We, the children of this great and ancient nation, naturally desire that our nation should scale ever new heights of prosperity, glory and honour in this world. This is a very legitimate desire, no one can deny it. However, life is not all smooth-sailing in this world of hard reality. Even in the fulfilment of just and legitimate desire one is confronted with impediments and challenges from outside forces. If we have to bring to life the dream of our national glory, we have to assess and analyse the nature of this challenge and prepare ourselves to meet it effectively.

 

 

The world, as it obtains today, is divided into groups of human beings called ‘nations’, which are constantly competing with one another for greater power and prosperity and greater domination over wider territories of the globe. This has been the unfailing feature of human history right from its beginning. In all these millennia the slogans have changed, but not this basic fact. The mask has changed, but not the spirit.

In earlier days, it was imperialism in its unabashed naked form trying to spread its political tentacles over others. Today, the spirit of domination has taken on many more garbs, more alluring and more dangerous. They are sometimes economic and sometimes ideological. But the spirit of world domination is there strong as ever. When one nation wants to dominate over another, a conflict is inevitable. Thus we find in this wide world that there is never any real peace. In fact it is always in a state of intermittent strife. And peace is only an interval between two wars. Conflict is in the very nature of mankind as it is constituted today.

Even so great a person as Sri Krishna, who left no stone unturned to avoid an internecine war and to bring about a just and peaceful settlement between the Pandavas and Kauravas, failed in his mission. War became inevitable and Sri Krishna tells Arjuna;

 

कालोस्मि लोकक्षयकृत्प्रवृद्धो लोकान्समाहर्तुमिह प्रवृत्तः ।

ऋतेपि त्वां न भविष्यन्ति सर्वे येवस्थिताः प्रत्यनीकेषु योधाः ।।

 

(I am the Power of destruction, come to slay these men here. Even without thee all the warriors, standing arrayed in hostile ranks, shall be destroyed.) It only means that death and destruction are in the very nature of this world. This is the great fact of human life to which it is no use shutting our eyes.

Conflicts are going on. Sometimes there is actual clash of arms, spilling of blood. At other times there is a ‘cold war’, the diplomatic persons of one country trying to out-manoeuvre others. Whatever the strategy, the basic rule of relations between nations is the law of the jungle – the strong feeding upon the weak and getting stronger. It is one of jeevo jeevasya jeevanam, of matsya nyaya, the big fish devouring the small fish and becoming bigger at the cost of the smaller.

 

 

Just look at the history of Europe. When the countries of Europe became powerful in the wake of the Industrial Revolution, each one of them stretched its aggressive arms to grab other countries. When Spain became strong it carried its sword to America. Portugal, in its days of power, spread its tentacles of destruction right up to Goa in our country. Whenever France became powerful, it brought under its heels the smaller countries of Europe. The history of England which spread its empire over distant corners of the globe is only too well known. The story of Germany is not different. It plunged the world in two world wars to satiate its aggressive spirit. Italy, when it felt strong enough, grabbed Abyssinia. Now, Russia, having emerged powerful after the Second World War, had devoured countries like Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Balkan States and even half of Germany. Under the very nose of UNO, it massacred thousands of Hungarian freedom fighters and crushed Hungary under its iron heels. Now Russia is prowling about all over the world, in search of its future prey. China, even at this early stage of its growing power, has bared its claws in Korea and Indo-China. It has already sat tight upon Tibet, devoured parts of Ladakh and NEFA and is now poised for a further drive into the Himalayan States.

 

Every time a war breaks out, the warlords say that it is a war to end all future wars! After witnessing the horrors of the First World War, people the world over prayed for peace and end of all wars. But within hardly two decades, the world was drenched in the blood-bath of another and a more terrible holocaust. And again after the Second World War, mankind hoped and prayed for peace. But what is the actual state of affairs now? Everywhere there are conflicts, sometimes flaring up into shooting war. The whole of Africa is like the seething bowels of a volcano, erupting every now and then. In its surreptitious move to turn Cuba into its missile base, Russia has pushed the world to the very brink of world conflagration.

 

 

However, these conflicts and bloodshed are carried on under various garbs. Today, for example, most aggressive and dangerous plans are being hatched under the cover of Communism. Communism, be it remembered, was born with the cry of revolt against domination of every kind. The communists in Russia and China rose in revolt against their own kings and feudal chiefs, liquidated them and assumed power. But in a short time, they too took to the same path of imperialism, though under the new slogan of ‘liberating the people of the world from the clutches of imperialists and capitalists’. They even call their aggressive armies as ‘liberation armies’.

