845.00/1–449
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Acting Secretary of State
| Participants: | The Acting Secretary of State. Mr. Lovett |
| Ambassador Huddle, the US Representative on the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan | |
| Mr. Thurston—SOA |
Ambassador Huddle stated that he was leaving for New York on January 5 to resume his duties with UNCIP and asked whether I had any instructions for him or any questions to ask in respect to the work which he had done in connection with the Kashmir dispute. I stated that I was familiar with the problem through the various memoranda which I had seen on the subject and that I had no particular questions to ask or instructions to give. I then added that I was concerned with the way in which we were constantly being pressured from all directions to take leading parts in virtually all spheres of UN activity and made reference in this connection to Palestine, Indonesia and Kashmir, as well as our having a number one position in such UN organisations as FAO. We have found by experience, I stated, that when we comply with what seems to be a simple request we find that it is a facade behind which a hundred other demands are made upon us—for personnel, equipment, jeeps etc. We don’t want to spread ourselves too thinly and we would prefer to keep our commitments down.
[Page 1688]Ambassador Huddle stated that he was sympathetic with this point of view tad that lie was aware that in all probability about 60% of the expenditures of UNCIP had had to be borne both directly and indirectly by the US, and he mentioned the US Air Force plane which had been loaned to him, when the Commission was in India, but stressed that he did not think that the work would have succeeded if the airplane had not been available. He referred to the question of a Military Adviser to UNCIP and the fact that Belgium had recently made available to the Commission a high ranking Lt. General1 for this position. He expressed the hope that the Department would do everything within its power to indicate to the governments of India and Pakistan, now that they have agreed to the establishment of peace machinery, that we were willing to make our contribution to the successful operation of this machinery and that in particular we should call upon the National Defense establishment to provide twenty military observers for the Kashmir cease-fire and traced Ambassador Huddle said that he hoped that the military would be able to make available four officers almost immedately to go out to the subcontinent. He added that in view of the cooperative spirit [in] which India and Pakistan had implemented the cease-fire arrangements it may not be necessary for these military observers to remain there very long. One reason why we are called upon to take the responsibility is that British observers are not desired by India, he added. He pointed out that Canada, Belgium, and perhaps some of the Scandinavian countries would also contribute observers.
I told Ambassador Huddle that I had just signed a letter to Secretary Forrestal2 stressing the urgency of the Military Observer question in respect of Kashmir. Ambassador Huddle went on to discuss the question of a selection of a Plebiscite Administrator for Kashmir and said that there was a likelihood that some prominent American might be approached by the UN to take this job. I stated that while we should prefer not to see an American chosen, if the parties concerned want one, we shall go along. Ambassador Huddle stated that both India and Pakistan had expressed a definite desire for an American for the Plebiscite Administrator.
We discussed for a few minutes which American might be suitable as Plebiscite Administrator. We agree that General Eisenhower could not be considered and in regard to Senator La Follette3 and General Wainwright4 I mentioned that neither was in good health. I stated that there may be some prominent Americans available this year who [Page 1689] would not have been available last year and mentioned Senator Hatch5 in this context. Paul McNutt6 was mentioned by Ambassador Huddle, and I indicated that he may be worth consideration. I expressed my understanding that should an American be chosen, the Department’s recommendation would be prerequisite. I indicated concurrence with Ambassador Huddle’s view that it was probably better not to have an active military officer as Plebiscite Administrator.
Mr. Thurston stated that congratulatory messages to the Indian and Pakistan Prime Ministers with respect to the Kashmir settlement had been prepared for my signature, and that it was believed desirable to give these governments a pat on the back for their constructive action in cooperation with the UN. I concurred with this and asked that the messages be sent to me by the regular channels.
In conclusion I commended Ambassador Huddle for his labors of that last few months in connection with the Kashmir problem.