“While (the) Pakistani representative, Malik, referred at length to the present consembly (constituent assembly) he did not say precisely anywhere in (the) statement (that the) present consembly
is (the) one to act on (the) issue.
“In (the) penultimate para(graph) of Malik’s remarks, he said: ‘(The) USSR Govt considers (that the) Kashmir question can be resolved successfully only by giving (the) Kashmir people (the) opportunity (to) decide Kashmir’s constitutional status by themselves without outside interference. This can be achieved if that status is determined by (a) consembly democratically elected by (the) Kashmir people.’ “This ambiguous passage (was) probably used by Soviet apologists to refute (the) charge Malik referred (to the) existing consembly: though evident to (the) (State) Dept, USSR wanted (the) Indians to believe (that the) USSR had (the)
latter in mind. In either case Pak stands to lose.
“Two-faced nature (of the) USSR operation (is) indicated by (the) fact that if Malik’s remarks (are) deemed applicable (to the) present consembly, (the) viewpoint of Sheikh Abdullah and certain
Indian elements is presumably favored; while if (the) Malik statement (is) interpreted as not (to) apply (to the) present consembly, (the) USSR is in (a) position cynically to assure the G(overnment) O(f) P(akistan), as Vyshinsky assured Zafarulla, (that the) USSR position (was) not opposed to (the) GOP position. “Nevertheless it is opposed since (the) selection of (the) new consembly would deny (the) Kashmiri(s) (the) opportunity to vote directly on (the) question (of) accession. Furthermore, (the) statement could in any event have (the) effect (of)
encouraging (the) Abdullah Govt toward autonomy with (the) increased danger (of) Commie (Communist) domination (of) Kashmir.
“(The State) Dept will appreciate continuing information with regard to developments (about) Pak reaction to (the) Malik statement.
(PS) This telegram was repeated for information to London and Paris.