693.93B/5–3151: Telegram
The Ambassador in India (Henderson) to the Secretary of State
3433. Interview with Bajpai yesterday was requested by Steere to ascertain GOI info and attitudes Indo-Tibetan agreement.
Bajpai stated text agreement just reed from Panikkar agreed with press version in all substantial respects. Panikkar had commented [Page 1692] very briefly, emphasizing that agreement provided for trade and friendly relations with neighboring countries. Bajpai intimated that Panikkar had failed to secure any info during course of negots, and Steere gained impression GOI taken by surprise at extent Tibetan capitulation.
Bajpai endeavored gloss over fact GOI disappointed at Tibetan failure secure better terms and gave unmistakable indication that GOI feels helpless in face this development and is likely accept it without protest. He said India was heir to Brit policy which had sought achieve buffer state in Tibet against Russia and Chi. GOI however was not disposed create or support buffer states. GOI however states throughout centuries Chi influence and control in Tibet had fluctuated with strength of regime in power. Weak Chi govts lost nearly all influence, strong govts regained it. “It was inevitable that present Chi govt shld gain control of Tibet, and there was nothing that GOI could do about it”.
Steere pointed out that announced GOI attitude was same as Brit had been; namely, recognition of Chi suzerainty but with autonomy for Tibet, and that GOI had maintained rep in Tibetan capital. He asked what attitude of GOI toward question wld be in case Dalai Lama shld refuse approve agreement. Bajpai seemed surprised and said GOI wld have consider what attitude it wld then adopt.
Bajpai said he had impression from Tibetan del when in Delhi enroute Peking that it had full power, but he did not seem positive. He added del had requested Indian dipl support in negots; GOI had promised do what it could, but Tibetan del as far as he knew, had never come near Indian Emb Peking. Steere remarked this was not surprising.
Bajpai was asked whether developments wld not affect India’s position such countries as Nepal, Bhutan, Burma, Korea. He admitted it wld, but that GOI had not had time fully consider these matters. He then volunteered in confidence info that mil comite had been estab to survey problem of defense northeastern and eastern borders fol Chi Commie invasion of Tibet last autumn. Comite had recently reported. Recommendations, which GOI was going implement, wld involve strengthening border posts, improvement communications, particularly roads, and efforts improve condition and morale of area inhabitants who had always been neglected. He added, however, that India was not a power in mil sense and there were definite limits to what she could do. He said GOI for example felt it could be of little assistance militarily to Burma; nor could Burma help India. GOI and Burmese Govts, however, both doubted that Chi Commies wld invade Burma in foreseeable future.
[Page 1693]Question was asked whether Sinha1 had reported anything from Lhasa about arrival there eight weeks ago of Chi rep with mil escort as reported by press from Kathmandu quoting Nepalese FonOff sources. Bajpai replied Sinha had reported nothing that nature and he considered info false.
Steere asked what GOI intended do re rep in Lhasa and mil mission Gyantse. Bajpai said “absolutely nothing”. Next move was up to Chi Commies, who had been informed months ago GOI wished keep both missions there.
- S. Sinha, Officer in Charge of the Indian Mission at Lhasa.↩