Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume E–7, Documents on South Asia, 1969–1972
Document 91
91. Telegram 13362 From the
Embassy in India
to the
Department of State
1
2
New Delhi
,
October 26, 1970, 1528Z

Subject:
US
Arms for Pakistan
1.
Persistently critical Indian press and other comment on arms decision reached new heights of volume and intensity in recent days stimulated by headlined reports from New York October 25–26 that Mrs.
Gandhi
had told Secretary
Rogers
privately, and
US
people on “Meet the Press,” that
US
arms will harden Pakistan’s attitude toward India. Ambassador’s inadvertent non-appearance at airport and non-acceptance by Mrs.
Gandhi
of President’s dinner invitation were also exploited to symbolize deep chill in Indo-American relations evoked by arms decision. As consequence, average attentive Indian’s interest on arms issue was heightened and public manifestation of popular displeasure increased.
2.
Major themes in criticism/commentary on arms decision in large number editorials and “analyses” October 24–26 (texts
USINFO
) were: (A)
US
shoring up pro-American elements in West Pakistan establishment prior to election, although these elements have always had vested interest in being anti-Indian

(National Herald (NH) October 26.) (B) It apparent to all, including us, that Pakistan arming self against India. In lengthy article October 26, “
US
Arms supply to Pakistan—the why and what of it,” NH noted, “unlike the fifties, there is no pretense in America this time that Pakistan requires American arms for defense against communists. American officials know full well why Pakistan wants these ... Pakistan has openly said its arms build-up is aimed against India.” Edit in October 26 Patriot also played this theme. (C) With each promise of arms Pakistan becomes more bellicose toward India. Hindustan Times, in reporting October 25–26, Mrs.
Gandhi
’s talks in New York, cited
Yahya Khan
’s comments on Kashmir during
UN
speech as evidence
Pak
intransigence growing. NH edit October 24 hit same chord: “Every time there is fresh spurt of
US
military aid to Pakistan her leaders have assumed aggressive attitudes, and their first step is to raise matter at UN.” (D)
US
decision contributes to arms race which will bleed India economically and perhaps drive country toward acquisition of nuclear weapons. Statesman of October 24, and NH October 26 wrote that most recent discussions of India’s numerical military superiority over Pakistan failed take into account length of India’s borders, country threatened by two putative enemies, and Pakistan’s military better-equipped than India’s (sic). According to analysis, “spurt given to armament race in subcontinent by
US
is bound generate pressures in this country ... for more arms and larger defense allocations creating new strains on our finances. Second, extremist elements in country will step up activities to undermine democratic institutions and orderly way of life ... One development, not taken into consideration by American administration, is that public opinion in India may now compel government to go nuclear and make dreaded ‘bomb’. This will not only escalate armament race between various countries of world, but will also encourage proliferation of nuclear armament.” (E) Ironic that
US
has decided try wean Pakistan from China through arms supply at time when
USSR
has concluded it cannot or should not do so. (In reporting
GOI
talks with Secretary Rogers, Hindu wrote, “there have been reports Soviet Union has actually slowed down its arms deliveries to Pakistan.) NH edit on “Indo-
US
Relations,” October 26, said, “... Soviet arms supply, also meant to wean her (Pakistan) from
US
and China, disturbed Indian people

much, and it was made known. While Soviet Union has withdrawn from race,
US
has resumed Dulles policy, and this has disturbed even traditional Indian friends of US. Soviet Union has, besides, had the achievement of the Tashkent declaration ... when India wants nothing but peace at home and abroad and when her main attention devoted to development, no big power which disturbs political and economic progress in region can be considered friendly ...
US
administration doing grave harm and American people not yet returning to normalcies of peaceful society. Till that normalcy achieved, Indo-
US
relations cannot be normal.”
3.
Indian press reports on
Yahya Khan
’s comings and goings in
US
have alleged that if
Yahya
were to see President in private session as rumored,
Yahya
would ask that arms package include tanks and more planes.
4.
In report from New York October 24, Indian Express’ Parasuram reported that only unequivocal statement from President
Nixon
that there will not be further exceptions to restrictive arms policy in favor Pakistan likely allay Indian fears of long-term
US
intentions. This same comment frequently made privately to EmbOffs by working level
GOI
officials, media leaders and other intelligentsia.
5.
L.N. Mishra, Minister of State for Foreign Trade, and previously Minister of State Defense Production, reportedly told newsmen in Patna October 23, that present
US
decision “discriminates” against India. Mishra said that although America had promised in wake of 1962 Indo-China war to modernize Indian ordnance factories,
US
, consistent with its decision suspend arms aid to India and Pakistan at time Indo-
Pak
war, had, in September, 1965, understandably ordered six ships carrying materiel to turn around, though near Indian shores.

US
had explained it did not wish contribute to tension. According Mishra, India cannot feel safe with new prospect of American “bombers” arriving soon in Pakistan. (All major papers except Patriot reported Mishra’s remarks as above. According Patriot, Mishra also said that
US
and Soviet arms to Pakistan cannot be equated, since Soviets and socialist bloc have stood by India at times of stress and helped with arms, whereas
US
and
UK
always let India down in hour of need. Patriot alleges Mishra said Soviet Union and other socialist countries have always made military supply deliveries ahead of schedule, while
US
and
UK
never supplied on time.)
6.
Weekend brought further demonstrations and visitors to
USIS
and Embassy. New Delhi 13279 reported forward bloc demonstration at
USIS
. M.L. Sondhi, Jana Sangh MP, brought few of Delhi’s “common people” to see
DCM
October 24 to protest arms decision. Ruling Congress representatives from party committee in Delhi suburb left at Embassy October 25 memorandum to President calling arms decision “unfriendly ... fatal to peace in Asia,” and certain to lead to greater Indian arms expenditures. October 26 at Kanpur, Ambassador’s car surrounded and his convocation speech interrupted by jeering students.
7.
October 26, K.L. Gupta, Jana Sangh MP, told EmbOff arms supply will be main issue in next session parliament. He alleged ruling Congress already in touch with Jana Sangh to work out common line. Gupta lamented that Mrs.
Gandhi
has played issue so cleverly (including declining President’s dinner) that Jana Sangh will have to toe her line. He said most Jana Sangh (and, by implication, Mrs.
Gandhi
’s other opponents) can do is contrast
GOI
reaction to American arms with its reaction to Soviet arms to Pakistan. As footnote, he said that in long run Jana Sangh (ultra nationalist) will benefit from “anti-Indian” decision of US, an estimate which many thinking Indians have made to EmbOffs past three weeks.
Keating
Contents
Press Release
Preface
Sources
Abbreviations