52 SOCIAL SCIENTIST pursuing a policy of ^containment of communism", and they were searching for allies in the developing countries; but India refused to oblige the imperialists in their global policies of anti-communism. Not only this, India recognised the People's Republic of China as an independent nation at a time when the U S was frowning on countries which recognised China. (c) During the Sino-Indian border dispute of 1962, the imperialists pressurised India to join them in an anti-communist alliance, but India refused to enter into such an arrangement. (d) While, during the 1950's and 1960's, India refused to succumb to the imperialists, in the 1970's India created many irritations for the imperialist countries by raising issues regarding the New International Economic Order. The imperialists found themselves on the defensive in international debates and forums on NIEO, and were not pleased with India's leading role in the Group of 77, UNCTAD and GATT. The Indian ruling classes may not be sufficiently anti-imperialist; but there is no doubt that on a range of issues, the Indian government has found itself in contradiction with world monopoly capitalism. To sum up, India's foreign policy of non-alignment has some anti-imperialist features, which reveal the confrontational character of the Indian bourgeoisie. This is one face of the Indian bourgeoisie and its foreign policy of non-alignment and anti-imperialism. The other face is revealed by its collaboration with world monopoly capitalism, and its concomitant compromises in foreign policy. India's foreign policy makers have made many compromises with world monopoly capitalism because of their failure to pursue a genuine policy of self-reliant economic development, an essential pillar of an anti-imperialist foreign policy. A developing country like India cannot follow a policy of autarky or isolationism in a world which is essentially interdependent. But global interdependence does not mean that a developing country should surrender its sovereignty under the pressures of foreign aid givers or private foreign investors. A few facts may be noted here regarding the quantum of foreign aid, pattern of private foreign investment and technological collaborations entered into by the Government of India with foreign countries. (a) On March 31, 1981, India had received foreign aid (on govcrnmcnt-to«government basis) amounting to Rs. 22,774.25 crores, (b) Foreign aid received on non-government account upto March 31, 1981, was Rs 1,369.96 crores. (c) India is the largest beneficiary of aid from the World Bank and its affiliate, the International Development Association. The total amount from tliese two sources is Rs. 7,995.93 crores. (d) The International Monetary Fund was not considered a loan-giving agency. Upto March 31,1981, India received IMF Trust Fund of Rs. 521.27 crores. India made history by borrowing SDRs amounting to 5.6 billion dollars for 1981-1983, the largest amount extended by the