Don’t fight 1962 all over again

[Joe Shearer]

A Indian that admits that the 1962 war started because of Nehru's forward policy.
From you're writing it seems that India is in the same position as China, that it has a lot of tensions with countries in its own region.

Nehru's forward policy was certainly one of the contributing factors, maybe even the main factor, but it takes two hands to clap. China went into it with a fell purpose, which she achieved even at a great sacrifice of life.

I don't know about tension in the region. That seems to be a wildly exaggerated view, usually heard from members of unfriendly countries about India.

 

[Obambam]

All this 1962 talk is nonsense. Both sides have developed so well since the 60's.
Do we really want a repeat of what happened in the 60's now? It does not matter what the outcome is, all we know is, it will not benefit those everyday people who just want to live life normally and peacefully.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Good idea; do we congratulate you? Is this the first one you have come up with?

The social niceties apart, please act on this understanding.

Please wait. Please wait at a considerable distance. Please restrict your interaction, and the interaction of those with your somewhat perverted bent of mind, to wise observations on a friendly forum, and wise exchanges on your TV channels. Please do not send hundreds of tourists who melt into the countryside; you may have noticed that in the teeth of the terrible state of the minorities that you have brought to public notice, the traffic is uniformly in one direction, with pole vaults by one nationality, with friendship rail or bus tickets by the other. The other use marine passage only when they wish to lighten the Indian burden of an excessive population, in the interests of India, of course.

If you have nothing to do because of this unwonted idleness, you might like to write about the IVC. It might interest others with similar, long stretches of time on their hands to learn that miraculously, that civilisation, which the world thought to have disappeared without trace, has been resurrected in the pages of PDF. The world will be delighted to welcome back those wise, peace loving people interested in trade and commerce, and without any traces of war-mongering, with no weapons found, or instruments of war, back into its midst as the people of Pakistan. A great step remains to be taken; it is clear that participating in the taking of this step will mark out the ideologues responsible for eternal glory and at least 36 grapes if not 72.

Perhaps it is premature, but they are giving the Nobel Peace Prize to the most singular candidates nowadays. Would it not be sweet vindication to have it around your neck, and to prove to the world that Pakistan is worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize? Even the Chinese would envy you; it has not yet been possible to introduce turtle blood into the competition for a Nobel gold.

A movie can be made to honor the future laureate, ''The Indus Valley Civilisation Mummy Returns'', similar to the other mummy returns movie - minus the bloody minds and senseless violence.

 

[mfreak]

A Indian that admits that the 1962 war started because of Nehru's forward policy.
From you're writing it seems that India is in the same position as China, that it has a lot of tensions with countries in its own region. I don't want to see a war between India and Pakistan and i certainly don't want to see a war between China and India. I think in the case there is going to be a war between India and Pakistan that China won't fight a war for Pakistan but that China would help Pakistan by increasing the number of troops on its border with India and tight down hundreds of thousands of Indian troops and thousands of tanks and hundreds of planes that then can't be thrown into the battle

.

We have to accept facts

And the chances for China attacking India, or India attacking China is almost non existent.

Pakistan attacking India is actually a possibility. And yes China could put pressure on India massing troops at her borders, but we have more than enough troops to maintain the status quo by deploying forces down there. China can indeed help in the form of material, but that's alright. Pakistan doesnt have that much of purchasing power. Also remember in case we get American Support for India, you could easily be tied down in your eastern borders as well, but I guess China wont even do anything as hostile as that. For the sake of regional peace and to avoid unnecessary panic

All this 1962 talk is nonsense. Both sides have developed so well since the 60's.
Do we really want a repeat of what happened in the 60's now? It does not matter what the outcome is, all we know is, it will not benefit those everyday people who just want to live life normally and peacefully.

Very rightly said.

 

[Joe Shearer]

.

We have to accept facts

And the chances for China attacking India, or India attacking China is almost non existent.

Pakistan attacking India is actually a possibility. And yes China could put pressure on India massing troops at her borders, but we have more than enough troops to maintain the status quo by deploying forces down there. China can indeed help in the form of material, but that's alright. Pakistan doesnt have that much of purchasing power. Also remember in case we get American Support for India, you could easily be tied down in your eastern borders as well, but I guess China wont even do anything as hostile as that. For the sake of regional peace and to avoid unnecessary panic



Very rightly said.

