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

293.1122/7–1851: Telegram

The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Gifford) to the Secretary of State

confidential

London, July 18, 1951—2 p. m.

352. Embtel 194, July 10.¹ Representations in Peiping on behalf foreign residents of China.

UKHC New Delhi has reported he not hopeful GOI wld wish Panikkar participate in joint representations but is prepared ask Bajpai and agreeable to Lamb in Peiping asking Panikkar whether they agreeable to such approach.

Meanwhile, FonOff in receipt of long telegram from Lamb in Peiping commenting about as fols:

(a) Parallel representations wld doubtless be strengthened by participation Panikkar who apparently agreeable.

(b) Any approach to GOI cld be more effectively made by UK rather than by US and UK jointly.

(c) Panikkar has reported to Lamb substance of talk he recently had with Sov Amb Raschin² whom Panikkar approached in latter’s capacity of Dean of Diplomatic Corps on subject ill-treatment of foreigners in China, mentioning arbitrary withholding of exit permits, imprisonment incommunicado, and failure of CPG respond to representations by foreign diplomatic missions on such subjects. Panikkar referred especially to situation Catholic nuns in Nanking and Canton. Raschin said to have responded sympathetically, to have endorsed Panikkar’s initiative in presenting problem to him as dean, and to have volunteered to raise issue at first opportunity with CPG at “higher level than vice Fon Min”. Raschin mentioned his dissatisfaction over failure CPG reply to his own protest on subject arrest Sov national. Panikkar promised inform Lamb any results Raschin might obtain from talk with CPG.

(d) Although Lamb feels above reported Panikkar-Raschin conversation encouraging from point of view joint representations, in circumstances he believes it may not be necessary attempt concerted approach; Panikkar’s approach through Raschin, independent of prodding by other Western representatives, might carry greater weight with CPG. In any case, important present spontaneous interest of Panikkar not be dampened by any suggestion US prompting. Lamb promised discuss problem with Panikkar and report soonest.

Gifford

1. The reference telegram reported that the British Chargé in Peking, Lamb, was consulting other representatives in Peking concerning possible multilateral representations on behalf of foreign nationals and that he thought Panikkar, the Indian Ambassador, would be willing to cooperate (293.1122/7–1851).
2. N. V. Roschin, Soviet Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China.