After China blocked the move to blacklist Pakistan-based Masood Azhar as a global terrorist, Congress president Rahul Gandhi tweeted that Prime Minister Modi is weak and scared to speak to Chinese president Xi. At the same time Congress spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjewala blamed it on the foreign policy of the NDA government.
This when all other 14 members voted for the proposition, moved by the P3 nations comprising the US, the UK and France, which in itself an unprecedented show of support to India.
After Pulwama terror attack, Rahul Gandhi has been constantly questioning “who released Masood Azhar in 1999?” Now after China blocked the proposal to blacklist Azhar in the UNSC for fourth time questions are asked about why did his great grandfather Jawaharlal Nehru forgo a chance to replace China on the UNSC.
Below are two excerpts from an article published in 2016 by Firstpost, which may leave anyone baffled.
A letter of Vijaylaxmi Pandit, India’s ambassador to the US: ““One matter that is being cooked up in the State Department should be known to you. This is the unseating of China as a permanent member in the Security Council and of India being put in her place. I have just seen Reuters’ report of your answer to the same question. Last week I had interviews with (John Foster) Dulles and (Philip) Jessup, reports of which I have sent to (Girija Shankar) Bajpai (the then foreign secretary). Both brought up this question and Dulles seemed particularly anxious that a move in this direction should be started. Last night I heard from Marquis Childs, an influential columnist of Washington, that Dulles (US secretary of state) has asked him on behalf of the State Department to build up public opinion along these lines”.
Nehru’s answer: “In your letter you mention that the State Department is trying to unseat China as a permanent member of the Security Council and to put India in her place. So far as we are concerned, we are not going to countenance it. That would be bad from every point of view. It would be a clear affront to China and it would mean some kind of a break between us and China. I suppose the State Department would not like that, but we have no intention of following that course. We shall go on pressing for China’s admission in the UN and the Security Council.”
Are we reading a sort of fear in between those lines?
The article also quotes an excerpt from Sarvepalli Gopal’s biography: “He (Nehru) rejected the Soviet offer to propose India as the sixth permanent member of the Security Council and insisted that priority be given to China’s admission”.