357.AD/9–3050: Telegram
The Ambassador in India (Henderson) to the Secretary of State
niact
[Received September 30—9:43 p. m.]
812. 1. Bajpai sent for me late this afternoon in order to discuss further problems re Korea. He read to me latest communication received this morning from Bevin and Nehru’s reply thereto.
2. Bevin referred to recent changes which had been made in text of proposed UK resolution and expressed hope GOI could now co-sponsor it. Bevin stated UK had not meant to convey in previous message belief that Peking was bluffing in making threats, but rather opinion that Communist Chinese leaders were too statesmanlike to push China into war with UN forces.
3. Nehru’s reply indicated that although GOI might not oppose resolution, it would make clear in GA that it would be preferable for UN before sending armed forces into North Korea to give North Koreans opportunity to lay down arms and to undertake to cooperate loyally with committee proposed in resolution in carrying out aims of UN.
4. Bajpai undertook explain what present GOI position is along following lines:
- (a)
- GOI agrees that under SC resolutions of June, UN forces have right to enter North Korea for military purposes. It believes, however, that in interest of peace, UN forces before entering North Korea should give North Koreans chance to lay down arms and to undertake to permit UN to take jurisdiction over area for purpose of carrying out program set forth in draft resolution.
- (b)
- Period during which this chance should be given could be so short that North Koreans would not be able to gain material advantage militarily for respite.
- (c)
- It is not intent of GOI to oppose resolution. It may abstain or it may even vote for it. Its final decision depends upon facts brought out during discussions in GA and on international developments.
5. Rau has been instructed to make speech in first committee outlining India’s views as set forth above. He is not, however, to undertake to propose any amendments to resolution. His speech will be confined merely to statement of how GOI considers matter might be most effectively handled in interest of peace.
6. Bajpai specifically requests that there be no indication to Rau or any other Indian official that US has knowledge of nature of instructions sent to Rau.
7. It will be noted that there has been a distinct shift in GOI position since my first conversation with Bajpai as reported in mytel 788.1