Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, The Far East and Australasia, Volume VII, Part 1

501.BC Indonesia/2–2449

The Department of State to the Indian Embassy ¹

Aide-Mémoire

The views of the Government of India² on the situation with which the Security Council is confronted through the lack, so far, of any implementation of the Council’s Resolution of January 28, are greatly appreciated by the United States Government, which shares fully the concern of the Government of India over the probable ultimate consequences of a substitution of military methods for those of negotiation as a means of achieving a solution of the Indonesian problem.

Before attempting to define what its precise position in the Security Council will be, the United States Government will of course wish to consider fully the report of the United Nations Commission for Indonesia received by the Security Council on March 1 together with the response by the Government of the Republic of Indonesia to the new proposals for a resumption of negotiations made by the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

The Government of India is aware of the extended efforts of the United States to find a peaceful path through the besetting difficulties of the Indonesian dispute in a role which it did not seek but in which it has endeavored to contribute its utmost, realizing that the prestige of the United Nations is deeply involved in the case. The Government of India has doubtless, indeed, a special insight into these efforts through the agency of its Consular Representatives in Indonesia, between whom and the successive Representatives of the United States on the Committee of Good Offices a most cordial and fruitful relationship has always existed.

The Government of India may be assured that the United States Government remains convinced of the fairness of the Security Council’s Resolution of January 28, and, in the absence of a free agreement between the parties upon a solution outside the terms of that Resolution, will fully discharge the obligations imposed upon it by its membership in the United Nations and its position on the Security Council in support of the Resolution. Having subscribed to the principle of collective security, the United States will be guided by the consensus of the Council and in addition it will in this as in other cases contribute what it can to a wise decision by the Council as to its course of action. Clearly, the Council as a whole has the task of achieving a satisfactory solution of the Indonesian dispute and must as a whole bear responsibility for the outcome. No warrant would therefore appear to exist for fixing a collective responsibility upon a single nation and certainly the United States Government cannot regard itself as in any such position. World opinion would surely not expect nor desire the United States to take it upon itself to exceed its responsibilities under the Charter and to court justifiable resentment by assuming a unilateral and arbitrary if well-intentioned role.

The United States Government will continue to be most receptive to the views of the Government of India on the Indonesian dispute, upon which by reason of geographical and historical factors it is able to throw light, and to welcome information on any particular efforts to bring about a solution which the Government of India for its part may be contemplating.

Geographical and historical factors in its own case cause the United States to feel a deep concern in matters which give grounds for possible misunderstanding between the peoples of Asia and those of Western Europe. It is therefore particularly grateful for the expression of the Government of India’s appreciation of the difficulties which it has faced and of the friendly feelings which have prompted the Government of India to make its views available. The United States Government will look to the Government of India for continued friendly understanding, confident that both Governments are striving for the same goal.³

Washington, March 2, 1949.

1. Reported in telegram 184, March 4, 7 p. m., to New Delhi, and in 62 to Karachi. (501.BC Indonesia/3–449)
2. Indian aide-mémoire of February 24, not printed.
3. In response to a Pakistani aide-mémoire of March 3 (not printed), the Department orally informed the Pakistani Counselor of Embassy (Baig) to the same general effect, concluding: “We would naturally welcome any mutually satisfactory agreement either negotiated under the Resolution [of January 28] or reached independently by the parties of the dispute.” (856d.00/3–349)