Sir, there is one psychological weakness in America’s position. America has fought wars. They have fought war in Vietnam and lost it. They have fought war in Korea and learned their bad lesson there. During the Second World War they fought wars on the Continent of Europe and, of course, got the credit.
It is good that they tried to save Democracy at that time and defeated Fascism. We are grateful to them. But it was not only Americans. It is the British, the French and the Russians who had their major share. Sir, there is a weak point about the American position : they have not fought war on their own land for the last 200 years. They only war they fought was a civil war and that too 200 years ago when there were conventional weapons. What war means is understood by the nations on the Continent. We know what war means. Let us go to Punjab and ask people what war means. Do they want war or peace? Soviet Russia has seen.
Therefore one is inclined to believe, if they say, that they believe in world peace. I have got all the respect for Mr. Brezhnev when he responded to the hawkish language of the United States by the offer of further talk of detente. That was a Statesmanlike, wise, thing. Certainly we also want some solution of Afghanistan should be found out but what about El Salvador. What Americans are doing there? What is the theory of Carter doctrine? For the sake of their security of America, they must be there, in the Indian ocean. Vested interests must be protected in the Indian Ocean and Gulf countries. This is ten thousand miles away. If they are justifiable in doing this, what about any other country being careful to see that their neighborhood is safe for them? We want to be careful about our safety and peaceful situation in all the neighborhood, not only in Pakistan.
Sir, some discussion took place about the relationship with our neighboring countries. Some people tried to take credit for what was done by the previous Government. I am willing to give it. I am not against it. I have always said that with one or two exceptions Janata Party tried to carry on by and large the foreign policy of friendship with Soviet Russia. But I must say their approach to neighboring countries was wrong. I have said it before on the Floor of the House as the Leader of the Opposition that there was some sort of feeling that neighboring countries had to be over pleased that India had taken a position of a sychophant to them. Try to be careful about the mutuality of interests. Respect them, which we have been doing all along, but don’t get yourself in a position where you have to be all the while attending on them as to what they wish, like and do not like, and fear about. This is not consistent with the standing of India. How can you justify the agreement on Farrakka in view of the dangers to Calcutta? We were a party to negotiations and discussions. I know the position that Bangladesh takes. We have got all the goodwill for Bangladesh. And in future also we will have it. Mr. Minister, but I would like you also to be very careful about our mutual national interests. It has been mentioned that there is going to be some sort of a Regional Conference of the Secretaries of the neighboring countries in Sri Lanka or some other place. Well and good. Such efforts are always welcome. We shall always welcome those efforts. Go and meet them; talk to them; find out if they have got any legitimate grievances; and accommodate them.
