that took that matter to the Security
Council when aggression was committed by Pakistan, and this has been
admitted by the United Nations Commission — that aggression was committed."
"Mr. Ambassador, I have no hope of
getting the Kashmir question solved
on this program," stated Mr. Lindley.
I would like to go to the question of
aid to India. The United States is providing some technical assistance and
some economic assistance to India at
the present time, isn't it?"
"It is 'some' in relation to the total
nagnitude of our plan," replied Mr.
Mehta, "but it has been most useful."
He adeleel that this constituted economic as well as technical assistance.
"There have been no strings attached to that which were embarrassing (o India?" asked Mr. Lindley.
Mr. Mehta agreed that there had
Nehru Speaks of "Strings"
"Why is it that your Prime Minister,
Mien he discusses these matters, so
often intimates that there is a problem
"f strings attached?" inquired Mr.
Lindley. "He doesn't say that our aid
''as strings attached, but I see in his
Beech on March 29th he saiel that,
there is nothing wrong about the
Pcher countries from their own view-
Point or any other giving aid to the
development of these countries (mean-
lng the underdeveloped countries).'
•Oat is a direct epiote. Then he goes
°n to say, 'However, what we have to
•Vatch about — they may sometimes
rani something in exchange.' He
''"csu'l seem to realize that we have
an interest in the survival of India
^hicli we've demonstrated by putting
his i iu nicy in without any strings attached. Why does he keep on talking
Is there any reference there that
•he United States has given aid to
"dia with strings?" queried Mr.
'No. he doesn't mention the United
Jtsites at all," replied Mr. Lindley.
fhit he does say 'they' — and the use
**' 'they' would logically refer to the
"''"at powers. . . ."
Mr. Mehta indicated disagreement
°n this score, stating that Mr. Nehru
v°ulel not accept aid of that nature.
. "I think you will admit, Mr. I.ind-
•'>'." he continued, "that there is a
F*tain amount of irritation in this
gUntry among at least certain sections
P the people when aid is given to a
*>cts Forum News, October, 1956
country that does not follow the same-
foreign policy as you elo. Ancl similarly there is a feeling in other countries that they have an obligation to a
single individual country. While this
is not a question of any kind of 'owner's condition' laid down for the aid,
there is a psychological feeling, certainly, which could be averted if it
were possible to channel this aid
through the United Nations, where
the country itself could give some assistance."
Mr. Mehta made reference to India's
participation in the Colombo Plan,
pointing out that under that plan India
also gives some technical assistance
with what little resources it has.
"But, Mr. Ambassador, why should
India object to taking aid directly from
the United States?" Mr. Lindley asked.
"Well, it does not object, or else it
wouldn't have taken it," Mr. Mehta
replied flatly, refusing to classify the
"psychological feeling" he had referred to as "objection."
"I am sure they wouldn't," pursued
Mr. Lindley, "but here is Mr. Nehru
(as you have just said) favoring giving aid through the United Nations.
What's wrong with the way it's being
Collective Source Preferred
Ambassador Mehta's reply indicated
that in the eyes of India, at least, there
would be less feeling that strings of
foreign control accompanied foreign
aid if this were channeled through tbe
United Nations ancl reached recipient
nations from a collective source. "It is
not myself alone who say this," he
pointed out. "Mr. Stevenson has said
this. Mr. Cabot Lodge has more or less
supported this. Mr. Lester Pearson has
saiel something similar. Monsieur Pineau has said this."
Mr. Mehta was most emphatic, and
using his preceding remarks as a
springboard, launched into the subject
uppermost in American minds as one
upon which India and the United
"Now you think," he continued,
"that every proposition that is made
that is not liked by you is made by an
Indian. That is not so. China's admission to the United Nations is not urged
by India only. I can mention a dozen
countries, including Sweden ancl many
European countries which have embassies in Peiping! You know that."
Mr. Lindley indicated that he was
aware of that fact.
Changing the subject at an oppor
tune moment, Mr. Lucas reopened the
question of Kashmir, asking Ambassador Mehta if India would agree to a
plebiscite there, which drew the reply
that Prime Minister Nehm had made
it clear that conditions for plebiscite
elo not exist at present.
"What are those conditions?" inquired Mr. Lucas.
"Well, the first condition is that
there is no agreement about the number of troops that are to be retained in
Kashmir." replied Mr. Mehta. "We
don't think it would be a fair plebiscite just now. Secondly, you also xx-ill
realize that if the plebiscite had been
held in the beginning, it would have
been another thing. It is so difficult
now, you see. You must realize India
today has 45 million Moslems. It is
not true to say that because there are
a majority of Moslems in one place,
certain areas should go to the Moslems. What should we do? Supposing
the Kashmir question i.s settled on the
religious issue. What then do we do
ee ith our 42 or 45 million Moslems?
In other words, xve are trying to build
a secular state, and in that secular
state we do not admit the principle
that man's religion has anything to do
xvith his nationality."
"Mr. Ambassador, I wonder if you
could specifically indicate the things
that this country ought to do to improve its standing with India," inquired Mr. Lindley. "What definitely
should we do?"
Would Prevent Competition in Aid
"Well before that may I revert one
minute to the previous question?"
asked Mr. Mehta. "What I was saying
about this channeling of United Nations aid. I realize that this may not be
a completely practical proposition at
the moment. But you must realize that
you can also obviate certain amounts
of competition by this method. What
happens today? Your feeling is that
some country says. 'You give us aid —
otherwise we will go to the other side';
or they will say to the other side, 'You
give us aid. or otherwise we will go to
the United States.' Now that could be
avoided. Your feeling is, for example,
that Soviet Russia wants to give aid in
order to spread communism. If it is
done through the United Nations there
is some control ancl some supervision.
Secondly, those countries which say
they arc prepared to help if it is
through tbe United Nations will be
put to a test."
Mr. Wilson pointed out that we had