690D.91/10–2251: Telegram
The United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin) to the Secretary of State
priority
515. Re Kashmir. Coulson1 (UK) requested interview with Gross today to express UKDel’s reservations about scheduled Paris Security Council meeting on October 29. He said they would like delay so as to allow time for consultations and advance agreement if possible on new res. Fowler (UK) had talked to Bokhari (Pakistan) this morning and had found no particular sense of urgency for meeting that soon. Bokhari suggested early part of next week could usefully be spent in Paris consultations. Coulson said UK had no present intention of consulting with Indians but might raise question of timing of Security Council action in New Delhi. He assumed Indians would not be anxious to meet.
Gross said we had thought early mtg necessary from Pakistanis’ point of view; if they did not want it we of course would not press. He said Graham planned to be in Paris 28th and wondered whether he should put him off. Coulson said it would be useful if Graham could be there for consultations with Fowler, Boss, Hyde2 and possibly parties. Jebb and Coulson could go to Paris on 29th or whenever thereafter need arose. Security Council might begin discussion later in week.
UKDel still feels it would be preferable if res could be agreed before parties spoke so as to avoid freezing their position. Gross pointed out Indians would presumably attempt to appear conciliatory at this time in any case. We agreed this question might be left for decision after consultation between US and parties. To our suggestion about need for blanketing Constituent Assembly, Coulson said UK saw little profit in denouncing it without taking other action at same time. He thought position of Security Council was clear and further agitation might simply irritate Indians without producing further results.
On Graham’s suggestion that UN rep be instructed to report back to Security Council in six weeks, Coulson said they did not feel six [Page 1889] weeks was sufficient time to complete job, and repeated Fowler’s previous remark that six weeks would be unfortunate time in any case since it would bring report back to Security Council just before Indian elections.
Gross explained Graham’s view that definite time period should be stated so as to show Pakistanis’ Council was not letting matter slide. He also explained Graham would plan to continue if task was not completed within this time, and that Graham had selected six weeks period arbitrarily and would probably accept longer period if Security Council desired.
We suggested UK might want to talk to Graham through Embassy in Washington. Coulson said he would suggest this possibility but if Graham was to be in Paris 28th and meeting was postponed from 29th there would seem to be sufficient time for talks there.
He assumed Foreign Office and State Dept would be concerting policy while dels were at sea.
After Gross left for appointment, Bolte3 inquired what were UK views on new res. Coulson said he was without instructions but assumed res should extend Graham’s term of office, commend substance of Graham’s proposals to parties (as requested by Bokhari) and urge him to continue efforts to achieve demilitarization along these lines. Bolte raised on personal basis suggestion that in changed circumstances since Liaquat’s assassination, and considering that Graham had apparently won confidence of parties to considerable degree, now might be time for Security Council to broaden his terms of reference along lines of authorizing him to place before parties suggestions likely to contribute to enduring solution of problem. He said res should reiterate principle of over-all plebiscite and demilitarization as first step, but broader terms of reference would give Graham opportunity if he saw fit to go beyond bounds of narrow demilitarization functions in effort to reach agreement. Coulson said this might be fruitful approach so long as Graham did not attempt to get into settlement of all outstanding problems between India and Pakistan. He said he would think and talk with his colleagues about this idea.
Department please relay GADel, Paris.
- John Eltringham Coulson, Deputy U.K. Representative to the United Nations.↩
- James N: Hyde, Adviser to the U.S. Mission to the United Nations; Member of the U.S. Delegation to the 6th session of the U.N. General Assembly, Paris, 1951.↩
- Charles G. Bolte, Adviser, U.S. Mission to the United Nations; Member of the U.S. Delegation to the 6th session of the U.N. General Assembly, Paris, 1951.↩