“The Chinese mind has never been easy for anyone to fathom. But it has often happened since the Communists came to power that while Peking has maintained a hostile posture towards another country, it has also at the same time tried to establish a working relationship with that country. There is really no issue outstanding between China and India that needs to be settled immediately. If some formula can be devised by which Peking can grasp, without appearing to make a volte face in policy, the hand of friendship extended by India, the relations between the two are bound to change for the better.”
APRIL 18, 1975
India’s foreign relations
FOREIGN POLICY DEBATES IN PARLIAMENT GENERALLY GENERATE much heat but the latest discussion in the Lok Sabha turned out to be a tame affair. This is not surprising though, for the Opposition really had no issue over which to castigate the Government. India has had a fairly good year in the field of foreign relations and ties have been strengthened with practically all countries, China being the exception. And if there is any cause for disappointment at all it is that normalisation of relations with the United States and Pakistan has not progressed as fast and smoothly as it should have. In the case of the United States, the high hopes raised by Dr. Henry Kissinger’s visit last October soon suffered deflation when the U.S. followed it up by lifting the embargo on arms to Pakistan. The quantity of arms that is likely to be made available to Pakistan may not be much and the Government of India evidently is not too worried on this score. What gave a rude jolt to all those in the Government and outside who were looking forward to a dramatic improvement in Indo-American relations was, as Mr. Chavan pointed out in his reply to the debate in the Lok Sabha, the timing of the lifting of the embargo and the consequential revival of the old concept of creating a balance of power in the sub-continent. Apart from causing a setback to the improvement of Indo-U.S- relations, Washington’s decision has also had the effect of slowing down the process of normalisation of relations with Pakistan. Mr. Chavan has said, with some justification, that improvement of Indo-U.S. relations now depends on the latter’s acceptance “of our national sensitivity”. However, since it takes two to make a friendship, it would be wise for us, in judging American intentions and actions, not to lose our sense of perspective and also not to forget that the U.S. is a global power with global interests. That closer Indo-U.S. co-operation is being forged in the economic, educational and cultural spheres must be taken as an indication that both Governments are anxious not to let differences over the arms issue cloud overall policy.
Notwithstanding Mr. Bhutto’s tantrums and periodic diatribes against India and his fruitless efforts to tarnish India’s image abroad, relations with Pakistan have been inching forward. Apart from Israel, Pakistan is the only country with which India has no diplomatic relations to-day and this situation would have been corrected by this time if Islamabad had only implemented all the elements of the Simla Agreement. Mr. Bhutto has his hands full with domestic problems but can there by any doubt that he will be better able to deal with them once he has ironed out his differences with India and Bangladesh
Mr. Chavan has pointed out that if relations with China have not improved it is not for want of India’s trying. The Chinese mind has never been easy for anyone to fathom. But it has often happened since the communists came to power that while Peking has maintained a hostile posture towards another country, it has also at the same time tried to establish a working relationship with that country. The SinoAmerican detente is an example. There is really no issue outstanding between China and India that needs to be settled immediately. If some formula can be devised by which Peking can grasp, without appearing to make a volte face in policy, the hand of friendship extended by India, the relations between the two are bound to change for the better.
It is natural that both official and Opposition spokesmen should have sung paeans of praise to Russia for the valuable and timely help it has been giving India in various directions. But the danger inherent in becoming too dependent on one source should not be lost sight of. India’s own self-interest lies in maintaining an evenly balanced relationship with all the important powers, particularly the U.S. and Russia. It is towards this end that the Government of India should constantly bend its efforts, and in the final analysis its foreign policy will be judged by the success it achieves in this regard.
Reference:
The First 100
A Selection of Editorials, 1878-1978, THE HINDU, VOLUME I