Panditji's China policy can be summarized as 1 ounce of Delusion, 1 ounce of Misinformation and 2 ounces of stupidity. Panditji repeatedly sacrificed India's national interest in trying to take into account 'larger considerations' i.e. his 2 favorite bogeys - World Peace and The need for a continued Sino-Indian friendship.
Let me elaborate a bit.
As Arun Shourie ji has shown in his book- 'Self-Deception; India's China Policies - Origins, Premises, Lessons' , India's China Policy during Panditji's rule had a 2 step response to any Chinese Aggression.
1. Suppress Information
2. Deny
The phenomenon of our leaders(including the present PM Narendra Modi) repeatedly misleading the nation into reading more into statements and Joint Declarations than is warranted isnt new. It has rather ancient roots(I will elaborate on that some other day). In contemporary times, it started with Panditji.
Yes, you guessed it right- Tibet. Most of you may have read Sardar Patel's prophetic letter to Panditji warning him about the imperialistic designs of the Chinese. If not, do read it here- http://www.friendsoftibet.org/main/sardar.html
While the Chinese were screaming that they will 'Liberate Tibet', Pandiji in his delusion thought that no such thing will happen as it would be counterproductive for the Chinese themselves given the precarious position of their UNSC seat. He was deluded enough to think that the Chinese were afraid that the world would get a bad impression of them !!
When they did take over Tibet, Panditji started advocating meek acceptance. That didnt shock me. What shocked me were the reasons he gave for doing so-
1. ' In the long term view, India and China are two of the biggest countries in Asia bordering on each other and both with certain expansive tendencies, because of their vitality ' . Do notice how he paints India as having expansive tendencies to justify not responding to China's aggression even though India had born the brunt of aggression by outsiders for over a millennia by then.
2. ' We cannot save Tibet, as we should have liked to do, and our very atempts to save it might well bring greater trouble to it. It would be unfair to Tibet for us to bring this trouble upon her without having the capacity to help her effectively. It may be possible, however, that we might help Tibet to retain a large measure of her autonomy. That would be good for Tibet and good for India. As far as I can see, this can only be done on the diplomatic level and by avoidance of making the present tension between India and China worse. '
Notice how Panditji uses 'as we should have liked to do'. This should be read in the context of the fact that he had kept the Tibetan Delegation in Delhi asking for his support waiting for months and when he did meet them, refused to do anything except help them diplomatically. Panditji still harbors the delusion that China would grant Tibet a large measure of autonomy. He then talks about diplomatic solutions. This should be read in the context that immediately after writing this , Panditji declares
'I think that in no event should we sponsor's Tibet's appeal. I would think that it would be a good thing if the appeal is not heard in the Security Council or the General assembly. ......
Tibet I think is still grateful for the help Panditji gave 'diplomatically'!!
Note to readers- I have heavily drawn from Arun Shourie ji's book for this post.
Let me elaborate a bit.
As Arun Shourie ji has shown in his book- 'Self-Deception; India's China Policies - Origins, Premises, Lessons' , India's China Policy during Panditji's rule had a 2 step response to any Chinese Aggression.
1. Suppress Information
2. Deny
The phenomenon of our leaders(including the present PM Narendra Modi) repeatedly misleading the nation into reading more into statements and Joint Declarations than is warranted isnt new. It has rather ancient roots(I will elaborate on that some other day). In contemporary times, it started with Panditji.
Yes, you guessed it right- Tibet. Most of you may have read Sardar Patel's prophetic letter to Panditji warning him about the imperialistic designs of the Chinese. If not, do read it here- http://www.friendsoftibet.org/main/sardar.html
While the Chinese were screaming that they will 'Liberate Tibet', Pandiji in his delusion thought that no such thing will happen as it would be counterproductive for the Chinese themselves given the precarious position of their UNSC seat. He was deluded enough to think that the Chinese were afraid that the world would get a bad impression of them !!
When they did take over Tibet, Panditji started advocating meek acceptance. That didnt shock me. What shocked me were the reasons he gave for doing so-
1. ' In the long term view, India and China are two of the biggest countries in Asia bordering on each other and both with certain expansive tendencies, because of their vitality ' . Do notice how he paints India as having expansive tendencies to justify not responding to China's aggression even though India had born the brunt of aggression by outsiders for over a millennia by then.
2. ' We cannot save Tibet, as we should have liked to do, and our very atempts to save it might well bring greater trouble to it. It would be unfair to Tibet for us to bring this trouble upon her without having the capacity to help her effectively. It may be possible, however, that we might help Tibet to retain a large measure of her autonomy. That would be good for Tibet and good for India. As far as I can see, this can only be done on the diplomatic level and by avoidance of making the present tension between India and China worse. '
Notice how Panditji uses 'as we should have liked to do'. This should be read in the context of the fact that he had kept the Tibetan Delegation in Delhi asking for his support waiting for months and when he did meet them, refused to do anything except help them diplomatically. Panditji still harbors the delusion that China would grant Tibet a large measure of autonomy. He then talks about diplomatic solutions. This should be read in the context that immediately after writing this , Panditji declares
'I think that in no event should we sponsor's Tibet's appeal. I would think that it would be a good thing if the appeal is not heard in the Security Council or the General assembly. ......
Tibet I think is still grateful for the help Panditji gave 'diplomatically'!!
Note to readers- I have heavily drawn from Arun Shourie ji's book for this post.
No comments:
Post a Comment