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

[scorpionx]

one thing that has amazed me is how Pandit Nehru who had his education in England, had a rather opposing view of capitalist ideology.
another thing after WWII, in an era when India along with sseveral nations had gained freedom, rebuilding was a priority. in

Perhaps these might help.

Fabian Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History of the socialist movement in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

that era US goverments Marshal Catlet plan was proving far more successful than what was seen in eastern europe and under communist regimes. now maybe we didn't want help but rejection of free market policies and follow what we know as Socialist policies, may be in hindsight, not a very wise thing to do.
i'm not suggesting India should have moved into US led block but embracing a rather antiquated diplomatic and economic policies not much different from communist ones could be one thing, i wish changed.

As we have seen, Nehru was visibly impressed by the post revolution Soviet progress in economy and technology, the absence of social hierarchies and economic disparities. In case of USA, his view was contemptuous. He places far more importance to Russia and China than America. Capitalism in his view led to economic slavery, gangster culture and broadening gap between the rich and the poor. So, it was not a natural choice for Nehru to adopt an economic model he abhorred most.

 

[Dungeness]

Yes, and no.

Manipur and Tripura were different; they had got transmogrified. The phrase that fits but I don't want to use is 'Sanskritised'. What you are saying is more true of Nagaland and Mizoram, and less true of Meghalaya.

Incidentally, when considering Nagaland, and parts of Manipur, it must be borne in mind that colonial conquests created an Africa-like situation, where some tribes were trifurcated, among two states governed by the British under the rubric India, and one geographical location within Burma. It would take too long to go into the details, but the Nagas, for instance, are split among Nagaland, Manipur and Burma.

Actually, it is too tempting to avoid a small detour: the tribe in question is the Tangkhul Naga tribe. They are thought to have originated around twenty centuries ago in China, and migrated in stages across Burma to the location of the Burma-Manipur boundary. This boundary was a creation of the British and the Burmese, and the Tangkhul had no idea that they were being partitioned!

Because they are considered a Naga tribe, the Nagas want them all in one state of Nagaland, all including the Tangkhul in Manipur and those in Burma. The Tangkhul themselves are quite happy to be Tangkhul, and don't especially yearn for absorption within the greater Naga masses. Tripura is far more 'settled' in character (an unlovely word, implying that others are less 'settled', and I cringe at having had to use it).



*I acknowledge being a troglodyte. Give me a little time; very soon now, I shall emerge from my cave and re-enter the human race at least in the eighteenth century. It may take a little while to complete the remaining three hundred years.

Personally, I think it was an egregious mistake by Nehru, and his complete lack of experience in diplomacy and external relations. He tried to apply his Fabian socialist background, and some of the ideals of the freedom struggle, meaning Gandhi's thoughts cleaned up for international consumption and couched in graceful terms, to relations between India and her neighbours, and really made a mess. I hate it when he is criticised in the vulgar, gutter language that some really uncouth young Indians use, but that is because they seem to overlook the cementing force that he was in the early years of the republic.

Thanks, Joe, very informative!

 

[Joe Shearer]

Thanks, Joe, very informative!

I am glad you enjoyed it. It is so rare to find people willing to stop and read, and inform themselves. My friends @chauism , who has been behaving very badly and keeping himself aloof from us, and my vanished friend, Cardsharp, were among those with whom I could exchange genuine information and views. I miss them.

 

[Dungeness]

I am glad you enjoyed it. It is so rare to find people willing to stop and read, and inform themselves. My friends @chauism , who has been behaving very badly and keeping himself aloof from us, and my vanished friend, Cardsharp, were among those with whom I could exchange genuine information and views. I miss them.

Joe, I will be the first one to admit that I do not have enough knowledge about NE. That is what I come here for, to learn, to exchange, and sometimes to fight. Really appreciate your time and patience.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Joe, I will be the first one to admit that I do not have enough knowledge about NE. That is what I come here for, to learn, to exchange, and sometimes to fight. Really appreciate your time and patience.

As a loved one put it to another loved one last week, the sea takes on the colour of the sky! Thank you for eliciting the useful side of my character and personality.

