I think, it is not fair to hold any’ individual Minister or even the hon. Prime Minister responsible for ‘it because it was the nation’s policy. This was accepted not by Government but by’ this House and by the entire country. That policy was to have peaceful attitude towards all the neighbouring countries. Some people try to make fun of Panchsheel now because it suits them. But the whole country accepted Panchsheel as our ideal. We did nothing wrong in accepting that as our ideal. It has certainly happened that one of our neighbours has turned out to be treacherous. Her intentions now appear to he some sort of expansionist intentions. Now it would be our duty to face it. It is in such circumstances naturally that a democratic country with peaceful objective certainly suffers initial reverses.
I entirely agree with Shri Indrajeet Gupta when he said yesterday that that is what had happened not only to a peaceful country, like India, but to mighty empires during the Second World War and even to a great military power, like Russia. That is what happens. What has happened in this campaign, I take it as an initial reverse. It does not mean that the Indian Army is defeated or that the Indian nation is defeated. But if, at the same time, we do not want to repeat the same mistake, we must study as to what was wrong with the whole thing.
Hon. Members have said that we have tried to hide something. Frankly I can tell them that consistent with the public interest, as it is understood. Please do not misunderstand the word ‘ public ‘. consistent with security considerations we have made an attempt, with the full consent and approval of the hon. Prime Minister to share all major conclusion with the hon. House and the country. We had certainly said that there was no chance of China starting an offensive against India. That certainly’ was the judgement of the situation in the country and the international situation then. That was not hidden. That was explained, and that was accepted by this House also on many occasions. So, I would suggest that it is not fair to say that something is being concealed from anybody. Something that the country should know or something that this House should know has been given out, with a view not merely to frighten ourselves, not merely to demoralise ourselves or to demoralise the Army or to demoralise anybody; but really speaking, to learn lessons from it and correct those deficiencies and correct those mistakes and see how we can strengthen our own approach in this particular matter, because it is through such experience, and it is through such appraisals, or self–appraisals or self-criticisms, if I may call it that the country can build its own defence concepts or defence strategies.
