Secret Telegram
November
1, 1971
From Amconsul, Hong Kong
To: Secretary State, Washington DC
Subject: Peking Policy in Indo-Pak Dispute
Summary: China's operational goal in South Asia at the present time is, we
believe, to avoid an Indo-Pak war and to encourage a political settlement of
the East
Pakistan problem. Should, however, a fullscale war begin, the PRC, while
supplying material aid to Pakistan, would probably support or even lead
diplomatic efforts in the UN and elsewhere to halt the fighting. If Western Kashmir should be threatened, the
Chinese might possibly intervene with the limited objective of restoring the
military balance in this section and preventing the total defeat of the Pakistan government. End summary.
1. Peking has remained silent on the recent reported
clashes on the Indian-Pakistan border and it has not reported the GOP's latest
charges of Indian provocations. This restraint is in keeping with the PRC's
cautious policy in regard to the growing crisis on the subcontinent and what
we believe is its determination not to be directly involved and to encourage a
political settlement. Following is our assessment of China's objectives and likely
intentions in the area.
2. Peking hopes to maintain its present high-level of
influence in Pakistan while eventually improving
its relations with India. As Chou told a Yugoslav
interviewer in August, the PRC hopes to promote "the liberation of the
Indian subcontinent from control by the two superpowers," meaning
essentially the reduction of Soviet influence. Main Chinese strategic goals in
South
Asia
for avoiding war and securing its borders against encroachment or submersion by
India or by USSR acting through India, would not be served either
by a regional war or by continuing hostility in Sino-Indian relations. Either
development would only increase India's dependence on the USSR. Despite these strategic
goals and although Pakistan today is not as important to Peking as it was in
the years before the PRC's isolation was reduced, China still does not wish to
be seen as reneging on its pledge to "firmly support" Pakistan to
oppose "aggression and interference."
3. Consequently, we believe that China's major
operational goal at the present is to avoid an Indo-Pak war and to discourage
the forcible detachment of East Pakistan from the west - the latter not because
the Chinese have any vital interests in the unity of Pakistan but because they
wish to avoid a Pak humiliation which would indirectly embarrass China, boost
India's confidence in its future dealings with the PRC, and make the Soviets
appear to be the arbiter of events in South Asia. Given the numerical
superiority of the Indian army over that of the Paks, the apparent Indian
determination to support the guerrilla war in the East, the problems faced by
the West Paks in subduing the Mukti Bahini, and the widespread unpopularity in
the world of the Pak Government's policies in the East, China's interests would
seem to be best served by a political settlement of the East Pakistan issue - even
if it should lead in a rather short period to effective independence for
Bangla Desh.
4. Although the Chinese have largely ignored the
Indian-Soviet treaty, as Gromyko suggested on August 13, Peking has drawn "appropriate
conclusions" about the accord. The Chinese, we believe, have from the
beginning seen the treaty as directed at the containment of China in line with Brezhnev's
"collective security" arrangement. Chou told the same Yugoslav
interviewer that the treaty has extended the Soviet threat to China's southern borders.
5. Beyond this, Peking also has probably
interpreted the treaty as a Soviet effort both to exploit and to counter the
impact of developments in Sino-US relations. The Chinese may also believe that
the treaty, if not actually designed for such purpose, will in fact be used to
screen Indian support for the independence movement in East Pakistan and to
checkmate Chinese moves on behalf of Islamabad should a Pak-Indian war break
out. Either development would embarrass the Chinese.
6. We do not know if any contingency planning for an
Indo-Pak conflict has taken place between Islamabad and Peking, but we doubt that it has.
