Nehru sought US assistance during 1962 Indo-China war Nehru sought

[Joe Shearer]

Chinese lost the war finally,the indian defend the territory at least, but chinese has to retreat and lost their military goal.Once again the chinese show their weekness and failure.I wonder why indian didnt try to go futher to Tibet and liberate the Tibetnese who as slaves for the chinese?Indian should respond for the darkness suffering of Tibetnese till now!!

Very interesting observation, coming from a Chinese. You do know that Maoist military theory states the opposite.

Presumably you are trolling my innocent young compatriots. That is like taking a biscuit from a baby.

@Joe Shearer
sir
several historians believe that NAM was a nehruvian utopia that was a flawed belief that it was possible in years after world war 2, to remain isolated from power game between capitalist and communist blocks.
how do you see the fact that pandit nehru first asked for US help and subsequently India moved to cozy with USSR was nothing but ditching NAM theory.

Much more complex than that.

I have classes now, and if you permit, this can be taken up later.

Not at all,he was just one pathetic soul for crying out loud.And if the nation could have been benefited from his assassination,then I wouldn't have any problem with that,let alone taking it as 'hugely offensive'!!In fact, let me stick my neck out here to tell you that I would have even set the muzzle at his temple and pulled the trigger myself,without even blinking for once.................if I was to be sure that this deed would benefit the whole nation in the longer run.

Repulsive.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

now i have 2 questions here:

1. Pandit Nehru asking for US help first is a bit baffling as one it goes against very founding principle of NAM and two India's closeness to Soviet Union? What actually conspired this move?
2. US foreign policy in entire Cold war era was containment of spread of communism. now as the story tells, even if US administration had not agreed for supply of supply of hardware on such large scale, even diplomatic efforts could have meant a lot. that didn't come. later India leaned towards USSR, and it took nearly half a century for situation to change. Is it a case of missed opportunity for US policy or whether US was not hoping for Indian Democracy to survive in long run.

@AUSTERLITZ @scorpionx

NAM was an organization to keep themselves out of the usa-ussr tussle,largely idealistic in nature.Now china itself earlier declared it fully supported the panchsheel principles.Nehru didn't suspect any aggressive move from their quarters as he embarked on his quixotic policy.
India at that time was not very close to the soviet union,rather equidistant to both superpowers and hadn't begun to recieve soviet military aid.Nehru (and menon) in his idealism and fear of a militray takeover like in pakistan had run down the army to a desolate state which was even outgunned by the pakistanis qualitywise,and its leadership demoralized.So when the chinese attacked they suddenly found around 10,000 IA soldiers with ww2 era weapons,.303 bolt action rifles facing over 80,000 PLA soldiers with ak-47 derivative assault rifles.To top of the debacle,due to complete negligence of army there was very limited strategic ammo reserve for large scale conflict,this was where USA came in.USA was until this time a economic aid provider to india.With ussr relations were cordial but would warm after 1962 more.Sino-soviet split was still in its last stages,ussr still wasn't ready to directly arm india against communist china in 1962 or have a pact like in 1971.Moreover in october 1962 ussr was preoccupied with cuban missile crisis.

This has been in many Chinese mind since 1962 til today. Mao shock the world with the unilateral ceasefire, ad it marked the first in history the victor of the war did not benefit from the victory. Chinese Gov doesn't talk about 1962, and we have no way knowing what was in Mao's mind at that time. We guess Mao was just going to teach Nehru a lesson but did not really want to break up with India, considering the difficult situation China was facing at that time. What is your take on this?

He could in no way 'break up india'.Logistical lines of chinese were stretched to limit over himalayas and indian reinforcements were assembling from the mainland.He would no longer face 10,000 soldiers with 80,000 with surprise on their side.Mao did want to tecah nehru a lesson and he did,but further chinese advance would have been militarily suicidal due to logistics as india had not yet involved its air force in ground attack operations which would have had free run.So chinese attained their objective and did the militarily prudent thing of withdrawing.
Chinese won 1962 because of 3 factors -
1.Surprise
2.Decisive numerical superiority (8:1)
3.Technological superiority in equipment(ak-47 vs .303)

 

[Joe Shearer]

NAM was an organization to keep themselves out of the usa-ussr tussle,largely idealistic in nature.Now china itself earlier declared it fully supported the panchsheel principles.Nehru didn't suspect any aggressive move from their quarters as he embarked on his quixotic policy.
India at that time was not very close to the soviet union,rather equidistant to both superpowers and hadn't begun to recieve soviet military aid.Nehru (and menon) in his idealism and fear of a militray takeover like in pakistan had run down the army to a desolate state which was even outgunned by the pakistanis qualitywise,and its leadership demoralized.So when the chinese attacked they suddenly found around 10,000 IA soldiers with ww2 era weapons,.303 bolt action rifles facing over 80,000 PLA soldiers with ak-47 derivative assault rifles.To top of the debacle,due to complete negligence of army there was very limited strategic ammo reserve for large scale conflict,this was where USA came in.USA was until this time a economic aid provider to india.With ussr relations were cordial but would warm after 1962 more.Sino-soviet split was still in its last stages,ussr still wasn't ready to directly arm india against communist china in 1962 or have a pact like in 1971.Moreover in october 1962 ussr was preoccupied with cuban missile crisis.



