893.01/6–1749: Telegram
The Ambassador in India (Henderson) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 18—8:45 a. m.]
682. 1. Menon, Foreign Secretary, read to me on June 16 excerpts telegram from Panikkar, Indian Ambassador to China, in which Panikkar reported US Ambassador to China had informed him that GOI87 had promised USA not to recognize Chinese Communist Government without prior consultation with US. Telegram expressed [Page 44] surprise that GOI should have given such undertaking. Panikkar pointed out if India’s approach towards new Communist China should be based on undertakings this kind, Chinese Communists might obtain impression that India was allying itself with Western Powers against them. Menon said that so far as he knew, GOI had given no such promise and asked if I had any idea on what American Ambassador’s statements to Panikkar could be based.
I said that I was unaware such commitment and thought it possible that Panikkar might have misunderstood substance Ambassador’s statement to him. I outlined to Menon substance mytel 600, May 26, as I recalled it, and Menon said statements made in mytel seemed correct to him. We agrecd they did not represent any undertaking on part of GOI. He said that GOI did not intend push ahead in recognizing Chinese Communist regime but wished retain free hand.
2. Later in day in discussing another matter with Bajpai, I referred to conversation with Menon and allowed him read copy mytel 600 which he agrecd was fair summary our conversation May 25. He said Panikkar in another section his telegram indicated that American Ambassador seemed to feel that there was some understanding which would permit US to work out principles which were to be observed by other powers including India in approaching problem recognition Chinese Communists. I outlined to Bajpai substance Depcirtel June 10, 3 a.m.88 He made no comment other than say it seemed to him that best procedure would be for various governments represented Nanking to refrain from making public statements and from initiating discussions with Chinese Communists re recognition and to await approaches to them by Communist regime. Decisions with regard to question of recognition might be based in part on time and manner such approaches. I agreed but said it seemed rather important that there should be some kind of understanding among powers concerned not to permit themselves to be played off against one [an] other by Chinese Communists. There were probably still number diplomats in influential positions so naive as to believe that their governments might obtain some special benefit by rushing ahead of others in granting recognition. Bajpai indicated although he did not say so directly that responsible officials of India were not so naive.
3. I shall discuss problem of Chinese recognition later with Bajpai or perhaps with PriMin89 himself when a favorable opportunity arises. Unwise in my opinion press India just now give any kind definite undertaking.