United States decisions to build a defensive ring around the Soviet Union have more than once been made at the risk of fanning local disputes. Last week, the National Security Council voted to extend military assistance to Pakistan, in spite of the disapproval of India's Nehru. The decision to grant arms aid comes at a particularly delicate moment; the Nehru controlled assembly in the Himalayan state of Kashmir, claimed by both India and Pakistan, recently voted to ratify annexation by India in spite of an earlier agreement for a plebiscite. Particularly now, Nehru fears that Pakistan will turn her new weapons against India over the Kashmir issue.

The action of the Kashmir assembly is in direct violation of a United Nations ruling for a popular plebiscite. Since the people of Kashmir are predominantly Moslem, it seems certain that they would have elected accession to Pakistan, not India. In the past, India and Pakistan have successfully negotiated questions equally touchy, such as plans for the administration of railroad stores and refugee bank deposits. The United States should press for further agreement; until the tension in Kashmir is eased, Nehru's protests will continue. The Kashmir negotiations should find an immediate place on the U.N. agenda.

Agreement must come before any arms aid can be extended. The State Department should also wait until Pakistan and Turkey complete their pact for military, economic, and cultural co-operation. Although long negotiations may slow defense plans, U.S. delay would help show Nehru and the Indian people that arms are for defense against Russia, not for local aggression. While no amount of diplomatic finesse will completely stifle Indian protests, careful negotiations will help muffle them.