793B. 00/10–3051: Telegram
The Charge in India (Steere) to the Secretary of State
1533. Deptel 882 Oct 25, rptd Calcutta 184, Deptel 849 Oct 19 rptd [Page 1839] Calcutta 176, Embtel 1465 Oct 24 rptd Calcutta 128, Contel 215 Oct 24 to Dept rptd Delhi 182.1
Subj reftels discussed first opportunity today with Bajpai. His understanding was Ind trade agent Yatung had been instructed (Embtel 302 July 21) pass to Dalai Lama info that GOI prepared accord asylum India. His impression was instrs had been carried out thru third party since direct access Dalai Lama impossible but he promised check MEA info and inform me. I asked if not definite that Dalai Lama had been informed GOI attitude, and if this attitude unchanged, whether Sinha, GOI rep Lhasa, might be instructed pass same info to Dalai Lama there. Bajpai replied GOI attitude re asylum unchanged but that in present circumstances Lhasa, GOI wld be unable take such initiative since it wld be open to construction GOI endeavoring encourage Dalai Lama leave Tibet. I then asked whether Sinha informed that GOI prepared grant asylum to Dalai Lama if latter desired. Bajpai said he felt sure Sinha so informed but that he wld investigate and wld have him informed if any doubt existed. He added Sinha wld inform any authorized rep of Dalai Lama re GOI attitude if such rep shld make inquiry.
Above inquiries were made after explaining to Bajpai that from several Tib sources Emb has heard that Dalai Lama had desired take refuge India but had been discouraged by apparent lack GOI sympathy for Tibet and in last analysis by failure or inability receive assurances from GOI that it prepared accord him asylum. I added that it wld be most unfortunate if simple mischance or misunderstanding shld result in damaging effects on welfare of Tibet and possibly even on personal safety Dalai Lama. Latter from all reports was intelligent, courageous youth who deserved better fate.
Bajpai gave vent to some expressions regret but pointed out that there had been little that India cld offer Tibet in way of polit or practical support. He concluded by remarking that there now seemed little or no possibility of Dalai Lama leaving Tibet even if he desired since MEA had just recd reports from Lhasa to effect Tib auths had agreed unanimously to ratification Sino-Tib agreement of last May.2 I remarked [Page 1840] Emb had seen Peiping press report to that effect and wondered whether his info might not be based on that report. Bajpai promised to check and advise later.
… Emb believes message shld indicate that if authorized rep of Dalai Lama approached Sinha in Lhasa, he wld learn that GOI was still willing grant asylum to Dalai Lama if desired.
Sent Dept 1533; rptd info Calcutta 136.
- Telegrams 1465 from New Delhi and 215 from Calcutta, October 24, 1951, neither printed, agreed that it might be advantageous to again discuss the question of asylum for the Dalai Lama with the Indian Government (793B.00/10–2451). Telegram 882 to New Delhi, October 25, 1951, not printed, instructed the Embassy to approach the Indian Government on the subject (793.B00/10–2451).↩
- Despatch 299 from Calcutta, December 21, 1951, confirmed that formal Tibetan acceptance of the agreement had been conveyed by a message dated October 25, 1951, from the Dalai Lama to Mao Tse-tung, after the Tibetans had been assured that the Chinese would not interfere in Tibetan internal affairs (691.93B/12–2151).↩