What's new

Tashkent Accord turns 50: Shastri felt India can make peace with Pak but not with China

dadeechi

BANNED
Joined
Sep 12, 2015
Messages
4,281
Reaction score
-8
Country
India
Location
United States
Tashkent Accord turns 50: Shastri felt India can make peace with Pak but not with China, says Kuldip Nayar
Jan 10, 2016 09:20 IST

New Delhi: Lal Bahadur Shastri, India's second prime minister, was confident of subcontinental peace, which is why he signed the Tashkent Accord with Pakistan exactly 50 years ago, on 10 January, 1965. But this collapsed due to his death hours later early 11 January, an event that should be probed even though half a century has elapsed, veteran journalist Kuldip Nayar, a long-serving aide of the Indian leader, said.
"Shastri was very sagacious. He firmly believed India could make peace with Pakistan but not with China," Nayar, who was Shastri's media advisor, reminisced in an interview with IANS, adding that it was the prime minister, who got then Pakistani President Field Marshal Ayub Khan to pencil in the words "without resorting to arms" in the first draft of the Tashkent Agreement.

Lal Bahadur Shastri. Getty Images
Under the agreement, the two countries agreed that their armies would return to the positions they held on 5 August, 1965, the day they went to war for the second time after the partition of the subcontinent in 1947.
"Ayub Khan was inclined but (Pakistani foreign minister Zulfikar Ali) Bhutto stormed out of the negotiations, saying he would denounce the president (back) home. After Shastri died (in circumstances that are still suspect), and thanks to Bhutto, whatever had been achieved at Tashkent collapsed in Rawalpindi (then the Pakistani capital)," noted Nayar, still sharp as a razor in spite of being 93 years old, and possibly the only survivor of Tashkent.
Reinforcing this view, Nayar recalled Ayub Khan saying on the morning of Shastri's death: "Here lies the man who could have brought Pakistan and India close."
Ayub Khan, in fact was one of the two front pall-bearers (on the left) who carried Shastri's coffin to the aircraft that transported it to New Delhi.
Elaborating on Shastri's sagacity, Nayar pointed to a letter the then Shah of Iran, Mohammad Raza Pahlavi, wrote to Ayub Khan in the wake of the Chinese invasion of India in 1962, asking him to send Pakistani troops to beat back the invaders.
"A copy was marked to (India's first prime minister) Jawaharlal Nehru, who sought (home minister) Shastri's comments. Don't accept it, Shastri said because tomorrow, if Pakistan asks for Kashmir (still a sticking point between the two nations on which they have fought four wars), we'll be in a difficult situation," Nayar contended.
Shastri had assumed office soon after India's first prime minister died on 24 May, 1964 in spite of the fact that it was widely felt that Nehru wanted his daughter, Indira Gandhi to succeed him.
So how did Tashkent, now the capital of Uzbekistan but at that time part of the undivided Soviet Union, come to be chosen as the venue of the peace negotiations?
"The Americans stepped in (after the 1965 war ended) but Shastri said, 'No. They have given them (Pakistan) arms. We can't trust them. The Soviets stepped in; they said come to Tashkent, known for its kababs and good food. Shastri was a strict vegetarian, but he said, let's go."
Though military cooperation between India and the Soviet Union had begun soon after the 1962 war with China, this took a quantum leap soon after the Tashkent Accord and today, India imports almost 70 percent of its armaments from Russia, the successor state after the collapse of the Cold War superpower.
Nayar also said there was much bonhomie between the Indian and Pakistani delegations, as also between the journalists of the two countries who were reporting on the talks.
"We (the journalists) were staying in the same hotel. Bahut milna julna tha. Saath khate peete the (There was much camadaraderie. We used to eat and drink together.) After Shastri's death, all of them came to sympathise with us. The next morning, even people on the street came to sympathise with us," Nayar recalled.
As for the circumstances of Shastri's death hours after the Tashkent Accord was signed, Nayar said, "There is a general perception that he was poisoned, there should be an enquiry, even though a long time has elapsed. The government says there are certain papers; whatever papers there are, make them public."
Speaking about the future of India-Pakistan ties, Nayar saw great hope. "There are fringe elements (as evidenced in the attack on the Pathankot IAF air base soon after Prime Minister Narendra Modi's dramatic visit to Lahore via Kabul after a state visit to Moscow), but everyone realises that peace must prevail," he said.
"Had people like Lal Bahadur Shastri been around, all this would not have happened," Nayar concluded.
IANS

Tashkent Accord turns 50: Shastri felt India can make peace with Pak but not with China, says Kuldip Nayar - Firstpost
 
It is again a typical Congress man thought...Our rivally or animosity with Pakistan will not calm down till Muslims see that Hindus are also human being who can be treated equally with Muslims and vice versa...It is not much more than political issue which everyone is trying to put in under the carpet...

