793B.00/8–1351: Telegram
The Consul General at Calcutta (Wilson) to the Secretary of State
114. Late on July 18 opportunity arose send message to Ragashar Shape, Tibetan Defense Min, by [name deleted] . . . . As [name deleted] was leaving early … there was no time obtain instructions. In view, however, of our knowledge of … anti-Communist, pro-US background, … we thought it advisable accept … offer take message to him. Important consideration was fact previous messages had been sent DL only, with consequent probability, in view many instances failure Tibetans confide in each other, that influential Kashag might not be aware US Govt position.
Message given [name deleted] was unsigned and like other similar messages did not contain any ref US Govt. … agreed give message to Ragashar with oral indication of US origin. … acted purely as private individual in this. Emb on being subsequently informed indicated approval.
[Name deleted] returned Calcutta … and reported overtaking DL’s party at Phari Dzong after rigorous 35 hour ride from Gangtok. Ragashar told … there was still good chance of DL coming to India but he (Ragashar) would be unable convince Kashag of US Govt interest without signed letter on US letterhead. We referred this to Emb which expressed view it was unwise transmit such signed letter to Ragashar, also no further message shld be sent him pending instructions from Dept re Deptel 295, Aug 4 to New Delhi as amended Embtel 507 Aug 6.1
[Page 1777]Subsequently we received Deptel 333, Aug 9 to New Delhi2 which although referring only to proposed message to DL, indicates Dept willing leave considerable discretion to Emb.
Last evening Linn and I had talk with [name deleted] who is intelligent and shows clear understanding situation in Tibet as well as Tibetan psychology. … gave us following info from Ragashar who … has throughout been in favor of DL’s coming to India. DL himself desires come India but decided return Lhasa first owing heavy pressure from all sides. Upon arriving Lhasa Tibetan Govt (i.e. Kashag) will negotiate with Chi del re Sino-Tibetan agreement which Tibetan del forced sign without authorization. DL and govt will also be able consult [name deleted] … who is reportedly anti-Commie. If Chi insist on sending large number of troops into Tibet, especially to Indian border, Tibetan Govt will refuse and will urge DL come to India, in which event he would have support of all major factions which he did not have when question discussed Yatung. Tibetans convinced Chi have insufficient troops in either east or west Tibet to force issue now. [Name deleted] did not see DL but asserts foregoing accurate picture situation.
[Name deleted] stated Ragashar’s reaction to message … gave him was one of incredulity as he could not believe if US willing assist, US unwilling make formal pledge. He told … unsigned message would not convince Kashag if, as he believes, opportunity should arise in Lhasa make effective use US offer assistance in bringing about DL’s departure.
I pointed out on basis Emb’s instructions that if any signed message fell into unfriendly hands would most certainly be used our great disadvantage as evidence US endeavor disrupt ostensibly friendly relations between Tib and Chi, also could be to disadvantage Tibetan Govt. [Name deleted] replied such eventuality most unlikely, as no Chi troops in Tibet between Gartok in west where according Ragashar there are only 500, and Chamdo in east where Chi garrison reduced to 2,000 from original 30,000. Only other Chi’s likely to be encountered were 5-man Chi del which incidentally is travelling separately from DL’s party. … discounted reports DL surrounded by Chi agents and sympathizers.
[Name deleted] offered take signed message to Ragashar at … own expense. Alternately we could designate messenger. … said it immaterial which US official signed letter so long as it was formal statement. … suggested duplicate be prepared for 2 Lhasa regents who are expected play important role in discussions. I said I would request instructions and could give no assurances.
[Page 1778]… Matter extremely urgent as DL’s party due Lhasa this week.
I appreciate reasoning behind our previous practice of sending unsigned unidentified messages to Tibetans but believe there is considerable force in arguments presented by Ragashar and [name deleted] we have info from other sources (being transmitted soonest) that DL still desires come India and that Tibs may disavow agreement following discussions in Lhasa. In such circumstances, formal statement our attitude might be deciding factor.
I suggested to [name deleted] that Ragashar might ask DL appoint accredited rep to deal with US reps in India but … points out time insufficient.
If Dept and Emb inclined send formal message, I believe we shld consider [name deleted] offer act as messenger. Shakabpa and [name deleted] are both back in Kalimpong but could only send someone with message. …
Request urgent instructions.
Sent Dept 114, rptd info New Delhi 110.
- In telegram 507, not printed, the Embassy suggested that, since it was not certain if and when the intermediary recommended by the Department in telegram 295 would return to Tibet, the proposed message should be translated into Tibetan, omitting all references to the U.S. Government, and transmitted by courier; it also suggested that the phrase “in India or Ceylon” be added to the end of the second sentence (793B.00/8–651).↩
- Telegram 333, not printed, approved the changes proposed by the Embassy and stated that, although the Department would prefer to have the message delivered orally by the emissary it had previously recommended it left the timing and selection of a messenger to the Embassy’s discretion (793B.00/8–651).↩