What's new

To all Indian members here. A question...

CardSharp

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
9,355
Reaction score
0
I genuinely want to know what Indian members here think about the 1962 war. Please be frank, my feelings won't be hurt and I'm not likely to get offended. I really want to get the Indian perspective on it as a student of history and perspectives.

Was the 1962 war a result of China stabbing India in the back?

What was the sequence of event that lead to the war?

Was Nehru's fault?

Do Indians think there are parallels to the reported incursion recently?

Thanks in advance for any reply
 
.
it depends on different point of view
in my view it was all nehru's faulthope you heard of the news that USA trained tibet freedom fighter were supported by india from usa they came to india then they entered tibet which made china angry to india however this was not mistake mistake was nahru never interpreted the outcome before 62 war he was saying hindi chini bhai bhai of which china took full advantage (any nation would have done so..........even india) and his second mistake was before supporting freedom fighter in tibet he shpuld have made stronger indian military he didnt do anything in this field so it was nehru who screwedup
so final concluision on practical ground it was india's fault
on moral ground it was china's fault
but if you think of long term policies china also made terrible mistake in 62 war however they win the war they defeated india badly but they have a permanent enemy in southern part of there country forever japan korea taiwan and USA to east vietnam to south east russia in north (we all know sino-russia conflict resulting max military buildup in history at there border) and now USA+india in west also in afganistan not a good neighbour for china
 
. . .
nahru never interpreted the outcome before 62 war he was saying hindi chini bhai bhai of which china took full advantage (any nation would have done so..........even india)

India let down its guard at the borders because of hindi chini bhai bhai and China took advantage with a surprise attack and that started the war?

Another quick question, was history of the war taught in school? and if so is it the same account that Shekar offered?
 
.
I genuinely want to know what Indian members here think about the 1962 war


Being Frank, You attacked without any Provocation, and only and only for greediness!!!

This is what One Indian Thinks!!!
 
.
I genuinely want to know what Indian members here think about the 1962 war. Please be frank, my feelings won't be hurt and I'm not likely to get offended. I really want to get the Indian perspective on it as a student of history and perspectives.

Was the 1962 war a result of China stabbing India in the back?

What was the sequence of event that lead to the war?

Was Nehru's fault?

Do Indians think there are parallels to the reported incursion recently?

Thanks in advance for any reply

I have changed your sequence of questions to make it more chronological and logical:

What was the sequence of event that lead to the war?
Claims and counterclaims from both sides as to what really began the war.Indian perspective : Indian army tried to push back PLA squatters in one sector of AP (Chinese South Tibet). There was a routine here of PLA troops occupying Indian claimed territory and Indian troops pushing them back. Not much shooting so far. Arguments between the troops on where China ends and India begins. Steadily between 1958 to 1962 PLA patrolling and squatting gets progressively more aggressive. One such incident results in full scale PLA invasion across AP at multiple sectors.

Root cause: China does not accept McMahon Line as international border. As the demarcation was done in 1914 by Tibetan Government when Tibet was free. According to China , Tibet has always been a part of China and therefore agreements made by any Tibetan government is null and void. Maps from as far back as the Yuan dynasty in 1300 AD are produced to "prove" this. But the Yuan dynasty was founded by the Mongols so can Mongolia today claim China as its own?

The ratcheting up of tensions followed by a massive offensive means that the PLA had already concentrated and built up forces in those sectors and in the Aksai Chin area further north. Creating a flash point incident was therefore in China's interests. The coordinated strike caught the Indian defenders by surprise. India just did not expect an attack and therefore had not really built up much defenses in those sectors. Overall the Indian armed forces had not been built up since independence in '47 with the civilian government not prioritizing defense.


Was Nehru's fault?

