1962
was a year of setback for India in the wake of the unprovoked
Chinese aggression. The Chinese overwhelmed our forces
and occupied our territories. In a sense, 1962 was also
the finest hour for India, because the misfortune brought
the Indian people together, made the forget their differences
and take a united stand against the aggressor.
Speaking
on the proclamation approving the resolution on Emergency
by the Government, Anna says that “we might march as one
people wedded to one principle having one aim, that is
to chuck out the Chinese and safeguard the country.” Anna
also asks the Government to “enter the name of the DMK
in the roll call of honour for the safety, for the dignity
and future of this country.”
A
champion of Dravida Nadu and an avowed votary of separatism,
when faced with the danger of foreign aggression rises
to the level of the tallest of India’s patriots and places
at the disposal of the country the entire resources of
his Party for meeting the challenge of the foreign aggressor.
In a sense, Anna was rewriting the history of India. It
has been the tragedy of India’s past that whenever the
country was faced with foreign aggression, from the time
the Aryan hordes thundered into India, the Indian princes
fought among themselves and some of them joined the foreigner
against the interests of their own country. The Chinese
aggression was also responsible for Anna’s modifying his
pet concept of an independent Dravida Nadu. As Anna himself
stated in an interview with the Editor of “The Illustrated
Weekly of India” in September 1965, “ we have since withdran
the demand for Dravida Nadu. We first realized its dangerous
potentialities at the time of the Chinese aggression………
Indeed session. We issued a statement to the Press announcing
the suspension of our agitation in favour of Dravida Nadu,”
(Illustrated Weekly of India, 26th November 1965).
Mr.
Chairman, Sir I rise today to support the motion brought
forward by the Home Minister, not only on my behalf, but
also on behalf of the Party to which I have the honour
to belong, the DMK. Very rarely indeed do legislative
bodies with one mind confer extraordinary powers on the
Government. The very fact that all the parties are united
in arming the Government with emergency powers is positive
proof that here has arisen a state, when group and political
differences ought to be submerged in the one cardinal
principle of safeguarding the dignity, independence and
freedom of the country.
Sir,
I was reading the news about Chinese incursions while
I was confined in cell at the Central Jail, Vellore. Naturally,
I was infuriated at the ruling Party. But when I read
the news about the incursions of the Chinese, the most
depressing period of my jail life were those three or
four days when I was reading that wave after wave of Chinese
aggressors were crossing the frontiers, and our warriors
in spite of fighting valiantly, were forced to give up
certain places and certain posts. This is a time not for
elaborate explanations of the situation. This is a time
indeed, not for discussing a motion. We meet here today,
to solemnly pledge ourselves to the one great task of
driving out the aggressor from our frontiers.
As
soon I was released on the 2nd of last month, I issued
a statement that the Party to which I have the honour
to belong, the DMK Party, would put a moratorium on all
its activities, agitational or otherwise, and direct its
entire energy and place its entire apparatus at the disposal
of the Government of India to thwart the ambitions of
the aggressor.
That
there is an aggressor, one need not doubt. Whatever may
be the aim of the aggressor, our aim is clear. We want
to safeguard the dignity of the country and the dignity
of democracy. It is not usual at this stage to probe into
the ideological causes of this great conflict. I do not
consider this a mere incursion. I think knowingly or unknowingly,
we are now engaged in an ideological conflict. The world
is divided today into two camps, the democratic and the
undemocratic. There is also the principle of co-existence.
If democracy is to co-exist with other systems of Government,
democracy should show that in times of crisis and tension,
it is as strong as, if not stronger than, the other systems
of government. Therefore democratic bodies, forgetting
political differences and political prejudices, have come
forward pronounce with one voice, that aggression shall
be defeated, the Chinese shall be pushed back to their
frontiers.
Sir,
the news came as a shock to men of my type. When I say
men of my type, I refer to people who did not have previous
occasion of listening to, or addressing august assemblies
of this sort. I represent the man in the street. We always
thought that no country would dare to commit aggression
on this country because we were so confident that our
principle of non-alignment, our principle of neutrality,
had been appreciated by the intelligent countries of the
world. We were also very confident because of the great
friendship that was forged between China and India, the
cause of China when China was friendless at the UNO at
every international forum, and even in this House and
the other House, was Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, who stood
as the champion of Chinese independence. It was he who
was pleading for the entry of China into the UN Organisation.
