690D.91/12–2951: Telegram
The Ambassador in India (Bowles) to the Secretary of State
2273. For Acheson. Ref Embtel 2224,1 rptd Paris 46, Karachi 108. Bajpai called me his office this morning to ask me if I had any info on US stand in re SC action on Kashmir. I told him I had none and that in my opinion the willingness of my govt to agree continue Graham mission until March 31 depended on likelihood of success.
I asked Bajpai if he had anything further to say which might give us indication of possibility of agreement between now and Mar 31 if US agreed to go along. He said he cld not speak at all specifically or officially but in his opinion there shld be no difficulty about agreeing to setting up the plebiscite admin by July 15 provided Pak took reasonable attitude on other points.
He told me very confidentially that India was faced with certain political problems in dealing with Sheikh Abdullah’s Kashmir govt and implied Kashmir Govt was sometimes inclined be unreasonable and stubborn. He said the military problem wld obviously be the most difficult to solve but intimated that if India were not asked compromise too large number of troops they might agree allow plebiscite admin to have final decision on placing these troops so that no one cld remotely claim they in any way influenced the election.
[Page 1928]I again asked Bajpai if the resolution was agreed to wld he have any objection to flat statement that this was Graham’s final effort. He said he would have no objection and that this fact in itself indicated his belief that agreement cld be reached. Bajpai again emphasized that any solution which criticized and pressured India cld only end in an impasse which wld make problems of his govt much more difficult here in India and be regarded as another defeat for UN.
I pointed out my govt was under pressure from Pak and asked if he had any knowledge as to how firm Pak position was likely be. He said he believed they wld talk very firmly but that he thought they wld be in very poor position if after all these months of negots they refused agree to final 90-day extension of time.
Bajpai impressed me as being entirely sincere and personally anxious to get this problem solved. Although I believe he speaking for Nehru and govt I cannot of course be sure of this. In any event I do not see how we can lose by accepting his suggestions.
May I caution that our reps exercise utmost discretion in any follow-up or use they might make of above info. I must protect Bajpai or my source info may dry up. I wld appreciate any views or comments which might help in pursuing this matter with him.2
Rptd info Paris 48 (for Warren Austin) Karachi 109.
- December 26, p. 1925.↩
- In telegram 1295, to the Embassy in New Delhi, December 31, the Department of State acknowledged the Embassy’s telegrams 2224 and 2273 and promised an early expression of its views on Bajpai’s suggestions. The Department’s preliminary view was to doubt that these suggestions would provide a basis for an acceptable settlement. (690D.91/12–2651)↩