What's new

'US has now an ally in India, enemy in Islamabad'

There were transfers of weapons, but Kennedy was offering too little too late.
By that time, the Russo-Chinese split was done and Russia had no qualms about Punishing the Chinese.

About the Americans; Kennedy was rather sympathetic to the Indian side; in fact John Kenneth Galbraith (a non-career diplomat) was his point-man of choice in New Delhi. What bogged down the pro-Indian lobby in Washington were the "infamous" Dulles Brothers; who were hard-core Cold-Warriors. They never forgave Nehru for not climbing on to the American Band Wagon in the Cold War. Remember that "Foggy Bottom" ie State Dept in Wash.D.C. always believed that India should remain beholden for the positive role that Franklin D Roosevelt played in persuading Britain to relinquish its Empire; the "crowning jewel" of which was India. After the War, when the Iron Curtain (figuratively) descended the Americans hoped to rope in India into their alliance. Only when Nehru looked away, was Ayub Khan's (actually Liaqat Ali Khan) overtures accepted. The paranoid Capitol Hill of that time also functioned on the basis of "if you are not for us, you are against us". So the American hardware was limited to small arms, vehicles, communication eqpt and Transport Aircraft. Highly lethal stuff like fighters were ruled out; just as the Americans persuaded the British not to transfer larger warships and most of all submarines.

About the Soviets; Stalin positively disliked the Chinese. The reason could be that Stalin harbored rascist beliefs. Later Kruschev and Mao shared a mutual antipathy and suspicion of each other. By 1962, the Sino-Soviet break was clear. So the Soviets not only decided to teach the Chinese a lesson, but also thought that getting India to align with them would give them greater legitimacy and acceptability in the International arena. But they were wise to calibrate it very finely. The zenith of Indo-Soviet ties was the Brezhnev era.
 
.
There were transfers of weapons, but Kennedy was offering too little too late.
By that time, the Russo-Chinese split was done and Russia had no qualms about Punishing the Chinese.

Oscar there were no transfer of weapons . mind telling me which ones we got? all they gave were non lethal weapons.
 
.
Oscar there were no transfer of weapons . mind telling me which ones we got? all they gave were non lethal weapons.

Well,that may be correct. But there was transfer of equipment to be used in high-altitude and terrain combat scenarios.
Point being, the US was reaching out to India...but with the usual "committal" costs.
 
.
Well,that may be correct. But there was transfer of equipment to be used in high-altitude and terrain combat scenarios.
Point being, the US was reaching out to India...but with the usual "committal" costs.

But 'costs'-which India did not wish to pay. That is where the Soviets stepped in...................the rest is documentad History.
While the Americans continued with their myopic policies all over the world; Latin America, Africa, Asia most notably S.E.Asia......that is also documented History.
 
.
Well,that may be correct. But there was transfer of equipment to be used in high-altitude and terrain combat scenarios.
Point being, the US was reaching out to India...but with the usual "committal" costs.

Yeah but the were all non lethal equipment . snow jackets, shoes, mountaineering equipment. till the early 2000 we did not get any equipment from the US.
 
.
Yeah but the were all non lethal equipment . snow jackets, shoes, mountaineering equipment. till the early 2000 we did not get any equipment from the US.

@jbgt90; there were also Carbines, Pistols, MMGs, HMGs and related ammo; then there were Brandt Mortars from FRG. The rest was largely non-lethal.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Yeah but the were all non lethal equipment . snow jackets, shoes, mountaineering equipment. till the early 2000 we did not get any equipment from the US.

They were probably "testing" India's potential to play the poodle.
 
.
@jbgt90; there were also Carbines, Pistols, MMGs, HMGs and related ammo; then there were Brandt Mortars from FRG. The rest was largely non-lethal.

Do you know that we had automatic weapons during the 62 war? they were just not issued to the troops. plus the items you mentioned were sold as a regular shopping list . those weapons can even be bought by anyone today . there are no restrictions on them . what we needed were major weapons systems which the west refused.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Do you know that we had automatic weapons during the 62 war? they were just not issued to the troops. plus the items you mentioned were sold as a regular shopping list . those weapons can even be bought by anyone today . there are no restrictions on them . what we needed were major weapons systems which the west refused.

Oh, you are talking about the FN rifles from Belgium I presume. The first lot had come in just about when the conflict started but in very sparse numbers. Eventually India acquired the licence to make them as SLRs or as the "Ishapore Rifles"

Apart from that the weaponry that I wrote about earlier came in on USAF C-130s and C-119 Packets which the IAF acquired. Actually the IAF asked for C-130s then, the request was turned down; possibly because the PAF was getting them. The IAF got a few C-46 Commandos also which were transferred to ARC. Later the DHC Caribous came which were the work-horses of supply in the the NE with the tired old Dakotas. A few Bell G-47 and Sikorsky S-55s were also supplied but they were found unsuitable and eventually the IAF bought Mi-4 Helos.