That is why we had a legitimate confidence that there
would be no clash at all between China and India. We thought
that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru would have instilled the
full bonding spirit in the Chinese mind. But knowing Chinese
history, we know that China and the Chinese stand more
for puzzles than for explanations.
I
realize that there are other parties which are not as
shocked as myself, because they have been issuing notes
of warning from time to time from this and the other House,
that our policy of appeasement, that our policy of non-alignment,
that our policy of neutrality, that this policy of decrying
military blocs and pacts is going to land us not in the
land of happiness, but in the land of danger. Therefore,
some of the Members of the other political parties who
were issuing warnings, rose in this House and in the other
House, to say that what they had feared all along had
come to pass but even in that, there was a note of restraint
and responsibility. That can only be found in the noblest
of democratic assemblies. In this House, during these
3 or 4 days, all the discussions that took place and the
sentiments expressed were so responsible, and there was
so much restraint, that the Prime Minister has come forward
with a courageous statement to say that at a suitable
time, an enquiry would be conducted into the nature of
the unpreparedness and the persons responsible for it.
It was only the most courageous of men that could have
come forward to order an enquiry into it. Whatever may
be the differences that we as opposite political parties
may have, and we do have differences with Pandit Jawaharlal
Nehru as the head of the administration as the Leader
of the Congress Party, nobody doubts his claim of the
great role to being the redeemer and resurrector of this
nation and as the repository of the ennobling ideals of
liberty, equality and fraternity. Therefore, when some
of us offer our suggestions, it is with that noble spirit
that the democratic leader comes forward halfway to meet
us, and considers the suggestions given by us.
We
have to find out one thing, because it is very necessary
to strengthen our war effort. We have to find out the
exact attitude behind the Chinese invasion. Why should
China fight over the frontier when this country has been
prepared to sit round a table and discuss the frontier
question? Why should the Chinese come wave after wave
and occupy border areas like Tawang, dig trenches there,
make Tawang into a military camp and await the proper
moment to leap forward? What was it that was done by this
country to infuriate China, and why should the Chinese
people think that their frontier lies very near Uttar
Pradesh? If we probe into the attitude of the Chinese,
I think we will have to consider the other problem which
I mentioned earlier, that this is an ideological conflict.
The Chinese think that our policy of non-alignment, that
our policy of neutrality, means weakness. They think that
we are left without friends. They think that because we
are wedded to the principle of Panchsheel we cannot fight.
We have always been saying that we well not fight. That
does not mean that we cannot fight. Our warriors at the
valley of the immortal have laid down their lives. We
have more men with increased striking power, and we will
have to prove to the Chinese that when we say that we
will not fight it does not mean that we cannot fight.
More and more arms ought to be supplied to the warriors
there and the whole country should stand alongside those
warriors at the front. During war time, the home front
is as important as the actual battlefield.
In
the minds of men today we find a remarkable unity of purpose
and a determination which only doughty warriors can command.
The resources of the people and the response of the people
is pouring forth spontaneously is an increasing measure.
But we will have to ponder whether this is enough. Our
Prime Minister has stated that it is not going to be a
war for months or years, but it is going to be a prolonged
affair. If it is going to be a prolonged affair, do we
not have the right to demand that we should formulate
our policy to meet not only a prolonged struggle, but
also the situation where China thinks it can declare war
on India? Even today, they are saying that there is no
war between India and China. Their agents of propaganda
are saying that the real friendship between the India
people and the Chinese people has not been disturbed,
that they have occupied only their own territory and not
India territory. Sir, the peace offensive of China is
as terrible as its war offensive. Therefore we should
be clear in our minds as to how, where and to what extent
we should commandeer the resources of this country. True
it is that men and women from the lowest strata and the
highest strata, have come forward with their help and
contributions. But while the poor men have come forward
and given princely sums, the Princes have been very poor
in their contributions. I would say that the amount spent
on the privy purses of the Princes,ought to be cut down
for one year, at least for one year, so that the man in
the street may know that this is a time when everyone
is prepared to sacrifice in a graded manner.