Yes. As the PM since 47 till 62 , for 15 years , when the war took place he holds highest responsibility. For the criminal neglect of the Indian armed forces he and his government are culpable. He may have been India's PM but he was her defacto Foreign Minister too. He set the direction and tone for relations with China. He was a founding member of NAM and the policy of "equi-distance" from the superpowers. Perhaps if he had not kept such distancing policies China may have bitten more than it could chew eg. the Korean war and US involvement. AT the very least Indian troops may not having been fighting with outdated enfields when their PLA counterparts had Russian assault rifles. He should have seen it coming but he was blinded by his own hubris. Zhou Enlai in particular took him for a ride. When the war started he still believed that the out-manned, out maneuvered , out gunned Indian army could be a match for the PLA fresh out of fighting the US- UN. He vastly overestimated the Indian army's capability while underestimating the PLA. He died a broken man as he deserved to.


Was the 1962 war a result of China stabbing India in the back?

Yes. But China acted in its own self interests. Mao and Zhou never bought Nehru's "Indians - Chinese brothers and comrades in arms" BS. They were realists and pragmatists. Nehru was a dreamer and naive. Mao and Zhou had earned their bones risking their necks fighting the Nationalists during the long march. Nehru got handed the PM ship because he was close to Gandhi and political maneuvering within the congress party. Perhaps with a leader like Subhash Bose things may have been different.China may have stabbed India in the back but India had provided China the opportunity to do so. India's culpability is therefore more.



Do Indians think there are parallels to the reported incursion recently?

Yes. But there is more to it than meets the eye. India does not have territorial claims on China in AP. India accepts Chinese sovereignty over Tibet (A big mistake I think - Blatant appeasement and feeding the war mongerers) This is not the first time that such incidents have happened since 62. There were other incidents like the 87 Sumdorong Chu clash. Since India does not claim Chinese territory and the incidents happened on Indian territory it begs the question who is responsible? So why is the Chinese leadership doing these things?

Consider the "string of pearls" strategy to constrain India in the southern ocean. The build up of Pakistan, formenting the maoists in Nepal and in India itself. Support and aid to Sri lanka , B'desh and Burma. Pressuring the Australian government from selling uranium to India. The competition in Africa to garner mines and raw materials. This is a simple strategy to ensure the economic and military supremacy of China in south and east Asia. The constant tension is also part of a probing strategy to keep the pressure up to keep its only real competitor in Asia off - balance both militarily and economically.

This also serves to inject nationalism into the Chinese populace , the CCP's domestic constituency. Expect the ratcheting to notch a level up if China's economic hot balloon blown up on government spending and cheap exports deflates. The CCP in short wants to hold on to power and will invent demons and imaginary enemies to distract the people. The CCP is astride a galloping tiger and is finding it difficult to hold on and can't get off. So there are both internal and external dynamics at play.

The thing that has changed fundamentally since 62 is that the Indians underestimate themselves and the Chinese overestimate themselves.
 
.
1. A lot of water under the bridge..............really pointless debating the issue now.
2. What I find especially objectionable is that you are making it sound like as if there is a mismatch between the 'so called' Indian perspective on the conflict and the ground reality as known to the Chinese and their friends. However I shall answer your question.
3. Salient aspects as generally known are as follows:-
A. McMahon line was demarcated between Tibet and British India in 1914. This formed the basis of India's border with Tibet. The British left in 1947 and all territorial possessions of British India were divided between India and Pakistan. India was left holding the areas adjoining Tibet.
B. China disputed the McMahon line as it claimed Tibet. refused to accept the McMahon line but did nothing to sort out the issue till the British left. Subsequently, China forcefully occupied Tibet thereby forcing thousand of Tibetan refugees to escape to India.
C. This brought India and China directly into conflict as we still go by the McMahon line which China does not recognize. China therefore laid claim to certain territories which were part of India as per the McMahon line but were parts of Southern Tibet as per the Chinese interpretation.
D. We genuinely felt that we should hold on to territory that is legitimately ours.
E. In case of a war over these territories, The Indian Defence forces are required to implement and enforce the will of the Indian people.
F. Yes, Indians did not expect the Chinese to attack. We feel that China back stabbed us after lulling us with the false bonhomie generated by the 'Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai' farce. The Japanese ambassador to the US was also talking of deep and everlasting friendship days before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1942. So perhaps, This is an Asian quality??
G. Barely 15 years after independence, India was militarily no match for China. This fact was known to all parties. In light of this, it was really very valiant and brave of the Indian Army to put up a fight with the vastly superior PLA.
H. Isn't it far better to be vanquished in battle with a superior enemy, instead of tamely lying down and accepting defeat?
4. Yes, in hind sight, the issue could have been perhaps handled better if the path of negotiations was chosen to give the Army time to strengthen itself till the point came where it could withstand a Chinese assault. Roads and infrastructure had to be built and improved to sustain a major military effort in the relevant areas.
5. However, defence preparedness and spending money on militarization did not figure very highly on Nehru's priorities as the PM of a newly born nation and perhaps rightly so.
6. All that is history, the long term fallout of the 1962 episode are many, a few are as follows:-
A. It brought home the fact that we were surrounded by hostile nations and therefore had to militarize rapidly. In this way India should thank China as China has had a tremendous role to play in India's development as a nation and a military power.
B. Yes, China has made a life long enemy on the south of its border. There can be any number of meetings and visits and friendly statements from both sides but Indians will never trust China again.
C. Yes, we will find a way to coexist peacefully. We have to. But that is about it.
 