China is a rival but again, they are not the enemy....The sooner we understand it is better for us..China is not sending radical Muslim terrorist to India to blow them us inside our nation...India has to come out of our obsession with China...The basic reason India and our media and secularist always do not like to admire China because China does not give a damn about the false sense of democracy and does not appease terrorist in the name of religion....So the success of China in world stage, shows the failure of Indian secularist where they claim that democracy and secularism brings propsering to the nation which is not not the case at least in India's perspective...
 
It is again a typical Congress man thought...Our rivally or animosity with Pakistan will not calm down till Muslims see that Hindus are also human being who can be treated equally with Muslims and vice versa...It is not much more than political issue which everyone is trying to put in under the carpet...

China is a rival but again, they are not the enemy....The sooner we understand it is better for us..China is not sending radical Muslim terrorist to India to blow them us inside our nation...India has to come out of our obsession with China...The basic reason India and our media and secularist always do not like to admire China because China does not give a damn about the false sense of democracy and does not appease terrorist in the name of religion....So the success of China in world stage, shows the failure of Indian secularist where they claim that democracy and secularism brings propsering to the nation which is not not the case at least in India's perspective...

What about China's role in propping up Pakistan?

What about Maoist insurgencies in India?

What about China's opposition to India memberships to UNSC and NSG?

What about China's string of pearls strategy?

Also, what do you mean by vice versa? When did Hinduism look down upon Islam?
 
It is again a typical Congress man thought...Our rivally or animosity with Pakistan will not calm down till Muslims see that Hindus are also human being who can be treated equally with Muslims and vice versa...It is not much more than political issue which everyone is trying to put in under the carpet...

Lets be frank here, this idea did exist, the 1 muslim = 10 hindu banya theory was actively perpetuated by the state but only in the aftermath of 1971 which was seen as a massive stab in the back and the state had to cover up for it. The result was massive propaganda and militarization. This myth is dying now, Pakistan is no longer the country of the 90s with a largely rural based public limited to state channels for information.

China is a rival but again, they are not the enemy....The sooner we understand it is better for us..China is not sending radical Muslim terrorist to India to blow them us inside our nation..

Neither is Pakistan. Whatever is happening inside India is because of their own misgivings, you might be able to find a convenient patsy in Pakistan to shirk of the blame but that does not make the problem go away. We tried that as a policy for almost a decade before we took charge of our own affairs and beat the TTP decisively.
 
It is again a typical Congress man thought...Our rivally or animosity with Pakistan will not calm down till Muslims see that Hindus are also human being who can be treated equally with Muslims and vice versa...It is not much more than political issue which everyone is trying to put in under the carpet...

China is a rival but again, they are not the enemy....The sooner we understand it is better for us..China is not sending radical Muslim terrorist to India to blow them us inside our nation...India has to come out of our obsession with China...The basic reason India and our media and secularist always do not like to admire China because China does not give a damn about the false sense of democracy and does not appease terrorist in the name of religion....So the success of China in world stage, shows the failure of Indian secularist where they claim that democracy and secularism brings propsering to the nation which is not not the case at least in India's perspective...

There are 2 parts to your posts

1 - The inexorable rise of China .China's economic & consequent military rise should be seen as we see the sudden demise of the USSR .Its a freak event .Nowhere in the history of mankind has one witnessed such an event as the sudden collapse of a superpower & nowhere in the history of mankind has one seen the rapid rise of another. I won't delve into the situation in which either occurred for the reasons are out there & too numerous to be catalogued.Hence, to all those of my countrymen eager to see us emulate China ( as lofty an aim as it is ) , it won't happen .At least not in the timespan that it took China to get to where it is today. Having said that, what happens tomm is entirely different .Its said a week is a long time in politics what to speak of geo politics .

2 - The closer relationship that China seeks to build with Pak thru various mechanisms as the CPEC , OBOR , MSR, etc .By wedging itself , delibrately between Ind & Pak, China seems to put itself into the arbitrators seat , to India's discomfiture - the ultimate arbitrator of all matters in SA, CA & the FE as of now .Pakistan seems to view all this with glee .Perhaps , it isn't quite acquainted with the phrase "There's no such thing as a free lunch. The crux of the matter is when China finds itself in a position when it gets more than it bargains for .Its not for nothing that the US is reviled all across the world .For , when you are the superpower , you exercise your power to benefit one party at the expense of the other .Its then that all your diplomatic , economic & military might is tested in pursuance of maintaining the world order in your favour. China has just started taking baby steps in this direction .That too at a less than fortuitous time.Its economy is not exactly in the pink of health & there are limits to chequebook diplomacy even if enjoyed the best of economic health .