A
Prince is not only a titular head. He should be a Prince
in character. When the whole country is faced with such
a danger, it will not be beyond his capacity or ability
to give up his privy purse.
Another
thing that I would suggest is, that if it is going to
be a prolonged war, we have to consider what ought to
be the method by which we should arm our men. How are
we going to arm our men at the front, if the front is
to be extended, as I am afraid it will be extended? With
what sort of weapons are we going to supply them? I was
very happy to hear the Prime Minister tell us the other
day that production is going apace, that factories are
working round the clock, that more and more automatic
weapons are being produced. But we should remember that
while we go on producing them, China will not be keeping
quiet. Perhaps, they are producing more weapons today.
Because they live behind the iron curtain, we do not know
their real strength. We do not know their potential strength
and we do not even know who their potential friends are.
Therefore I would suggest that we should draw out the
goodwill of the forty odd countries who have expressed
their willingness to help us. In drawing upon their goodwill,
the principle of non-alignment should not stand in our
way. This country exists not for non-alignment but non-alignment
exists for this country. Therefore, if we find that non-alignment
stands in the way of the security of this country, I would
far rather forego the principle of non-alignment, than
forego the independence of the country.
Sir,
I may also point out that though theoretically the principle
of non-alignment is unassailable, the practical implementation
of this principle ahs left grave doubts in the minds of
the powerful countries of the world. Non-alignment, certain
countries think and they have got a right to think so
is only a cloak, a convenient cloak. I do not remember
the name of the person who said it, but a statement was
made that our principle of non alignment is only a method
or policy adopted for getting aid from both the blocs.
That is the result of the practical implementation of
the principle of non-alignment. Perhaps our representatives
at the UNO have woefully failed to impress on the minds
of the powers, the basic implications of this principle
of non-alignment. I do not name anybody. But I would remind
this House that a cloud of suspicion has been created
by some of the words and some of the deeds that we have
indulged in, in the last ten or twelve years. Therefore,
I would ask the Government to choose such men for the
UN Organanisation as can place before the world a clear
enuniciation of the implication of the principle of non-alignment.
Though the principle application of that principle, there
ought to be some liberalization. What should be the guiding
principle in the application of this non-alignment? I
find from the directory that alignment is good and men
conversand with motor cars would know that without alignment
a car never moves. Therefore, non-alignment is a negative
thing and it should not bar our progress. If by non-alignment
we mean that we are not going to allow ourselves to be
placed in, or dragged into any military bloc, I can understand
and appreciate it. I do not want India to be dragged into
any military pact. But if it means that we will not move
and move in the right direction, then it means that we
have not understood clearly or that we have not been told
clearly the implications of this principle of non-alignment.
Therefore, I would say that all the democratic forces
should align themselves, in counteracting the baneful
effect of the undemocratic forces.
I
suggest that while drawing on the goodwill of the forty
odd countries that have declared their intention towards
our country, see should send a representative delegation
to the United States of America, to the United Kingdom,
to Canada, and to such other countries as are friendly
towards us, so that we can build up an arms aid consortium
with those countries. We cannot pay for all the arms that
we need. Nor can we go on producing more and more arms
as more and more Chinese invade our country. Therefore,
I suggest that this “arms aid consortium” should be established
and a good-will mission for this purpose should be sent
forthwith to the USA, the UK and Canada. A representative
delegation preferably, with members not only from the
ruling Party but also from the opposition parties. I say
this because we should show to the world outside, that
it is not only the ruling Party but also the other parties
which are interested in maintaining the Government’s policy.
I would say that we may even call for volunteers from
other countries that are favourably disposed towards us.
There is nothing wrong in that. There is nothing derogatory
in that I do not mean to say that our battles are to be
fought by other soldiers. But I would like the world to
know that there are people who are prepared to lay down
their lives for the cause of democracy. Therefore I would
suggest that this goodwill delegation that I propose,
should tour these countries, collect funds, collect arms,
and also collect volunteers, so that China may know that
our principle of neutrality is not something negative
but something positive; that our attitude has created
such an amount of goodwill in the minds of democratic
countries that we are able to draw from the bank of goodwill,
from this international bank of goodwill, at our will
and pleasure. These are some of the suggestions that I
want the ruling party to consider.
