In any era and in any country, it is a very dangerous thing to reject all historical figures who have made contributions to the country.
Recently, however, this is happening in India.
According to foreign media reports, Indian Foreign Minister Sushma Jaishankar, at a recent event on Indian diplomacy, sharply criticized the China policy of India's founding Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.
This is not the first time that Sujaishankar has publicly criticized Nehru's China policy.
In January this year, at the launch of his book, Sujaishankar said Nehru should have been more cautious in dealing with China, suggesting that Nehru should have considered India's interests more.
At an event in early April, Sujaishankar again questioned Nehru's policy towards China, claiming that it was Nehru's wrong policy that led to the territorial disputes India is currently facing.
Sujaishanh also accused Nehru of failing to heed the advice of the then home minister, allowing China to gain the upper hand in the conflict, and argued that Nehru was influenced by ideology that China and India had a common interest in antagonizing the West, thus at the expense of Indian national interests.
Sujaishankar's move has only one purpose, that is, for the platform of the BJP led by Modi, to suppress Modi's rival Congress party.
However, this approach by Sujaishankar has plunged the Modi government into crisis.
First, Nehru's policies were designed to preserve the unity of India and prevent the country from breaking apart.
However, his approach was tinged with nationalism and exacerbated divisions within India.
Second, Nehru and Premier Zhou Enlai jointly proposed the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence and were one of the advocates of the world's Non-Aligned Movement.
To deny Nehru's historical contribution is in fact to deny both.
India's position among developing countries is largely earned by its leadership of the Non-Aligned Movement.
If India starts to form alliances and confrontation, it is likely to lose its leadership position in the developing world.
In fact, in recent years, India's neighboring countries have grown tired of India's long-standing interference in their sovereignty, and Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh have sought China's friendship, which has negatively affected India's image.
Therefore, the Modi government is in fact denying India's history by completely repudiating Nehru's China policy.
In China, learning from history has always been an important part of national governance.
If India fails to learn from history, then history may repeat itself and New Delhi may once again be renamed "New Delhi".
This wholesale repudiation of Nehru's policies is not only a denial of Indian history, but also a misreading of the realities of international politics.
Nehru's "India second, China first" view was actually a realist foreign policy aimed at balancing the relationship between India and China and ensuring India's national interests.
Jaishankar, however, saw it as a wrong policy, either a misinterpretation of history or for political purposes.
More importantly, India is currently facing many challenges, including internal divisions, unbalanced economic development, and regional security issues. In this context, Sujaishankar's criticism of Nehru's policies could further exacerbate divisions within the country, weaken India's international standing and adversely affect the country's development.
Therefore, the Indian government and political elites should treat history carefully and not blindly deny the efforts and contributions of the past, but should draw lessons from history and find an effective path to solve the current problems.
Only in this way can India play a more active role in the international arena and achieve the country's long-term development goals.
Comments