Jagat Mehta (right) greeting the US deputy secretary of state, New Delhi, 1977

The Tryst Betrayed: Reflections on Diplomacy and Development By Jagat S. Mehta, Penguin, Rs 550

Jagat Singh Mehta’s autobiography covers an eventful and rewarding career spanning the worlds of diplomacy, academics and social service. Mehta was a cerebral foreign secretary. After retiring from foreign service, he was a visiting professor at the University of Texas in Austin for 15 years. He has written extensively on diplomacy and, more recently, has devoted himself to social service for the cause of education and rural development. He was awarded the Padma Bhushan by the president of India in 2002.

Jagat Mehta joined the Indian foreign service in August 1947, just a few days after India’s entry into the comity of independent nations. His first appointment was as private secretary to the secretary-general of the external affairs ministry, Sir Girija Shankar Bajpai. The full contribution of this formidable official to India’s foreign policy in the early post-Independence years remains to be chronicled. Mehta recalls that the “PM invariably came to Sir Girija’s room on his way in and out of the Secretariat and seldom summoned him except for meetings… They would exchange drafted replies. More than once I heard the PM say, ‘Your draft expresses my thoughts better; let yours go as from PM to Sir B.N. Rau [ambassador at the UN]’”

Nehru and Bajpai shared a deep mutual respect for each other’s abilities even though their personalities could hardly have been more different. Elegant simplicity marked Pandit Nehru’s style. On the other hand, Sir Girija Shankar Bajpai, KCSI, KBE, CIE, was a grandee of the British raj. Fastidiously dressed in Savile Row suits, he was a connoisseur of fine food and wines and an expert on rare carpets. Jagat Mehta informs us that during the raj, the “best room in the Secretariat — in the south-west corner (which gets the sun from two sides in the winter and was cooler in the summer) and nearest to the Viceregal Lodge — was earmarked for the Foreign Secretary”. Not wishing to disturb the occupant of this room, Nehru moved into another room at the end of the corridor. Bajpai, “more finicky about prestige, the location and size of his office”, had no such inhibition and became the first Indian occupant of the coveted room.

Mehta was posted in the Eastern Division from 1957 to 1961 and led the Indian delegation in the border talks with China in 1960. He subsequently served as chargé d’affaires in Beijing from 1963 to 1966, during the Cultural Revolution. He was thus intimately connected with India-China relations during a critical and tumultuous period. His finest hour in Beijing came in September 1965, during the Indo-Pakistan war. Summoned to the foreign ministry in the middle of the night on September 16, Mehta was handed the famous ultimatum demanding the return of allegedly abducted sheep and yaks, and the demolition of bunkers allegedly built across the Sikkim border within three days. A second ultimatum was served on September 19. Mehta kept his cool and conveyed to New Delhi before the expiry of the second ultimatum that, in his judgment, the Chinese would not violate the border. Lal Bahadur Shastri commended him for his professional judgment.

Mehta was appointed foreign secretary in 1976, during the Emergency. In the following year, Indira Gandhi lost the general elections. For the first time since Independence, a non-Congress government — the hastily assembled Janata coalition under Morarji Desai — took over the reins of government, giving rise to speculation about a shift in India’s foreign policy and a possible tilt towards the western powers. Mehta lost no time in advocating basic continuity in foreign policy. Immediately after the swearing-in ceremony of the new prime minister, Morarji Desai, Mehta managed to buttonhole him at the Rashtrapati Bhavan itself, in order to press this recommendation. However, Desai’s initial comments about “genuine non-alignment” served only to fuel speculation about a policy shift. Fortunately, the new foreign minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, was a true statesman. On Mehta’s advice, Vajpayee renewed an invitation to his Soviet counterpart, Andrei Gromyko, to visit India at an early date. The Soviet foreign minister arrived post-haste and went away fully reassured that there would be no weakening of established Indo-Soviet ties.

Diplomatic historians will find many interesting nuggets of information in Jagat Mehta’s latest book, complementing the material offered in his earlier analytical work, Negotiating for India. However, some of Mehta’s observations about India’s foreign policy are certain to be questioned. Did India really violate the principle of non-intervention in Goa, as Mehta alleges? The principle of non-intervention applies to territories of foreign states, not to a part of our own territory under foreign occupation. Freeing Goa from Portuguese colonial rule and reuniting it with the rest of India cannot be condemned as a violation of the principle of non-intervention. Similarly, is it a fair assessment that during the Cold War, “non-alignment accustomed us to a kind of blackmail leverage — presuming on the West and leaning towards the East”? Did India lean against the West or was it the West that leaned against India? The historical record shows that in the immediate post-Independence years (1947-53), India’s ties with the West were far more substantial than those with the Soviet bloc, in every sphere. This began to change in 1953 as a result of a number of developments including, in particular, the Anglo-American decision to induct Pakistan into the Western alliance system. Even so, India’s policy was to develop parallel ties with both superpowers. We ‘leaned’ towards the Soviet Union only after the Nixon administration ‘tilted’ strongly towards Pakistan (and China) in 1971.

Mehta must be well aware that these views will be strongly contested. During his years in service as well as after retirement, he has not hesitated to express an unpopular opinion and for this, he deserves our respect.