He could in no way 'break up india'.Logistical lines of chinese were stretched to limit over himalayas and indian reinforcements were assembling from the mainland.He would no longer face 10,000 soldiers with 80,000 with surprise on their side.Mao did want to tecah nehru a lesson and he did,but further chinese advance would have been militarily suicidal due to logistics as india had not yet involved its air force in ground attack operations which would have had free run.So chinese attained their objective and did the militarily prudent thing of withdrawing.
Chinese won 1962 because of 3 factors -
1.Surprise
2.Decisive numerical superiority (8:1)
3.Technological superiority in equipment(ak-47 vs .303)

Also far superior grand tactics and tactics. They used the Bailley Trail, for instance; attacked Indian Army positions piece-meal, used night-fighting extensively, and generally displayed far more military competence.

 

[anant_s]

quixotic policy

haven't heard a better word for the policy.

So when the chinese attacked they suddenly found around 10,000 IA soldiers with ww2 era weapons,.303 bolt action rifles facing over 80,000 PLA soldiers with ak-47 derivative assault rifles.To top of the debacle,due to complete negligence of army there was very limited strategic ammo reserve for large scale conflict,this was where USA came in.

I think Chinese army benefited a great deal from their experiences in recently (then) fought Korean war against a much better trained and equipped army.
Until Shastriji became PM, imho, we as a nation were living in a honeymoon period after independence. 62 war was like smelling the coffee and realizing that unless we show resolve, little could be achieved on world stage just by standing the moral high ground.
a bit off topic, but i wonder how things would have been had Vallabhbhai been the PM.

Also far superior grand tactics and tactics. They used the Bailley Trail, for instance; attacked Indian Army positions piece-meal, used night-fighting extensively, and generally displayed far more military competence.

Tactically speaking, do you see better use of Airforce would've made difference in those high battlegrounds?

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Also far superior grand tactics and tactics. They used the Bailley Trail, for instance; attacked Indian Army positions piece-meal, used night-fighting extensively, and generally displayed far more military competence.

This is not wholly true.Some chinese units did,some didn't.
The favourite chinese tactic of infiltration was derived from the japanese hook(scorpion sting) which the chinese had picked up during their war and had also used well in the korean war.Most indian troops surrendered when they ran out of ammunition.
Many other chinese units however also resorted to massed human wave tactics with heavy casualities.With a 8 to 1 superiority in numbers and superior weapons one has a lot of flexibility in options.

 

[Hindustani78]

Jawaharlal Nehru was suppose to be killed well before MK Gandhi.... He gave a big loss to India....He managed to settled politics as family business in India.

India was attacked from all sides shortly after Independence but we Indians have stood strong with courage and defended our country's border.

Jawahar Lal Nehru's health began declining steadily after 1962, on 27 May 1964 Nehru ji left his world.


“Russia didn’t dissuade China”

“Because the Soviets were engaged in their own high-stakes gamble in Cuba, Moscow did not discourage the Chinese, despite Khrushchev’s close relationship with Nehru,” he said in the book.

““At the same time defeating India would answer the question Kennedy had raised in his 1959 speech in the Senate about which country, democratic India or communist China, was poised to win the race for great power status in Asia. For Mao, the conflict with India provided a surrogate for his rivalry with Moscow and with Washington,” Mr. Riedel wrote in his book.

I guess the OP 's second question is had US helped at Nehru's request, India would have been in US camp 50 years earlier instead in USSR's camp, therefore, India could be a total different state of affair today. By the way, Amur conflict between USSR and China happened in 1969, so it was not a factor at that time. USSR was just too busy with the missiles crisis.

Thanks!

1958–59 are often considered the key years in convincing Mao that the USSR was not to be trusted.

 

[Joe Shearer]

haven't heard a better word for the policy.

I think Chinese army benefited a great deal from their experiences in recently (then) fought Korean war against a much better trained and equipped army.
Until Shastriji became PM, imho, we as a nation were living in a honeymoon period after independence. 62 war was like smelling the coffee and realizing that unless we show resolve, little could be achieved on world stage just by standing the moral high ground.
a bit off topic, but i wonder how things would have been had Vallabhbhai been the PM.


Tactically speaking, do you see better use of Airforce would've made difference in those high battlegrounds?

