This is our forth working paper (WP) on the EC. The first paper (WP 841, Jan.1990) analysed the basic motives underlying the formation of the EC as reflected in the writings of Jean Monnet-“The Father of the Common Market”. The paper discussed the gigantic changes of great historical significance taking place in Europe. Following the Common Market strategy EC is relentlessly moving towards its ultimate political objectives, i.e., a United States of Europe. Recent events in Eastern Europe and USSR are not spontaneous but result of the long-term strategy for uniting 'People of European Origin'. Gorbachov's perestroika and glanost are strategies to provide “freedom” to East Europeans and European (white) Russia to ultimately become members of a Unites States of Europe. Both Monnet's and Gorbachov's strategies have been and are being executed with great finesse, shrewdness and top level diplomacy to develop a sense of complacency among the non-European communities. Today, EC leaders talk about “a broader, Helsinki-type Europe, from San Francisco to Vladivostock”. Our analysis indicates that the driving force behind the 'Unity of Europe' and of “People of European Origin” is genetic-ethnic-racial. It indicates that Europe's march from nationalism to supra-nationalism leads to supra-Euracialism. EC-1992 is of great symbolic significance for non-European communities. It is exactly 500 years after Columbus reached North America in 11492; the beginning of ruthless exploitation of non-European communities since then. EC-1992 is a landmark, a symbol of consolidation of European power and Euracial fundamentalism. It can also be a prelude to War of Races. Against the United Europe and 'People of European Origin” where do non-European communities stand? Have they realised in time the long-term implications of European unification processes and taken timely steps so safeguard their future? Have they asked themselves the question, whether by cooperating with EC with an eye on short-term commercial gains, are they further strengthening Europe's drive towards its politico-racial objective? In our second paper (WP 854, Mar,1990) we have sought answers to these and related questions in the writings of western writers. In our third paper (WP872, July 1990) we have discussed twelve sets of questions which try to look at EC from our perspective, i.e., non-European perspective. In this paper we shall see whether Indian thinking on EC has been in any way different from that of the western writers. Did it go beyond the traditional, stereotype ways of looking a European Community? What basic issues and concerns dominated Indian thinking? What was their analysis of events and reading of the future? What strategies and actions they recommended? And so on. The paper reviews ICSSR's survey of research (trend reports) in various disciplines, especially, in Public Administration (Khilnani and Sinai, “Administration of External Affairs”), Macroeconomic (Manmohan Singh, “International Trade and Payments”), Management (C.P.Rao, “Marketing”), Political Science: International Studies (Prasad and Phadnis, “Area Studies”; Mahendra Kumar, “Foreign Policy”; K.Subrahmanyam. “Defence Policy and Analysis”). In addition, the paper reviews in detail the writings of eleven other Indian scholars from various disciplines. This review is an eye-opener. It tells us about our scholars', top political leaders' and bureaucrats' world view, their orientation towards EC, and their reading of the events and perceptions about the future. Readers can themselves check the validity of these writers' assumptions and conclusions and their perceptions against the current realities.
