Nehruvian Blunders!!!!

[arp2041]

Though this article talks about a specific issue but I want to HIGHLIGHT this part:

"It was Jawaharlal Nehru who gave away the UN Security Council seat to China when it was offered to India; who gave away Gwadar to Pakistan after the Sultan of Oman offered it to New Delhi for just $1 million; and who handed over the strategically vital Cocos islands to China," a former official pointed out, adding that "his legacy has long paralysed policymakers from taking decisions that would secure India's interests". In his view, the "dereliction of duty showed by the making of maps that omitted huge chunks of Indian territory was a Nehru-era mistake that calls for immediate rectification".

Manmohan did not correct map error to protect Nehru name

@Abingdonboy @sancho @scorpionx @levina @JanjaWeed @DRAY @Indischer @nair @others.............

 

[AnotherDude]

Nehru was an idiot, no doubt about that. He had no idea how to run defence/military and foreign relations. That being said, back in 1950 the UN was nowhere as close to being how influential it is today, so perhaps that was a reason why he passed it up.

Gwadar I agree with Nehru here. We didn't hav the military muscle or navy or economy to protect a port away from the mainland in 1950.

 

[Indischer]

Though this article talks about a specific issue but I want to HIGHLIGHT this part:



Manmohan did not correct map error to protect Nehru name

@Abingdonboy @sancho @scorpionx @levina @JanjaWeed @DRAY @Indischer @nair @others.............

Kya chutiyapa hai ye?! Sach me desh ko baech rahe hain ye dalle.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Though this article talks about a specific issue but I want to HIGHLIGHT this part:



Manmohan did not correct map error to protect Nehru name

@Abingdonboy @sancho @scorpionx @levina @JanjaWeed @DRAY @Indischer @nair @others.............

Interesting no doubt but you know what? It is 2014, Modi is in power with a HUGE mandate the Congress (Nehru) party has been decimated like never before in the general elections, it is time to look forewords not back. Where there are strategic holes that need to be filled- bloody fill them! Don't moan about why they exist just do it. Modi has the mandate to fundamentally shift India's strategic attitude and as the leader has the right to, if Nehru moulded his policies based on his beliefs Modi or any other PM can do the same.

As time goes on India will and is shifting this outdated Nehruvian mindset and Modi will likely accelerate the process.

 

[dray]

Though this article talks about a specific issue but I want to HIGHLIGHT this part:



Manmohan did not correct map error to protect Nehru name

@Abingdonboy @sancho @scorpionx @levina @JanjaWeed @DRAY @Indischer @nair @others.............

He was delusional, he believed in some strange world order where all our neighbouring nations are our budding friends, he even wanted to dismantle our military and gone on to say that a country like India with no natural enemy only needs a police force to maintain our security!!

And I also think that he was eying for the Nobel prize, when our soldiers were dying in 1962, he was busy sending peace keeping missions to Korea, and our soldiers died in cold at China border in expectation of support & supply that never arrived.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Him being influential in making India a socialist planned economy was the biggest blunder. Sadlly successors continued it from 47 to 90s.

 

[Levina]

Though this article talks about a specific issue but I want to HIGHLIGHT this part:



Manmohan did not correct map error to protect Nehru name

@Abingdonboy @sancho @scorpionx @levina @JanjaWeed @DRAY @Indischer @nair @others.............

Lol
That man believed that the first General to head Indian army should have been aBritisher just because our army officers didnot have enough experience.
It was then that Lt.Gen Nathu singh drilled some sense into Nehru by telling him that India deserved a Brtish PM too as Indian politicians were also equally inexperienced to lead the country.
A True Soldier!!

I tell ya...I have stopped using the idiom "Himalayan blunder".

 

[anant_s]

Biggest blunder was the overly defensive mindset he had reflected in the policies be it economic, foreign, domestic. He lived in an imaginary Utopian world and had he had a reality check, things would have been starkly different today.

