India's Prime Minister Indira Gandhi Is due in Washington next week on a mission that could significantly influence the prospects for war or peace in South Asia. If her visit is to advance the chances for peace, it is essential that Americans—and particularly the White House — come to a better understanding of the desperate dilemma posed for India by the seven‐month‐old political crisis in Pakistan.

Early last March, India was stirred by the brightest prospects in years as a result of two remarkable elections on the subcontinent. Mrs. Gandhi's personal triumph in a bold electoral gamble gave her a commanding majority in Parliament with which to institute long‐overdue social and economic reforms. Mrs. Gandhi's New Congress Party swept aside extremist parties of both left and right, eliminating her past dependence on Communist support and greatly reducing the danger of communal friction between Hindus and Moslems, which has posed a constant threat to Indian unity.

Indians were further bolstered by the results of an earlier election in Pakistan which had given Sheik Mujibur Rahman's Awami League, based in Pakistan, a majority in a new constituent assembly. Mujib had called for better relations with India. His prospective role as Pakistan's Prime Minister promised the easing of tensions which had caused both countries to divert to arms resources needed for development.

These bright hopes were rudely shattered by events in Pakistan beginning on March 25 with the arrest of Mujib and the ruthless crackdown on his followers throughout East Bengal. Instead of the restoration of democracy and moderation in Pakistan, Indians were horrified to witness a bloody repression inflicted by a vengeful military regime on Pakistan's Bengali majority. These horrendous acts were accompanied by a revival of Islamic xenophobia focused in the first instance on the Hindu minority in East Pakistan but increasingly directed at India.

This shocking attack on Indian sensibilities became a more direct assault on India's security with the arrival of large numbers of destitute refugees fleeing the terror in East Pakistan. Indian Government estimates, which most foreign observers regard as substantially accurate, put the refugee population to date at more than nine million, a figure that approaches the total flow of refugees in both directions between India and Pakistan during the massive upheavals that followed partition in 1947. And the flood is continuing at an estimated rate of more than 30,000 a day.

India cannot long endure this staggering burden. The financial and administrative cost of caring for the refugees already has delivered a stunning blow to India's development effort. The money costs of refugee care already exceed the net amount of external development assistance that India receives annually. Even more alarming for Indians are the potential social and political repercussions of the refugee influx.

Provision of any reasonable standard of subsistence in the refugee camps in West Bengal can only stir envy and resentment among natives of that most wretched of Indian states.

Already prices have risen, adding to the pressures on the poor, and there has been friction over refugee competition for scarce jobs. Exploitation of the refugee presence by local leftists could upset Mrs. Gandhi's hopes for restoring a degree of stability to tumultuous West Bengal in next spring's state elections.

The predominance of Hindus in the refugee population and their tales of persecution by Pakistani Moslem zealots threaten the uneasy peace between India's Hindu majority and the 70 million Indian Moslems. Pakistan's ugly communalism could spark a revival of Hindu communal parties in the state elections.

In the face of these dangerous provocations, Mrs. Gandhi so far has acted with remarkable restraint. But pressures on the Prime Minister to take some drastic action are rapidly mounting. Many Indians, despairing of third party intervention and especially dismayed by American support for Islamabad, have concluded that only military action by India can create conditions that will enable the refugees to return to East Pakistan in safety. While recognizing the risks of war, they see greater risks for India in allowing the present state of affairs to continue.

It is doubtful whether the United States could, if it would, engineer the quick political fix in Pakistan for which some Indians naively hope. But President Nixon could significantly ease India's dangerous mood of frustration by indicating to Mrs. Gandhi a greater appreciation of India's democratic achievements and a deeper understanding of India's present dilemma than his Administration has done so far and by adopting a more discriminating posture toward the repressive regime in Islamabad.

If the United States will not stand up for freedom and tolerance, where else can this hard‐pressed leader of the world's largest democracy turn?