I would like to concur.

This is an unusually lucid presentation on the current state of affairs.

 

[Ticker]

A movie can be made to honor the future laureate, ''The Indus Valley Civilisation Mummy Returns'', similar to the other mummy returns movie - minus the bloody minds and senseless violence.

ha ha ha .......

Touched some raw nerves...........

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

One point to note, post 1967 border skirmish, there hasn't been a single casualty on Sino-Indian border.

 

[arp2041]

All this 1962 talk is nonsense. Both sides have developed so well since the 60's.
Do we really want a repeat of what happened in the 60's now? It does not matter what the outcome is, all we know is, it will not benefit those everyday people who just want to live life normally and peacefully.

Yes sir, absolutely agree with u, i think India has not been able to overcome from the only defeat it got since independence, i m of the opinion that this talk of India-China war is fueled by western countries just to fulfill there goal of remaining the most powerful countries of the world (a place threatened by both India & China), an India-China war can be the last thing that humanity can afford, with 2.5 billion people, 2 largest armies, 2 oldest civilizations, 2 fastest growing economies - war can't be afforded by anyone in India & China.

But the suspicion in the Indian leadership & Indian people are due to these points:

1. Constant infrastructure build-up along the Indo-China border in Tibet.
2. String of Pearls policy of China to surround India.
3. Arming Pakistan against India.
4. Not supporting the Indian aspirations of playing major role in world affairs (eg. UNSC).

Thus, the thing favorable to both India & China will be constant trust build-up & confidence building measures, so that the two can gain from each other's rise & can make this century a truly Asian century. As PM Manmohan Singh rightly said that world is big enough for both China & India.

 

[isro2222]

Am fedup.... Again 1962.... most of you here wasnt even born that time yet keeps talking about it on PDF day and night.... i dont see china talking about japan war with them.... i dont see america and uk talking about war between them.... just want to create a arguement this thread been opened.... Day and night people just want to argue here on PDF.... Sad....

 

[Ticker]

India's power potential is limited, I can agree with that and is probably much lower than that of China. India's army is solely for defensive purposes at this point. So I dont myself foresee anything similar to 1962 happening ever again. It was Nehru's forward policy that caused that war. Although that war was still a political victory for us because it caused a dent in image for China, internationally primarily due to the cold war. Today, it is long forgotten history, a 50 yr old history.

Anyway you have to understand how politically and militarily weak Pakistan is today especially after having been exposed multiple times for harboring terrorists and destabilizing the region. The only thing you can rely on is mutually assured destruction because of your nuclear arsenal. At a time when Chinese-Indian relations were at their worst, China refused to attack India. Today after 45 years of not a single shot being fired across the border, increasing trade relations, everyone including China knows that India is militarily and politically more powerful than Pakistan. That is the truth.

So whenever you argue about geo-politics dont take your friendships with China literally. China wont fight your wars and risk its growth. You will always find yourself alone, so when it comes to Pakistan-India relations and geo politics, Pakistan lacks any military power projection capability or political credibility for that matter. When it comes to India and China, China definitely projects more power militarily, but more countries will be equally willing to work with India as with China. Especially Korea, Japan, Singapore and certain other South east Asian nations. The countries that side with China will be the ones bordering India. Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan etc., These are however, miniscule powers that dont really have that much of a voice in international politics compared to India.

Oh and BTW, as for India crumbling, disintegrating etc., The right time to force that to happen, has long gone. You should have done it pre-liberalization. You should have done it in the 1960s when the Khalistan movement, the Tamil Nationalism movement etc were quite strong. Today, most have integrated. Yes we do have cries for separatism every now and then, but people are starting to understand the importance of the Indian Union. Tamil Nationalism, the Khalistan movement etc has mostly ended. Today people take pride in India's development so there is more unity than before. Your reliance on these 140 armed secessionist and other separatist movements, and your inclination to actually "wait" in false hope for something disastrous to happen to India is in itself telling. About your frustration and your ineptness whether it be in power projection or playing effective geo-politics.

