tendency that this is a situation where if all the money is found, perhaps India can get reconciled. This is a very dangerous aspect and generally if you talk to the representatives of other countries, they can be very sympathetic to you saying it is quite a big burden, we realize it; we have, shared it, we will share it. But that is not the correct approach. We might appreciate this sharing of burden but our principal objective has to be to create political conditions in Bangladesh which reverses the present trend, which in the first instance stops the forced exodus of people from Bangladesh into India territory, and secondly that this flow turns backward and these people go back and we are convinced that this can happen only if there is a solution which is accepted by those who have already been elected by the people. This in essence is the entire situation in Bangladesh. I think, the essentials of the situation are dawning upon the people and Governments of other countries. We have also made it clear that there is a limit to our5 patience and our perseverance there is a limit to our restraint and it will be a very dangerous development if the time were permitted to run out. It is, we are afraid, already running out rather fat and the limits are being reached. These are the realities of the situation, and we have. I think, to a large measure succeeded in projecting this to the world. The unity, the basic unity demonstrated by our peoples and the determination of our people to meet the challenge, are sources of our real strength.
About People’s Republic of China, you must have noticed that after the second visit of Dr. Kissinger to Peking the United States of America altered their policy which have been pursuing for all these years to keep the People’s Republic of China out of the United Nations, to deny to the Government of the people’s Republic of China their rightful place in the United Nations. When they suddenly reversed their policy, then a large number of countrics, who, mainly under United States’ inspiration and persuasion, had pursued a policy of endorsing the American line, suddenly found that their original postulates and their original postures had become out-of-date and they started revising their briefs. It is not easy to revise briefs quickly, and even the latest effort that is being made is again a very interesting approach. On the one hand, the United States effort is to ensure that the rightful place to the People’s Republic of China is resorted to them not only in the General Assembly but also in the Security Council, with a permanent seat and with the right of veto. Whereas they are in support of this, at the same time, they do want to retain Taiwan as representative of Taiwan. Historically, it is not an easy exercise because all these years the supporters of the United States and the United State were saying that Taiwan Government is the government not only of Formosa and Taiwan but also of the whole of China. And now suddenly to take another line again has caused a certain measure of confusion. So far as India is concerned, notwithstanding our bilateral difficulties in relation to the People’s Republic of China, our brief has been straight, and this changing situation has not necessitated the alteration of even a single comma in our attitude in this respect. We have all along been strongly of the view that there is only one China, there is only one Chinese Government, and that is the People’s Republic of China and its rightful place in the United Nations should be restored to it. That has been our consistent line. I am not sure whether during this session the efforts to retain Formosa will succeed, but I have no doubt that the restoration of its rightful place to People's Republic of China will receive overwhelming support. We have always been of the view that in the interest of universality and also in the interest of exposing China to