Madam,
I am very glad that we have had an assurance from the
Government side, that the price level will be kept, because
the home front depends entirely on controlling the price
level. War creates a scare only when people find the necessities
of life denied to them, or when the prices of the necessities
of life are soaring high. Therefore, if the Government
comes forward with the assurance that the home front will
be very strong. As far as the food front is concerned,
the Food Minister has assured us that we need have no
misgivings about the stock. But the stock is not as important
as future production and, therefore, future food production
should be at a very high level and the very pertinent
and very timely suggestion given by the Hon. Sri V.T.
Krishnmachari about the food front, may be looked into.
I would also suggest that when we want the peacetime economy
to be geared to the war-time economy, measures ought to
be formulated. It is not very easy, because a peace-time
economy is based on plenty and a war-time economy is based
on scarcity. Therefore a Directorate of Economic Affairs
should be set up to correlate peace-time economic machinery
to war-time purposes. For all these things, I would suggest
that the ruling Party should take other political parties
into its confidence. I am not thinking in terms of Defence
Committees and and the like, but I am asking for an intimate
contact between the different political parties and the
ruling party. Any suggestion ought to be welcomed; any
contribution ought to be welcomed by the ruling Party
so that we can move, not as this or that political party,
but as a solid phalanx to meet the Chinese attack.
Madam,
I do not think I should travel over controversial ground,
but one Hon. Member did take us into that controversial
subject. He was saying that our attitude towards the Tibetean
crisis was not wrong. I beg to differ. We have a very
vital interests in Tibet, Bhutan, Sikkim and Nepal because
they form the natural buffer states of India. You will
find ample evidence in history, whether it is during the
Huan Dynasty or during the revolutionary period of Sun
Yat Sen, that China has become the Yellow peril and a
world-wide danger. Ofcourse, now there has been a mixture
of yellow and red and I do not know what colour it comes
strong, it casts its covetous eyes on the frontiers of
other countries. I read the speech of a very great dignitary
of China after the Tibetan incident. Instead of saying
that Tibet belongs to China, he indulged in a curious
logic. He said that Tibet belongs to China and Bhutan,
Sikkim and Ladakh belong to Tibet and therefore, the Ladakhis,
Butanese and Sikkimese are Tibetans and that they must
come to the great motherland of China. Madam, if this
theory is translated into action it may not be merely
a prolonged conflict: it may eve lead to a prolonged war
ad you should be prepared for al eventualities. Therefore
I suggest, that we should forthwith formulate schemes
for taking into our fold the democratic countries, I hope
they will come.
Madam,
I read the other day, the appeal issued by the Minister
of Information and Broadcasting, Mr Gopala Reddi, asking
news papers to come forward to donate space. I offer to
donate as much space as the Minister desires in all the
dailies and weeklies which our Party has got, but while
donating this space I would request the Information and
broadcasting Minister to gear up the radio to war-time
purposes rather than to peace-time purposes. I was very
pained to hear time and again our radio telling us, “Chusul
is still in our hands”, as if it is a regrettable thing
that it is in our hand. Our radio should become the charge
house for emanating propaganda of the right sort to counteract
the propaganda of the other side. Why don’t we think of
asking members of different political parties to talk
of the difficult terrain and the dangers that they have
to face? Why don’t we ask our people who have donated
to come and announce their donations over the radio, stating
that they have donated so much and asking others for donations?
Madam, propaganda is such a delicate weapon. Today we
find that non-democratic countries know more about the
full the implications of propaganda than the democratic
countries. Therefore, while I am prepared to offer space
in the papers which our party has got, we have got two
or three dailies and ten or fifteen weeklies I am saying
that the propaganda system ought to be geared up and the
other parties should also be given a proper place, so
tht we mind march as one people wedded to one principle,
having one aim and that is to chuck out the Chinese and
safeguard the country.
Madam,
I do not want to take more time of this House. I would
have liked this Session, to end with this plea so that
we might meet again, come forward and discuss other items.
If we go on discussing other items and other Bills, I
think we are disturbing the solemnity of the occasion
and, therefore in supporting the Resolution brought forward
by the Home Minister, I enter the name of the DMK in the
roll call of honour that is being now formulated for the
safety, for the dignity and future of this country, this
nation.
Thank
you.