Nehru’s Impact on the World,1946-1964 I

 

Nehru’s Impact on the World,1946-1964 I

The Modi government in India is doing everything within its power to erase the name and legacy of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru-a co-architect of the freedom movement and the father of modern India- by willfully inventing lies and distorting history through its concerted propaganda machinery. The ruling dispensation just can’t digest his unmatched greatness and stature and his enormous contribution to building modern India. Though its hostility towards him is rooted in the ideology, the attempt of the regime to denigrate him essentially comes from an inherent inferiority complex and fear of being overshadowed by the towering personality of Nehru and his monumental accomplishments. Now even the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML), housed in a historic monument Teen Murti Bhavan, where the Indian first Prime Minister resided and shaped the destiny of the nation, which has been a global intellectual landmark and treasure house of books and archives for nearly six decades- is renamed as Prime Ministers’ Museum & Library. It is nobody’s case that the Prime Ministers that followed Pandit Nehru should not receive due credit. But the manner in which the Teen Murti Bhavan-the memorial of Nehru- was first converted into a Museum for Prime Ministers, instead of constructing the Museum at some other place, and now erasing his name from the plaque of the NMML shows ‘pettiness and vengeance.’ 

 

An attempt is made to present Narendra Modi as the most popular leader of the largest democracy that India ever had, conveniently ignoring the rise of authoritarianism and weakening of the democratic institutions under his regime. It is an exercise in self-deception. It is in this context, I think it is imperative to inform the people within India and outside what Prime Minister Nehru’s India meant to the world, particularly during the cold war era, and the power of moral authority that Nehru exercised on the community of nations. I have pleasure in reproducing some excerpts from the Chapter Five: Nehru’s Impact on the World,1946-1964 of my book Nehru and World Peace (which was my thesis- Jawaharlal Nehru: His Contribution to Word Peace, for which the University of Bombay awarded me PhD in 1990- incidentally, it was the first and only full-fledged research, covering the entire period of Prime Ministership of Pandit Nehru, undertaken by any scholar):

 

“Jawaharlal Nehru is one of those great figures in history who belong to the whole world. According to the renowned historian, Arnold Toynbee, Nehru took nothing less than the world itself as the field for his public activity. To the new emerging states, Nehru was both a source of pride and inspiration.  

 

A Buffer and Bridge

 

Through his policy of positive neutrality, he attempted to bridge the wide gulf that separated the ‘free world’ and the ‘socialist world’.  With China also becoming communist in 1949. This fear was reinforced with the conclusion of the Sino-Soviet Treaty in that year.  America had reasons to fear expansion of ‘Marxism’ in Europe and Asia. America, inspired by John Foster Dulles, pursued a policy of containing communism by forcing alliances with all the democratic and anti-communist forces. To Americans the struggle was between freedom and slavery, between democracy and totalitarianism. On the other hand, the Russians were afraid of ‘Liberalism’ checkmating ‘Stalinism.’ Nehru played the role of moderating conflicts between the West and the East.

 

The rift between the US and the Soviet Union had assumed a dangerous proportion during the Eisenhower-Dulles and Stalin administrations. General Mark Clark, former UN Commander in the Far East, called upon the Americans to resign to an eventual show down with the Russians since ‘honesty was not part of their national character.’  He urged upon his Government to cut off diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union.  He demanded reorganizing of the UN by getting rid of the communist members. 

 

On the question of admission of some eighteen countries to the UN in 1955, the interests of the US and the Soviet Union clashed. The hostility between them was intensified. Out of these eighteen nations, five belonged to the Soviet bloc.  Kuomintang China cast a veto in the Security Council to bloc the entry of Mongolia into the world body. The Soviet Union, in retaliation, vetoed all other non- communist applicants, including Japan. This had created a tension in the world body. Marshall Bulganin and Khrushchev were in Delhi on a state visit.  Prime Minister Nehru discussed the issue with them. Consequently, the Soviet Union lifted the veto, thus enabling the entry of sixteen nations into the world organisations, while Mongolia and Japa were admitted to the UN in the following session. Hose Maza, President of the UN General Assembly, acknowledged Indian contribution to the ending of the impasse: Then that night Prime Minister Nehru’s great gesture came…There were continuous movement of telegrams, telephone calls, radio messages, coded messages back and forth…that night negotiations were carried out…The next day we were all astounded that the Soviet Union proposed the admission of sixteen countries.  

