Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, Asia and the Pacific, Volume VI, Part 2

690D.91/9–2851: Telegram

The Acting Secretary of State to the United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin)¹

secret

Washington, October 1, 1951—7 p. m.

167. Re Kashmir (urtels 389,² 390 Sep 28):³

1. Re timing SC mtg: SC Kashmir discussions Oct complicated by: (a) SC consideration Iran problem; (b) Graham’s views (reported USUN’s 390) wld file report around Oct 8 and did not contemplate SC action prior Paris; (c) changed UK attitude preferring action near end Oct (USUN’s 389, London’s 1537,⁴ Sep 27, rptd Karachi 42, Delhi 38).

2. Accordingly, any timetable tentative but Dept still believes advisable SC mtg New York before Oct 19 adjournment for move to Paris because: (a) necessity forestall increased tensions, particularly Pak; (b) Dept and UKDel statements to Zafrullah re early mtg fol submission report (USUN’s 369, Sep 24,⁵ rptd Sep 26 London 1679, Delhi 691, Karachi 336). Dept questions realism attempting set specific date introducing res, but believe parties might be able speak before Paris move. Such plan wld not necessitate UK or US speaking until resumption discussions Paris.

3. In discussing SC timetable with Graham (Urtel 390) suggest you indicate Dept favors, unless he perceives overriding objections, early consideration case and we wld like discuss future courses action after careful study his report expressing hope he will continue make available his services future use.

Webb

1. Repeated as telegram 1763 to London, 355 to Karachi, and 723 to New Delhi.
2. In telegram 389, from New York, September 28, not printed, Ambassador Gross reported the substance of a conversation with Mr. Robert Fowler of the U.K. Delegation at the U.N. concerning consideration by the Security Council of the Kashmir question (690D.91/9–2851).
3. In telegram 390, from New York, September 28, not printed, Ambassador Gross reported that Dr. Graham had arrived in New York that morning, that the preparation of his report would require another ten days, and that Graham did not contemplate action by the Security Council prior to its move to Paris (690D.91/9–2851).
4. Telegram 1537, from London, September 26, not printed, reported in part that the British Foreign Office believed the last week in October to be the best time for Security Council consideration of the Graham report (690D.91/9–2651).
5. In telegram 369, from New York, September 24, not printed, Ambassador Austin reported that Pakistan Foreign Minister Zafrulla had stressed to the U.K. Delegation at the U.N. the importance of bringing Graham’s report before the Security Council at once. Zafrulla favored a resolution under Article 37 of the U.N. Charter that would pinpoint the differences between India and Pakistan, set forth what each party should do about these differences, and lay the foundation for action by the General Assembly in case of Indian disregard of the resolution. (690D.91/9–2451)