I am sorry, I disagree with some of the aspects that you highlighted here.

Pakistan is not weak due to application of proxies. Pakistan is in a bit of weaker state due to certain other factors and the major one being the war going on in our neighbourhood which has affected us negatively – it is coming to an end and we will gradually get out of its negativities.

Every body thought that the space for application of proxies has squeezed in this world. Libya, Syria, India through Afghanistan and certain other places have ruled this out. The space is still there and is being exploited and would continue to be exploited.

The use of nuclear weapons would be resorted to when certain nuclear thresholds are crossed. For that to happen, Indian Armed Forces need to possess the capability and Indian politicians the will to cross those. The Pakistani Armed Forces are strong enough to deny India such an advantage. However, nuclear aspect is now part of any future war, despite Indian defence analysts and her Generals stating otherwise.

Regarding India-China war and involvement of Pakistan therein, the mere fact that India prepares for such an eventuality clearly is indicative of the fact that such a possibility exists. Despite you people stating again and again that it will not happen.

In this world of nation states, there are no friends and no permanent enemies. It is very well understood. And that is why Pakistan is a nuclear power and can fight its own wars, even if it receives limited or no support from anyone.

Geopolitically, I still maintain that Pakistan is much better placed than India currently is. At regional level, if India loses whatever little support it has from its smaller neighbours like Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan and Sri Lanka etc, it will stand to lose even more as it will be strategically surrounded and contained. This type of environment will have major negative impact on India and its ability to exercise her influence would suffer a major blow.

Most of you people underestimate the internal weaknesses India presents due to its secessionist movements and the large number of secessionist groups. Today it may not matter to India, but when the push comes to shove, its impact would definitely be enhanced dramatically.

 

[mfreak]

Pakistan is not weak due to application of proxies. Pakistan is in a bit of weaker state due to certain other factors and the major one being the war going on in our neighbourhood which has affected us negatively – it is coming to an end and we will gradually get out of its negativities.

Pakistan is weak due to a large number of reasons. Most of those reasons are internal in nature. Without solving those issues Pakistan will have no regional credibility - politically or militarily.

a) Terrorism: This is a major factor that not only weakens Pakistan's international image and political credibility, but is also debilitating to the very integrity and fabric of your society. In fact Pakistani cities suffer worse terrorist attacks than Indian cities do.

b) Political instability: In the last 65 years or so, you guys havent been able to set up a stable form of govt. This not only weakens your international image, but also shows that you have no steady foreign policy. Either you guys could be very hostile toward India or push for talks, only for those talks to go nowhere because of your constant backtracking and finger pointing. But thats another debate.

c) The Dilemma of whether to support the "War on Terror" or to sustain terrorism in Pakistan in order to use it as an extension of your foreign policy against India further weakens you. If you support the US, you get bombed by terrorists. If you support the terrorists, you are gonna get into trouble with the US. Its a very precarious situation for you and choosing a side is extremely difficult.

d) As you stated the war. That will take quite sometime to recover.

As for the nuclear threat, yes nuclear threshholds need to be crossed. And India will never cross it. All the arguments about the possibility of a nuke actually being used, inspite of the rhetoric merely serves just that purpose - rhetoric. Even PAkistani analysts know that nuking India would mean WW3. Or atleast for Pakistan.

India will always have to strategize for every possibility. But honestly such a scenario will never happen. The chances of India and China getting into a war is very miniscule, infact non existent. In times of trouble the Chinese and Indians have shown extreme restraint. So dont count on that possbility.

Geopolitically Pakistan is actually not better placed than India is. Even though Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan and Sri Lanka might express dissatisfaction about India, in a scenario where they have to actually choose between Pakistan and India, they will choose India as India will have international support and more credibility, whereas its very difficult for Pakistan in lieu of its past actions to garner the same support. Even if they side against India, the Indian Army is more than capable of wielding off that threat, but that scenario where these countries will be blatantly hostile toward India is extremely far fetched.

Your whole argument is based on the presumption and hope that the hate that these neighboring countries feel toward India is SO strong as to present India with a strategic disadvantage. I advice you to look ourside PDF and not take PDF as being representative of any of these countries. In reality these countries will and still do very much stand with India.

