Its purpose is not merely to try to hold somebody responsible. I think, we arc rather too near the history to hold anybody responsible. Let us have an attitude of sitting in judgement like historians; let us leave the whole matter for the future historians to apportion the blame. My hon. colleague, an hon. Member on this side, Shrimati Sharada Mukherjee, said that blame must he apportioned. At some time somebody will sit in judgement ‘and the historian will try to apportion the blame. That is a different matter. But today our present duty is not to sit in judgement over any body with a view to hold anybody responsible or punish anybody. We are not at the end of our journey, of the trouble. The journey has perhaps only begun. We are in the process of defending our country. Somebody referred to what had happened as a defeat. Certainly’ it was a reverse, but I do not think the Indian nation was defeated; I do not think the Indian nation will ever he defeated. It was a reverse in a campaign; it was reverse in a battle.
I must try to correct some of the impressions that even my statement made. I did say that the higher commanders deficiency became apparent. I must make one correction in the impression that was created—though that was not what was in my mind. The battles that were fought in Ladakh were certainly’ fought well and there the high command had done its duty very well. Even in the eastern sector, in the Walong sector, our army has done well and some the hon. Members tried to hold one particular General responsible for it. He was also responsible for certain well-conducted battles in the Walong sector. It is not enough that we hold anyblody responsible. I am not holding a brief for any individual. If at all, I am to hold a brief, I must hold a brief for the defence of the country.
I am only looking at it from this point of view. Please do not understand that I am trying to reply to this debate only in the spirit of replying to it or to explain away everything. I am trying to put my feelings or my thoughts about it. So, the main attitude is as to what lessons we should learn from this inquiry and what lessons this nation should learn from the experience that we had in the last campaign.
Government has not tried to shirk its responsibility. Some of the hon. Members did make a mention that Government asked the aggressors to be thrown out. I think that was certainly’ Government’s duty to give instruction to the army to do that. If Government had not done that, the Government would have failed in its duty. It is the very’ purpose of the Government to exist and it is for that purpose that the Army is supposed to he its instrument.
It is not a fact that Government told them, “Go .on this day and do this or that. “ It was certainly left to the army commanders to do that as soon as possible and when they were ready. On that account, I must say, there was no political interference at all of any nature about the detailed conduct of the campaigns that took place anywhere.