That's my view in a nutshell.
 
His views are probably after 62 war and the fact that Indians do not understand chinese but we know everything about pak, so there is a level of comfort in dealing with pak.
I think its very much possible to have peace with both china and pakistan. China does not attack arunachal pradesh, and most of border has been calm, more or less.
 
His views are probably after 62 war and the fact that Indians do not understand chinese but we know everything about pak, so there is a level of comfort in dealing with pak.
I think its very much possible to have peace with both china and pakistan. China does not attack arunachal pradesh, and most of border has been calm, more or less.


indians can never understand Pakistanis or ever feel what it is like to be a Pakistani and vice versa. No matter what happens in the universe, there will never ever be peace between Pakistan and india for the rest of eternity. The hatred between the 2 nations is the strongest in the world. Even worst than that between the Israelis and Palestinians. In fact it is far more likely that there will be peace between the Palestinians and israelis than that between Pakistan and india.
 
indians can never understand Pakistanis or ever feel what it is like to be a Pakistani and vice versa. No matter what happens in the universe, there will never ever be peace between Pakistan and india for the rest of eternity. The hatred between the 2 nations is the strongest in the world. Even worst than that between the Israelis and Palestinians. In fact it is far more likely that there will be peace between the Palestinians and israelis than that between Pakistan and india.

As i said earlier, if Muslims and Hindus does not feel equality of both religion and accept that the world does not exist with one God, but many religious beliefs and culture can cooexist, till that point the confrontation will continue..

Again, there is nothing more to understand Pakistan..Neither you ever try to understand Hindus of India...Both of us are fault...Now we have to wait when we suffered enough caualty so that we will realize the importance of each other..
 
Lets be frank here, this idea did exist, the 1 muslim = 10 hindu banya theory was actively perpetuated by the state but only in the aftermath of 1971 which was seen as a massive stab in the back and the state had to cover up for it. The result was massive propaganda and militarization. This myth is dying now, Pakistan is no longer the country of the 90s with a largely rural based public limited to state channels for information.
To be accurate - It existed even in 1965 in Pakistan Army. Your military studies book(a profile of India or some such title) - mandatory course read for Army officers also propagates that.
 
China will easily manhandle india in any negotiations. China is simply too powerful compare to india.
 
China will easily manhandle india in any negotiations. China is simply too powerful compare to india.


Yup.You ought to advice your CCP to move fast .off late Modi , Doval & co are in a pretty masochistic mood.Hurry.offer open for limited period only.
 
indians can never understand Pakistanis or ever feel what it is like to be a Pakistani and vice versa. No matter what happens in the universe, there will never ever be peace between Pakistan and india for the rest of eternity. The hatred between the 2 nations is the strongest in the world. Even worst than that between the Israelis and Palestinians. In fact it is far more likely that there will be peace between the Palestinians and israelis than that between Pakistan and india.
you ok mate?
I was talking about language and cultural barrier in dealing with china being higher even then it is very much possible to have peace with china.. and am differing with his assessment wrt china, and I think it was colored by a recent conflict (then)
nobody is saying we totally 'understand' pakistan or need to feel like pakistani..its a matter of degree..
we dont feel like chinese or korean or american or arab either but we can have peace with them..

As i said earlier, if Muslims and Hindus does not feel equality of both religion and accept that the world does not exist with one God, but many religious beliefs and culture can cooexist, till that point the confrontation will continue..

Again, there is nothing more to understand Pakistan..Neither you ever try to understand Hindus of India...Both of us are fault...Now we have to wait when we suffered enough caualty so that we will realize the importance of each other..
what is understanding pakistan?its about relation between countries not marriage proposal...
 
Neither is Pakistan. Whatever is happening inside India is because of their own misgivings, you might be able to find a convenient patsy in Pakistan to shirk of the blame but that does not make the problem go away. We tried that as a policy for almost a decade before we took charge of our own affairs and beat the TTP decisively.

This is the wish and thought of a sane Pakistani citizen.
You do not account for the insane Pakistani citizens who are responsible for terror attacks in India.
 
His views are probably after 62 war and the fact that Indians do not understand chinese but we know everything about pak, so there is a level of comfort in dealing with pak.
I think its very much possible to have peace with both china and pakistan. China does not attack arunachal pradesh, and most of border has been calm, more or less.
Really???
 
To be accurate - It existed even in 1965 in Pakistan Army. Your military studies book(a profile of India or some such title) - mandatory course read for Army officers also propagates that.

Yes but that book was written after the 1971 War. In the eighties to be precise.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom