Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, East Asia and the Pacific, Volume VI

793B.00/6–1650: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom

secret

Washington, June 16, 1950—7 p. m.

2945. Dept today called in rep Brit Emb for purpose informal discussion Tibet with particular reference any steps which cld or shld be taken to encourage Tibetan resistance to Commie control. Brit rep was given brief informal outline US thinking¹ this problem along lines set forth position paper this subj prepared for FonMins mtg last month.² Brit Emb will transmit outline FonOff for study and comment. Meanwhile rep expressed pessimism personally that Brit Gov wld be willing assume any special responsibility vis-à-vis Indian Gov or even approach GOI respecting Tibet. This contrasts attitude Dening³ with whom Merchant discussed US position briefly in London and who concurred in our view of primary responsibility India and Brit.

Acheson

1. A copy of the Department’s paper which was given to Mr. Graves of the British Embassy by Mr. Freeman of the Office of Chinese Affairs is attached to the memorandum of their conversation in file 793B.00/6–1650. The paper stated that Tibet under Chinese control might offer a base for the extension of Communist penetration and subversive activities into Nepal and Bhutan and, eventually, India. Although probably Communist China had the strength to conquer Tibet, comparatively little covert assistance in the form of specialized military instruction and supplies to the Tibetans might make a Chinese military expedition prohibitively costly, particularly if the Western States manifested no extraordinary interest in attempting to alter Tibet’s international status.

   The concluding paragraph of the Department’s paper read as follows:

   “By reason of its traditional interest in Tibet and its special relationship with India, the British Government obviously is in a better position than is the United States Government to appraise Tibetan needs, to ascertain the extent of Indian help and to exert influence upon the Government of India to assume responsibility for any necessary action respecting Tibet. In the opinion of the United States Government, however, it would be undesirable, because of Indian sensibilities, for British representatives to refer to any exchanges of views between the British and United States Governments regarding Tibet in discussions which they may have with the Government of India.”

2. See the editorial note under date of May 11, p. 339.
3. Maberly Esler Dening, Assistant Under Secretary of State, British Foreign Office.