 

What is the story of China and the various East European countries like Hungary, Poland, etc., ‘liberated’ by Russia? Those who visited China afterwards – and who had the mental poise and courage to call a spade a spade – had unequivocally stated that the average man there seemed to scent danger all-round and did not appear to be free in his behaviour. That was the result of Russians and their local agents sitting in their secret nooks and corners of every departments and dominating each sphere of national life, its army, its navy, its air force, its farming, scarcely coming out in the open but tightly holding their overall supremacy.

 

Of course, some people were there in China who went about singing the praise of ‘New China’, of ‘the great leap’ and ‘our great brother Russia’ and so on. Even in our country, when the British were ruling, there were some persons who went about the world saying that British rule was a godsend, a boon, as if the British were direct messengers of God, sent for our emancipation. We will always find such slaves who extol to the skies their masters. If the masters flog them they will praise the strength of the masters and say, "What a fine whip he has and how well he wields it"! Now, China is repeating the same story of ‘liberation’ in the case of Tibet.

 

America too stood up against the imperialistic tyranny of Britain, overthrew its domination and established its independence. The same America, maybe with a view to containing the rising danger of Communism, is now trying to bring a large number of countries under its wing by giving them economic aid and sometimes military aid too. But as we know, arthasya purusho dasah. Wherever economic aid comes some sort of mental enslavement also follows. Thus we find in all such poor countries receiving the America aid the imprint of American culture, corroding their national ideals, traditions and originality in every sphere of life.

 

 

What then is the way out to maintain our national integrity and glory in this world of conflicts? Can we depend upon the friendship and alliance of other nations? Here too the lesson of world history affords us no streak of hope. Friendship or hostility between any two nations has never been a permanent feature. Nations change their friends and foes as it suits their self-interest.

 

The story of the permutations and combinations of relationship between nations of Europe in the last few centuries makes interesting reading. England and France were bitter enemies for centuries. When France, under Napolean, posed a challenge to England, the latter developed friendly ties with Germany and crushed France. Later, when Germany became too powerful, England and France came together in both the world wars and crushed Germany. In the beginning of the Second World War, Russia remained neutral but later joined Germany to get a share in the loot. But still later, England manoeuvred to wean away Russia from Germany and Russia joined the camp of America, England and France. America, too, during her struggle for independence, was hostile to England but friendly to France. The picture changed after a few years, and again England became its friend. Such has been the history of ‘mutual friendship’ between nations on the face of the earth. Nor can we expect anything different so long as the spirit of self- aggrandisement and domination rules the minds of nations. So, to seek permanent security in the form of friendship with other nations would be just a delusion.

 

 

Today the world appears to be torn into two power-blocs. Seeing their power and splendour, and our own weakness in comparison, there are some who advocate our joining the one or the other bloc so as to be able to breathe freely under its protective wings. But then, to remain weak oneself and become an ally of the strong is not without its grave risks.

 

Once a giant and dwarf became friends. They embarked upon an adventure to a forest. There they found a band of dacoits sharing among themselves the booty of a vast amount of wealth. The giant put the dacoits to rout, took all the wealth and returned. Unfortunately, in the fury of the fight, the dwarf lost one of his hands. After some time they again set out on another adventure. This time they came across a fort with people imprisoned and tyrannised by a cruel despot. The giant killed the tyrant; and the people out of gratitude chose him as their king thereafter. This time the dwarf lost one of his legs. The giant got a big fort and many dutiful subjects.

 

The dwarf, cursing his ill luck and envying the good fortune of the giant, thought that something must be done to gain some advantage for himself also. So he started on his crutches along with the giant once again. As luck would have it, they chanced to see a princess being taken away by some miscreants. She was rescued and taken to her father by the giant. Out of gratitude the king offered the princess to the giant in marriage along with his kingdom. The dwarf lost one eye in that ‘mercy’ campaign. The upshot was, the giant got two kingdoms, a princess for a wife and a vast store of wealth; and his friend the dwarf, lost one hand, one foot and one eye!

 

The moral is too evident. The friendship between the strong and the weak is bound to result in the strong taking away the profits leaving the weak to suffer the losses. That is what we witness in the international field also. The powerful nations build their strategic frontiers away from their own national frontiers with a view to carrying on the war against the enemies on others’ soil and avoiding the calamities of war on their own soil. We see the Russian armies spread out in distant countries. We have seen the American armies fighting in Korea, in Viet Nam. The smaller countries thereby become war-fields for the trial of strength of bigger powers, and the local people treated by them as so much cannon-fodder.

