In this both Prime Minister and Foreign Minister especially latter were unreasonable and Foreign Minister resorted to every forensic artifice in his efforts. Their position was that they must have plebiscite program settled so that they could give positive assurances to tribesmen and Azad Kashmir in endeavoring persuade them to lay down their arms.
Commission exercised great patience, satisfied every reasonable demand for hearing, listened to Foreign Minister for hours, and endeavored to give firm well reasoned and logical explanations.
Commission is more than ever convinced that military activity must cease if any plebiscite is to be worked out and that two phases must be handled separately. It would be simply impossibility to comply with Pakistan demand that terms of plebiscite be agreed upon simultaneously with cease fire because such complicated agreement could not be effected in present temper both disputants and meantime fighting would continue with all its dangers of sudden engulfment entire subcontinent.
But Pakistan correct in apprehension that India will be difficult in plebiscite problem if that stage is reached. SC and commission must be prepared to adopt very firm procedure and when required may have to be tough.
As I suggested in my 23 (Embtel Delhi 7321) Pakistan like India found proposals couched in such form that they realize responsibility they would assume by rejection. Proposals have therefore not been summarily turned down but on contrary have been thoroughly debated. Now there is at least an even chance of their acceptance but no prediction can be made with any degree of certainty. Perhaps they themselves do not know until they have the decision of their volatile and redoubtable Governor General whose authority in this matter, so intimately related to his empire building, seems supreme.