As for the secessionist groups, most of us dont even hear about them in the media. They dont do anything apart from holding rallies every now and then. To really give these guys any momentum at all, you need to break India's defences, plunge India into war, somehow be politically stronger than India to actually cause civil war like it is happening in Syria (through external intervention). Neither Pakistan nor anyone else possess the political or material strength to make that happen, nor do these groups have the guts to go against the state. There was a time when this was indeed a possibility, but that time has long passed. Am afraid you are too late my friend. Pakistan's options are limited. And those options are to solely seek peace with India, put the Kashmir issue on the backburner (cuz frankly Kashmir will never work out for you favorably) and concentrate on confidence building measures, and drop the war rhetoric.

 

[Ticker]

@mfreak

I posted this in another thread, but in order to reply to some of your comments this is also important ..........

India has been able to generate a limited scaled diversionary effort from Afghanistan against Pakistan by supporting the terrorists. However, their effort beyond a certain level may intrusively confront the American interests.

Though Americans have also utilized such Indian sponsoring to achieve some of their objectives as well, such Indians actions and efforts would tend to lose support in the long run whence the Americans may initiate stability enhancing measures in Afghanistan.

Therefore, Indian efforts by default are restricted due to time and space limitations. Beyond these time and space limitations, Indian sponsoring would hurt the American efforts and would then become counter productive.

The Americans will retain 4-6 bases in Afghanistan as their next objective, before or after Iran, is full spectrum domination of Eurasian Hinterland and is therefore beyond Afghanistan. For such objective attainment, it is important for Afghanistan to attain a measure of stability. Indians will have to stop at a particular stage.

And if one goes by the happenings in Libya and Syria etc, the same body of trouble makers would be moving in to Central Asia in not too distant a future. This would leave Pakistan relatively free from such activities.

The Indians therefore can smile for the time.

 

[Ticker]

@mfreak

I have posted this analysis before as well. This also fits in response to your query about geopolitical environment .........

Geo-political environment is transitioning from American efforts to retain its uni-polarity to a stage where the emerging competitors are moving to a position of asserting their influence. Major US concerns focused on Asia include:

An emerging China.

Seeking and sustaining support for a countervailing India against China.

A resurgent Russia with an eye on Central Asia and a resurgent desire to reach warm waters through Pakistan.

A concerned Muslim world attempting to redefine its place in the world polity.

While US led efforts aimed at containment of Russia are stabilizing in Europe, endeavours to curtail Russian and Chinese influence in Eurasian hinterland are also underway.

What does US want from India:

India to act as a countervailing force against China.

As a milkman to sustain US economy.

Compete with Chinese economic progress.

Stabilize regional disputes with limited force projection capability.

Lets see what are India’s geopolitical and geostrategic strengths:

India cannot laterally expand its influence beyond its western borders due the existence of geo-political impediments in addition to the geographical restrictions placed by the presence of Pakistan, unless Pakistan allows it to do so.

Expansion of its influence towards the east is impeded due to the large geographical lay of China.

Myanmar can provide India with limited ability to expand towards South East Asia. Chinese influence in Myanmar has increased manifold and may limit future Indian endeavours.

Therefore the only direction it may be able to expand its influence is towards the vast expanse of sea in the south. The US also supports India’s increasing influence in IOR, but only as a second fiddle.

India would become a strong economic power and would be able to generate fair bit of economic influence in all those countries which are its trading partners and may also be able to exercise fair bit of negativity against Pakistan and China in this domain.

However, it’s overall power projection and generation of influence in the key regions would still remain limited unless it drastically improves relations with both Pakistan and China.

This fact also highlights the importance of strategic nature of Pak-China relationship.

Pakistan’s sympathetic leanings towards China is one of the major causes of Pak-US trust deficit.

However, the US in its endeavours to contain China is also eyeing Pakistan’s southern sea ports to acquire its own strategic corridor with links to Central Asian resources and to safeguard its interests.

Therefore, it is likely that the US will continue to act as Pakistan’s neighbour for quite some time through its presence in Afghanistan and the Gulf. And therefore, Pakistan remain an important player for the US.

 

[mfreak]

India has been able to generate a limited scaled diversionary effort from Afghanistan against Pakistan by supporting the terrorists. However, their effort beyond a certain level may intrusively confront the American interests.