 

 

When we thus read the world correctly, we are forced to arrive at simple conclusion that the only basis for our free and prosperous national life is invincible national strength – a strength that will strike terror into the hearts of aggressive powers and make other nations seek our friendship. Strength is the very elixir of national life.

 

In fact, to remain weak is to extend invitation to aggression and depredation by stronger foreign powers. It is the weak who are thus responsible for the disturbance of peace in the world. Churchill called the Second World War an ‘unnecessary war’. As England and France could easily have held Germany in check in the initial stages and avoided war if only they had displayed the nerve and strength to do it. But they remained unprepared and weak and thus indirectly fanned the German war-spirit. To be strong is the real path to peace.

 

Even today we see that because America and Russia are equally strong neither is prepared to risk a global war. Both are in possession of world-destructive missiles and both are aware that neither would survive a nuclear holocaust. The Cuba episode holds a great lesson for us. Russia attempted to sabotage the security of America by secretly turning Cuba into its missile base. But the drastic and timely action on the part of America checked the Russian adventure and saved the world from a future world conflagration.

 

But this does not mean that the weaker countries are safe or that wars have come to an end. Only the final nuclear showdown is being avoided and postponed to a future date. All other things are going on as before. We often hear the ‘wise man’ of our country assuring us that we need not to be worried about any foreign power risking a war with us as that would involve the whole of humanity in a nuclear conflagration. But it would be very naïve on our part to believe that others are as much afraid of war as we are. Even without a formal declaration of war, enemies invade and occupy territories. There is the glaring instance of our own country losing large chunks of territory to Pakistan in Kashmir and Kutch and to China in Ladakh and NEFA all without a declaration of war! The same story is being, repeated in Indo-China and other places even today.

 

 

Nowadays in our country we hear a lot about ‘non-alignment’, ‘dynamic neutrality’, etc., as if they are our life-saving principles. But will they really help the weak? In the event of an attack by an aggressive power, how are we going to save ourselves? Shall we not have to throw ourselves into the arms of one or the other power-bloc for our protection? Then, that would indeed be the ‘dynamic neutrality’ of a football which is ‘impartial’ and ‘neutral’ by itself but is also ‘dynamic’ being kicked about from one side to the other! Moreover, in the event of a wider conflict, the bigger powers will care two hoots for the neutrality of the weak.

 

 

During the First World War, Germany chose the plains of the neutral Netherlands to cross its armies into France in order to avoid the hazardous mountainous border between Germany and France. Germany never bothered itself about the protestations of neutrality by Belgium and trampled their neutrality under its military boot. If these countries too were armed to the teeth, then Germany would not have dared to incur their wrath.

 

The example of Switzerland affords a striking contrast. During the last war, Switzerland maintained its strict neutrality. The country is comparatively poor, but the people’s heart is vibrant with intense patriotic zeal, national pride and an indomitable spirit of freedom. The international rule is that neutral countries cannot be utilised as a corridor for the transit of foreign armies or arms during wars. Once during the war, English planes were seen flying over Switzerland on way to bomb Germany. Immediately, a warning was given to those planes to quit the air space of Switzerland forthwith. But the English, in their inflated consciousness of strength, ignored the warning. Then Switzerland, without compunction, shot down those planes. Later, England sent a long letter of protest. But Switzerland replied that she was a free nation determined to preserve her neutrality and if there was a recurrence of similar violation of her sovereignty, the same results would follow!

 

 

But in our country a queer notion has gained ground that in this world we will be able to pull through with happiness and honour even without being strong, that just an appeal to the higher sentiments of man, to Panchsheel, or an appeal to the UNO will act as a solvent for all human conflicts. All such perverse notions are being paraded as universal truths.

 

Our leading personalities even preach to our army the virtues of ‘internationalism’ and ‘world brotherhood’! Once a military officer and another gentleman were travelling with we in train. They were conversing in Urdu. The military officer remarked, "Oh! You speak very nice Urdu." The other gentleman replied, "Yes I have studied Urdu during my school days. But now, as I have grown older, my love for Urdu has disappeared." The military officer asked, "What is the reason?" He replied, " When I read Urdu or Persian, the picture that comes up before me in all their literature is some bul-bul, some Persia, some Euphrates, Tigris, but nothing of my country." The military officer exclaimed, "How narrow-minded and medieval you are! Now the times are such that we should give up thinking in narrow confines of country, nation and so on. Now we have to think in terms of the whole world." Suppose such an army officer goes out for war; will he be able to fight with conviction for the protection of his country? At any moment the ’world consciousness’ in him may revolt and he may feel, "What is all this humbug? Why should I fight? What does it matter if they conquer? After all they are as much human beings as we are!" Then what will be our fate? Will such ‘world consciousness’ save us from annihilation?