 

[nair]

Though this article talks about a specific issue but I want to HIGHLIGHT this part:



Manmohan did not correct map error to protect Nehru name

@Abingdonboy @sancho @scorpionx @levina @JanjaWeed @DRAY @Indischer @nair @others.............

If it is true, then there is no doubt it was blunder..... He could have grabbed it then..... But one thing we forget is what was priority then, His priority would have been something else, and he concentrated on it. Probably he (his govt) those priorities are allowing us sit and criticise him today.....

 

[Levina]

If it is true, then there is no doubt it was blunder..... He could have grabbed it then..... But one thing we forget is what was priority then, His priority would have been something else, and he concentrated on it. Probably he (his govt) those priorities are allowing us sit and criticise him today.....

One who repeats his mistakes is called a fool.
Nehru was a nefelibata....

 

[Kloitra]

Though this article talks about a specific issue but I want to HIGHLIGHT this part:

It was Jawaharlal Nehru who gave away the UN Security Council seat to China when it was offered to India

Manmohan did not correct map error to protect Nehru name

@Abingdonboy @sancho @scorpionx @levina @JanjaWeed @DRAY @Indischer @nair @others.............

This is bullshit. India was never offered UNSC seat, it was solely for the winners of WW2. The 5 countries - Britain, US, France, Russia and China. China was independent country, while there was no India but British India and Britain got the seat.

The Security Council consists of fifteen members. The great powers that were the victors of World War II— Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, and the United States, serve as the body's five permanent members.

who handed over the strategically vital Cocos islands to China

Aren't they Australian territory? They are far away from Indian or Chinese mainland.

Also, the boundaries between China and India were drawn by British and not Indians. There is no position where drawing line would not be controversial - to one party or another.

If it is true, then there is no doubt it was blunder..... He could have grabbed it then..... But one thing we forget is what was priority then, His priority would have been something else, and he concentrated on it. Probably he (his govt) those priorities are allowing us sit and criticise him today.....

Exactly, it is very easy to criticize with the hindsight.

 

[arp2041]

@Kloitra it was offered in 1955 not 1945 as West countries din't wanted a COMMUNIST China in UNSC:

Obama supports adding India as a permanent member of U.N. Security Council

Coco islands are the islands NORTH to Andamans & closer to Burma, actually Nehru gave them away to Burma & there are now reports that CHINESE have a listening post there:

In Profile: Andaman and Nicobar Islands - India Real Time - WSJ

India takes up with Myanmar reports of China 'base' in Coco islands | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

In Fact, I have even read that Nehru was the opinion that Andaman's resources should be utilized & abandoned as POOR India can't afford to maintain it's presence there far from mainland, now we know that Andamans are the biggest immovable ACs India could have ever produced & strategically very important.

It's not a question of "HINDSIGHT" but did our First PM The Great Nehru Chacha had ANY strategic VISION for the Nation? Like the Mao had for China......

 

[Iggy]

This is bullshit. India was never offered UNSC seat, it was solely for the winners of WW2. The 5 countries - Britain, US, France, Russia and China. China was independent country, while there was no India but British India and Britain got the seat.
.

Actually, India got an offer to have UNSC in 1955 to replace Taiwan because US didnt want China to replace Taiwan in UNSC seat.. Nehru didnt want to hurt the relation with China refused it..

 

[Kloitra]

@seiko

@Kloitra it was offered in 1955 not 1945 as West countries din't wanted a COMMUNIST China in UNSC:

Obama supports adding India as a permanent member of U.N. Security Council

The Hindu : Miscellaneous / This Day That Age : dated September 28, 1955: UN seat: Nehru clarifies

dated September 28, 1955: UN seat: Nehru clarifies
Prime Minister Nehru has categorically denied any offer, formal or informal, having been received about a seat for India in the UN Security Council. He made this statement in reply to a short notice question in the Lok Sabha on September 27 by Dr. J.N. Parekh whether India had refused a seat informally offered to her in the Security Council. The Prime Minister said: "There has been no offer, formal or informal, of this kind. Some vague references have appeared in the press about it which have no foundation in fact. The composition of the Security Council is prescribed by the UN Charter, according to which certain specified nations have permanent seats. No change or addition can be made to this without an amendment of the Charter. There is, therefore, no question of a seat being offered and India declining it. Our declared policy is to support the admission of all nations qualified for UN membership.''

