Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c8.s5.49

c8.s5.49

But this was not always possible. States were therefore advised to make treaties and even conclude offensive and defensive alliances. They might also enter into alliances for furthering certain common interests. The plantation of a colony was a case in point. It required a good deal of effort and organisation, and gave rise to any amount of inter-state feeling. It was but effected in concert. The construction of trade-routes across several states was another enterprise in which co-operation should be achieved through treaties. The reclamation of wild tribes was yet another such project. Joint action might also be profitable in building forts at strategic centres, working mines, and clearing forest. The school of real politics, however, never forgot that self-interest was the primary spring of diplomacy. A weak state, driven to extremities, might purchase peace by sacrifice of its honour, by consenting to furnish hostages, paying indemnity, or binding itself to military service. But under favourable circumstances it might violate the treaty imposed by force. There were ways and ways of such action. A hostage might be encouraged to escape in any one of innumerable ways. And so forth. The whole subject is treated with an inexhaustible wealth of detail, supposition and ingenuity. In the infinite complications of foreign affairs, envoys play a high rôle. Kautalya classifies them like everything else.