Teheran, June 28: Ina special interview to me, the Shah of Iran made the categorical statement here that India must be completely reassured that, unless it attacked Pakistan, it would not face, either directly or indirectly, the arms Iran is acquiring.
Apparently sensitive to the possibility that his qualification regarding an attack on Pakistan might be misunderstood in India, where his massive purchases of highly-sophisticated military hardware have already caused some concern, the Shah took pains to emphasise that he was convinced that New Delhi had no interest in working for the dismemberment of what remained of Pakistan. On the contrary, in his view, India was as alive to the dangerous consequences of the break-up of Pakistan as Iran.
He also said that not only was he not encouraging intransigence on the part of Pakistan, but he was imploring it to pursue a policy of peaceful co-existence, and indeed active co-operation, with India because it was evident to him that there could be no stability in Asia without it. Iran’s own interests required peace in the sub-continent.
Arms Transfer
The Shah is known to be unhappy that his statement affirming support for the territorial integrity of Pakistan should have been interpreted in India to imply a willingness on his part to transfer military hardware to Islamabad.
That is presumably why he used the occasion provided by the interview to me to make it clear that he did not doubt India’s bona fides.
The Shah did not say in so many words that he would not transfer equipment to Pakistan. Indeed he said that in principle, he had as much right to use his equipment in any way he thought beneficial to his country’s interests as India had to raise and deploy a formidable force of 800,000 men and 800 planes. But the tenor and context of the interview clearly indicate that he is sensitive to the implications of arms transfer to Pakistan and does not intend to do so, at least for the time bring.
The Shah said India should welcome a strong and prosperous Iran. We have no conflict of interests. We have many affinities and, above all, we have many possibilities of collaboration in the future. He made the same point more than once.
The Shah did not contradict the view that tribal rivalries accounted, at least partly, for the trouble in Pakistani Baluchistan and that, instead of trying to exploit it, Islamabad should attempt to persuade different tribes to co-operate with one another. But he still felt that Iraq was training Baluch guerillas, issuing maps of “independent Baluchistan” and conducting propaganda in favour of such a new state. This meant that more than traditional tribal feuds were involved in the present trouble.
Read together with his statement on what he called the tremendous military build-up in Iraq with Soviet assistance, his observations on Baluchistan indicate that, when he talks of threat to Pakistan’s territorial integrity, he has Baghdad in view. He claimed that he knew all the details of the equipment which Iraq had acquired so far.
By implication the Shah also criticised previous Pakistani governments for having failed to break the power of tribal chiefs through a programme of land reforms. He said Baghdad had been unable to stir up trouble in Iranian Baluchistan mainly because he had pushed through land reforms and thus ended the stranglehold of tribal chiefs whom he described as foreign agent:.
The Shah recalled the efforts he had made to dissuade Gen Yahya Khan from continuing the conflict in East Bengal in 1971 to underscore the point that it was his policy to do all he could to bring India and Pakistan closer in the interest of peace not only in the sub-continent but in Asia.
As for the present, he had no difficulty in accepting either that India wanted friendly relations with Pakistan or that recognition of Bangladesh by President Bhutto could still help in breaking the deadlock. But he said that the main obstacle to progress towards peace in the sub-continent was Sheikh Mujibur Rehman’s insistence on trying the POWs for war crimes. That would poison the atmosphere and create enormous difficulties for everyone concerned.
Bhutto’s Difficulties
The Sheikh himself should realise that this was not the best way of serving his people. He said that countries friendly to Bangladesh other than India should use their influence with the Sheikh to persuade him to give up his insistence on the war crimes trials.
The Shah recalled the opposition party leader, Mr Asghar Khan’s alleged threat to encircle the Pakistan National Assembly in case Islamabad recognised Bangladesh to point out that President Bhutto had his difficulties.
Earlier in the interview, the Shah conceded that there was no power in the Gulf area which could seriously threaten Iran’s security. But he insisted that this was the result of the steps he had taken to strengthen the country’s economy and defences: “If we had built only hospitals, a bunch of murderers and savages would have held the knife at our throat and made us surrender.”
Still he would not rule out altogether the possibility that an adventurer might, in a moment of folly, attack Iran. “We would then crush him but, as a matter of policy, we would never attack any country, however hostile, first”.
He said it was ridiculous to talk of unresolved problems between Iran and Iraq. The British had imposed on Iran a wholly unjust treaty which it would never accept.
Source of Tension
The Shah reiterated his stand that the median line must serve as the frontier between the two countries. But he hastened to add that the real source of tension was not so much the dispute over the Shatt-el-Arab as the tremendous build-up in Iraq and the steady drift towards a Soviet-type regime in Baghdad. “We know these arms would never be used against Israel.”
The Shah is immensely and justifiably proud of his country’s achievements since 1963 when launched his reforms programme which has come to be known as “the white revolution” abroad and “the revolution of the Shah and the people” at home. He spent some time in explaining its importance.
He claimed that land reforms alone could have paved the way for the recent take-over of the entire oil industry became these helped eliminate foreign influence which used to be exercised through the landlords. He claimed that he had taken steps to ensure that, unlike in the past, the well-being of the country would not, in future, depend on the personality of the monarch.
The Times of India, 29 June 1973