.
last year i was in hong kong (i visit HK very frequently) and there are many indians there...

i was talking to them about whether they face discrimination because of 1962 war and what their point of view of 1962 war is... they told me that it was all nehru's fault because he was not like subash chandra bose as he did not know war strategies and he could not foresee the threat of china....

but they told me about two events that i did not previously know about... these two turned out to be the second and third conflicts between india and china and from my research it turns out india had "won" or had the upper hand against china... in 1967, (chola incident) china had an incursion in sikkim area but the indian military found out about this incursion...after 2-3 days of fighting the chinese retreated their invasion of chola... i THINK (im not sure!!) that a ceasefire was signed thereafter... then again in 1987 china had an incursion in arunachal pradesh region, and same thing like chola, around 1 or 2 days of fighting then the chinese invasion was retreated back... i haven't found out anything whether there was an official ceasefire in 1987...

so CardSharp, maybe you can see 1967 and 1987 as parallels to 1962 war...
 
. .
Well we went from a non aligned, pacifist nation to the world's 2nd largest standing army all thanks to the '62 war. Got AP back anyway, so it could've been worse.
 
.
2. What I find especially objectionable is that you are making it sound like as if there is a mismatch between the 'so called' Indian perspective on the conflict and the ground reality as known to the Chinese and their friends. However I shall answer your question.


I'm sorry if there were any appearance or implication of the Chinese version of the events being superior. To be fair to me, I've only stated that there are obvious discrepancies between different version of events on a contentious issue without reference to who is correct. And as such the nature of truth is hard to pin down without looking at events from many perspectives. Hence this thread :) thank you for taking the time to write.



1. A lot of water under the bridge..............really pointless debating the issue now.

....


Yes, China has made a life long enemy on the south of its border. There can be any number of meetings and visits and friendly statements from both sides but Indians will never trust China again.
C. Yes, we will find a way to coexist peacefully. We have to. But that is about it.

Ahh but that is precisely the point, it is not pointless to clarify the issue precisely because we have to co-exist peacefully. I hope you can see how a lack of trust not only preclude us from being friends but can easily slide us towards war. Again thanks for taking the time to answer the questions.
 
.
Well we went from a non aligned, pacifist nation to the world's 2nd largest standing army all thanks to the '62 war. Got AP back anyway, so it could've been worse.

True. Military Iron has been added but Steel is still missing in the National Will. So long as that does not happen it does not matter how large India's armed forces are or how many nukes she has. Incidents like Kargil, the Parliament attack ,Mumbai 26/11 and Chinese incursions will keep happening.

India does not understand and has not internalized the Will to Power.
 
.
China_administrative.png
 
.
excellent analysis Nietzche...I could not have done any better..
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom