611.9194/11–2454: Telegram
The Ambassador in India (Allen) to the Department of State
700. In two hour conversation November 23 with B. N. Jha, Secretary Ministry Communications and L. C. Jain, Director General Civil Aviation, I explored possible basis for solution aviation impasse in light Department’s A-124, November 10. Emphasizing unfortunate consequences which termination US air services to India might have on relations between two countries, I said USG anxious find practical solution.
In response my query re GOI view of situation which would exist on January 14 in absence agreement, Jha called in deputy Secretary Venkatachalam who said traffic rights US carriers would legally cease that date; transit rights would continue unabridged. Jain agreed this view. Jha then said only basis on which American carriers could continue operate would be with unilateral authorization GOI It was not inconceivable, he said, such authorization would be granted upon request of carriers submitted through Embassy, but on conditions set out by GOI
Jha commented GOI position had hardened since 1953 consultations because of inflexible US attitude to GOI view that no increase in frequencies be made without its consent. GOI, he said, does not insist on unilateral right to restrict (or as Jha emphasized to regulate) frequencies and fifth freedom traffic but does insist that level of traffic be mutually agreed to in advance. GOI, he asserted, could not agree to any proposal which would permit frequency increase without its consent. Inherent right GOI regulate frequencies is recognized even under present agreement through right of denunciation, Jha remarked. In GOI view, however, mutual pre-determination is essential.
Speaking personally I said it was my hope that as a minimum the frequencies of US carriers immediately after January 14 whether under terms of any new agreement or under authorization procedure would remain at present level. This plus my recitation of the tourist and related arguments elicited from Jha rather sardonic comment that “thought [though?] one was sweeter, record seemed same” as in 1953 talks. Continuation of US carriers at present frequencies, he said, [Page 1781] would be concession on part GOI in view US agreement during 1953 consultation that TWA frequencies excessive. I countered that that was 18 months ago and traffic had since increased substantially.
Interview with Jha terminated with understanding we would have further informal conversation prior my departure for Washington. On basis this conversation and that with Ram (Embtel 678 November 19),1 I have concluded that GOI in effect rejects approach 1. It does not intend withdraw denunciation or permit status quo to continue after January 14. In belief approach two would be counterproductive I do not intend advance it.
In next conversation with Jha I will endeavor explore approaches three and four. Approach three a possibility, but seems more likely GOI will insist on termination after which it may unilaterally authorize temporary continuation services, perhaps at reduced level, while some permanent solution sought. In this connection I warned that reduction in frequencies below economic level might cause carriers discontinue services entirely.
GOI of course would almost certainly agree to continuation present agreement provided we would recognize its right in confidential exchange of notes to regulate frequencies and fifth freedom traffic on basis annual review. This, Jha acknowledged, is method employed with British and Dutch.
- Not printed. (611.9194/11–1954)↩