Some of the Members mentioned the emergence of Indo-China and our duty towards those countries. I can assure them that we consider the emergence of Indo-China as a landmark, an event of historical significance. They are independent and progressive countries which are facing their own problems on the basis of co-operation with non-aligned countries. The re-unification of South and North Vietnams is going to be a very important event, and we welcome it. Whatever co-operation they need and we can give, we will certainly try to give. The same is the case with Laos and Cambodia. Cambodia is called by some other name now. Things are developing there. We have not yet established diplomatic relations though we have relations in the sense of recognising them. They are not in a position to receive foreign missions in that country. Possibly we will have to take our turn.
In South East Asia also, our efforts are to build our relations. There may be contradictions in Indo-China and South East Asian countries, some of the countries, because of outside intervention. We have to realistically take note of it and make an effort for bilateral development in those areas. I think, with patience, through this instrumentality of bilateralism and keeping our principle clearly in mind - if we pursue with friends - I am sure that a day would come when this idea will be a reality. This is about Asia.
Now, I must come to the immediate neighbourhood. As far as the immediate neighbourhood is concerned, fortunately, amongst us today is the Prime Minister of Nepal. We welcome him heartily. His discussions with our Prime Minister and other representatives of the Government are going on and I am sure the relations will become more productive, more useful in mutual interest, because I think geography has put us together and traditionally, culturally and historically both the countries must find ways to work together.
As far as Burma and Sri Lanka are concerned, I do not want to repeat that we have made some efforts at solving our problems and we have succeeded considerably in that. The most important change is in the case of Sri Lanka. I think in the last three or four years, there is a sea change in the relationship in the sense that a very small problem could have been developed into a tricky issue. But our Prime Minister took a very courageous initiative and at the present moment, whatever those problems were ... the Kachativu issue, the question of repatriates more particularly, in the contemporary sense, the question of delineation of the maritime boundary is a very very important matter. It can be a very tricky issue. And in the present context of things, persons who are adversely interested in India - I would not say enemies, but I would say people who are adversely interested in India - can develop some of the small issues into big and intricate issues. But only last month, we succeeded in finalising and completely delineating the maritime boundary with Sri Lanka. So, there is no problem which remains, as far as that is concerned.
There are other countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan. Well, last year, when we discussed this question Bangladesh was different Bangladesh. Unfortunately, things have changed and a very eminent leader like Mujibur Rehman was assassinated. Though, as a nation, we took it as a shock, we conceded and ultimately accepted that it is their internal matter, because ultimately we have to live together as nations. We wish their people well. We continue to make efforts for co-operation, but, unfortunately, the response so far is not positive. I would say, to a certain extent, it is even negative. In the beginning, they said, “India is attempting to make military attacks and is poised for military action.” We said, “That is not so. Why do you not please come and see?” They sent a delegation. Mr. Justice Satar came and had discussions. Not only that, we invited their military people. We said, “They should come and see if at all they feel that there is any military preparation or deployment which will lead ultimately to such an action.” When they saw that it did not work, they kept quiet.