Office of the Historian

357.AB/3–2152: Telegram

The Ambassador in India (Bowles) to the Department of State

top secret
priority
New Delhi, March 21, 1952—10 p.m.

3436. Graham left yesterday for Karachi and believe will go directly from there to Geneva to write his report. I have not cabled Dept about progress of talks because my only info until yesterday was given me by Graham on specific understanding it wld not be repeated to any one. However, Bajpai in mtg yesterday described to me progress of talks in detail and since this jibes with what I have heard from other sources I can repeat:

1.
Graham has made more progress than in previous mtgs in Dec and now feels there is good chance situation can eventually be settled on reasonable basis.
2.
Indian Govt has demonstrated most reasonable attitude and is agreed specifically on fol:
a.
To remove all troops from Pakistan frontier for minimum distance 70 miles from border with most of troops going back 450 miles. This retirement in process and will have been completed by April 15.
b.
Removal of additional 18,000 Indian troops from Kashmir to be completed by end April.
c.
Both actions to be taken regardless of what Pakistan may do with no request by GOI for compensating advantages.
3.
In addition GOI stated to Graham.
(a)
Belief (but not agreement) that 21,000 Indian troops on which GOI insisted last fall can be reduced somewhat probably to between 16,000 and 18,000;
(b)
That they cld see no difficulty agreeing appointment plebiscite administrator by middle of July once remaining difficulties removed;
(c)
That best way remove remaining difficulties and reaching final agreement is through partition, i.e., Azad Kashmir going to Pakistan, Jammu going to India, with plebiscite confined to valley. Bajpai stated there was only one reason he had not made GOI partition proposal matter record through letter or memo. If Pakistan Govt shld learn about it now it wld be more difficult for Graham secure agreement this approach. Bajpai stated, however, GOI position was established as result clear verbal statement made personally to Graham and Marin. Bajpai confident if all efforts ended in failure no doubt about GOI attitude wld exist because Graham wld be able include verbal statement in his SC report.
4.
Attitude Pakistan Govt has also been reported as reasonable and Graham convinced both sincerely want settlement.
5.

However, because Graham was not briefed on partition possibility as reported by me in Jan he has continued take his terms of reference very literally and has informed GOI he cld not properly explore path which everyone here has consistently held offers best hope of settlement.

I emphasized this phase of situation repeatedly in Jan visit to Washington and again in telegrams, particularly Embtel 2851, Feb 11, and I believe it was mistake not inform Graham. Only conversation he had with rep of US Govt was with Gross in New York who told Graham of emphasis which he had placed on terms of reference in his talks with Sheikh Abdullah early in Feb. For this reason Graham is convinced he cld handle problem only on strict interpretation of his terms of reference, and because of this he feels can do nothing further at present. However his report will undoubtedly recommend he be allowed continue negotiate with broader terms of reference necessary cover this promising possibility.

6.
It seems to us biggest question now will be attitude Pakistan Govt toward continuation of discussions under new mandate from SC since GOP has repeatedly stated will not agree to any further extension Graham negotiations past April 1. Graham will be seriously handicapped in talking to Pakistan Govt because if he tells them he asking [Page 1200] for broader terms of reference so he can discuss question of partition, Pakistan Govt may assume this is Indian proposal and very likely refuse go along. However, Graham reasonably confident he can convince Pakistan Govt Karachi he shld be allowed further opportunity basing his request solely on reasonable attitude shown by GOI.

If Graham unable win Pakistan agreement to continuation his efforts then probably wld be useless him return here and our only hope wld lie in direct negotiations between two govts with partition proposal as basis. On other hand if Pakistan Govt agrees continuation and if they do not get idea proposal of partition coming from Indians there seems be good chance Graham can bring two parties together fol favorable action on part SC in widening his terms of reference.

I asked Graham whether he wld be prepared continue efforts now if I were to inform Dept of latest developments and Dept were to cable him urging him widen his efforts here in case he thought GOI and GOP would be receptive to broader approach. He shrugged and said he thought it was too late.

If, as seems possible, both GOI and GOP were to be found receptive to partition idea it seems shame Graham leave here at this time for legalistic reasons.

If Dept shld decide situation requires its intervention and it wishes refer info from Delhi in msg to Graham, I wld appreciate you referred to info “communicated to Bowles by GOI”.

Extremely important there be no leak to anyone on development this situation since it wld not only be embarrassing to us here but also cld readily jeopardize attitude Pakistan Govt. In any event nothing we can do until Graham report completed.

Bowles