 

[Indian Patriot]

If you were not totally blank on these issues, Ayub Khan proposed to the US that they take this opportunity of taking back Kashmir, drawing a thundering scold from Galbraith.

Ah, the great genius is back.

Don't call others blank when you are the one posting propaganda here KID. Your comments are irrefutable evidence that you don't have the remotest idea of what happened prior, during and after the 1962 war.

While Western nations did not view Chinese actions favourably because of fear of the Chinese and competitiveness,[9] Pakistan, which had had a turbulent relationship with India ever since the Indian partition, improved its relations with China after the war.[63] Prior to the war, Pakistan also shared a disputed boundary with China, and had proposed to India that the two countries adopt a common defence against "northern" enemies (i.e. China), which was rejected by India.[27] However, China and Pakistan took steps to peacefully negotiate their shared boundaries, beginning on 13 October 1962, and concluding in December of that year.[21] Pakistan also expressed fear that the huge amounts of western military aid directed to India would allow it to threaten Pakistan's security in future conflicts. Mohammed Ali, External Affairs Minister of Pakistan, declared that massive Western aid to India in the Sino-Indian dispute would be considered an unfriendly act towards Pakistan. As a result, Pakistan made efforts to improve its relations with China. The following year, China and Pakistan peacefully settled disputes on their shared border, and negotiated the China-Pakistan Border Treaty in 1963, as well as trade, commercial, and barter treaties.[63] On 2 March 1963, Pakistan conceded its northern claim line in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir to China in favor of a more southerly boundary along the Karakoram Range.[21][60][63] The border treaty largely set the border along the MacCartney-Macdonald Line.

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I really wonder about you.

Yesterday you were crying and acting like an immature kid because I exposed the flaws in your argument. Instead of countering my claims you beat around the bush. Today you are trying to do the same thing. Instead of posting facts you are trying to get personal with your comments. Listen here KID, if you have facts then post them here. Young teenagers like you talk the talk but cannot back up your claims.

It is indeed a worrying concern that children like you have unrestricted internet access.

The Chinese attack on India in 1962, however, placed the USSR in a delicate position as it was difficult for it not to support a Communist state, Hence, Moscow adopted a neutral position.

1962 was remembered as the year of the Cuban missile crisis. USSR and USA almost started world war 3. The USSR being a communist state would not go against a fellow communist ally in such troubled times. The 1962 war was not a knee-jerk reaction, the Chinese had made careful preparations and timed their execution well.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Ah, the great genius is back.

Don't call others blank when you are the one posting propaganda here KID. Your comments are irrefutable evidence that you don't have the remotest idea of what happened prior, during and after the 1962 war.

While Western nations did not view Chinese actions favourably because of fear of the Chinese and competitiveness,[9] Pakistan, which had had a turbulent relationship with India ever since the Indian partition, improved its relations with China after the war.[63] Prior to the war, Pakistan also shared a disputed boundary with China, and had proposed to India that the two countries adopt a common defence against "northern" enemies (i.e. China), which was rejected by India.[27] However, China and Pakistan took steps to peacefully negotiate their shared boundaries, beginning on 13 October 1962, and concluding in December of that year.[21] Pakistan also expressed fear that the huge amounts of western military aid directed to India would allow it to threaten Pakistan's security in future conflicts. Mohammed Ali, External Affairs Minister of Pakistan, declared that massive Western aid to India in the Sino-Indian dispute would be considered an unfriendly act towards Pakistan. As a result, Pakistan made efforts to improve its relations with China. The following year, China and Pakistan peacefully settled disputes on their shared border, and negotiated the China-Pakistan Border Treaty in 1963, as well as trade, commercial, and barter treaties.[63] On 2 March 1963, Pakistan conceded its northern claim line in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir to China in favor of a more southerly boundary along the Karakoram Range.[21][60][63] The border treaty largely set the border along the MacCartney-Macdonald Line.

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

<sigh>


"On October 28, 1962, the day before Nehru asked for American military help, the US Ambassador in Pakistan, Walter McConaughy met with the then Pakistani ruler Ayub Khan.
"The Ambassador urged him to send assurances to Nehru that Pakistan would not take advantage of India’s war with China," he wrote.

