Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume E–7, Documents on South Asia, 1969–1972
Document 197
197. Telegram 232870 From the
Department of State
to the
Mission to the United Nations
1
2
Washington
,
December 30, 1971, 0016Z
SUBJECT:
UN
Humanitarian Assistance for the East
1.
We have reviewed the question of humanitarian relief in the aftermath of the war and in context of the present situation that exists in the East. In discussing this matter with
Bhutto
on Saturday, latter indicated to Secretary that he understood why
US
would wish to provide humanitarian assistance in East, but he expressed hope that it be done in such a way that there be no implication of recognition of Bangla Desh.
2.
UN
seems to be regrouping itself, and there is hope that they will get on with task of humanitarian relief in East in a reasonably effective way as many of refugees start back. We will want to continue to support humanitarian relief effort in the East, but timing and amounts of our support will have to be carefully reviewed in light of developments in South

Asia. We do not want assumption made, either by international community or by Indians, that
US
will more or less automatically pick up a substantial part of tab.
3.
Whatever we do at least in foreseeable future, will want be through
UN
, in kind rather than dollars, and to assure that our assistance goes to East directly and not to or through India. In this connection, for example, there is considerable amount of
US
grain already in pipeline ready for distribution in East as soon as
UN
can take hold and get it to refugees and others in need. There are also certain administrative costs which
UN
has and will in future incur. We will not want to make any commitments at this time on such costs, pending results of any appeal which
UN
makes to
UN
membership generally to provide help in East. In addition to mandate which
UN
High Commissioner for Refugees has resulting from Third Committee action, there is also resolution adopted by Security Council on Tuesday evening which calls for international assistance and gives
SYG
a specific role in

dealing with such humanitarian problems.
4.
There are definite policy advantages for
US
to be both positive and helpful with respect to humanitarian assistance in East. However, in view of changed situation in Subcontinent resulting from war, we believe that others should be required to contribute very substantially. We will want to do enough to demonstrate our deep concern and concrete desire to relieve suffering by substantial material support of a
UN
relief assistance program, but we do not want
UN
or others to make assumption that they can more or less automatically expect that
US
is going to share a disproportionate part of the burden.
5.
We already have a case in point before us.
UN
has made an informal request for
US
to finance coastal vessels. We understand that
UN
wishes grant to cover costs of chartering ten minibulkers to carry food and other relief supplies into interior of East Bengal. We are fully prepared to participate in internationally supported effort of
UN
as

is evidenced by fact that there is a substantial amount of American grain in pipeline which
UN
should utilize as needed. We find it noteworthy that
UN
automatically has come to
US
unilaterally, to finance such things as minibulkers or provide
UN
with funds to take care of administrative costs, (our assumption is that in early January
UN
will need such money). We do not want to respond overeagerly; whether and what we contribute in this regard will depend on how generous others are willing to be in response to an appeal from
UN
for assistance.
6.
In short,
UN
should understand that
US
will be willing to share in international effort generally but they should not assume more or less automatically that we intend to play a leading role in this regard and assume preponderant share of costs.
END
Johnson