 

Once upon a time there was a Jyotishi. As we know, the world has never been free from problems. This Jyotishi was perturbed. Anxious to know future of the world he set out to note the positions of the various planets influencing the earth. As he walked out of his village, seeing one planet after another and weaving his web of fancies and fears, he fell into a well. Fortunately for the Jyotishi the well was long abandoned and dry. He shouted for rescue. A small party was passing by. When they had pulled him out they asked in wonderment, "But Panditji, how did you manage to land yourself in this out-of-way well?" Paditji detailed his piety for the world and his mission of the planets and sobbed about his fall. His rescuers commented, "Panditji, before you set out to find the world’s horoscope, had you but read your own, you might have well avoided this fall."

 

Those gentlemen who today camouflage weakness and ignorance under the booming name of internationalism would be well advised to take a lesson form the sorrows of the Jyotishi and set our national house in order before launching on international enterprise which they have no power to execute. Those who speak of ‘world unity’ and all that, while the world is governed by power politics and might rules supreme, really do not seem to know what they talk. The one fact of world politics today is the existence of nation-states governed by the one supreme consideration of self-interest and self-aggrandisement. Those who ignore this stake a fact on a fiction.

Once I was addressing a group of elders. I reviewed the state of nation and expressed my opinion that unless we stopped the rot from within and became strong, we will cease to live as a nation. Pat came the too wise remark, "What if we cease to live as a nation? We’ll live all the same, and live as humanity." I replied, "Why, we’ll ‘live’ even after we die. Our ashes – or rather our entombed carcasses – will remain. For, has not science proved the indestructibility of matter?"

 

Such is the ludicrous and dangerous extent to which the present fads of ‘internationalism’, ‘world unity’ etc., has driven our country today. We are so thoroughly hypnotised by such slogans that we have become incapable of seeing through the aggressive designs of foreign powers who put on the mask of ‘world peace’, ‘internationalism’, etc., etc. They come and conduct ‘international peace conference’ here, while they prepare world-destructive missiles in their home countries. The only meaning of all their moves is that they want to draw us into their camp to serve as cannon-fodder in the future war they are planning. They, of course, want ‘peace’. But what kind of peace? With them as the masters and others as slaves, they wish to sleep in peace and desire that the slaves should not quarrel amongst themselves and disturb the sleep of the master! And we, who have become victims of fantastic fads, allow ourselves to be duped, and pat our back on our ‘progressive’ and international outlook! Do we not see our people going to the so-called international peace conference organised by the Communists, knowing fully well that such tactics are the thin end of the wedge of Communist expansionism?

 

The slogans and paper compromise like ‘peaceful co-existence’ and ‘Panchsheel’ that out leaders are indulging in only serve as a comouflage for the self-seeking predatory countries of the world to pursue their own ulterior motives against our country. China, as we know, was most vociferous in its expression of faith in Panchsheel. China was extolled as our great neighbour and friend for the last two thousand years or more from the day it accepted Buddhism. Our leaders declared that they were determined to stick to China’s friendship ‘at all costs’. Once, we had similarly resolved to win the friendship of Muslims in this land ‘at all costs’. How much it has cost us in terms of our national integrity and honour is all too well known. The same history has been repeated in this case also.

 

 

We have forgotten that the ancient Buddhist China is now dead for the past few years. The Russian wizard has called a spirit in that corpse turning in into a fiend. And we are today witnessing its devil-dance on our borders. When it devoured Tibet and Pandit Nehru mildly protested, he was curtly admonished not to poke his nose in their ‘internal affair’. Our late Prime Minister silently gulped down the national humiliation. Form then on, we had been continuously paying the ever-mounting price to maintain China’s friendship and the glory of ‘Panchsheel’-the historic treaty of ‘eternal friendship and fraternity’ between the two great countries – on which solemn signatures of the two great Prime Ministers were affixed at the same time when the Chinese army trucks were rolling on the military road they had constructed in Ladakh and were grabbing large chunks of our Himalayan territory!

 

Dr. J.C. Kumarappa, a great disciple of Gandhiji and an economist of repute, after his visit to Russia and China had even in those days categorically warned that in their eyes the treaty of Panchsheel was not worth the paper on which it was written. But our leaders continued to roam in their own dreamland, shutting their eyes to the glaring signs of the all-enveloping danger of Communist China’s aggression. The Communists in our country distributed copies of a new map of China showing therein portions of all Himalayan territories – Ladhakh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, and NEFA (indicating the five fingers of the aggressive fist of China protruding from Tibet)- and of Burma. Our Government did not even confiscate these maps.

 

When Khrushchev visited our country and was in Kashmir, he declared, "When you are in distress, climb the top of these mountains and shout for help. We will always be ready on the other side to rush to your help." Let us not forget that their henchmen are here who may at any time raise that cry for help?

At the same time when Khrushchev and Bulganin were being greeted with unprecedented ovations all over the country and acclaimed as heroes of world peace, there was a Russian documentary film being exhibited in our country. The film opens with the scene of Moscow and the commentator declares, "Moscow, the capital of the future world"! If Moscow is to become the capital, does it not imply that the whole world must needs be under the heels of Russia?

 

 

We are still unable to free ourselves form the delusion that our international prestige has risen high because of such pious platitudes. But what are the facts? For instance, take Pakistan. This flesh of our flesh does not lose a single opportunity to fling at us its impudent insult, kill and kidnap our men and officers, shoot down our planes and carry on regular genocide of Hindus still living there. And now, it has invaded our country. Ceylon, a tiny country, is throwing out lakhs of our brethren staying in that land for generations. Burma also has followed suit. We referred the Kashmir issue to the UNO as the aggrieved party and in spite of our ‘high international prestige’, that world forum is now treating us on par with the aggressor! It is claimed that our influence counted in getting released eleven American pilots imprisoned in China, that we played a notable role in Korea and so on. Then, why has not that ‘great international prestige’ come into play in all these matters where our national hounour and integrity are gravely jeopardised? Or is that ‘prestige’ similar to that of the washerman’s donkey whose fate it is to work all day for its master and then be driven out to fend for itself.

 

Our leaders often repeat that because of our policy of peace and non-alignment we are befriended and respected by all the big powers. They point to the economic aid that we are receiving form America and even from Russia. But it is the same America, which is arming our enemy Pakistan with the latest arms. Is it a sign of friendship to feed us on economic aid like a sacrificial goat on the one hand and on the other supply arms to those aggressing on us? Much need not be said about Russia, which has declared its ‘unbreakable bonds of brotherhood’ with China in contrast with its ‘friendship’ for Bharat and has often acted as the driving force behind China’s aggressive designs.

In our simplicity, we take the words and diplomatic moves of the world powers at their face value and begin to flatter ourselves that we occupy a great position in the councils of the world. To give an example, some years ago Srimati Vijayalakshmi Pandit was elected as the President of the General Assembly of the UNO. But what was the ulterior motive behind the move of bestowing that ‘great honour’ on our country? Just then, the treacherous plot of Sheikh Abdullah to turn Kashmir into an independent state had been exposed. He had been dismissed and arrested. The intrigues of UN agents in abetment of that foul plot were also thoroughly exposed. The Anglo-Americans-whose tools those UN agents were-became anxious to devise ways and means to save their face and retain their foothold in Kashmir and bring our country into an amicable mood so as to continue their designs unhampered. And what better tactics could they have devised than bestowing the august honour of the UN Presidentship upon the sister of the then Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru? That was a subtle form of flattery and nothing more. But we, in our simplicity, took it as a genuine honour done to us.

 

 

Thus we find that the various high-sounding concepts that we have taken up as the sheet-anchor of our national prestige and progress have really no value in this world of hard reality. However, in spite of burning our fingers repeatedly, we are not able to overcome the infatuation for wishful thinking. This has been a curse on our people not merely now but for a number of centuries past. When Chengiz Khan was planning to invade our country he came to know that a large number of people in our N.W. region had embraced Buddhism. So he made a show of becoming a Buddhist and then invaded. Many of the Buddhist here, seeing that he was their co-religionist, went forward to welcome him. The result was, Chengiz Khan could raise mountain-high heaps of human heads – all under the ‘non-violent’ cover of Buddhism!

 

 

Let us at least now recognise the truth that for real national honour and peace, there is no other way except the building of invincible national strength. It is only then that the great principles that we preach to the world will carry weight and prestige. The world is not prepared to listen to the philosophy, however sublime, of the weak. There is an old incident, which appeared in many of our important papers. Our great national bard Rabindranath Tagore had gone to Japan. He was to address the University students on the greatness of Hindu philosophy. But the lecture hall remained vacant except for a few professors! Thinking that such a poor show would be an insult to the distinguished visitor, one of the professors tried to persuade the students, who were standing far away, to attend the lecture. The students firmly refused saying, "We do not want to listen to the philosophy of a slave nation"!

 

The world worships only the strong. Before the last war, when England was powerful, our people tried to imitate and eulogise the English. But when, during the war, it appeared for a time that Germany would win, they began to adore Hilter and even Nazism. We know of persons now most vociferous in their condemnation of Hitler and Nazism but who were turning their radios in secret to listen to German news in those days with a sense of admiration. How elated they were to hear of the fall of France within hardly two weeks of German invasion! Now the very same persons worship either America or Russia because these happen to be the countries, which shattered the military might of Germany and stand today as great world powers. The fascination communism holds for many people today is mainly due to the show of brute strength by the votaries of Communism-Russia and China. That is the way of the world. Nobody cares a whit for the voice of the weak. Long ago our forefathers had declared that the desires of the poor and weak are just castles in the air-

 

उत्पद्यन्ते विलीयन्ते दरिद्राणां मनोरथाः ।

 

 

Whatever the external conditions, it is the weak who suffer. No amount of external adjustment or juxtapositions will be able to save a nation if it is inherently weak. To remain weak is the most heinous sin in this world, as that would destroy oneself and also incite feelings of violence in others. Our forefathers have said that physical survival is part of the highest religion and for physical survival strength is the only basis. It is said of Vishwamitra that once during an acute famine he did not get any food for days together. One day he saw the rotting leg of a dead dog lying in a Chandala’s house. Vishwamitra snatched it and got ready to eat it by first making an offering to God. The Chandala exclaimed, "Oh, sage, how is it you are eating a dog’s leg?" Vishwamitra replied, "Yes I must first live and be strong enough in order to do penance and good deeds in the world."

 

But the thinking in our country during the last few decades has been one of looking down upon strength as something sinful and reprehensible. A wrong interpretation of ‘non-violence’ has deprived the national mind of the power of discrimination. We have begun to look upon strength as ‘violence’ and to glorify our weakness.

 

Once a Sadhu said, "The very word ‘ahimsa’(non-violence) is a negative expression derived form ‘himsa’(violence) by prefixing ‘a’ (non) to the positive idea of himsa (violence). A person sufficiently strong to do himsa, but not doing so out of restraint, discretion and compassion can alone be said to be practising ahimsa. Suppose a strong man is going in a road and somebody knocks against him. If the strong man says with compassion, "All right, my dear fellow, I excuse you for the wrong you have done me", then we say that the strong man has practised non-violence. For, though he is capable of giving him a blow and smashing his skull, he has restrained himself. Suppose, a thin, lean man – just a mosquito! – is going and somebody pulls his ears and the ‘mosquito’ trembling form head to foot says, "Sir, I excuse you", who will believe him? Who will say that he is practising non-violence? He is like a man who, unable to check the dacoits plundering his house, loudly proclaims vasudhaiva kutumbakam (the entire world is my home)! People will only say that he is a coward and hypocrite, that he dare not to do anything and is only hiding his cowardice behind big platitudes. The atmosphere of our country today is charged with such misconceptions and platitudes of self-deception. A dense cloud of dust is raised in the form of high-sounding words like ‘peace’ and ‘non-violence’ with an assumed air of moral authority only to cover up our imbecility.

 

It is because of such perverse notions that we have been losing all-round. We find our frontiers shrinking. No one is in a mood to protect the integrity and honour of the motherland. Every national insult is covered up under the mast of ‘peace’. Day after day insults are being heaped upon us. Our people are being shot down by the enemies. And China presents the dead bodies of our eleven soldiers on the birthday of Pandit Nehru! All these we gulp down saying that we are devotees of ‘peace’! It is said in the Mahabharata that a person who goes on swallowing insults is neither a male nor a female.

 

एतावानेव पुरुषो यदमर्षी यदक्षमी ।

क्षमावान् निरमर्षश्च नैव स्त्री न पुनः पुमान् ।।

 

(He alone is a man who does not brook or forgive insults. One who remains cold and tolerant in the face of insults is neither a male not a female.)

 

 

Our philosophy tells us that man should be humble only when he is capable of humbling others. When can one be forgiving? Only when one becomes powerful enough to strike down those who insult him. When should one serve others? Only when he becomes worthy of commanding the willing service of the entire world. We see this ideal in Sri Krishna who preached ahimsa in Gita, after annihilating the many evil demons one after another right form his childhood. It was he who slew Kamsa, reinstated Ugarasena on the throne but himself remained as the sentinel at the court entrance, welcoming the royal guests. It was again he who took upon himself the menial service of removing the leaves after meals in the great Rajasuya Yaga of Yudhishthira, where he was the person honoured with Agrapooja! Such is the message of our philosophy.

 

All our great masters who have set the standards of our national conduct have always blended idealism with realism, the highest principles of human welfare with the demands of the practical world. There is an incident, narrated in the popular lore, which took place while the battle between Rama and Ravana was at a high pitch. Lakshmana, after killing Meghanada, the son of Ravana, had brought his head to his camp. Meghanada’s wife Sulochana, who wanted to ascend the funeral pyre along with her husband’s body, proceeded towards Rama’s camp to request him to return the head of her husband. The soldiers on the side of Rama, seeing a beautiful woman approaching their side from Ravana’s camp, concluded that she must be Sita herself. They were agog with joy and jubilation and were about to lay down their arms. But when Sri Rama heard of the excitement and the reason for it, he calmly told, "Do not forget that Ravana with his ten heads and twenty arms is still very much alive. It is only after walking over the dead body of Ravana that we can enter Lanka and free Sita. Do not dream of seeing Sita till then. Do not be under any such illusion." With his thorough grasp of human psychology, he had correctly assessed Ravana’s nature and had concluded that the rakshasa’s evil tendency was too deep-rooted to allow him to change under any circumstances and that his menace could be eliminated by the unfailing Ramabana alone. Rama’s upholding of the highest standards of human life and his conviction in the ultimate sanction of strength were two aspects of the same character that made him Maryada-Purushottama (the ideal man).

And again in the Mahabharata Sri Krishna, on the battle-field of Kurukshetra, invoked manliness in Arjuna with the call:

 

क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ ।

 

(Yield not to imbecility, O Partha!) not only the message of the Gita, but the context in which it was delivered, and the preceptor who gave it out, and the pupil, are all cast in a heroic setting. Sri Krishna, the preceptor, was accepted on all hands as the supreme hero of that Yuga. Arjuna, the pupil, too was a warrior par excellence, only next to Sri Krishna. And Bhagvad – Gita, the greatest treasure-house of spiritual knowledge, is the dialogue on the battlefield between these two great heroes of those times. This only highlights the fact of human life that the establishment of righteousness and virtues in this world of conflicts is not possible without the quality of fearlessness and heroism. Of course, Arjuna was not a coward. But having seen his own elders and preceptors ranged against him, he was riddled with doubts about the rectitude of his course of action. He did not want to run away from the battlefield. On the contrary, keeping aside his arms, he wanted to die at hands of his adversaries, in a spirit of resignation.

 

यदि मामप्रतीकारमशस्त्रं शस्त्रपाणयः ।

धार्तराष्ट्रा रणे हन्युस्तन्मे क्षेमतरं भवेत् ।।

 

(Far bettter would it be for me if sons of Dhritrashtra, weapons in hand, should slay me in the battle, while I remain in non-retaliating and unarmed.)

The same confusion appears to have gripped the hearts of our leaders today. Words like ‘non-retaliation’, ‘peace’ etc., are being shouted form housetops. Of course, there is a vast difference between the mental conditions of the two. Arjuna was a hero to the very core; while the protestations of high-flown words like ‘non-retaliation’ etc., that we hear today are put up as a smoke-screen to cover up our imbecility.

 

 

In the world of today, whether one desire it or not, conflicts are bound to arise. Merely because we remain pious, does it imply that others also will be cured of their wicked tendencies? Can there be a greater self-deception than believing in such a palpably absurd superstition? The sacrificial goat which is peacefully led to the alter of sacrifice is, in fact, the very embodiment of ‘non-retaliation’! Without the slightest murmur, it puts its head under the knife of the butcher. The butcher never feels for a moment that he should not kill such an innocent, ‘non-violent’ creature. At the same time no one dares even to think of offering a tiger in sacrifice. It is only the weak, docile, ‘non-violent’ goat that is pitched upon for sacrifice. There is a saying,

 

अश्वं नैव गजं नैव व्याघ्रं नैव च नैव च ।

अजापुत्रं बलिं दध्यात् देवो दुर्बलघातकः ।।

 

(It is not the horse, not the elephant, and never never the tiger but the goat that is offered in sacrifice; even gods destroy the weak.) Such is the fruit of the attitude of ‘non-retaliation’! of course, we should not indulge in unprovoked violence. At the same time, we should also not allow others to do violence to us. Allowing violence to be done to oneself is also violence and therefore adhrama. Once a great Jain Sadhu explaining the significance of ahimsa said, "If you are faced with a brute force bent upon destroying you and you do nothing to protect yourself in the name of ahimsa, then you will have only encouraged the evil power to indulge in violence. You thus become an abettor in the crime and an abettor is as much guilty of the crime as the actual perpetrator." He added, "Intention, and not the physical act, is the only criterion to decide whether the act is in the nature of himsa or ahimsa."

The teaching of the really great ones have always guided us correctly in all such matters. Even a most compassionate saint like Tukaram defined compassion as:

 

दया तिचे नांव भूतांचें पालन आणिक निर्दलन कंटकांचें ।

 

(Compassion is protection of all living beings and destruction of the wicked elements). Usually the names of two great men are associated with the word ‘non-violence’ – Bhagawan Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi. There is an instance in the life of Buddha, significant in this connection. The commander-in chief of a particular kingdom came to him to receive deeksha and become his disciple. Buddha asked him as to what had prompted him to become a bhiksu. To that, the commander replied, "Enemies have invaded our territory. I am now required to lead our forces against them. But that will lead to violence and bloodshed on both sides. I felt that it would be sinful act. I therefore decided to relinquish the military responsibility and have come over here to follow your path of peace and non-violence." Buddha counseled him: "Merely because you have come away, the enemies are not going to give up their aggression. They are bound to indulge in killing and ravaging. If you forsake your duty of protecting the innocents under your charge, the sin of all that violence will visit upon your head. Protection of the good and righteous is verily a duty enjoined by Dharma. No sin will attach to you while doing this duty. So, go back and carry our your assignment." That was how Buddha interpreted the true meaning of ahimsa.

 

Gandhiji too preached in the same strain. Once when the Muslims went on a rampage and attacked the Hindus in Ahmedabad, the Hindus began fleeing form their hearths and homes. Gandhiji castigated them saying, "Why are you behaving like cowards? You take my name and repeat the word ahimsa parrot-like and run for your life under that shelter. My non-violence is not of the cowards, it is of the brave. Instead of running away in such a cowardly fashion it would be far better for you to fight, to kill or get killed." Sri Krishna has unequivocally and for all time to come declared that establishment of dharma implies the destruction of the evil-doers:

 

विनाशाय च दुष्कृताम् ।

 

Sri Krishna himself was the very embodiment of that principle. No doubt he exerted himself to the utmost to avoid war and bring about peace. But he clearly foresaw that the ultimate sanction lay in his own supreme strength. When he was about to go to Duryodhana for bringing about a compromise Dharmaraja became anxious about his safety fearing that the evil-natured Duryodhana might harm Sri Krishna. Sri Krishna assured him that in that event Dharmaraja would get the kingdom without a war as he himself would destroy Duryodhana and his host of associates. That is the only right view regarding the role of strength while facing adversaries. To speak and act always in terms of applying force when it is not needed and when a just and honourable compromise is possible is inhuman and brutal. But to talk always of compromise and not to use force even when there is no other way out to undo injustice and insults is sheer cowardice and imbecility.

 

We, therefore, have to properly understand the true message of those great lives as lived by them in this world of hard realities. And the hard reality is that the world, as it is constituted today, understands but one language – the language of strength. It is on the unshakable foundation of immense strength alone that the nation rises and maintains itself in a glorious condition.

 

 

Where does this strength come from? What is that real and inexhaustible source of national strength? It is the consolidated, dedicated and disciplined life of the people as a whole. After all, the various spheres of national life are only so many manifestations of the innate strength of the people. Political power is one such manifestation. Military power is the well disciplined, intensely patriotic and heroic attitude of the people.

 

It has been truly said that it is not the gun but the heart behind it that fights. Without a strong patriotic heart no amount of arms and ammunition will save the country. There is an incident which occurred in Nagpur during what people call "Hindu-Muslim" riot (but which is invariably a Muslim riot as it is always the Muslim who strikes first and it is the Hindu who bears the brunt). During the disturbance a Hindu sat upstairs in his house with a loaded gun. Some Muslim goondas attacked his house, but as the doors were tightly secured they could not enter inside. Then one of them flourished a small axe in his hand, shouting to the person sitting above to throw down the gun or else he would be cut into pieces! Struck with terror, the Hindu gentlman actually let down that gun and was shot down with the same gun! So, it is the fearless and steel-willed man alone who can wield weapons and protect himself. Similar is the case with a nation.

 

It is on these practical and realistic guidelines of national conduct that our people can hope to rise again as great nation. All our efforts have therefore to be concentrated in the direction of generating invincible national strength by making our people nationally conscious and moulding them all for a well disciplined, co-ordinated and invincibly powerful national entity, which alone is the ultimate sanction for a free and glorious national life on the face of this earth.