In response Khan proposed that "the Americans and Pakistanis work together to to seek the surrender of Indian territory just as Chinese were grabbing land".

This the US considered as "blackmail", Riedel said.

Galbraith immediately sent an "alarming telegram" to Washington and Karachi "asking for God’s sake that hey keep Kashmir out" of any American message to Pakistan, Riedel said in the book, adding that Washington sided immediately with Galbraith on Kashmir.

At the advice of the US, Nehru then wrote a letter to Ayub Khan.

"Pakistan was clearly capable of initiating war with India, but decided in 1962 not to take advantage of India’s vulnerability," Riedel writes.

According to Riedel, the Americans played a decisive role in forestalling a Pakistani attack on India.

"Kennedy’s message to Ayub Khan, reinforced by similar message from Prime Minister Macmillan, left little in doubt that the United States and the United Kingdom would view a Pakistani move against India as a hostile and aggressive action inconsistent with the SEATO and CENTO Treaties. The Americans told Pakistan that the Chinese attack was the most dangerous move made by Mao since 1950 and that they intended to respond decisively," he wrote.

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

Yesterday you were crying and acting like an immature kid because I exposed the flaws in your argument. Instead of countering my claims you beat around the bush. Today you are trying to do the same thing. Instead of posting facts you are trying to get personal with your comments. Listen here KID, if you have facts then post them here. Young teenagers like you talk the talk but cannot back up your claims.

It is indeed a worrying concern that children like you have unrestricted internet access.

Yes, Father William.

1962 was remembered as the year of the Cuban missile crisis. USSR and USA almost started world war 3. The USSR being a communist state would not go against a fellow communist ally in such troubled times. The 1962 war was not a knee-jerk reaction, the Chinese had made careful preparations and timed their execution well.

 

[Indian Patriot]

Sorry, but I think your history was taught by Vietnamese. China had never intended to grab Vietnamese land to begin with, they just want to teach Vietnamese a lesson, very much like they did in 1962. They did face the stronger opposition than they did in 1962, therefore suffered a heavier loss, in the end they did accomplished one of two strategic goals, proving to Vietnam that USSR would not come to their aid.

Unlike the trolls and fanboys here I read history as it happened. I don't sugarcoat history or try to tweak it to suit my ideology.

This gentleman here Mr. Shearer has been posting his claims on the 1962 war which unfortunately is far from accurate. Ditto, the Chinese suffered a setback in their adventures in Vietnam. And that is putting it politely. The Chinese underestimated the iron resolve of the Vietnamese.

<sigh>


"On October 28, 1962, the day before Nehru asked for American military help, the US Ambassador in Pakistan, Walter McConaughy met with the then Pakistani ruler Ayub Khan.
"The Ambassador urged him to send assurances to Nehru that Pakistan would not take advantage of India’s war with China," he wrote.

In response Khan proposed that "the Americans and Pakistanis work together to to seek the surrender of Indian territory just as Chinese were grabbing land".

This the US considered as "blackmail", Riedel said.

Galbraith immediately sent an "alarming telegram" to Washington and Karachi "asking for God’s sake that hey keep Kashmir out" of any American message to Pakistan, Riedel said in the book, adding that Washington sided immediately with Galbraith on Kashmir.

At the advice of the US, Nehru then wrote a letter to Ayub Khan.

"Pakistan was clearly capable of initiating war with India, but decided in 1962 not to take advantage of India’s vulnerability," Riedel writes.

According to Riedel, the Americans played a decisive role in forestalling a Pakistani attack on India.

"Kennedy’s message to Ayub Khan, reinforced by similar message from Prime Minister Macmillan, left little in doubt that the United States and the United Kingdom would view a Pakistani move against India as a hostile and aggressive action inconsistent with the SEATO and CENTO Treaties. The Americans told Pakistan that the Chinese attack was the most dangerous move made by Mao since 1950 and that they intended to respond decisively," he wrote.

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






Yes, Father William.

Yes kid, keep posting your fantasies which nobody except you believe.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Unlike the trolls and fanboys here I read history as it happened. I don't sugarcoat history or try to tweak it to suit my ideology.

This gentleman here Mr. Shearer has been posting his claims on the 1962 war which unfortunately is far from accurate. Ditto, the Chinese suffered a setback in their adventures in Vietnam. And that is putting it politely. The Chinese underestimated the iron resolve of the Vietnamese.

Since he apparently doesn't know what happened between China and Vietnam, and how many times the countries clashed, he is going by headlines and anecdotal knowledge. No point, @Dungeness .

Unlike the trolls and fanboys here I read history as it happened. I don't sugarcoat history or try to tweak it to suit my ideology.

This gentleman here Mr. Shearer has been posting his claims on the 1962 war which unfortunately is far from accurate. Ditto, the Chinese suffered a setback in their adventures in Vietnam. And that is putting it politely. The Chinese underestimated the iron resolve of the Vietnamese.



Yes kid, keep posting your fantasies which nobody except you believe.

Since you didn't notice, that was not my post, and the quotation was not from my book. I am not Bruce Riedel.

Hope there will be a juicy collection by this evening. Will be back by 8 pm.

 

[Indian Patriot]

I thought apart from Assam, the rest of sates in NE did not have the historical/cultural/ethnically bond with mainland India, and people on the land were largely tribal people who did not have the modern day "nation-state" concept at the time. They became parts of Indian Union was totally the legacy of British Raj . The momentum of British colonial rule took them well into after India's independence. Hence the calm and lack of resistance. For them, under either Indian or Chinese rule could meant the same thing.

The NE is a peculiar entity in rest of mainland India.

If you read into the legends of mythology then the NE states particularly Pragjyotishpur (Assam) and Manipur had mentions in texts like Mahabharat. In real history, the Chinese traveller Hieun-Tsang made a stopover in Assam as Harshvardhan and the then Kamrupa king were close allies. But in the middle ages the link was lost.

While he rest of India was under the rule of Islamicinvaders, he NE region remained free. Turkish sultans tried to annex Assam but failed. Later the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb tried to do the same and his army too met the same fate. The reason I am telling you all this is veryrelevan. While the rest of Indian states faced the same shared history ie. occupation by Islamic armies and Islamic rule the NE region maintained their own autonomy.

Coming to your "nation-state", India as a modern country did not exist before 1947. This is a very touchy subject for many Indians but the truth should be told as the truth. In 1947 when the British left they created a Muslim majority and a Hindu majority state, but they played a trick wherein they mentioned that the princely states could keep heir kingdoms and remain independent. This last clause would have far-reaching consequences.

India strong-armed the independent kingdoms to join the Indian federation. The state of Hyderabad was annexed by force after Operation Polo. The Rajputana kingdoms in Rajasthan too faced the same fate and later the princely kingdoms of NE.

NE like I said is peculiar because the longest they were associated with rest of India was during British Raj. The British occupied NE following the Treaty of Yandaboo in 1826 where the British pushed back the marauding burmese invaders from he state of Assam and instead imposed British rule. The NE states of Assam, Manipur and Nagaland put up resistance but they were no mach for a global superpower. The rebellion was crushed. The Ahom dynasty of Assam ended in 1826 but the Manipur and Tripura princely states remained, on paper, where they had to follow British orders.

After 1947, these princely states of Manipur and Tripura wanted to remain independent but were arm-twisted by a resurgent Indian federation. Assam nearly became east Pakistan but the transfer was stopped at the last minute. The present insurgency crisis is socio-political. There is lack of development and government negligence in the region which prompted frustrated local youth to rebel. You can argue that it is a case study of the lapses in central administration. Interestingly Sikkim is now clubbed as a NE state - though geography states otherwise. Sikkim was a "foreign country" till 1975 where a referendum merged the former princely state with India.

Your last statement is an exaggeration. The people in the region there are facing issues but to claim they would not care if they are under Chinese occupation is claiming too much. But since you mentioned culture and ethnicity it might interest you that the Ahoms claim to have migrated from China in 13th century AD. That is the only Chinese link to NE. The rest of the population is mongoloid but calling them "from China" is simply being ..... you know.

Since he apparently doesn't know what happened between China and Vietnam, and how many times the countries clashed, he is going by headlines and anecdotal knowledge. No point, @Dungeness .

So what according to you happened in Vietnam clashes? Vietnam showed more steel and resolve while facing China and USA. If India in 1962 had shown he same resolve then today the central establishment would not have been suffering from a China phobia.

Since you didn't notice, that was not my post, and the quotation was not from my book. I am not Bruce Riedel

Since you did not notice either, KID. The quotation I posted was from WIKIPEDIA.

 

[Spectre]

You need the source?

Wasn't in reference to your statement but the one which you debunked regarding Ayub offering India a joint defence deal.

Regards

 

[Hindustani78]

1962 Indo-China war: 'Kennedy was planning $500 mn military aid package for India' | Zee News

Washington: In the aftermath of 1962 Indo-China war, the then John F Kennedy administration was planning a USD 500 million military aid package for India including help to increase arms production and creation of six mountain divisions, a new book has said.

The package, which was shelved due to Kennedy's assassination, also included an aid of USD 120 million to be equally split between the United States and Britain.

But India under prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru wanted an aid package of USD 1.3 billion.

Following intense negotiations between New Delhi and Washington, the two countries agreed on a military aid package of USD 500 million, former CIA official Bruce Riedel writes in his latest book.

The book "JFK's Forgotten Crisis: Tibet, the CIA and the Sino-Indian War" scheduled to hit the book stores in November says that the final decision with regard to this massive military aid package to India was to be decided at a White House meeting with Kennedy on November 26, 1963.

"But Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas several days earlier," Riedel writes.

According to the book, National Security Action Memorandum No 209, approved on December 10, 1962 by JFK, authorised the mew military aid package for India.

"The United States would -- assist in creating and equipping six new mountain divisions to work with the Indian Army to guard the Himalayas, help India increase its own production facilities, and prepare for a US-UK air defence programme for India," the book says.

"The first two missions were to assist India develop its capabilities, and the third was joint American British military exercise in India," Riedel said adding that Kennedy wanted the funding programme of USD 120 million to be split 50-50 with the United Kingdom and its Commonwealth partners.

Riedel writes that Nehru was disappointed with the proposed aid package.

"He wanted a much larger and more long-term package of military aid. In May, 1963 the new Indian minister for defence production, TT Krishnamachari, came to Washington and proposed an aid programme with a price tag of USD 1.3 billion to Kennedy," Riedel wrote.

"Further discussions in New Delhi and Washington led to agreement on a USD 500 million programme over five years," he wrote adding that before it could be announced Kennedy was assassinated.

In his book, Riedel observes that the final year of Kennedy's administration saw a dramatic improvement in American relations with India in the military arena as well.

In 1963, American, British, Australian and Canadian pilots were training in India on bombers and jet fighters supplied by those countries, he wrote.

"Six Indian mountain divisions were being equipped by American and British arms, and a robust dialogue was underway on further military cooperation," Riedel wrote.

After Kennedy's assassination, the proposed military aid package could never see the light of the day.

Under heavy pressure from Pakistani lobby, the new administration led by president Lyndon B Johnson postponed the decision and engaged in a review of the proposals for several months.

It was not until May 28, 1964 that a final meeting to approve the agreement was scheduled at noon in the White House.

A day earlier, news came that Nehru died, Riedel writes, adding that the Indian team who had come to Washington to negotiate the agreement left.

"Once again the decision was postponed. President Johnson was persuaded to let the dust settle in New Delhi, and the fears and confusion at high levels in Washington created by the possibility that Pakistan would cancel our agreement on the Peshawar air base were no doubt the most immediate cause for the delay," the book says.

Under the new prime minister Lal Bahadur Shastri India increased its defence co-operation with Russia.

"That India never signed an arms deal with the United States was a 'lost opportunity' in Indo-American relations, Riedel wrote.



PTI

 

[Hindustani78]

1962 was remembered as the year of the Cuban missile crisis. USSR and USA almost started world war 3. The USSR being a communist state would not go against a fellow communist ally in such troubled times. The 1962 war was not a knee-jerk reaction, the Chinese had made careful preparations and timed their execution well.