There were the small arms as I mentioned, Radio Sets and IIRC 2-3 Radar sets. Apart from Parkas and cold-weather gear.
 
.
Oh, you are talking about the FN rifles from Belgium I presume. The first lot had come in just about when the conflict started but in very sparse numbers. Eventually India acquired the licence to make them as SLRs or as the "Ishapore Rifles"

Apart from that the weaponry that I wrote about earlier came in on USAF C-130s and C-119 Packets which the IAF acquired. Actually the IAF asked for C-130s then, the request was turned down; possibly because the PAF was getting them. The IAF got a few C-46 Commandos also which were transferred to ARC. Later the DHC Caribous came which were the work-horses of supply in the the NE with the tired old Dakotas. A few Bell G-47 and Sikorsky S-55s were also supplied but they were found unsuitable and eventually the IAF bought Mi-4 Helos.

There were the small arms as I mentioned, Radio Sets and IIRC 2-3 Radar sets. Apart from Parkas and cold-weather gear.
Yeah , that's about right . but they constantly refused us the big ticket items.
PS : we had already received about 50k rifles by the start of the conflict, some even fell into Chinese hands (who after the war returned them)
 
.
Yeah , that's about right . but they constantly refused us the big ticket items.

That was the "Cold War" era. See it in context; I tried to explain it some-what a little earlier. Nothing would have pleased USA more than India joining the American camp. But as Oscar has also said; that overture came with strings attached. Which Nehru spurned.
Whatever may have been Nehru's faults; he never forgot that while India was newly independent, India was an old country dating back to antiquity. That heritage and identity he never forgot. Of course, it also contributed to his sense of "hubris" which led to his heart-break eventually.
In comparison, Pakistan did not (and could not) forge that sense of identity. So it behaved differently with Uncle Sam and conversely Uncle Sam treated Pakistan on different terms. Now can you connect the dots and understand where and how the fraught US-Pakistani relationship began and why it has trended the way that it has for all this time.
The Soviets were wise to all this and acted accordingly.

The difference in the two Super-Power's policies were born out of different senses and understanding of History.
 
.
That was the "Cold War" era. See it in context; I tried to explain it some-what a little earlier. Nothing would have pleased USA more than India joining the American camp. But as Oscar has also said; that overture came with strings attached. Which Nehru spurned.
Whatever may have been Nehru's faults; he never forgot that while India was newly independent, India was an old country dating back to antiquity. That heritage and identity he never forgot. Of course, it also contributed to his sense of "hubris" which led to his heart-break eventually.
In comparison, Pakistan did not (and could not) forge that sense of identity. So it behaved differently with Uncle Sam and conversely Uncle Sam treated Pakistan on different terms. Now can you connect the dots and understand where and how the fraught US-Pakistani relationship began and why it has trended the way that it has for all this time.
The Soviets were wise to all this and acted accordingly.

The difference in the two Super-Power's policies were born out of different senses and understanding of History.

Oh yeah i know this , mind you i am not complaining , but a lot of officers (old timers like my father) felt betrayed by the west. , they then went to embrace the soviet methodology of battle which was only replaced by Gen Sunderji, in his army 2000 plan.
 
.
Oh yeah i know this , mind you i am not complaining , but a lot of officers (old timers like my father) felt betrayed by the west. , they then went to embrace the soviet methodology of battle which was only replaced by Gen Sunderji, in his army 2000 plan.

Soviet methodology or doctrines was a different matter, it had little to do with being spurned by the West. It was related to utility of some of the Soviet weaponry esp the use of Armor and MICVs. But the IA did not change all of their doctrines to replicate Soviet ones. Take the IN for instance; they adapted some of the Soviet ideas but conjured many of their own around Soviet supplied hardware. Case in point: the use of the Missile Boats in 1971. That impressed Admiral Gorshkov no end. Another thing that Adm. Gorshkov learnt from the IN was the utility of Airpower at sea. As different from the US concepts of Naval Airpower. That inspired him to start the Soviet move to build and operate Carriers.

About Gen, Sundarji's ideas; his ideas did not totally replace older ones, but built on them. He restructured the Div and Cops level formations and their tasking; which was further refined by others such as Gen. Bipin Joshi and Gen. Padmanabhan (who has been credited with the mobilisation study called Cold Start). Many of Sundarji's ideas while being different; needed to be re-engineered to be made workable. One area where Sundarji failed was Jaffna. The Officers who served there have not forgotten him yet.
 
.
US is a betrayer , they cheated Pakistan and now they are running back after India . Btw we are still an ally of Russia .
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom