U. Muthuramalinga Thevar – Parliamentary Speech on Foreign Policy (Part I)

The maiden parliamentary speech of Shri Muthuramalinga Thevar, a staunch sanatani and a nationalist who considered “desam” (Nationalism) and “deivigam” (Spirituality) as his two eyes made such reverberations across the corridors of the parliament that Indian Express wrote, “Mr.Muthuramalinga Thevar the last speaker of the day, held the attention of the house with his fiery oration”. Here is a transcript of his speech on foreign policy:

“At this time when we have to speak on the President’s note, I wish to speak about our foreign policy and the Commonwealth which I feel is necessary. We are in an association with other nations in the name of the Commonwealth. But our partners in the Commonwealth want to share our country and its resources and consider these as ‘common’ wealth. But they don’t recognise our right to rule. As they do not like us having Swarajya as much as they want our country and its resources, it is to be considered as a dangerous partnership.

We have made an impression all over the world that the things we achieved were achieved through ahimsa. But most of us know that while it’s easy to think and speak about ahimsa it isn’t the case in implementing it. Ahimsa is a philosophy that cannot go hand in hand with political actions. One can speak about it, write about it. But it’s apparent that one cannot follow it in politics.

All over the world, in every other country usually, there are 2 kinds of political parties. We know that while one of them would be left leaning, the other would be right leaning ideologically. They differ only on their ideology but not when it comes to nationalism or anything regarding the welfare of the country. Both would be nationalistic parties. Both have the support of the public and fulfill their duty towards the nation. Similarly in India two ideologically different, left and right, parties operated, and still do.

Among the leftists who spearheaded the revolutions to attain freedom, there are heroes who went to the gallows with Bhagavad Gita in their hands and those who lost their lives in Andaman prison. But they were not known to be Gandhians. Therefore, in India for whose independence they fought, there was no special place for them. Which means it is not enough for one to be a martyr and that more than being a nationalist and a martyr, he must be one among those who worship Gandhi.

Ahimsa as a policy was somewhat acceptable when we were slaves. But now we have established a republic. Our government spends crores and crores on defence. Yet we do not fail to refer to ahimsa while talking about the Portuguese and Pakistani atrocities in the border. The policy is Ahimsa, but most of the revenue goes towards defence. At the same time, as we talk of ahimsa in the face of foreign aggression, we unleash the army on our own Naga tribes living in the mountains. We allow bullets to be fired on our political dissenters, labourers and farmers. No one is able to understand what kind of Ahimsa this is.

Any policy, at any point in time, must coordinate with our actions. Only the policies that can materialise into actions should be formed. If you have a policy to speak about and a different thing to work on then that policy will merely be lip service. It won’t be immortal either in my opinion. In the early days after the war ended, everyone spoke of peace and tranquillity and an organisation, the United Nations Organisation was formed for that. But only in its name is it ‘united’ as it seems to be aimed at dividing the ‘united’. Its peace talks do not transform into actions at all.

The UN’s aim to bring peace and tranquillity are mere words. Its actions are aimed only at disrupting the peace. So, the UN is nothing but another international association of nations and it won’t go beyond that status. We have unleashed a propaganda at the international stage that, “Democracy has arrived; it’s powerful; it has improved the quality of life and attitude of mankind. So no nation would invade another. No nation would enter another by force. They won’t even dream of doing such an act.” But what is happening? That which doesn’t bode well for democracy and the mankind following it is what is happening. One country invaded another and the big brother of the democratic nations sat idly watching it. I’m referring to the Suez incident here.

We thought that the Suez incident wouldn’t repeat and that the power of democracy would prevent it. But it was repeated in Lebanon. Our big brother America wasn’t even idle during the Lebanon incident. It showed more cruelty than what Britain did in the Suez incident. Showing the mighty power of its Navy and warships America frightened a small country such as Lebanon. Lebanon, seeing a democratic country thumping its chest against another democratic country through America’s actions, decided to face it in the battle of wars believing in the power of democracy and the power of its people. This courageous act of standing up to America suppressed the issue created by America. We saw that America couldn’t stand before the small but powerful nation such as Lebanon that decided to face the battle. 

We want democracy to be brought everywhere in the world through our way of Ahimsa. But what happens around us? Military dictatorship. Not only in Pakistan but military rule is in place in other countries such as Burma (Myanmar now) and Thailand as well. These countries surround India. But we do not say anything about Burma and Thailand. Because Burma isn’t a part of the Commonwealth and Thailand is a part of Association of South East nations (SEATO). But we have to think about Pakistan immediately as it’s a part of the Commonwealth like us. This country is under military rule. The western countries are also allowing this to happen which means we have to be careful about it and shouldn’t we express our displeasure over it? The principles of the Commonwealth nations state that all the members must be democratic. But one of its members is under military rule. If we, as a neighbour allow it, then how can we practice democracy? Isn’t it a cunning way of dragging us into violence? It doesn’t stop here, the situation gets worse. Not only foreigners’ air bases are being built in Pakistan but new rocket launch sites and weapon depots are built near the Afghan mountains to store new and innovative weapons. I do not know how the western countries had explained to us about this kind of democracy. Let us stop here and focus on our borders. It has been 12 years since we became a republic. Yet we haven’t surveyed and demarcated our boundaries.

Even a small family that distributes its properties among its members marks their boundary by building a wall or at the least drawing a line to define their part of the house and properly divide all properties. But that a country, even 12 years after partition, hasn’t demarcated its boundaries is a mystery. This state of indifference is creating new dangers every day. If questions are raised when something unfortunate happens, ‘boundary hasn’t been demarcated; so nothing can be said; MPs exaggerate the incidents’ they say easily. Knowing very well that it’s wrong as per article 3 of our constitution, our prime minister and his Pakistani counterpart hold talks and exchange territories. If we point out that exchanging territories is unconstitutional under article 3, “no-no this is a disputed territory. It doesn’t come under the purview of article 3. So there is no controversy about it” is given as an overall answer. If it’s indeed disputed territory isn’t there any constitutional measure as a remedy? Why can’t we do everything as per the constitution? The laws are written to ensure that the government of the day does everything properly. What good is the law if things are done as per one’s whims and fancies?”