UN Secretariat Item Scan - Barcode - Record Title Page 32 Date 30/05/2006 Time 9:39:26 AM S-0863-0003-06-00001 Expanded Number S-0863-0003-06-00001 items-in-Peace-keeping operations - India/Pakistan - press clippings Date Created 08/12/1971 Record Type Archival Item Container s-0863-0003: Peace-Keeping Operations Files of the Secretary-General: U Thant: India/Pakistan Print Name of Person Submit Image Signature of Person Submit BOSTON GLOBE, Wednesday, g> December 1971 As the UN .General Assembly Hindu India has foughlt with its Mos- takes over the mission of restoring lem neighbor on two previous ooca- peace between India and Pakistan sionsj once in 1947 and again in 1965, from the veto-locked Security^ and the 1965 question of Kashmir Council, the United States stands in has never been settled. With outside the position of a discredited and help, the more disciplined Moslem disabled bungler: nation of Pakistan was becoming in- dustrialized and increasingly power- By insisting oh the pursuit,, of.- ful vis-a-vis Hindu India. India, quiet (one might say silent) diplo- sharing 1500 "miles of mountain fron- macy on a unilateral basis', this coun- tier with China, had a natural ally 'try significantly weakened•'. the role in Russia while China saw Pakistan of the. United,Nationsi 'and -delayed as a barrier state. In all of this, the action that could have averted full- industrialized United States sided scale war on the subcontinent. with tidy-minded Pakistan against By misjudging the issues, the Mrs. Gandhi's vast, disorganized and United States has turned its back on often petulant feminist regime. the most populous democray in the Certainly India has not been an world — India — in favor of a--racist innocent bystander. It was and is dictatorship in Pakistan. And, at a clearly to India's advantage to see time of shifting alignments in Asia, Pakistan diminished by the loss of only three months before the Presi- its eastern province and to have a dents exploratory visits to Peking friendly, autonomous state at the top and Moscow, we have pressed India " of the Bay of Bengal. And, with into the Soviet camp against China double Pakistan's military forces, • and the United States. India had little to fear from a fight. Though it can fairly be argued But, even before India got into that the United States could not in- the act, it began to appear that tervene in the internal question of Pakistan, too, had reasons for want- suppression by West Pakistan's tall ing a war. Facing an insoluble situa- light-skinned Punjabis of the small tion in East Pakistan, it seems likely dark Bengalis of East Pakistan's that Yahya Kahn felt it would be tropical Ganges Delta, 1100' miles less humiliating to lose Bengal away, we .surely had some obligation through Indian intervention than to recognize that the East Pakistanis through internal rebellion. Further, were being brutally massacred for if India could be persuaded to inter- winning an election (one year ago vene in a limited way, the big pow- this week) which gave them a ma-; ers might be forced to step in with jority of seats in the national assem- the hope that they would compel bly on a pla^fornr of-limited auton- reunification of the two Pakistans omy within the Pakistan" -nation. where Yahya had failed. Though American money spent We believe thlat India fell into the for refugee relief in India was .great- trap, despite the fact that Soviet er than that of all other nations com*- Foreign Minister Grorhyko's rushed bined, we took no visible steps to' visit to New Delhi last August and press for a permanent solution the signing of a new military assis- through the freeing of the East Pak- tance pact was probably an attempt istani leader, Mujibur Rahman, and by Russia to calm militant elements for a political resolution of the crisis in India with promises and to fore- that hiad forced 10 million, Bengalis stall outright war at that time. from East Pakistan into India. In- Now, by abruptly cutting off stead, throughout the summer and nearly $90 million in aid and sancti- fall, the United States seemingly moniously branding India as the took every opportunity to offend "main aggressor," the United States Mrs. Gandhi in. India while refusing , adds insult to injury, possibly prov- to terminate final shipments of arms ing that the little nations like Afri- to General Yaliya 'Khan in Pakistan'. can Somalia are better at world di- This policy ignored the basic facts plomacy than the rest of us. Certain- of life on the subcontinent. Religious ly it is time to hope that world coun- land territorial bitterness between cils will be allowed to move toward India and Pakistan have been intense a swift cease-fire with UN observers ever since the countries .were divided -and a hand n! 1947. Huge ing