This accusation that India supports terrorism against Pakistan is baseless albeit a frequently repeated one by the Pakistan side. There has however been absolutely no proof that has been found supporting this for a fact. Please provide sources to back up these claims.

And if one goes by the happenings in Libya and Syria etc, the same body of trouble makers would be moving in to Central Asia in not too distant a future. This would leave Pakistan relatively free from such activities.

This is going by your assumption that these terror groups will actually be able to move in the first place because the political situation in their home countries will be favorable to them or become favorable to them in the future. This is never gonna happen.Not until the US maintains its presence in that region and not until Israel exists. Which is probably gonna be for a long long long time. So these groups diverting their attention to India is almost next to impossible. India is not the main target of terrorism these days. ISrael and the US are.

Also Indian interests do not lie in destabilizing the region. It is for that reason that India actually supports continued United States presence in Afghanistan. The fact that the US presence not only brings stability but also some business to India is what India is interested in. Not destabilizing Afghanistan. Also tackling Pakistan, although is important for India, is not the sole foreign policy motive for us. We have already achieved a level of credibility that cannot be taken away now.

As a milkman to sustain US economy.

China sustains the US economy more than India does. Infact India is still heavily socialist. With a large public sector. China infact has more economic freedom than India, a fact supported by their growth pattern. However, India being a service oriented economy, will also benefit from this.

Lets see what are India’s geopolitical and geostrategic strengths:

India cannot laterally expand its influence beyond its western borders due the existence of geo-political impediments in addition to the geographical restrictions placed by the presence of Pakistan, unless Pakistan allows it to do so.

Expansion of its influence towards the east is impeded due to the large geographical lay of China.

Myanmar can provide India with limited ability to expand towards South East Asia. Chinese influence in Myanmar has increased manifold and may limit future Indian endeavours.

Therefore the only direction it may be able to expand its influence is towards the vast expanse of sea in the south. The US also supports India’s increasing influence in IOR, but only as a second fiddle.

India would become a strong economic power and would be able to generate fair bit of economic influence in all those countries which are its trading partners and may also be able to exercise fair bit of negativity against Pakistan and China in this domain.

However, it’s overall power projection and generation of influence in the key regions would still remain limited unless it drastically improves relations with both Pakistan and China.

This fact also highlights the importance of strategic nature of Pak-China relationship.

Pakistan’s sympathetic leanings towards China is one of the major causes of Pak-US trust deficit.

However, the US in its endeavours to contain China is also eyeing Pakistan’s southern sea ports to acquire its own strategic corridor with links to Central Asian resources and to safeguard its interests.

Therefore, it is likely that the US will continue to act as Pakistan’s neighbour for quite some time through its presence in Afghanistan and the Gulf. And therefore, Pakistan remain an important player for the US.

You are right here to a certain extent. However, India's objectives are not to influence nations worldwide. India is not in a position to do so militarily or economically or even politically. India's concerns are to have a stable border, have strategic autonomy while pursuing bilateral relations. Also you forget to take into account the limitations for the Chinese. For example Japan, Korea, Vietnam etc would gladly side with India, but not with China.

You are right in saying that in order to project more power, we need our relation with Pakistan and China to improve. We are doing that. With China it has been more successful than with Pakistan, for obvious reasons. So in the long term I see better relations with China take shape. 45 years of peace in the borders, with only minor patrolling violations on both sides, is not something to worry about too much.

Regarding Pak_US relations and Pak-China relations you are right again. The Us wont ditch Pakistan atleast in the short to mid term.

However, you ignore the implications all of this has on PAkistan.

1. Pakistan experiences unstable govts and internal strife.
2. Pakistan supports two opposing parties. Sooner or later you guys will have to make a choice. And its a difficult one. Throw in the terrorists, then you have 3 different people you have to handle/choose from. You'd never be able to use one relationship to the fullest.
3. India to its east will keep getting stronger and stronger both economically, politically and militarily. With increasing economic wealth, both China and the US would be keen on investments in India. Even India would be looking to invest in China and the US. Add to that the fact that India's goal to have strategic autonomy is also in the interest of the US then the situation is in India's advantage. We would be able to grow economically while having good relations with everybody, on top of influencing our neighboring countries to a great extent. So we have relative border security and growth. While you will be caught between a Rock and a hard place.

