Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, Asia and the Pacific, Volume VI, Part 2

330/6–551: Telegram

The Acting United States Representative at the United Nations (Gross) to the Secretary of State

confidential

New York, June 5, 1951—7:17 p. m.

1611. Re convening of Kashmir Constituent Assembly. Bokhari¹ (Pakistan) called at his request this noon under instruction from his govt to ask us to convey to our govt with reference to SC President’s letter concerning convening of Constituent Assembly that his govt was “thoroughly dissatisfied and considered it a retrograde step”.² Bokhari said the attitude of his govt was based on expression in letter of satisfaction with assurances given by rep of India. Bokhari said that these assurances were not assurances at all, that they were almost a verbatim repetition of “assurances” Rau had given in March which had in effect been repudiated at that time in the council by Jebb.

Point was that convening of Assembly and expression of opinion by Assembly would, in fact, be prejudicial to carrying out of SC intent.

I pointed out and emphasized that SC letter went on to point out sense of SC that reports under review would involve procedures in conflict with commitments of parties to determine accession by plebiscite. I also emphasized I had stated at last meeting of SC that if GOI permitted convening of Constituent Assembly at this time it would not be adhering fully to spirit of its commitment.³ I indicated I did not believe council would be prepared to enjoin, in effect, convening of Constituent Assembly.

Bokhari expressed appreciation comparative strength my statement in SC. He referred to present very difficult position his govt vis-à-vis Pakistan public opinion mentioning, in this connection, widespread charges that “SC was doing nothing and, from left-wing sources, that Anglo-American bloc was creating muddle in Kashmir”.

Bokhari expressed great concern that Graham had not yet left, two months having passed since his appointment. He said that Pakistanis did not expect in March, and did not now expect that Graham’s mission would be successful. He expressed strong hope that Graham could be persuaded to leave for sub-continent immediately and that he would report to SC as soon as he found that agreement of parties was not possible. This would pave way to order by SC to both parties to withdraw their forces from Kashmir.

We told Bokhari that we would of course report views he had expressed to Dept.⁴

Gross

1. Ahmed S. Bokhari, Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations.
2. On May 29, the Security Council approved (S/PV. 548) the text of a letter (S/2181) to be sent by the President of the Council to India and Pakistan. The letter noted with satisfaction the assurances of the Indian representative that the constituent assembly was not intended to prejudice the issues before the Council. On the other hand, it said, reports concerning the constituent assembly contained in two recent communications from Pakistan to the Council (letter of May 4, S/2119; and May 8, S/2145), if correct, would conflict with the commitments of the parties to determine the future accession of Jammu and Kashmir by a fair and impartial plebiscite under U.N. auspices. The Council reminded the governments of India and Pakistan of the provisions of its resolution of March 30, 1951, and trusted that they would do everything in their power to insure that the authorities in Kashmir did not disregard the Council.
3. The last meeting of the Security Council was held on May 29; see U.N. document S/PV. 548.
4. In telegram 975, to the U.S. Mission at the United Nations, June 8, the Department of State approved the comments made by Ambassador Gross to Mr. Bokhari, and stated that further action in the matter was unnecessary (330/6–551).