Coco islands are the islands NORTH to Andamans & closer to Burma, actually Nehru gave them away to Burma & there are now reports that CHINESE have a listening post there:

In Profile: Andaman and Nicobar Islands - India Real Time - WSJ

India takes up with Myanmar reports of China 'base' in Coco islands | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

In Fact, I have even read that Nehru was the opinion that Andaman's resources should be utilized & abandoned as POOR India can't afford to maintain it's presence there far from mainland, now we know that Andamans are the biggest immovable ACs India could have ever produced & strategically very important.

The article said Cocos, and not Coco, which are two different islands. Cocos are Australian while Coco are Burmese.

The Andaman Islands were taken over by the English East India Company in the 18th century. In the 19th century, the British government in India established a penal colony in the Andamans, and the Coco Islands were a source of food for it (mainly coconuts).

Due to the isolation of the Cocos, they were not properly governed, and the British transferred their control to the government of Lower Burma in Rangoon. In 1882 they officially became part of British Burma. When Burma separated from India in 1937 and became a self-governing Crown Colony, they remained Burmese territory.

There is no Indian control over them - more than any control India has over Burma. And Myanmar is very good at putting India and China playing tag over it, benefiting from both.

It's not a question of "HINDSIGHT" but did our First PM The Great Nehru Chacha had ANY strategic VISION for the Nation? Like the Mao had for China......

He had a vision, it wasn't practical but vision nonetheless. From Mao's point of view, China is to be prepared to confront the world. Nehru believed in otherworldly brotherhood. He was a product of Ghandivian ideology. I do agree that Nehru's policies lead to the mess which plagues the country, but this is all in the hindsight. We can only make assumptions that a different leader would have turned out better.

 

[scorpionx]

The Hindu : Miscellaneous / This Day That Age : dated September 28, 1955: UN seat: Nehru clarifies
dated September 28, 1955: UN seat: Nehru clarifies
Prime Minister Nehru has categorically denied any offer, formal or informal, having been received about a seat for India in the UN Security Council. He made this statement in reply to a short notice question in the Lok Sabha on September 27 by Dr. J.N. Parekh whether India had refused a seat informally offered to her in the Security Council. The Prime Minister said: "There has been no offer, formal or informal, of this kind. Some vague references have appeared in the press about it which have no foundation in fact. The composition of the Security Council is prescribed by the UN Charter, according to which certain specified nations have permanent seats. No change or addition can be made to this without an amendment of the Charter. There is, therefore, no question of a seat being offered and India declining it. Our declared policy is to support the admission of all nations qualified for UN membership.''

The confusion lied somewhere else. Soviet Prime Minister Nikolai Bulganin made a proposal before Nehru on 22nd June'1955 saying,"Regarding your suggestion about the four power conference we would take appropriate action. While we are discussing the general international situation and reducing tension, we propose suggesting at a later stage India's inclusion as the sixth member of the Security Council."

Now, this offer has been interpreted differently by different blocks without going through the further conversations between Nehru and Bulganin and without understanding Bulganin's motive to bring this offer before Nehru. Nehru insisted that the inclusion of China in security council (of which the US was firmly opposed while the Soviets and the Chinese were the new found allies) should be solved first before India's chance comes in to question. Nehru anticipated that India might be subject to controversy because it needed a revision of UN charter and India would become just a pawn in the great game between the traditional super power rivals.

Bulganin's reply to Nehru was he made his proposal to get India's point of view. It was a trick to test the position of Indian leadership.and it was not the right time to make a proceed on this.