357.AB/10–1951: Telegram
The United States Representative at the United Nations (Austin) to the Secretary of State
priority
507. Re Kashmir. Liaquat’s assassination, we believe, emphasizes need for consideration of action on Graham report when SC reconvenes in Paris, on October 29. Graham plans to be in Paris October 28. Parties will presumably speak at October 29 mtg and SC can meet later in week to consider res. Thus beginning of SC debate would precede convening constituent assembly and would take place while constituent assembly is in session. SC members can make clear that any decisions by constituent assembly will have no effect on disposition of state.
As to res, while it is obviously premature to predict its most suitable form, two practical alternatives should be discussed with Graham. One is based on his recommendations. The other is outlined below. His views would be major factor in decision. If he agrees, he or we might propose course to UK, which would if agreeable consult key council members and parties in effort to work out draft res which could command widespread support now and also lay foundation for whatever future action becomes necessary.
Alternative res might include following elements:
- 1.
- Note Graham’s report.
- 2.
- Recall GOI and GOP acceptance of UNCIP resolutions of 13 August 1948 and 5 January 1949.
- 3.
- Note with approval assurances of two govts on Graham’s first four points, listing them; call upon govts along lines of Graham’s first recommendation; and declare SC will not recognize constituent assembly action.
- 4.
- Observe, on basis of Graham’s report, that area of disagreement between parties in regard to demilitarization has been narrowed to specific points, which could be listed along with areas of agreement.
- 5.
- Instruct Graham to continue his efforts to effect demilitarization (possibly adding: and to place before GOI and GOP suggestions likely to contribute to enduring solution of this problem.)
- 6.
- Instruct Graham to report to SC as he may consider necessary, submitting conclusions and any recommendations.
We see following advantages in res along these lines:
- (a)
- It holds parties to UNCIP commitments, mtg Pakistan public opinion problem.
- (b)
- It lists areas of disagreement and agreement on demilitarization, giving Graham solid foundation on which to proceed while at same time not calling on parties to carry out his plan in detail; which we agree would risk an outright rejection and consequent freezing of situation.
- (c)
- Paras 2 and 3, together with timing of meeting, help blanket expected action by constituent assembly.
- (d)
- Bracketed suggestion in para 5 specifically adds substance of Dixon’s powers to Graham’s present terms of reference so that he can, if he considers it desirable, enlarge discussion with parties beyond narrow issue of demilitarization. We realize problem of anticipated Pakistani reaction against this. However, we think it may be more productive in long run to give Graham this added flexibility now instead of in subsequent res if he feels it would be useful. It seems to us that possible disadvantage of two-step res procedure suggested in Deptel 200 is that it might be construed as public registration of failure of demilitarization effort. Moreover, we think addition of this phrase does not necessarily indicate SC approval of conditions other than state-wide plebiscite, especially since proposed res specifically reaffirms plebiscite principle.
- (e)
- It gives Graham free hand in determining his own pace of work and desirability or otherwise of interim reports, thus taking advantage of considerations that GOI position may be more flexible after Indian elections at end of year and that Graham can probably work better away from glare of SC debates, whether in Paris or on sub-continent. Changed circumstances since Liaquat’s death, we think, may provide adequate reason for SC to give Graham slightly different terms than those he suggested in report written before assassination.
We would be glad to have Dept’s views on above suggestion. The key to the problem is of course Graham’s own reactions.
Dept please relay GADel Paris.