President Yahya Khan has privately said that in the event of fighting, "China will support us" (Islamabad 9848) and Chou EnLai
recently told authoress Han Su-Yin that Chinese "support" would
follow external aggression against Pakistan. But the vague wording of
Chinese pledges of "support", the reserved treatment of the crisis in
Chinese public media, the failure of Chou En-Lai to dramatize Peking's support
with a visit to Pakistan, and Chinese avoidance of a "meaningful
dialogue" with Pakistani officials on the developing situation (Islamabad
9848) have apparently been intended to discourage Pak expectations that the
PRC will intervene with military force in Indo-Pak war. The Chinese apparently
hope that their reserved expressions of support for Pakistan, while retaining the PRC's
position as number one friend of the Paks, will discourage the GOP's taste for
war and promote its resignation to a political face-saving settlement. Peking has reportedly treated
coolly a GOP probe about the possibility of a Sino-Pak treaty similar to the
Soviet-Indian accord (HK 5888). And although the PRC won Pakistan's acclaim with
its early relief and rehabilitation assistance and it has reportedly agreed to
assist the Paks in equipping two newly-raised divisions (replacing units
transferred to East Pakistan), the Chinese have apparently been dragging their
feet on actual deliveries (HK 5818).
7. Meanwhile, the Chinese are apparently attempting
to restrain the Indians from precipitous action by holding open the door to improved
Sino-Indian relations and by intimations that Indian subversion in East Bengal could lead to serious
problems in West Bengal. Moreover, the Chinese may expect that India's uncertainty about the
nature of the Chinese "support" will, despite the Soviet treaty,
still tend to deter Indian aggression. Chou En-Lai in recent interviews has
stated China's interest in a "mutual
understanding" with India, but he has also stressed that the East Pakistan
issue is an internal Pak problem and that Peking is concerned only with the
question of foreign interference. On the other hand, Peking has avoided the subject of
the East
Pakistan refugees and so far as we know it has made no offer to help solve
this problem, which is the major provocation of Indian impatience.
8. Should a full-scale Indo-Pak war begin, the PRC,
we believe, would probably support or even lead diplomatic efforts to halt the
fighting. For this purpose, the PRC's new position in the UN would be very
useful in mustering world support for a ceasefire. Whether or not hostilities
break out, Peking may push for a UN solution to the problem. In this way Peking could further the GOP's
objective of involving the UN in a peace-keeping role on the Indo-Pak border.
9. Should the fighting, however, continue, the
Chinese will very likely do what they can to help supply the Pak forces in both
the East and the West. Although the ability to freely cross Burmese air space
would be of value to the Chinese for immediate logistic support to the East,
supply by sea would seem to be the only practical way for the Chinese to move
large amounts of materials to either East or West Pakistan. PRC capabilities for such
sea re-supply would seem to be adequate.
10. In the event of Indo-Pak hostilities, Peking might make threatening
noises in order to divert Indian attention, but given the direct Soviet
commitment, and the improved defensive position of the Indian army, the
Chinese are likely to be more cautious in such verbal action than they were in
1965. The only danger of direct Chinese intervention, we believe, might be in
the event that Indian forces either threatened the Pakistani-controlled portion
of Kashmir, an area which of course
borders on the PRC, or seemed on the verge of toppling the Islamabad
Government. Direct Chinese military action within West Pakistan would generally be seen as
defensive and therefore presumably less likely to spark Soviet retaliation
against the PRC.
11, There has been no indication of recent military
shifts by the Chinese in anticipation of hostilities. The latest OB carries a PLA strength of
47,000 men in the Sin-Kiang military region but the existence of 600,000 to
1,000,000 PLA production and construction corps personnel in the region may
provide a capability for rather rapid mobilization of additional support and
logistic forces in the Tibet military district, where
there are only about 76,000 PLA forces. Although this is a relatively small
number, it should be remembered that in 1962, Chinese attacks across the
Northeast frontier agency were carried out by only 20,000 men.
12. If western Kashmir was threatened and the
Chinese did actually elect to send volunteers into West Pakistan, they would presumably do
so to restore the military balance in the Western sector, and to prevent the
total defeat of the Pakistan Government. At the same time, the PRC would very
likely accelerate its diplomatic activity for an immediate ceasefire.
Source: Bangladesh Liberation War and the Nixon House 1971, Enayetur
Rahim and Joyce L. Rahim, Pustaka Dhaka, p – 298-302.