Signature yesterday, of instruments of surrender for all Pakistani troops under his command in the East by Gen. “Tiger” Niazi brings a definite end to the war in Bengal. Mrs. GANDHI has also taken the statesmanlike action of ordering Indian forces to cease fire on the Western front, declaring that “India has no territorial ambitions,” and “it is pointless, in our view, to continue the conflict.” This lives up to the best expectations of those who have sympathised and to a large extent understood and condoned the action India took in East Pakistan. The promptness of Mrs. Gandhi’s action on the Western front gives the lie to all those, whether in Peking or Washington, who have been labelling India as an, “aggressor” whose aim was to smash Pakistan. Peking was still saying this yesterday, while veiled threats have continued to issue from the usual unnamed “senior White House official” that President Nixon might have to consider cancelling his visit to Moscow if Russia did not restrain India. This kind of semi-public blustering and hint-dropping, coupled with routine aircraft-carrier movement (presumably according to paragraph so-and-so of the appropriate crisis-management manual), have had an improvised air about them which is disturbing. Mrs. Gandhi’s critique of America’s attitude, in her letter to Mr. Nixon published yesterday, is trenchant, reasoned and convincing.

President Yahya’s broadcast that Pakistan will “fight on” is, of course, depressing. On the best interpretation, it could be no more than a cover-up to save face while the war subsides. Equally, it could mean exactly what it says. One must hope not; but Mr Bhutto’s outburst at the United Nations does not suggest he is the kind of adviser to urge caution. Obviously, the Government in Rawalpindi and the West Pakistan Army have been shocked and outraged to their depths by the defeat in the East. But why opt for more bloodshed? This is a case where the Anglo-French initiative for peace may help.