UNITED NATIONS, N. Y., Nov. 24—Pakistan, uncertain whether she would get the, necessary support from the big powers, was still reluctant today to call for a meeting of the Security Council to consider her charges of a large-scale Indian invasion of East Pakistan.

In the absence of a Pakistani request for a meeting, no other country appeared willing to take the initiative.

The United States, the Soviet Union, China and Britain were understood to have political reasons of their own for avoiding public discussion of the, India‐Pakistan conflict at this stage. Their inaction raised fundamental questions about the effectiveness of the Council in dealing with what all diplomats here regard as an obvious threat to international peace and security.

Secretary General Thant, who since last summer has been vainly pressing for more active role by the United Nations, was said to have no intention of calling for a Council meeting, even though he has the power to do so under the Charter.

Officials said it would be the “height of irresponsibility” for him to do so in the knowledge that the principal members of the Council were deadlocked on the issue.

They added that the only time in United Nations history that a Secretary General look it upon himself to call the Council into session was on July 13, 1960, when Dag Hammarskjold, knowing that he had the backing of the Western powers, called a historic meeting that set the stage for the United Nations operation in the Congo.

Diplomats today gave many reasons to explain the lack of action here, Some were bitter that the Security Council, which met all day, was dis cussing, in the words of one, “sandbags in an African village while large‐scale war is building up in the Indian subcontinent.” The Council meeting dealt with incidents on the border between Senegal and Portuguese Guinea.

Big‐power representatives said that “public diplomacy” on the floor of United Nations bodies was a last resort that should come into play only if all the means of quiet diplomacy had been exhausted. They said that the governments of the United States, the Soviet Union, Britain and probably China, among others, were tricking urgent representations in the Indian and Pakistani capitals for restraint.

All the big powers were said to be reluctant to choose publicly between India and Pakistan on the floor of the Security Council.

China's Position

The arrival at the United Nations of China, which has given strong public support to Pakistan, has strengthened the Pakistani position in the Council. Pakistani diplomats now feel, for the first time that they have an unconditional friend among the five veto‐wielding permanent members, but even China, some Sources say, may prefer to avoid seeing the “third world” publicly divided at the United Nations.

Similarly, the Soviet Union, which has close treaty ties with India, is not anxious to take a public position that could drive Pakistan permanently into the arms of the Chinese, the sources added.

They pointed out also that Britain has close ties with both countries and does not want to widen an already painful rift in the Commonwealth by having both denounce each other in the Council.

These hesitations would he swept aside only if the big powers came to the conclusion that a major border war had already started, one diplomat said. Most diplomats here feel that the Indian incursions; though real, have nowhere reached the proportions contended by the Pakistanis.

Agha Shahi, the Pakistani delegate, today said that he had received no instructions yet from his Government to seek a Council meeting. He was holding consultations with friendly delegations, including the, Chinese.

Pakistan, it is reported. does not want to go into the Council if all she can obtain is a resolution calling for an immediate cease‐fire. This would freeze the present military positions and make it impossible for the Pakistani Army to press its fight against the guerrilla forces.

The Pakistanis, it is felt, must hold out at the very least for resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of the Indian forces that have crossed the border. But the Soviet Union is thought likely to veto such resolution because it would imply a condemnation of India.