Mr. Gorbachev’s four-day visit represents, as Mr Rajiv. Gandhi has said, a “major landmark” in Indo-Soviet bilateral relations. At the heart of these bilateral ties has been the problem of India’s security and so it remains. It must have figured prominently in the 10-hour-long discussions between the two leaders for the additional reasons that Pakistan has moved close to acquisition of nuclear weapons and the United States has promised it AWACS which would give it an enormous advantage over this country in air. Indeed, Indian defence secretaries and chiefs of staff met the chief of the general staff of Soviet armed forces on Thursday apparently in order to acquaint him with their perception of the country’s security environments and needs. Mr Gorbachev himself discreetly reaffirmed Soviet commitment to India’s security when he said in an address to the Indian parliament on Thursday that the “supreme meaning” of the Indo-Soviet treaty of peace, friendship and cooperation “lies in a reciprocal commitment to act should a complicated situation arise for one, or both. Such situations did arise. Both the Soviet Union and India have remained faithful to their commitments.” All in all, there cannot be any doubt that the Soviet Union will do all it can to help India strengthen its security arrangements.
But it is equally significant that in keeping with his overall approach favouring cooperation among countries in the Asia-Pacific region, Mr Bachelor did not publicly make a single critical reference to Pakistan and China. The fact and importance of this approach became particularly evident at his press conference on Friday. As was only to be expected, Mr Gorbachev faced pointed questions regarding China and Pakistan. In response the Soviet leader left little room for doubt that he favoured India’s present policy of seeking normalization of relations with both Beijing and Islamabad. In respect of China, he went so far as to express the hope that both countries would act “responsibly” on the border question and to indicate that the Soviet leadership had no desire to take sides in the border dispute.
It can safely be anticipated that these statements by Mr Gorbachev would be quoted by anti-Soviet elements in the country to create the impression that Moscow could not be relied upon to help India in a conflict with China. In fact, these could also embarrass pro-Soviet communists and fellow travellers who have sought to push India virtually into the Soviet camp on the plea that Moscow is a guarantee of its security vis-à-vis both China and Pakistan. But in both cases the argument would be invalid. India has sought Russia’s friendship and not an alliance with it. The Indo-Soviet treaty provides for consultations in the event of a threat to either country; it does not provide for automatic help on the part of one in the event of an attack on the other, and it could not do so in view of India’s continued adherence to non-alignment. India has been responsible for its own security. As such its security cannot be compromised by an improvement in Sino-Soviet relations. The world is also moving into an era of greater flexibility with the steady erosion of ideological rigidities and Indian policy-makers have to get used to it.
Mr Gorbachev’s visit, however, should not be seen only in the context of bilateral relations between the two countries. The Soviet leader has demonstrated capacity for adopting and pursuing a dynamic approach to international relations generally. Three points deserve attention. First, the Soviet Union is prepared to step up its financial contributions to the UN in order to reduce its dependence on the United States and its allies because it realizes that, in view of the permanent majority of third world countries in it, the organization can serve as a major platform for embarrassing and even harassing the United States. Secondly, Mr Gorbachov is willing to place Soviet technological resources at the disposal of developing countries to enable them to use outer space for peaceful purposes; he has coined a phrase – “star peace” in contrast to Mr. Reagan’s “star wars” – which is bound to catch on to America’s great discomfiture. Finally, he has detailed a programme for the demilitarization of the Indian Ocean which could help give life to the UN resolution favouring the conversion of the Indian Ocean into a zone of peace. Thus Mr Gorbachov seems determined to retain the initiative he seized from President Reagan at the recent Reykjavik summit.