Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XXV, South Asia

109. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Pakistan¹

Washington, April 24, 1965, 9 a.m.

1195. Delhi’s 3015 repeated Karachi 628.² Since Paks have already confirmed to us that their forces have attacked in Biar Bet area and that this well within disputed area (Karachi’s 2003 repeated Delhi 699),³ and since you report that these are MAP supplied forces, you should seek appointment soonest with Forn Minister or Forn Secretary to express our strong concern over what appears be worsening situation Rann of Kutch. You should recall assurances given you by Ayub (Karachi’s 1971 repeated Delhi 687)⁴ that Paks had not and did not intend to go beyond traditional patrol routes in disputed areas and that Pak forces would not use any more force than necessary to repel force resorted to by Indian side. Moreover Ayub recognized something had to be done to relieve worsening situation and that Pakistan shared responsibility for this. Pak action confirmed by MFA Director Akhund would appear inconsistent with these assurances and we must now ask what Pak intentions are.

In making representations you should cite accusation re use of MAP equipment made by General Chaudhri and seek confirmation.⁵ Since we assume there little doubt that accusations well founded, believe you should sound warning that use of our MAP equipment in this type of situation could jeopardize MAP program.

You should also say that we are expressing our strong concern over Kutch situation to Indians.

For Delhi: In whatever followup steps Embassy takes with MEA noted reftel, assume Ambassador will register our increasing concern. Ambassador should inform MEA we are making representations to GOP.

Agree with Delhi on importance of coordinating closely with British, who we would hope also bringing their influence to bear on both parties.

Rusk

1. Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, Pakistan, Vol. III, Cables, 12/64–7/65. Secret; Immediate. Drafted by Laingen and Laise, cleared in substance by Stoddard in DOD/ISA, and approved by Handley. Also sent to New Delhi as telegram 2222, and repeated to CINCMEAFSA and London.
2. See footnote 2, Document 108.
3. Dated April 22. (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 32–1 INDIA–PAK)
4. See footnote 6, Document 103.
5. In telegram 2015 from Karachi, April 25, the Embassy reported that a Defense Ministry spokesman had emphatically denied the Indian allegations. (Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, Pakistan, Vol. III, Cables, 12/64–7/65)