 

A veteran British Socialist, H.N. Brailsford suggested that the Indian Prime Minister should mediate to bring rapprochement between the East and the West because’ Nehru stands between two worlds…he is in charge of the of the foreign policy of the one great Asian power whose weight, moral an material, could influence the scales in the choice between peace and war…the test of India’s maturity and Nehru’s stature will be his ability to turn this attitude of neutrality to a creative use to play the part of a mediator and voice the will of the world’s silent millions for peace…there is no figure in the front tank of Statesmen whose personality would so certainly evoke a friendly response.”  

 

Sino-American Rapprochement

 

During the 1950s, hostility between the United States and Red China had intensified. The Communist Revolution in China in October 1949, the Korean war, the Indo-China conflict and other bilateral issues-all have added to the widening rift between them.  On June 6, 1954, Republican Senator, Harry Bridges, President of the Senate, in a television programme stated that the atom bomb should have been used in Korea, and ought to be used against China to save American lives. One month later, the Republican leader, Senator Knowland, demanded that the US should give notice to the UN to choose between the Communist China and the United States and that America would leave the world body if Mao’s Chia was admitted. 

 

Nehru realized the importance of understanding between America and China, in order to normalize ‘other relations on the basis of mutual recognition and respect’ and wished to play a role of conciliator between them.  Through his trusted lieutenant on international diplomacy, Krishna Menon, he sought to bring rapprochement between the USA and the communist giant of Asia.

 

 In 1955, Chia held a group of American airmen as a prisoners. They were caught near the Chinese coast and were condemned as spies.  This had become a highly emotional issue in the US and the UN. The UN Secretary General, Dag Hammarskjold, flew to Peking to persuade the Chinese Government to release the American prisoners but of no avail. Consequently, Eden and Hammarskjold sought the personal intervention of Nehru. Nehru dispatched Krishna Menon to Peking. Menon talked to Chou En Lai as one Asian to another in the spirit of Asian solidarity created at the just concluded Bandung Conference. China agreed to release the American airmen.  Subsequently, the US accepted Menon’s suggestion of repatriating the Chinese nationals through the Indian Embassy in Washington.  Similarly, a reconciliation between America and China on the Formosa question was brought about through the good offices of India.  Krisha Menon had conferred with the Chinese, British, American and the Soviet leaders on the Formosa problem. Consequently, the heads of states involved in the Formosan tangle are listening to the voice of Krishna Menon with growing attention. The Soviet Premier, Marshal Bulganin acknowledged the efforts made by Menon to achieve a settlement on the Formosan problem. India thus acted as a go-between between the Americans and the Chinese, at a time when they didn’t have any diplomatic relation and were not on talking terms. The most important effort that India made to reconcile the difference of the two countries was in December 1956 when Nehru after talks with the Chinese Prime Minister in New Delhi visited Washington and, on his return, again met Chou En Lai. This had contributed to a better understanding of their mutual differences. President Eisenhower appreciated India’s role in the relaxation of tension between the two countries.

 

Nehru created a climate of conciliation.  During the height of the cold war, India appeared on the international stage as a great force which attracted counties of the East and the West in the tense period of history as a factor of conciliation. India played in those dangerous days a role which has not perhaps been correctly assessed. India stands apart from other powers in invoking the giants to resolve their tensions and conflicts. And by the late fifties, it came to be widely recognized that Nehru had performed the delicate role of acting as a buffer and a bridge between the two super powers during the critical decade when a dialogue between them had not yet begun.”