weeks worrying about the protocol of a symbolic trip to Peking, they apparently could not spare the lime to understand the human drama unfolding in South Asia.
And I believe that however symbolic that trip-which I myself approve-its results can scarcely offset the tragic setback for our nation and world peace which his administration's neglect of the India-Pakistan crisis has brought about. If the President had to visit China because some 750 million people live there, by similar reasoning he should not ignore South Asia since 690 million live in that region.
But now that war has broken out. what is to be done? Now that the mistake has been made and a whole generation of Indians and Pakistanis taught to mistrust us?
I say, let us begin with at last grappling with the realities of the crisis.
The first reality is that Pakistan in its previous form is dead. The date of death is not precise but it occurred sometime this summer as Pakistan continued on with the bloody suppression of the East, driven by its own intransigence and by the unwise counsel of friends like Communist China and the United States.
But the second reality is that Pakistan's separate parts continue to live. It may still not be clear how these two pails will evolve. They may move on to separate and independent status. Or despite rivers of blood, they may yet be able to come together under a new form of association which at last grants the East the freedom and self-determination ii has sought for so many years.
My personal opinion is that an independent Bangladesh is inevitable. But Pakistan should be given a last, peaceful chance to return to its former status of potential greatness.
The third reality in South Asia is that the cause of peace is not served by the international conspiracy to avoid U.N. involvement in this crisis. There is always one virtue of public debate. It places nations in a position where they must defend policies that in the full glare of publicity may prove to be indefensible.
By the international agreement to silence on the India-Pakistan crisis, it is safe to say that the conduct of virtually every interested party has been worse than it otherwise would have been.
Had the Security Council taken up the crisis at an early date. Pakistan would have been forced to defend large-scale crimes.
Had the U.N. debated this issue early, India-for which otherwise one has only sympathy-could not have continued so easily its seemingly callous game of exploiting the tragedy to weaken its hated opponent.
Had the United Nations seized the initiative, Communist China would have been compelled to explain how it squared its well-publicized support for the impoverished masses of the world with a policy of backing the brutal suppression of East Pakistan.
Had the world body demanded a public accounting, the United States and the Soviet Union would have been under an obligation to defend their immoral decision to continue
