‘‘Religious fanaticism is a very dangerous trend’’

T.N. KAUL needs no introduction. As India’s best known foreign policy expert, he has had long innings with Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Lal Bahadur Shastri, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. As a member of the UNESCO Executive Board for five years, he has been a past-master at espousing India’s cause in the world forum.

A widely travelled man, Kaul has served as India’s ambassador in countries like Britain, China, USA, the erstwhile Soviet Union and Iran. He was the Chairperson of International Commission in Vietnam and also the Indian representative to Mongolia and the Bahamas. He was also the Foreign Secretary for over four years and in that capacity he came in touch with world leaders and participated in international hub centres.

An honorary fellow of Kings College, London, where he did his masters in law, Kaul has written almost a dozen books on the erstwhile Soviet Union, USA, China, Britain, the Non-Aligned Movement and more. He is an honorary professor of Kashmir University and also takes an active interest in public and social activities. Despite his advancing age, he is the Chairman of the HRCF and Man and Development and also President of the World Affairs Foundation.

Active as ever, Kaul is constantly on the move whether attending a conference or addressing a seminar or chairing an international meeting overseas. Just back from a trip to London, Kaul took time out to talk to Sharad K. Soni about his reflections of the century.

"I have no doubt in my mind that the 20th century has been one of the worst centuries in the history of mankind. There were two World Wars and a Cold War which lasted till almost the early nineties. And the latter was, to my mind, the most diabolic version of a war.

People say that the Cold War ended with the disintegration of the Soviet Union but I am not too sure of that. I feel it has started all over again but this time against countries which defy the established nuclear powers. The so-called Super Five led by the USA have enough nuclear arsenal to destroy the whole world. These five nations are now trying their hardest to maintain their monopoly over nuclear weapons. Not just that, they don’t even want to share their knowledge of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. And those, like India, who don’t toe their line have to bear the brunt of their wrath and are subjected to economic and other sanctions.

The CTBT is another gimmick which forbids future nuclear tests except in the laboratory and only the USA can carry out these tests to refine its existing weaponry. Now my fear is that if we do not have a universal nuclear disarmament agreement in the coming millennium, we are going to face the threat of a nuclear holocaust which will wreak complete devastation wherever the wind takes it.

India must take the lead in using its nuclear capability as a deterrent against violence. In fact both India and Pakistan should sign a treaty of no-first use against each other and utilise their influence and nuclear capability for total nuclear disarmament. Otherwise the next century could be worse than the current one and even be the last one for the mankind.

Another negative point of the twentieth century has been the increased drug trafficking and the making use of the huge amounts of money earned thereby for supporting terrorism and violence.

Religious fanaticism

Equally dangerous has been the exploitation of religion by fanatics. The results are now being manifested in Afghanistan and Pakistan. What such states have failed to realise throughout their existence is that danger from fundamentalism can be immense. For example, it can further dismember Pakistan and can lead to ethnic cleansing as has been witnessed in Sindh, Baluchistan and the NWFP.

But let me not be so pessimistic about the century I have lived in. Despite its flaws there is no denying that it also saw a number of very positive developments. For instance, the process of decolonisation started after World War II and India was one of the first countries to attain freedom in 1947 from the British rule after almost two centuries. In the sixties and seventies more and more countries, particularly in Asia and Africa, attained independence from colonial rule.

Another positive aspect of this century was the setting up of the United Nations which has to a certain extent guaranteed peace, development and progress without impinging on the sovereignty or territorial integrity of member countries. The fact that the number of members in the UNOhas increased from 50 in 1945 to over 140 shows the universal acceptability of this concept.

The only worrying feature about the United Nations is that the Security Council is still a body of the Super Five which have the right to veto decisions of even the permanent members. This is very discriminatory and the UN needs to reflect the realities of the present-day world much more adequately and expand the Security Council for a wider participation of nations. This right of veto must be abolished in the new millennium.

Communication explosion

Apart from the setting up of the United Nations, one of the biggest contributions of the 20th century has been the communication explosion which has made the world more interdependent and also brought people and countries closer to one another.

Unfortunately in the coming millennium, I can foresee it being used not just positively but negatively as well. The positive aspect is that communications will lead to a better understanding and more peaceful, friendly relations between various countries, regions and people. But if facilities like the Internet are exploited for wrong purposes in the next millennium, they can generate conflict and war.

The coming generations would have to be more judicious in making proper use of facilities and amenities which science and technology has been providing us in this century and will continue providing us in the next. These benefits should be made available to all countries and people, especially those in poor countries.

Priorities for the millennium

In the new millennium the world must also work towards the creation and establishment of a new international economic, political and cultural order. If this is not done, there will be great danger of an explosion of widespread violence and possibly the third world war.

The other priority of world leaders should be to resolve disputes peacefully and bilaterally and improve the lot of mankind through constructive use of science and technology in the fields of agriculture, industry, health, hygiene and education.

The third priority should be to create a one world where no single country or a combination of countries can dominate the rest, where each individual has the opportunity to make his or her contribution for peace and progress of the whole world. In this cooperative venture, India can play a very constructive role because of its policy of non-alignment.

These are some of the most important priorities for a world on the threshold of the new millennium. Most intellectuals know what’s gone wrong in the new century and how these wrongs can be rectified. What the world now needs is a strong political will to put these into action. More than that it needs one mass leader who would work for the good of mankind.

To put it very bluntly I don’t think the world can continue the way it has in this outgoing century where more than three-quarters of the population lives below the minimum human standards while the rest live in luxury. In the next century the world must come together and find quick solutions to issues like universal nuclear disarmament, greater economic cooperation, pooling in of the resources of science and technology and reaching the benefits to the poorest of the poor of the world.

Mankind does not have any more choices. In the new millennium it will collectively have to work for a better and a happier world where people have equal opportunities and there is an equitable treatment particularly for the poorer sections of society in each and every country.

Besides, leaders of the world would have to rectify the widening gulf between the haves and the have-nots for a better quality of life. I fervently hope the new millennium brings about these positive changes’’. — NF