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

[Indian Patriot]

Thanks for tagging me. Kinda late today, I will read through news posts and reply tomorrow

I know the Indian side of 1962 story. I would like to know the Chinese side of history. Many Chinese claim that 1962 was a Chinese response to India's Forward Policy. What is your opinion?

 

[Dungeness]

I don't.

The Chinese decided to "teach a lesson" to Vietnam. I agree with your conjecture that China was not interested in the destruction or occupation of the country. But things went south for China pretty soon. The Vietnamese did not flinch in the face of casualties and bravely stood their ground, something not seen by the Chinese in their 1962 adventure. In many fronts the Chinese failed to break through Vietnamese defences and in some cases they were even pushed back.

Vietnamese did not hoist their flag in Beijing. But hey did not get intimidated by the Chinese and did not roll over.

True, Vietnamese fought for their country bravely, and PLA suffered higher casualties than they prepared for, in some battles PLA failed to achieve its tactic goal. But one can't overstate the gain in part against the loss in whole.

Some of the strategic goals of this PLA military offensive have been accomplished:

1. Proving to Viets that USSR would not come to their rescue which falsified the significance of the military alliance between USSR and Vietnam;

2. Devastating Vietnam's economy for the next 10 years until Vietnamese leader come to Beijing in 1989 to sign the ceasefire agreement, therefore Vietnam missed the critical 10 years in developing their economy;

3. Shattering Vietment's wild dream of putting Laos and Cambodia under its control and eventually forming an united "Greater Vietnam" in the entire region which could have been a significant security threat to China;

4. Showing to the US and the world that China could teach "The Third Strongest Military Power", as they claimed, a lesson at will.

China failed to force Vietnam to withdrew its troop from Cambodia.

It is not a "KO" win, but it is a "point win" for China. Of course, Vietnamese can always claim they are the victors.

I wish what you are saying is true but it is not. In 1962 the Indians got a hammering, it fact even today the center is scared of China. This is evident from the fact that everybody downplayed the incursion into Ladakh by PLA soldiers.

PLA declared a ceasefire because Uncle Sam extended political support to India. China is not a mental case to easily hand back occupied territory. If they can occupy Tibet then they can occupy NEFA as well. Bear in mind hat in 1962 Arunachal (which you Chinese claim as Lower Tibet) did not exist, it was North East Frontier Agency. These areas were not even full-fledged states of Indian union. So why did the Chinese make such a tactical blunder from Chinese point of view?

Also bear in mind that the Chinese supply routes were stretched but never under threat. No Indian land or aerial operations were carried out against Chinese supply lines. In fact the Indian army was given marching orders to make a strategic retreat, here was no preparations for a counter-attack. Instead the army was given orders to consolidate, reorganise and defend bengal against a possible Chinese invasion.

China had the upper hand in every field. So what made the Chinese so kind-hearted to declare a unilateral ceasefire if not US support?

It is the greatest military blunder in my mind, that China did not take the land it claimed as its own.

There are 4 reasons about this stunning withdraw in my personal opinion:

1. Its capacity to fight a prolong war with India in that part of world during winter where there was no logistic facility aside from mules and local people;

2. Mao's personal ego to become THE leader of entire 3rd world, and grabbing land from one of the NAM founders would damage his moral high ground;

3. China did not want to turn India as a permeate enemy, considering China already face two superpowers at its North and South, as Mao said he just wanted to achieve 30 years peace on the border with India, when talking about the purpose of the war;

4. China did not have the territorial ambitions as many Indian people believed based on Indian's own expansionist mindset.

I do not think USA's support to India was a factor, as before the offensive was launched, it was defined publicly as "China India Border Self-Defense Operation", and it was meant to be a short duration border combat.

Beside, China had fought with the USA led 16 national UN alliance during the Korean war, and it did not back down, why they would be afraid of 500 millions military aid in the hands of Indian military which they deemed inferior? The very letters we are talking about from Nehru showed the desperation of India at that time, do you think that 500 million aid would have reversed all that?

It is one thing to "strong arm" those small princely states or little kingdoms to submission, but it is entirely different thing to mess with then battle hardened PLA troop. India was not prepared to fight with PLA militarily, logistically, or mentally, Nehru and his gang was betting on China's no action, and sneak whatever they could get without fighting a war, which was the whole philosophy behind the "Forward Policy".

 

[Jlaw]

I do not think USA's support to India was a factor, as before the offensive was launched, it was defined publicly as "China India Border Self-Defense Operation", meaning it was gonging to be a short duration border combat.

Include: 1) greatest famine in Chinese history
2) Fighting a long two front war with USSR + India at the time
3) Not completely sure, but did USSR or US threatened to use nukes on China?

 

[Dungeness]

I cannot agree or disagree with the claims of Forward Policy. I need to learn more about the allegations by the Chinese that India was the aggressor.

This is a grey area. The Chinese went mad when Sikkim joined India. They alleged that the referendum was a big conspiracy and votes were rigged. But the border disputes with Pakistan and Bangladesh are legacy of colonial rule. Like the McMohan line the borders with both these countries are genuinely ambiguous.

I mentioned that princely kingdoms were given the choice to join India or Pakistan or chose to remain independent. Kashmir chose independence but they were invaded by Pakistani pathan tribes. In panic the Maharaja of Kashmir approached India for help. India put forward the condition that hey will help Kashmir only if Kashmir becomes part of India. The dispute continues even today.

China has always maintained that the India's territorial aggression under the "forward police" was the reason that China entered the war with India, which has been independently verified by BBC reporter to India Neville Maxwell in his book "India's China War" in 1970s, and by CIA reports and some other materials recently made available to public. Not until recent years, the majority of Indian masses were believing Indian Government's theory of "Backstabbing", and deemed China as the aggressor.

In the case of Sikkim, the opposition party of Sikkim sought for China's intervention until last minute, 20 minutes to be exact before the signing ceremony. I have to look into it to find more information as why China did not take any action.

But my point stands true, India has the territorial ambition, hence the "forward policy".

The NE did have historical links with India, but just not as extensive as other Indian states. Pragjyotishpur or modern day Assam had a close alliance with the Delhi king Harshvardhan. Another example is when Guru Nanak, he founder of Sikh faith made a pilgrim to Assam. There are many other such small examples.But I agree that other Indian states were consolidated because of shared Islamic rule and subsequent Islamic culture.

Indians considered themselves the natural rulers of former British colonies just like the Pakistanis consider themselves the natural rulers of former British colonies. Even today many pashtuns in NWFP do not recognise the international border between the two countries. Baluchistan is another grey area.

Yes, there is a deep-rooted racism against NE people in mainland India. Many Indians have a racist attitude and call the NE people "chinki". But I doubt that is enough proof to claim NE would be happy under Chinese.

I did not mean you when I said some people claim NE people originated in China. Let's not name him here, he is an immature kid and will go into a long, tireless rant. But having said that, the Ahoms who founded the Ahom kingdom in Assam do claim their ancestry from China and it is a valid claim.

Because of the ambiguously drawn borders in 1947 many parts of India ended up in bangladesh and myanmar. Many Naga, Manipuri and other NE tribes are now distributed in myanmar and bangladesh because of colonial era borders.

Yes, this has been my point, Indians considered themselves the successor of British Colonial Master, and act as such in many part of NE minority area, that is why until this day, you still have the resistance movements in many sates in NE. I do not want to involve Pakistan in our discussion.

At least China dose not have wide spread racial discrimination against minorities, and I do think many NE people would blend into Chinese society mach better, as we share the same or similar ethnic and linguistic background. More importantly, Chinese do not have the mentality of the colonial master. In fact, the minorities in China enjoy many benefits that majority Han do not have, for example, infamous "One Child Policy" is not imposed on minorities.

 

[Hindustani78]

That's speculation. Our Chinese friend here @Dungeness would attest to the fact that the Chinese still mainain that 1962 was a defensive war on heir part in response to India's Forward Policy. If Forward Policy claims are true then the deployment of Indian troops was not a concern.

And I hate to burst your bubble but there was no "stiff resistance" by Indian army in 1962. There were sporadic defenses but on a whole India simply crumbled in face of Chinese onslaught. The general order given to soldiers was simple retreat. Not a single airforce fighter was deployed to attack PLA communication lines.

Arunachal was lost and the PLA had entered Tezpur. The then PM did not mount a counter-offensive instead in his broadcast he shed tears that the NE was lost to China. A country who puts up "stiff resistance" does not make statements like that. Read about he Vietnamese defense against China. A smaller country put up a better fight.

October 20, 1962
The battle of Walong, in the Eastern Sector of NEFA, will go down as a golden chapter in the history of Independent India. The story of 3,000 officers and men of the Indian Army putting up a stiff resistance and holding their positions for three weeks beating back wave after wave of fierce attacks by a formidable enemy 12,000 to 15,000 strong, in a seven-mile front over treacherous mountain terrain, where even drinking water is scarce, is unparalled anywhere in military history. During the battle, they foiled every attempt by the enemy to outflank them and cut off their positions from behind. It was a feature of the Chinese tactics to avoid driving frontal attack but to rely all the time on probing activity to find gaps in the defences and to get behind them. They came from the heights. The battle of Walong was led by young army officers, many of whom fought heroically not only to the last round of their ammunition but to their last breath. A large number fell at their posts but those few who survived returned with a feeling that they were not “defeated though beaten”, and it was worth fighting another day.

When the 1962 conflict began, India was the acknowledged leader of the non-aligned movement.

B. N. Mullick was the Director of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) from 1950 to 1964. He claims that accurate intelligence assessments of Chinese intentions were passed on to Service headquarters as early as June 1962.5 Information
was also received of Pakistani plans to attack India simultaneously from the West, in coordination with the Chinese

The IB inputs indicated that the PLAAF already had MiG-21s supplied by the USSR before the rupture. They also had night interception-capable MiG-19s as well as MiG-17s.

the Chinese infiltrated behind Indian lines by launching a multi-directional attack. After overrunning some of India’s defences along the IB they met with stiff resistance from a platoon of 1 Sikh under Subedar Joginder Singh. The platoon fought fiercely, losing more than half their men. Subedar Joginder Singh, despite a bullet injury in his thigh, refused to be evacuated and fought on bravely to stem the Chinese advance. The Chinese attacked in waves and finally regrouped in larger numbers to attack the post. Using the lone light machine gun, Subedar Joginder Singh killed many advancing Chinese. When the situation became desperate, he and his men, with their bayonets unsheathed, emerged from their trenches with their war cry, “ Wahe Guruji ka Khalsa wahe guruji ki fateh .” Subedar Joginder Singh was captured by the Chinese, but refused treatment and died a prisoner of war. He was awarded the Param Vir Chakra for his gallantry. There is a memorial to him on the road to Bumla.

On the other flank, the Chinese attacked Nuranang valley, which is between Tawang and Sela. The 4 Garhwal Rifles beat back three consecutive waves of Chinese attack. During a lull in the attacks, three brave soldiers — Rifleman Jaswant Singh Rawat, Rifleman Gopal Singh Gusain and Lance Naik Trilok Singh Negi — equipped with most basic arms, slithered to the Chinese positions and lobbed grenades into their bunkers.

 

[Dungeness]

October 20, 1962
The battle of Walong, in the Eastern Sector of NEFA, will go down as a golden chapter in the history of Independent India. The story of 3,000 officers and men of the Indian Army putting up a stiff resistance and holding their positions for three weeks beating back wave after wave of fierce attacks by a formidable enemy 12,000 to 15,000 strong, in a seven-mile front over treacherous mountain terrain, where even drinking water is scarce, is unparalled anywhere in military history. During the battle, they foiled every attempt by the enemy to outflank them and cut off their positions from behind. It was a feature of the Chinese tactics to avoid driving frontal attack but to rely all the time on probing activity to find gaps in the defences and to get behind them. They came from the heights. The battle of Walong was led by young army officers, many of whom fought heroically not only to the last round of their ammunition but to their last breath. A large number fell at their posts but those few who survived returned with a feeling that they were not “defeated though beaten”, and it was worth fighting another day.

When the 1962 conflict began, India was the acknowledged leader of the non-aligned movement.

B. N. Mullick was the Director of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) from 1950 to 1964. He claims that accurate intelligence assessments of Chinese intentions were passed on to Service headquarters as early as June 1962.5 Information
was also received of Pakistani plans to attack India simultaneously from the West, in coordination with the Chinese

The IB inputs indicated that the PLAAF already had MiG-21s supplied by the USSR before the rupture. They also had night interception-capable MiG-19s as well as MiG-17s.

the Chinese infiltrated behind Indian lines by launching a multi-directional attack. After overrunning some of India’s defences along the IB they met with stiff resistance from a platoon of 1 Sikh under Subedar Joginder Singh. The platoon fought fiercely, losing more than half their men. Subedar Joginder Singh, despite a bullet injury in his thigh, refused to be evacuated and fought on bravely to stem the Chinese advance. The Chinese attacked in waves and finally regrouped in larger numbers to attack the post. Using the lone light machine gun, Subedar Joginder Singh killed many advancing Chinese. When the situation became desperate, he and his men, with their bayonets unsheathed, emerged from their trenches with their war cry, “ Wahe Guruji ka Khalsa wahe guruji ki fateh .” Subedar Joginder Singh was captured by the Chinese, but refused treatment and died a prisoner of war. He was awarded the Param Vir Chakra for his gallantry. There is a memorial to him on the road to Bumla.

On the other flank, the Chinese attacked Nuranang valley, which is between Tawang and Sela. The 4 Garhwal Rifles beat back three consecutive waves of Chinese attack. During a lull in the attacks, three brave soldiers — Rifleman Jaswant Singh Rawat, Rifleman Gopal Singh Gusain and Lance Naik Trilok Singh Negi — equipped with most basic arms, slithered to the Chinese positions and lobbed grenades into their bunkers.

From the strategic point of view, I don't know how much these individual heroic stories means to a historical event in which India was defeated. I am not sure what your point is.

 

[Dungeness]

October 20, 1962
The battle of Walong, in the Eastern Sector of NEFA, will go down as a golden chapter in the history of Independent India. The story of 3,000 officers and men of the Indian Army putting up a stiff resistance and holding their positions for three weeks beating back wave after wave of fierce attacks by a formidable enemy 12,000 to 15,000 strong, in a seven-mile front over treacherous mountain terrain, where even drinking water is scarce, is unparalled anywhere in military history. During the battle, they foiled every attempt by the enemy to outflank them and cut off their positions from behind. It was a feature of the Chinese tactics to avoid driving frontal attack but to rely all the time on probing activity to find gaps in the defences and to get behind them. They came from the heights. The battle of Walong was led by young army officers, many of whom fought heroically not only to the last round of their ammunition but to their last breath. A large number fell at their posts but those few who survived returned with a feeling that they were not “defeated though beaten”, and it was worth fighting another day.

When the 1962 conflict began, India was the acknowledged leader of the non-aligned movement.

B. N. Mullick was the Director of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) from 1950 to 1964. He claims that accurate intelligence assessments of Chinese intentions were passed on to Service headquarters as early as June 1962.5 Information
was also received of Pakistani plans to attack India simultaneously from the West, in coordination with the Chinese

The IB inputs indicated that the PLAAF already had MiG-21s supplied by the USSR before the rupture. They also had night interception-capable MiG-19s as well as MiG-17s.

the Chinese infiltrated behind Indian lines by launching a multi-directional attack. After overrunning some of India’s defences along the IB they met with stiff resistance from a platoon of 1 Sikh under Subedar Joginder Singh. The platoon fought fiercely, losing more than half their men. Subedar Joginder Singh, despite a bullet injury in his thigh, refused to be evacuated and fought on bravely to stem the Chinese advance. The Chinese attacked in waves and finally regrouped in larger numbers to attack the post. Using the lone light machine gun, Subedar Joginder Singh killed many advancing Chinese. When the situation became desperate, he and his men, with their bayonets unsheathed, emerged from their trenches with their war cry, “ Wahe Guruji ka Khalsa wahe guruji ki fateh .” Subedar Joginder Singh was captured by the Chinese, but refused treatment and died a prisoner of war. He was awarded the Param Vir Chakra for his gallantry. There is a memorial to him on the road to Bumla.

On the other flank, the Chinese attacked Nuranang valley, which is between Tawang and Sela. The 4 Garhwal Rifles beat back three consecutive waves of Chinese attack. During a lull in the attacks, three brave soldiers — Rifleman Jaswant Singh Rawat, Rifleman Gopal Singh Gusain and Lance Naik Trilok Singh Negi — equipped with most basic arms, slithered to the Chinese positions and lobbed grenades into their bunkers.

I don't know if this battle is worth the title for India, as it ended in India's defeat, no matter how many soldiers could be glorified as heroes..

I am sure 9 out 10 Chinese born after 1962 have never heard of this battle or even Walong this place, as Chinese Gov has never really talked about it. You can not find even a single dedicated Chinese movie or TV drama for Sino-India war, while there are literally thousands for Sino-Japan war.

The conclusion of this battle is that China run over Walong and reached the edge of Assam Plain. I know some Indians would argue that India killed 5 times as many Chinese soldiers as Indian's loss, but the highest numbers of Chinese casualty for the Battle of Walong I have found from Chinese side are 550 wounded, 172 dead, which was considered heavy. India's lost: 750 dead, POW 502, no number for wounded. One Indian helicopter, 62 pieces of artillery were captured.

I would like to believe the numbers from China side, as Indians fled from the area, and there was no way to accurately head-counting China's casualty.

 

[Indian Patriot]

1. Proving to Viets that USSR would not come to their rescue which falsified the significance of the military alliance between USSR and Vietnam;

USSR was nobody's ally. They helped Vietnam during the American war to give a bloody nose to USA. USSR won't risk fighting a war with China over Vietnam. The USSR and China had their own conflicts but that is another story.

2. Devastating Vietnam's economy for the next 10 years until Vietnamese leader come to Beijing in 1989 to sign the ceasefire agreement, therefore Vietnam missed the critical 10 years in developing their economy;

Vietnam's economy was already devastated following the destructive American invasion. More bombs fell on Vietnam than in entire duration of World War Two.

3. Shattering Vietment's wild dream of putting Laos and Cambodia under its control and eventually forming an united "Greater Vietnam" in the entire region which could have been a significant security threat to China;

The claim of "Greater Vietnam" will have to be verified but it is no denying that today entire SEA is apprehensive of China. Unwittingly China pushed Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Philippines, South Korea, into an unofficial group who are all bound by their mutual worry of China. Bad diplomacy I must say.

4. Showing to the US and the world that China could teach "The Third Strongest Military Power", as they claimed, a lesson at will.

With all respect, that is a stretch. The Chinese suffered just as much as Vietnam.

Vietnamese can always claim they are the victors.

Again with respect, your points are the Chinese side and likewise a Vietnamese too can claim similar objectives achieved. From what I know the Vietnamese stopped the Chinese invasion cold and that counts as a Vietnamese victory.

1. Its capacity to fight a prolong war with India in that part of world during winter where there was no logistic facility aside from mules and local people;

The same was true for India. In fact it was even worse for India. Some mandarins in Delhi, even today, believe that under-developing infrastructure in (Chinese) border areas is a smart move because it will slow down a potential Chinese aggression. If ammunition and supplies reached Chinese front in days it would have taken Indian side weeks.

2. Mao's personal ego to become THE leader of entire 3rd world, and grabbing land from one of the NAM founders would damage his moral high ground;

That's a new one. If I am not wrong then Mao wanted to show the third world that China is the natural leader. Arunachal or lower Tibet as you call it is not some random land lying around. It is claimed by Chinese, even today, as their historical land. Remember that China does not call it "land grabbing". For China the McMohan line simply does not exist.

And China did grab land during 1962. Aksai Chin is the most prominent example. There were border outposts which were forever lost to India post 1962.

3. China did not want to turn India as a permeate enemy, considering China already face two superpowers at its North and South, as Mao said he just wanted to achieve 30 years peace on the border with India, when talking about the purpose of the war;

Well that's ironic because present politics suggest otherwise.

4. China did not have the territorial ambitions as many Indian people believed based on Indian's own expansionist mindset.

China had Arunachal, in fact entire NE India, under its thumb and India did not have the will to fight and take it back. China has territorial ambitions because their claims on Arunachal and Sikkim are decades old.

Beside, China had fought with the USA led 16 national UN alliance during the Korean war, and it did not back down, why they would be afraid of 500 millions military aid in the hands of Indian military which they deemed inferior? The very letters we are talking about from Nehru showed the desperation of India at that time, do you think that 500 million aid would have reversed all that?

I agree that China shocked he US alliance during Korean war. But a lot had evolved in military tech since then. I won't say US would have sent troops but they could well have sent military supplies. Indians in 1962 were fighting with vintage WW2 era weapons.

October 20, 1962
The battle of Walong, in the Eastern Sector of NEFA, will go down as a golden chapter in the history of Independent India. The story of 3,000 officers and men of the Indian Army putting up a stiff resistance and holding their positions for three weeks beating back wave after wave of fierce attacks by a formidable enemy 12,000 to 15,000 strong, in a seven-mile front over treacherous mountain terrain, where even drinking water is scarce, is unparalled anywhere in military history. During the battle, they foiled every attempt by the enemy to outflank them and cut off their positions from behind. It was a feature of the Chinese tactics to avoid driving frontal attack but to rely all the time on probing activity to find gaps in the defences and to get behind them. They came from the heights. The battle of Walong was led by young army officers, many of whom fought heroically not only to the last round of their ammunition but to their last breath. A large number fell at their posts but those few who survived returned with a feeling that they were not “defeated though beaten”, and it was worth fighting another day.

When the 1962 conflict began, India was the acknowledged leader of the non-aligned movement.

B. N. Mullick was the Director of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) from 1950 to 1964. He claims that accurate intelligence assessments of Chinese intentions were passed on to Service headquarters as early as June 1962.5 Information
was also received of Pakistani plans to attack India simultaneously from the West, in coordination with the Chinese

The IB inputs indicated that the PLAAF already had MiG-21s supplied by the USSR before the rupture. They also had night interception-capable MiG-19s as well as MiG-17s.

the Chinese infiltrated behind Indian lines by launching a multi-directional attack. After overrunning some of India’s defences along the IB they met with stiff resistance from a platoon of 1 Sikh under Subedar Joginder Singh. The platoon fought fiercely, losing more than half their men. Subedar Joginder Singh, despite a bullet injury in his thigh, refused to be evacuated and fought on bravely to stem the Chinese advance. The Chinese attacked in waves and finally regrouped in larger numbers to attack the post. Using the lone light machine gun, Subedar Joginder Singh killed many advancing Chinese. When the situation became desperate, he and his men, with their bayonets unsheathed, emerged from their trenches with their war cry, “ Wahe Guruji ka Khalsa wahe guruji ki fateh .” Subedar Joginder Singh was captured by the Chinese, but refused treatment and died a prisoner of war. He was awarded the Param Vir Chakra for his gallantry. There is a memorial to him on the road to Bumla.

On the other flank, the Chinese attacked Nuranang valley, which is between Tawang and Sela. The 4 Garhwal Rifles beat back three consecutive waves of Chinese attack. During a lull in the attacks, three brave soldiers — Rifleman Jaswant Singh Rawat, Rifleman Gopal Singh Gusain and Lance Naik Trilok Singh Negi — equipped with most basic arms, slithered to the Chinese positions and lobbed grenades into their bunkers.

I will give you a very small example. When the Chinese were marching into Tezpur here was practically no Indian army battalions in the entire North-Eastern region.

The conclusion of this battle is that China run over Walong and reached the edge of Assam Plain. I know some Indians would argue that India killed 5 times as many Chinese soldiers as Indian's loss, but the highest numbers of Chinese casualty for the Battle of Walong I have found from Chinese side are 550 wounded, 172 dead, which was considered heavy. India's lost: 750 dead, POW 502, no number for wounded. One Indian helicopter, 62 pieces of artillery were captured.

The truth is different. India's losses were horrific while the Chinese suffered very little in comparison. To add insult to injury many of Chinese casualties (in 1962) were a result of harsh weather.

China has always maintained that the India's territorial aggression under the "forward police" was the reason that China entered the war with India, which has been independently verified by BBC reporter to India Neville Maxwell in his book "India's China War" in 1970s, and by CIA reports and some other materials recently made available to public. Not until recent years, the majority of Indian masses were believing Indian Government's theory of "Backstabbing", and deemed China as the aggressor.

Will read the book. Thanks.

But my point stands true, India has the territorial ambition, hence the "forward policy".

I don't know about Forward Policy but one time when India indeed tested Chinese resolve was during Operation Brasstacks which happened in the eighties if I am not wrong. And if my memory serves me right then under Project Falcon India had undertaken a massive infrastructure upgrade program along its Chinese borders.

At least China dose not have wide spread racial discrimination against minorities

I don't want to question you here but maybe you can explain the supposed Han supremacy thing going in China.

and I do think many NE people would blend into Chinese society mach better, as we share the same or similar ethnic and linguistic background

Ethnic ground may be correct but linguistic background similarity is flawed.

More importantly, Chinese do not have the mentality of the colonial master.

Tibet would strongly disagree.

 

[Dungeness]

USSR was nobody's ally. They helped Vietnam during the American war to give a bloody nose to USA. USSR won't risk fighting a war with China over Vietnam. The USSR and China had their own conflicts but that is another story.

The treaty between USSR and Vietnam was signed in 11/3/1978. Please check the fact.


[QUOTE="Vietnam's economy was already devastated following the destructive American invasion. More bombs fell on Vietnam than in entire duration of World War Two[/QUOTE].

Chinese delayed their due rebuilding for another ten years.



[QUOTE="The claim of "Greater Vietnam" will have to be verified but it is no denying that today entire SEA is apprehensive of China. Unwittingly China pushed Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Philippines, South Korea, into an unofficial group who are all bound by their mutual worry of China. Bad diplomacy I must say.[/QUOTE]

Wrong. Divided ASEAN countries are to a threat to China, united "Greater Vietnam: could have been. South Korean is not a ASEAN country. Laos and Cambodia can't be more friendly to China. Check the facts.


[QUOTE="With all respect, that is a stretch. The Chinese suffered just as much as Vietnam.[/QUOTE]

There is no point to guess who suffer more, because it is all subjective.

[QUOTE="Again with respect, your points are the Chinese side and likewise a Vietnamese too can claim similar objectives achieved. From what I know the Vietnamese stopped the Chinese invasion cold and that counts as a Vietnamese victory.[/QUOTE]

As I said, they can claim anything they want, I just show you my reasoning. You are running a circular logic.

[QUOTE="The same was true for India. In fact it was even worse for India. Some mandarins in Delhi, even today, believe that under-developing infrastructure in (Chinese) border areas is a smart move because it will slow down a potential Chinese aggression. If ammunition and supplies reached Chinese front in days it would have taken Indian side weeks.[/QUOTE]

Assam is a plain with rail road, and China would have to fight over Himalaya.

[QUOTE="That's a new one. If I am not wrong then Mao wanted to show the third world that China is the natural leader. Arunachal or lower Tibet as you call it is not some random land lying around. It is claimed by Chinese, even today, as their historical land. Remember that China does not call it "land grabbing". For China the McMohan line simply does not exist.[/QUOTE]

It would be in other's eye, especially India was the leader of NAM, and enjoy the support from both USA and USSR.

[QUOTE="And China did grab land during 1962. Aksai Chin is the most prominent example. There were border outposts which were forever lost to India post 1962.[/QUOTE]

In India's eye, not from China's point of view. So we are running into circular logic again.

[QUOTE="Well that's ironic because present politics suggest otherwise.[/QUOTE]

From India point of view, China maybe enemy, but not the other way around. China withdrew with a good intention to India.

[QUOTE="China had Arunachal, in fact entire NE India, under its thumb and India did not have the will to fight and take it back. China has territorial ambitions because their claims on Arunachal and Sikkim are decades old.[/QUOTE]

That just proves my point. China had it and let go.

[QUOTE="I agree that China shocked he US alliance during Korean war. But a lot had evolved in military tech since then. I won't say US would have sent troops but they could well have sent military supplies. Indians in 1962 were fighting with vintage WW2 era weapons.[/QUOTE]

WE all know India's reasoning for the defeat, and no need repeating. It is you ask me about China point of view about 1962.


[QUOTE="I will give you a very small example. When the Chinese were marching into Tezpur here was practically no Indian army battalions in the entire North-Eastern region.[/QUOTE]

That proved my point again. China did not have territorial ambitions.


[QUOTE="Will read the book. Thanks.[/QUOTE]

Good book to read, may answer your questions.

[QUOTE="I don't know about Forward Policy but one time when India indeed tested Chinese resolve was during Operation Brasstacks which happened in the eighties if I am not wrong. And if my memory serves me right then under Project Falcon India had undertaken a massive infrastructure upgrade program along its Chinese borders.[/QUOTE]

1987 when India turned NEFA into AP.


[QUOTE="I don't want to question you here but maybe you can explain the supposed Han supremacy thing going in China.[/QUOTE]

Personally, I do not know anything about Han Supremacy, honestly. Some people may think Hans have higher IQ as some test suggested, but nothing more than that. Comparing to Supremacy of India Brahmins, it is nothing worth mentioning. In contrary, many Han Chinese claimed discriminated by the government as they can not have the benefits designed for minorities.

[QUOTE="Ethnic ground may be correct but linguistic background similarity is flawed.[/QUOTE]

Many of NE tribal have their relative in China, like Monba, Lhoba people, and they share similar Sino-Tibetan languages.

[QUOTE="Tibet would strongly disagree.[/QUOTE]

Again, subjective statement.

Sorry， messed the quotes. My friend, I think we have discussed issues, and let's just leave it. I feel we are going circles and the discussion is going nowhere. If you have a chance, please read Maxwell's book and CIA reports, better yet, if you can get hold on Henderson report. Maybe you will have new thoughts. Nice discussing with you. Thanks.

Next time, let's talk about "beef".

 

[Indian Patriot]

The treaty between USSR and Vietnam was signed in 11/3/1978. Please check the fact.

I will. But if you claim victory on the basis that USSR did not intervene then you are standing on very weak ground.

Chinese delayed their due rebuilding for another ten years.

Another weak claim. USSR in some opinion suffered just as badly as Germany but the USSR was not the defeated party.

Wrong. Divided ASEAN countries are to a threat to China, united "Greater Vietnam: could have been. South Korean is not a ASEAN country. Laos and Cambodia can't be more friendly to China. Check the facts.

South Korea has its own issues with China and currently the apprehension of China in that region rivals that of Japan.

There is no point to guess who suffer more, because it is all subjective.

Perhaps. But you can't deny China suffered as a result of their actions.

As I said, they can claim anything they want, I just show you my reasoning. You are running a circular logic.

I am not, it's just that my opinion is contrary to yours.

Assam is a plain with rail road, and China would have to fight over Himalaya.

Only one rail road. Assam does not have a direct border with China. The Chinese entered Assam via Arunachal and Arunachal is the immediate norther neighbour of China. Arunachal was comfortably in Chinese hands and no troops were mobilised to Assam either. In fact Indian troops were ordered to retreat from the front.

In India's eye, not from China's point of view. So we are running into circular logic again.

From Chinese POV Arunachal is Chinese territory that is why even today they issue stapled Visas to Arunachalis and protest strongly when an Indian minister visits he state. China had Arunachal in its grasp in 1962 but withdrew.

From India point of view, China maybe enemy, but not the other way around. China withdrew with a good intention to India.

Is that why China kept Aksai Chin, the border outposts and is now building a "string of pearls" in Indian Ocean, a listening base in Myanmar and the supply of most critical military tech including nukes to Pakistan?

That just proves my point. China had it and let go.

China had it and had to let go because of other reasons. China has not renounced their claim on Arunachal even today, so why did the Chinese let go of Arunachal in 1962? Indian army was in full retreat and the Chinese could have simply annexed Arunachal. China did the same to Tibet which is many size larger, so what made them change their mind in Lower Tibet?

Next time, let's talk about "beef"

What makes you think I have a problem with beef?

Nice discussing with you. Thanks.

Same here. Thanks.

 

[Hindustani78]

From the strategic point of view, I don't know how much these individual heroic stories means to a historical event in which India was defeated. I am not sure what your point is.

Indian soldiers have exhibited thier courage and fought .

All-India Anti-Terrorist Front chairman M S Bitta presents Veer Bravery Award to Baljit Singh, a CRPF man who fought during Chinese aggression in 1959, in New Delhi.

 

[Hindustani78]

Routes to Kailash Mansarovar

Srinagar (Kashmir) through Ladakh, Gartok, Gyaninla Mandi, round Kailas and Manasarovar, to Taklakot, Khocharnath,Chhakra Mandi,again to Gartok; and back to Rishikesh, by the Gunla-Niti pass.

from Mukhuva (Gangotri) through Nilang by the Jelukhaga pass, Thulillg, Mangnang, Dapa, Dongpu, Sibchilim, Gyailima Mandi, Kailas-Manasarovar, Chhakra Mandi, and back to Gangotii by the Damjan-Niti pass.

from Almora by the Lipu Lekh pass and returned by the same route.


Four Great Rivers of this Region, namely the Brahinapurta, the Indus, the Sutlej, and the Karnali, to their sources, of going over the frozen lake of Rakshas Tal from east to west and north to south, and landing on the two islands in it. visit these regions by the Unta-dhura, Jayant4 and Kungri-bingri passes

240 miles from Almora in Uttar Pradesh and 800 miles from Lhasa, the capital of Tibet, stands Kailash parvat and Manasarovar Kund. 22,028 feet above Sea level. circumambution of Kailash Parvat is about 32 miles, five monasteries and five hundred bodhisattvas. Manasa Sarovara lies between 2 majestic mountains. Kailash on the north and the Gurla Mandhata on the south and between the sister lakes Rakshas Tal or Ravana Hrada on the west and some hills on the East.

 

[Trango Towers]

What i dont understand is why pakistan didnt take advantage and attack kashmir when indian forces were so stretched.....today we would have peace and india would have been a friend

 

[MultaniGuy]

What i dont understand is why pakistan didnt take advantage and attack kashmir when indian forces were so stretched.....today we would have peace and india would have been a friend

That was indeed sheer stupidity on our part, not to take advantage of the 1962 war, when India was at war with China.

But the Indians took advantage of the 1971 war, lol.

 

[Hindustani78]

What i dont understand is why pakistan didnt take advantage and attack kashmir when indian forces were so stretched.....today we would have peace and india would have been a friend

The build-up to ’62 changed this, and while Pakistan did engage in hostile action against India, it did pile pressure by announcing the holding of border negotiations with China.Pakistan was quick to conclude a border treaty with China in 1963.


By the late 1950s an ethnic insurgency in Tibet had put Beijing on the defensive. President Kennedy on November 19 for “twelve squadrons of supersonic all-weather fighters” and “modern radar cover.” the aircraft be “manned by U.S. personnel [to] protect cities and installations and… to assist the Indian Air Force in air battles with the Chinese air force.”