611.91/8–1952: Telegram
The Ambassador in India ( Bowles ) to the Department of State
703. Called on Nehru Sun 17th for what I assumed wld be brief visit. Actually turned out be leisurely relaxed extremely friendly discussion lasting more than hour. I brought up subject TCA and particularly what I believe three weaknesses in program.
- 1.
- Not enough people GOI accept community development program as mass effort designed eventually cover all India. Because costs too high, coverage plan wholly inadequate and we in danger simply setting up model operations which will have only minimum effect on mass poverty and low production.
- 2.
- Importance malaria program not fully understood by planning commission and has been treated somewhat as stepchild. This program shld have priority immediately after agric effort. With good organization, $7,500,000 yearly and comparable amount rupees new cases malaria can be eliminated by next gen election 57.
- 3.
- Community development effort shld have at head man with rank of minister who can deal more effectively with heads of depts and PriMin himself. Also concerned with arbitrary approach many civil servants who believe their job is do things for people or to people but not sufficiently with people.
Detailed discussion these points foll and Nehru expressed himself emphatically in agreement. He showed imaginative grasp of program as whole and I felt considerable progress was made. Had 75 project directors to lunch our house Saturday with members planning comm and top TCA personnel. Our relations with them have become extremely close which gives us powerful influence. Nehru who had seen project directors at tea spoke warmly in stating they told of closer relationships development with Amer Point IV personnel.
Then told Nehru I wld like discuss USIS program in India. Showed him last four copies Reporter which he looked over with much interest. He much impressed with fact Reporter had circulation of 300,000 with requests in writing for additional 350,000 subscriptions. I explained work of our libraries, motion picture units, book publishing, etc. He seemed impressed and by no means displeased with scope our work and with gen good acceptance we receive from Indian public. Told him in future wanted discuss material we putting out and to [Page 1664] contrast it with that of Sov Union and Comm Chi. I again stated we reluctant turn India into propaganda battleground but we must be free meet Comm attacks vigorously.
As I hoped, Nehru himself then brought up political questions. Our discussion gen but covered some detail Korea, Ger and disarmament. Nothing particularly new. I gave him point by point outline our position on Ger and apparent impossibility reaching any agreement with Soviet Union.
Also gave him detailed outline our latest disarmament proposals with which he unfamiliar. He expressed opinion UNGA meeting wld be most important and he earnestly hoped we cld avoid line-up Arab-Asian world versus West on colonial questions such as Tunisia.
This led to Indo-China and we went over same ground in which I suggested he worried too much about 19th century imperialism which fast dying and not enough about 20th century Communist imperialism which much greater threat. He told me he extremely glad I going Southeast Asia and he wld be most interested my reactions on return.
I asked PriMin when Ayyangar leaving for Geneva and he said about week. I asked if he optimistic about results and he smiled and said he always optimist which meant nothing.
However, whole talk was warm, friendly and open despite fact PriMin has bad cold and sore throat. He about to leave for Kashmir for ten day rest.
Chief of Mission here extremely critical lack of contacts with Nehru or competent GOI spokesman since Bajpai’s departure. With exception Nep Amb Bijaya who met Nehru discuss recent cabinet crisis, I informed I only Chief of Mission who has seen Nehru past eight weeks.