In1957,the USSR successfully tested its first ICBM,and by the early 1960 it had available a variety of ballistic missiles

By 1964, the first battalions were deployed to their operating area in West Germany. The Pershing I quickly replaced all PGM-11 Redstone MRBMs.

February of 1959, the United States deploys nuclear weapons to Turkey.

Wasn't in reference to your statement but the one which you debunked regarding Ayub offering India a joint defence deal.

Regards

Pakistan first started talks with Chinese and gave up Kashmir land and here only India was not willing to take any help from Pakistan.

And during 1962 , Indian military was deployed along the Pakistan border but a minimum deployment would be maintained on the border with China, with whom India fought a brief war in 1962.

 

[Hindustani78]

After 1947, these princely states of Manipur and Tripura wanted to remain independent but were arm-twisted by a resurgent Indian federation. Assam nearly became east Pakistan but the transfer was stopped at the last minute. The present insurgency crisis is socio-political. There is lack of development and government negligence in the region which prompted frustrated local youth to rebel. You can argue that it is a case study of the lapses in central administration. Interestingly Sikkim is now clubbed as a NE state - though geography states otherwise. Sikkim was a "foreign country" till 1975 where a referendum merged the former princely state with India.

In reality Indian military was guarding the independence of these nations against Chinese occupation.

Government of Indian Dominion took over the Administration in 1949 under an agreement made between the Governor-General of India and His Highness the Maharaja of Tripura which was signed by V.P. Menon, Adviser to the Government of India, Ministry of States, on behalf of the Governor General and by Kanchan Prabha Devi Maharani Regent, Tripura State, on behalf of the Maharaja, who was a minor. According to this Agreement, the Tripura Administration order 1949 was passed by the Government of India on the 15th October, 1949.

The North Eastern Areas (Reorganization) Act,1971, was passed in the Parliament and assented to by the President on 30th December, 1971. In Tripura this Act was given effect to on and from the 21st January,1972 under which the State of Tripura attained full Statehood of the Indian Union. The State Legislative Assembly became sixty seated according to the Constitution and first election was held in March 1972.

**********
Bodhchandra Singh set up a committee to draft a constitution for a new government in Manipur. This task was completed in 1947 and in June 1948 the first election was held in Manipur. M.K. Priyobarta was elected the first Chief Minister of Manipur and a State Assembly was formed. Meanwhile the Maharaja was asked to meet with representatives of the Indian Government in Shillong and after a few days of negotiations signed an instrument of accession with India on 21 September 1949.


On 21st September 1949 Manipur was merged with the Indian Union. It was once an independent princely state, which was taken over by the British in 1891.

The signatories of the Instrument of Accession were the Maharaja Bodhchandra Singh on behalf of the state of Manipur, and V.P. Menon and Sri Prakash for the Government of India. The Maharaja was guaranteed full privileges and customary rights and three lakh rupees as a privy purse. He could also retain the use of his private properties. The Government of India assured the Manipuri people that their rights would be protected and their customary laws and cultural practices could be followed without any hindrance. The Manipur State Assembly was dissolved and the first Indian Chief Commissioner of Manipur, Rawal Amar Singh took over. Manipur was a Union Territory of India from 1962 and achieved full statehood within India in 1972.

************

the Prime Minister of Sikkim, appealed to the Indian parliament for a change of Sikkim's independent status in 1975 and expressed the wish of the inhabitants to be a part of the Indian statehood. Steps followed each other, and was formalized in 1975.

 

[nForce]

Your points are individually correct, but I didn't see the connection. Why should the military take-over in Pakistan, and the resultant acute discomfort in Indian circles, have had anything to do with 1962 being Nehru's fault? (It was, but the connection is not clear).

Rajiv Gandhi's remark about Kolkata was asinine. Nothing more, nothing less.

Nehru started downplaying the army, tried to reduce it's importance. That, was one of the reasons.

I don't know why I mentioned Rajiv, sounds silly now. I keep visualizing things as interconnected graphs..