Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, Korea and China, Volume VII, Part 2

793B.00/7–851: Telegram

The Chargé in India (Steere) to the Secretary of State

top secret   priority

New Delhi, July 8, 1951—8 p. m.

101. Throughout current discussions with Tibetan officials (Deptel 42, July 6)¹ Emb and ConGen have been greatly hampered by lack secure means communication with Dalai Lama. Latter who is literally God-King is almost inaccessible except to certain traditional advisers and certain members family. Shakabpa and Taktse both left Yatung prior Peiping announcement re conclusion Sino-Tibetan agreement. Written communications are couched in generalities lest they fall into unfriendly hands and are usually carried by runner. In spite this archaic situation, Emb convinced that Dalai Lama has now recd substance US position and that there probably has been no real shift his attitude.

Emb believes Dalai Lama’s presently reported attitude is probably combination fol:

1. Policy temporization (as has been case since June 1950) including reception Chi del, further talks and possible postponement implementation agreement in hope other international developments such as Korea will prevent Chinese absorption Tibet. Such policy wld likely be advocated by: Tibetan nobles and clergy to whom resistance wld seem certain result loss their wealth and poverty in India, whereas compliance might hold or restore wealth in Lhasa; and by Tibetan officials many of whom likely ready appease Commie China.

2. Duress. Emb cannot prove but believes Taktse, although apparently fearful, wld not openly disobey brother’s command by leaving for US unless some secret understanding between them existed. Emb inclined believe Dalai Lama under duress. Previous statements by Tibetan official in India, their communications from Dalai Lama and ltr carried by Taktse indirectly support this thesis as does the rather sudden change in tenor reports from Yatung.

In addition info originally supplied Shakabpa (Embtel 3576, June 11) Emb has communicated further info as subsequently instructed by Dept through both Shakabpa and Taktse and has also summarized in writing through Taktse and another means as indicated in Embtel 3764, June 24.² ConGen reports latter info should have reached Dalai Lama about July 6.

Meanwhile, Emb has scheduled fuller discussion with British (Deptel 38, July 6) in hope they will be willing take some helpful action and at least will urge GOI communicate offer of asylum to Dalai Lama. Emb has also taken action reported in Embtel 100, July 8³ re Tibetan del members. Pending results from foregoing Emb believes developments at Yatung may only be awaited.

Sent Dept priority 101, rptd info Calcutta 17.

Steere

1. Telegram 42 to New Delhi, repeated as number 9 to Calcutta, not printed, asked the Embassy and Consulate General to comment on the Dalai Lama’s apparent shift of attitude and asked if they had any suggestions for a future course of action (793B.00/7–351).
2. Telegram 3764, not printed, stated that the Embassy had some doubts whether the information previously given Liushar and Shakabpa had reached the Dalai Lama and was therefore forwarding the substance of the information to the Dalai Lama through “other sources” (793B.00/6–2451). See despatch 70, July 11, p. 1743.
3. Telegram 100, repeated to Calcutta as number 16, instructed the Consulate General to suggest to Shakabpa that one member of the Tibetan Delegation returning from Peking should remain in Kalimpong, so that he could, if necessary, inform the world that the Sino-Tibetan agreement had been obtained under duress; another member of the delegation should be requested to carry oral messages to the Dalai Lama concerning the importance of his denunciation of the agreement and the necessity of his departure for India (793B.00/7–851).