793B.00/6–2751: Telegram
The Chargé in India (Steere) to the Secretary of State
3785. Ref Deptel 2252 June 22 rptd info London 6062 and Deptel 2232 June 21 (London 6654 June 18 to Dept).1
Instrs Deptel 2252 carried out in part June 24 with UK HC who just back from Simla. Said had seen no cables past week and completely uninformed.
Nye2 listened closely particularly to reasoning substance of which was we regarded Sino-Tib agreement as additional evidence aggressive intentions Chi Commies; agreement emasculated Tib autonomy which we had recognized; we considered it incumbent upon us, therefore, if Dalai Lama rejected agreement, not only to express sympathy and support to Tibs themselves, but to make our attitude clear before world on such important event. I also observed that if DL or Tib Govt did not soon reject agreement Tib autonomy wld be gone forever.
Nye said that he had expressed view to HMG following announcement Sino-Tib agreement that GOI wld accept it as fait accompli and take no action that might disturb relations with Chi Commies. He had also recommended that HMG attitude shld be recognized paramount interest Ind in Tib and keep step with GOI re this matter. Nye agreed to further conversations soon as he cld prepare himself; eventually talk fixed for today.
Nye began with questions on assurances given Tib reps. In particular had we committed ourselves to make official statement of US sympathy for Tibs regardless attitude of GOI (or UK) or before GOI might indicate its attitude. I said we generally committed to making statement if DL rejected Sino-Tib agreement. Tenor and timing wld depend considerably upon Tib statement. We wld probably want to make our statement soon after Tibs.
Nye observed that US statement might show attitude differing with Ind and therefore embarrassing to Ind and that GOI was likely take offense at and even regard as unfriendly, such US statement particularly if made without consultation with or prior advice to GOI. He even thought that HMG in such event might find itself leaning toward Ind rather than US side in this matter.
I replied that US statement, if made, wld be based upon attitude US (and UK) had long maintained toward status of Tib, i.e. recognition of autonomous Tib under Chi suzerainty. Ind only few months ago had confirmed similar attitude. We proposed maintain that position, [Page 1720] and not recognize even tacitly, fait accompli by Commie Chi. I cld not see what basis GOI wld have for objecting on substantive grounds to statement maintaining US attitude, if GOI shld decide change its position which we hoped it wld not do.
I also said under my instrs our conservation was to endeavor find common basis for both of us approach GOI with view enlisting Ind support if possible for some practical assistance to Tibs in their dilemma. It was also my intention inform MEA about Emb convs with Tibs soon as possible (reftel 2252 para 1). I therefore did not think GOI had basis for taking offense at course US following.
HICOM (with Cumming-Bruce3 also present) took above remarks extremely well, it seemed, as also hope I expressed he might agree that we both shld rep to GOI that it in Ind national interest for DL to reject Sino-Tib agreement and be given asylum in India.
We discussed advent Chi del and bearing on Tib statement. Nye at first thought not necessarily serious if del arrived and proceeded Yatung, but finally seemed accept Emb view that Tib declaration before Chi arrival best.
Nye suggested FonOff and Dept might usefully examine legal aspects of Sino-Tib agreement in re Tib autonomy. I agreed. We agreed Nehru absence Kashmir wld impede GOI action this matter for week. Net effect might not be bad.
Conversation concluded with Nye stating it most useful and he wld communicate HMG for further instrs.
Sent Dept 3785, rptd info London 139, Calcutta unnumbered.