501.BC Kashmir/7–3049: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom 1
priority
2686. Pls deliver fol personal msg from Sec for Bevin.2 I am sure that you share my gratification at the successful outcome of the IndPak mil mtg at Karachi. Agreement on a definitive cease-fire line is a significant step forward which shld, temporarily at least, reduce the tension in Ind and Pak which was causing you concern at the time your personal msg of July 223 was dispatched. It is, of course, essential that the UNCIP take advantage of this favorable development by submitting to the parties at an early date a concrete proposal for the solution of the remaining truce problems.
Although we wld prefer that the Comm immediately submit our proposal of arbitration, we recognize that the success of the Karachi talks will incline certain members of the Comm to revert to the idea of recommending a high level, Ind–Pak polit mtg. Our view is that it is doubtful that both parties wld agree to polit talks and more doubtful that these talks, if held, wld be productive. Mr. Macatee will press this view in the Comm, but it is quite possible that he will be unable to prevent the formal proposal of a polit mtg to Ind and Pak.
Shld this proposal be rejected by one or both parties or shld the mtg prove unproductive, we are confident that the Comm wld then [Page 1729] turn to arbitration. Mr. Macatee reports that all his colleagues now recognize the merit and practicability of the arbitration procedure and are prepared to support our proposal if the polit talks fail.
We have carefully weighed your suggestion (a) in the light of the present position. I doubt that it wld be advisable for us to intervene with direct approaches to the parties just when the Comm has succeeded in bringing them into agreement on the cease-fire line. Moreover, we believe that the risk of rejection wld be greater if arbitration were proposed by our two Govts than if embodied in a recommendation of the Comm which we supported.
The action proposed in your suggestion (b) wld appear unnecessary as the Arg and Belg Reps have already assured Mr. Macatee that they will support arbitration. It is true that this support may become effective only after a proposal of joint polit talks has failed, but our two Govts cld hardly make dipl démarches to prevent the Comm from exploring the possibilities of further direct negots between Ind and Pak. I might say in that connection that Amb Austin has discussed with the Arg Alternate Rep SC, Dr. Muñoz, our proposal of arbitration and our intention to give this proposal, when made by the Comm, pur strong dipl support. He suggested to Dr. Muhoz that his Govt might like to do likewise.
As regards your suggestion (c), Mr. Macatee has standing instructions to obtain adoption of our arbitration proposal by the Comm as soon as possible.
You may also be interested to know that I have discussed with the Pres our interest in the peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute. The Pres has agreed to dispatch, immediately after the Comm has submitted the arbitration proposal, a personal appeal to the PriMins of Ind and Pak urging acceptance of the Commas recommendation. The parallel approach planned by PriMin Attlee will be very welcome, and helpful.
Although we may have to acquiesce in further delay, I am still hopeful that the Comm will recommend arbitration to Ind and Pak, and that with the support of our two Govts and possibly that of other Govts, the parties will accept this proposal.