501.BC Kashmir/4–2249: Telegram
The Ambassador in India (Henderson) to the Secretary of State
456. Comkas 38. Following principal points replies both governments April 15 proposals for truce agreement (see Comkas 37,1 April 16):
GOI objects (1) Absences references disarming, disbanding Azad forces; (2) Plan of Indian withdrawal which GOI alleges does not sufficiently take into account Indian responsibility for security of State. GOI seeks to condition withdrawals on reduction Azad forces; (3) Commission formula re sparsely-populated areas of north renewing request to post garrisons throughout area now; (4) Proposals re free use roads and waterways in State and release political prisoners, both of which GOI argues, are not contemplated by Part II of August 13 resolution.
GOP objects (1) 7-week period for Pakistan Army withdrawal which they argue precludes “synchronization” with bulk Indian withdrawal which is to be completed in 3 months; (2) Commission formula re northern area which GOP argues is contrary provisions Part II, August 13 resolution.
Thus, neither response acceptable but GOP representative states it “accepts” proposals with stated exceptions whereas GOI reply makes no reference either acceptance or rejection.
Commission now making some revisions these proposals both governments end week with urgent request immediate unconditional acceptance and refusal engage in further discussions or clarifications. In revisions, Commission not departing from essential points previous proposals nor framework August 13 resolution. Indian schedule withdrawal modified and provision made to permit revision withdrawals both sides if both governments agree plans for reduction forces referred to point 4 of January 5 resolution. Discussions these matters to begin immediately upon conclusion truce.
ReEmbtel 457,2 USDel believes Nimitz best able decide his movements basis situation prevailing time his planned departure and purpose his visit. Notwithstanding Commission feeling reftel reluctant suggest he postpone departure assuming he clearly understands difficulty his position in Subcontinent if truce agreement not concluded before or soon after his arrival.3
[Page 1701]Entire Commission plans remain Rawalpindi till conclusion truce agreement. Hence prompt communications between USDel and Department difficult.
Sent Department 456, Rangoon 17; pouched Karachi, repeated London.
- Telegram 431, p. 1698.↩
- Dated April 16, not printed.↩
- Telegram 108, Kascom 72, April 25, to Karachi read as follows: “Nimitz has requested Dept inform Embs Karachi, Delhi date his departure now uncertain and is dependent upon status truce agreement … PlebAd will indicate when he is able to set firm date departure.…” (501.BC Kashmir/4–2549)↩