Anyway after all of this, what you said just means that India will still maintain its strategic dominance over Pakistan. You only foresee India not being able to expand as much as it wants, but how much India wants to expand its influence is not something that is set in stone. Its limited at every stage. Right now we are not looking for world hegemony. Not even South Asian hegemony. We are only looking for peace, stability and growth. We get that with the current system in place. This century will be led by the United States, so undoubtedly, India would have to follow the US, it can never lead it. China would compete, but how much they can dominate others is in question, given the fact that their political system by itself is a hindrance.

What I mean to say in short is that:

1. India will remain non aligned, and be everyone's friend and no one's enemy
2. India will have strategic autonomy while looking for peace,stability and growth and it will get it - although that depends on pakistan. And this is why Pakistan wants to not give India peace and stability.
3. Pakistan not being able to counter India politically, economically or militarily will have to take an aligned stance. Meaning they need allies. Whether its China or the US, is upto them, but its a very difficult and precarious situation.

Therefore the one coming out winning this will always be India.

 

[pilgrim999]

I am sorry, I disagree with some of the aspects that you highlighted here.

Pakistan is not weak due to application of proxies. Pakistan is in a bit of weaker state due to certain other factors and the major one being the war going on in our neighbourhood which has affected us negatively – it is coming to an end and we will gradually get out of its negativities.

Every body thought that the space for application of proxies has squeezed in this world. Libya, Syria, India through Afghanistan and certain other places have ruled this out. The space is still there and is being exploited and would continue to be exploited.

The use of nuclear weapons would be resorted to when certain nuclear thresholds are crossed. For that to happen, Indian Armed Forces need to possess the capability and Indian politicians the will to cross those. The Pakistani Armed Forces are strong enough to deny India such an advantage. However, nuclear aspect is now part of any future war, despite Indian defence analysts and her Generals stating otherwise.

Regarding India-China war and involvement of Pakistan therein, the mere fact that India prepares for such an eventuality clearly is indicative of the fact that such a possibility exists. Despite you people stating again and again that it will not happen.

In this world of nation states, there are no friends and no permanent enemies. It is very well understood. And that is why Pakistan is a nuclear power and can fight its own wars, even if it receives limited or no support from anyone.

Geopolitically, I still maintain that Pakistan is much better placed than India currently is. At regional level, if India loses whatever little support it has from its smaller neighbours like Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan and Sri Lanka etc, it will stand to lose even more as it will be strategically surrounded and contained. This type of environment will have major negative impact on India and its ability to exercise her influence would suffer a major blow.

Most of you people underestimate the internal weaknesses India presents due to its secessionist movements and the large number of secessionist groups. Today it may not matter to India, but when the push comes to shove, its impact would definitely be enhanced dramatically.

agree with some of your points.however, folowing is my 2 cents:-

1.Pakistans geo political advantage is nullified by having a volatile region as Afghansitan. Had the Af Pak region been peaceful and under propoer admin control of Pak/ Afghan govt, the advantages of economic / pol/security would have been many folds. just now , having a war ravaged land with conflict never seeming to get over and also the Taliban presence on the Afghan scene will deprive PAk of the advantage fully. Strange that lots of Pak see this as an advantage considering that the same region has pulled Pak backwards due to all problems that the Afghan policy brought to the country. Add to the narrow minded policy of support of these elements has done great deal of damage to the state with army ops planned in the border area. quite a change over from the original script as thought by the policy makers....

2. Indian internal security has been a problem but we have some how been able to manage these and contain them using a variey of methods....including using the powerful use of integration of rebels/ insurgents in the political arena.(democracy)...Maoist are the most dangerous of the lot and are being tackled now.

3. like smallers countries around the world, relations with bigger neighbour are never easy. US vis a vis mexico, russia visa vis CIS countries, china.....India will have to strive to better her relations with BD, nepal and Bhutan and SL and fight urge to be seen as hegenemous. This however will not let us to relent on negotiations / solutions where interets are compromised. consensus should be build as the first step always.