No.

This is not wholly true.Some chinese units did,some didn't.
The favourite chinese tactic of infiltration was derived from the japanese hook(scorpion sting) which the chinese had picked up during their war and had also used well in the korean war.Most indian troops surrendered when they ran out of ammunition.
Many other chinese units however also resorted to massed human wave tactics with heavy casualities.With a 8 to 1 superiority in numbers and superior weapons one has a lot of flexibility in options.

As you have spotted, it was different in different sectors. The only setback that the PLA suffered was in eastern NEFA. They were very successful with the massed attacks at one end of a position, the infiltration to envelop an Indian Army position during night hours, and subsequent massed attack at one point, and marches through unguarded territories debouching on very vulnerable ground for the IA.

I am for one not at all convinced about the authenticity of the 8 to 1 figure. Did you get some authentic information about this? Preferably either a Chinese, an American or any other neutral figure, not IA memoirs.

Chinese lost,that is the final fact.

I disagree strongly.

The PLA got a moral ascendancy, which, in spite of several incidents in subsequent years, still sets the tone in the minds of the Indian Army and all Indian decision-making.

Personally, when I see the topography, and the arrangement of forces, the military infrastructure, and PLA and PLAAF plans and procedures, I feel pessimistic of any military move more than a brigade in strength on the Indian side. I also do not see the PLA starting something, but they will keep testing the envelope and never give this border a chance to settle down - not in the foreseeable future.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

I am for one not at all convinced about the authenticity of the 8 to 1 figure. Did you get some authentic information about this? Preferably either a Chinese, an American or any other neutral figure, not IA memoirs.

American sources.Congress committee report.

 

[Joe Shearer]

American sources.Congress committee report.

Love to see it. I've been looking high and low for data on this.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Not really surprised. India is only fit in fighting smaller guy's like Pakistan. Preferably when it has 7 times numerical advantage. Pit India against anybody remotely the same size ( China ) and it is case of sudden, violent, uncontrolled, explosive diarrhoea and do a Usain Bolt down the mountains to the safety of Ganges Valley.

And then go screaming and crying to "Uncle Sam".

* India motto should be "All is fair in love and war if you have at least 1:6 advantage"

Ps. Fact: India has about 6.5 times more people. Just one Indian state ( out of 26 ) Utter Pradesh is slightly larger than Pakistan - 195 million to 200 million.

 

[Virk1]

Not really surprised. India is only fit in fighting smaller guy's like Pakistan. Preferably when it has 7 times numerical advantage. Pit India against anybody remotely the same size ( China ) and it is case of sudden, violent, uncontrolled, explosive diarrhoea and do a Usain Bolt down the mountains to the safety of Ganges Valley.

And then go screaming and crying to "Uncle Sam".

* India motto should be "All is fair in love and war if you have at least 1:6 advantage"

Ps. Fact: India has about 6.5 times more people. Just one Indian state ( out of 26 ) Utter Pradesh is slightly larger than Pakistan - 195 million to 200 million.

Better than mass surrendering along with the female family members with tail between their legs to just 6000 troops in dhaka.FYI India still occupies laddakh and Arunanchal pradesh after thrashing PLA in 1967,since than China is not fighting but negotiating.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Better than mass surrendering along with the female family members with tail between their legs to just 6000 troops in dhaka.FYI India still occupies laddakh and Arunanchal pradesh after thrashing PLA in 1967,since than China is not fighting but negotiating.

Please ignore @Atanz He has confessed to a rooted dislike of India and Indians.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

Not really surprised. India is only fit in fighting smaller guy's like Pakistan. Preferably when it has 7 times numerical advantage. Pit India against anybody remotely the same size ( China ) and it is case of sudden, violent, uncontrolled, explosive diarrhoea and do a Usain Bolt down the mountains to the safety of Ganges Valley.

And then go screaming and crying to "Uncle Sam".

* India motto should be "All is fair in love and war if you have at least 1:6 advantage"

Ps. Fact: India has about 6.5 times more people. Just one Indian state ( out of 26 ) Utter Pradesh is slightly larger than Pakistan - 195 million to 200 million.

For the LAST several weeks ; we have been observing that you have an almost
uncontrolled anger and hatred towards India

What do you think ; can any thing GOOD for Pakistan come out of this hatred

 

[Virk1]

The feeling is mutual old man,be rest assured.



I hear it was to be half of that number you quoted!!

Thanks,just refered to Gen video 3000 troops saved 26000 pakistanis soldiers in dhaka from Bangladeshi mob.

 

[Indian Patriot]

Just wondering how many Indian people know about it?

Everyone does. It was not a secret that US interference saved India.

I don't understand why this is a news. Every educated person in India knows the 1962 war and how the stupidity of central leadership cost India the war.