outsiders.;,-• v ,'-'• NEW YORK TIMES, ¥ednesday, 6 December 1971 oe By BERNARD GWERTZMAN , Special.to TlieNeWVork.Times • . WASHINGTON, Dec. 7—The White House, its position on the war in the Indian subcontinent^ilselted today that the United States --^-i- ^^-I-^^K^. v tave£!ha d; made contact • withborders/They political settlement — i '&<*:'&£*:<— '• . Des_ h leaders in| urgency was conveyed to She 1 ing some autonomy for / 3t' September and October 'akistani Government by the Pakistan — when India a^; East :%Wst^;Tefugees^''int6 in Calcutta. They said the United States. tacked Pakistan without justi- In(^a Bengalis had at first seemed "to But, according to the White fication. Although the White House agree to talks with Pakistani House officials, the Indian Gov- officials defended the United officials on a political solution, ernment was unwilling to wait In an unusual briefing for States decision to pin respon- but the, proposed talks broke for a political solution to be newsmen at the White House, sibility on India for the war- down after India advised them reached. They said this was officials—who declined to be fare, they went out of their only to negotiate through their >articularly disappointing since quoted directly or identified— way to deny that the Nixon leader, Sheik Mujibur Rahman, Pakistan, under American ur,; said the United States had Administration was "anti- who was seized by the Pakisr to return to ci Indian." tani authorities last March. an rule by <!he end of Decem- wrung several concessions from They said that they con- s jer, when officials not directly the Pakistani Government and tinued to regard India as the Contact With Bengalis nvolved "in the East Pakistan had conveyed this information world's largest democratically The White House officials Tepressio'n" would take office. to New Delhi before the out- governed country and pointed said that the United States, in out that the Administration had' jrivaite discussions with Pakis- No Reply From India break of hostilities. continued large-scale aid to ;an, had won agreement for The officials were asked why : The purpose of the briefing India. serious consideration of sub- hey thought India had 'seemed at least in part aimed But they said that, In the stantial autonomy for East Pak- aunched the attack. They said at answering criticism leveled present crisis, India seemed istan that they never received an ex- less desirous of a political solu- This was conveyed to the )lanation from India despite by Senator Edward M. Ken- tion than of dismembering Indian Ambassador, Lakshmi ;wo personal messages from nedy, Democrat of Massachu- Pakistan. Kant Jha, on Nov. 19, the of- President Nixon. In addition setts, Senator Edmund S. As outlined by these officials, ficials said. Mr. Jha was told, they said, Secretary of State Muskie, Democrat of Maine, the United States had engaged they said, that the Pakistanis William P. Rogers had met and others. m a hectic race against time were prepared to discuss a pre- with the Indian Ambassador 18 These critics have attacked to achieve a solution that cise timetable for political au- times, and Henry A. Kissinger would be acceptable to India, tonomy for East Pakistan. But the national security adviser the Administration for brand- to Pakistan, and to the East on Nov. 21, the officials said, had met with the Indian offi ing India as the aggressor in Pakistani secessionist move- the Indians launched their first cial seven times. the war instead of assigning ment without resort to war. attack. It was felt necessary to pu' ^blame to the Pakistani Govern- The Pakistani rebels have pro- The White House officials blame on India for the fighting <ment for claimed- Bangla Desh (Bengal said that they recognized that the officials said, because the Station); as their country and Indian leaders, were under some United States had an obliga iEast Pakistani insurgents, hayeJLwon recognition by India compulsion to take steps to put tion to make clear for the saki an end to the repression in .officials East Pakistan and stop >-Bhe |n;.ri!presenta- flow of refugees., .across. (|e pfvlutojre-.peace \ihat4i;:.cjid not fjor-Jorecpurse; to military ac- matter :who was re- The White' House, official: said that the repressioti'in East Pakistan in; March started the process leading to the war, but iujtan it was clear from the context tj."i.'."if^5 JT» V /• . JDEpLrilp u C|U •:,. i \£*JT, / of the briefing that they felt The; Himalayan mountain i kite India's actions were the direct dom of Bhutan today? became cause of the hostilities. •r •': • •' ' the second nation to, recognizi They said that, after the the'People's Republic of '.-Bangi! fighting began. otiNpy; 2V; the Desh, the -name given- .to,- East United States withheld-'1-as- Pakistan by the rebels.