‘The government’s position should be status quo ante’
AK ANTONY, former defence minister under UPA government from 2006 to 2014
Congress leader AK Antony, who served as India’s defence ministry from 2006 to 2014, when India was governed by the UPA government, spoke to Sunetra Choudhury in the backdrop of the latest conflict with China. Edited excerpts: There has been a lot of sparring between your party and the Union government about China. Allegation is that Congress governments have been soft on China over the last 60 years and conceded area to them. Your response?
They are referring to 1962, which was a betrayal by China. The whole country never expected that China will betray us. India was arguing for China’s inclusion at the UN Security Council at that time. The euphoria at the time was China saying “Hindi Chini, Bhai Bhai”. After that, the country was more careful, and successive governments started strengthening our borders, building more infrastructure, getting more equipment, weapons for the army, airforce and navy -- more aircraft, more tanks. All governments were doing that, but during the UPA time, we spent the maximum. It was an economic boom time, and we spent to strengthen the armed forces. I can tell you that after 2006, we spent more than double the amount for the defence budget. They are now well-equipped and their morale is high. In mountain warfare, the Indian Army is one of the best in the world. In a war-like situation, however, they will have to be supported more. You say that the UPA strengthened the force, but the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) says that the Congress did a tie-up with the Communist Party of China in 2008, and that is the reason you are soft on the Chinese?
It is totally wrong, totally false. What is wrong with the agreement between the Congress party and the Chinese Communist Party? The BJP is also sending delegations to Chinese Communist Party meetings, at the invitation of the Chinese. It is party to party, and not only the Congress. Narendra Modi is the only chief minister who visited China, I think, four times or more. He was invited so many times. At embassy-level meetings, so many people go; many MPs go. Those are different things, but when the question of national interest comes, then it is a different matter. The Congress party always stands for national unity. So why was the Congress the only party critical of the government in the all-party meet?
I can tell you my experience during Manmohan Singh’s time. I attended the all-party meeting, I was defence minister for more than seven years. All parties used to raise many doubts and queries. It is the job of the opposition parties. Sonia Gandhi categorically said we are with the government, we are with the armed forces. She raised some doubts, which is natural. She had some doubts -why did this happen?
In Ladakh, both armies identified over the years more than a dozen disputed sites — Galwan was not a disputed point; it was always Indian territory. So why have the Chinese suddenly attacked Indian territory when the whole country was still under the euphoria of the Mahalbalipuram meeting? And the Galwan Valley aggression was not an accident; it was premeditated and pre-planned, even though the incursion came to light in April, it was prepared for much before that. That is why they were able to mobilise tanks, equipment, tents. When I was defence minister, in 2010 we started the construction of the road to the Galwan Valley. At that time, there was no objection from the Chinese army. Why suddenly this dispute; why suddenly has China decided to cheat India? Just like in 1962, when the whole country was under the euphoria of Bandung conference, we have now seen similar cheating — a betrayal. So, naturally, you have to ask the questions. The Chinese army is now up to the Finger 4 area; they are still there, they are still fortifying their positions, so it is natural as an opposition party to ask questions about that. During our time, we took the major decision of raising a strike corps, so she asked what happened, what is the status of these. But she also said that we are with the government, we are with the armed forces. You talked about your experience as defence minister. Walk us through the 2013 standoff: was it similar to that 3-week incident?
Depsang, 2013, and Chumar, 2014 -- the Chinese came, but not like this. In Galwan Valley, they came with thousands of forces. In 2013, after 21 days of standoff, through army and diplomatic talks, the Chinese army withdrew to the original position. There was some scuffle face-toface at that time too, but no injuries. This time, still they are there since mid- April. Every day, they seem to be fortifying. Finally, how do you think this can be resolved?
Our army is well trained, wellequipped; in mountain warfare they are the best. To resolve the issue, we need army-level talks, diplomatic-level talks, and if needed, political-level talks. At the same time, the government’s position should be status quo ante, which means Chinese army must go back to the position before this process started.