Even if India was prepared for conflict the poor performance though less poor would still have probably resulted in an Indian defeat. Even today if friction on the North East were to develop into a conflict, Indian forces would be defeated for the reason that Chinese forces are better equiped and similarily trained. Even a hawkish "mode" cant change the fact that India is still forced to maintain the bulk of its force on its Western border, and even in conflict with China India will still be forced to maintain 500,000 troops on the West.
Sino-Indo Border Conflict
- Thread starter master_fx
- Start date
Even if India was prepared for conflict the poor performance though less poor would still have probably resulted in an Indian defeat. Even today if friction on the North East were to develop into a conflict, Indian forces would be defeated for the reason that Chinese forces are better equiped and similarily trained. Even a hawkish "mode" cant change the fact that India is still forced to maintain the bulk of its force on its Western border, and even in conflict with China India will still be forced to maintain 500,000 troops on the West.
One would be forced to think that your assumption is based on prejudice than logical thinking and past incidents.
Chola inident 1967 - this left the PLA smarting after suffering about 500 casulties.
Sumdorong Chu valley 1986 - PLA were checkmated when IA countered Chinese attempts to intrude in the Sumdorong Chu valley, with equal deployment. (8 PLA divisions and 10 IA Divisions were deployed)
As per statements from China watchers like "Officer of Engineers" and his interaction with an ex-PLA officer, the CPC wanted war but the PLA had doubts of repeating 1962 and refused to guarentee success. They only way they hoped to win was by launching an attack through Pakistan.
Reality is quite different from what you assume.
Precisely. If the Chinese would stayed back longer they would been slaughtered and history would never said "Chinese defeated Indians" .
The chinese just threw numbers at us in 1962. There was nothing phenomenal about it.
Adux
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 3,856
- Reaction score
- 0
They gave us a thrashing, But they went back before we could get back up, I would still give them credit for knowing thier strengths and weakness and acting up on that.
In the Present Secanrio It is easier for us to resupply and equip soldiers than them now, We have the Americans, French coming to our Mountain Warfare School's, We are far better trained, and recently our equipment are getting better,
About 200.
Don't ridicule the Chinese for deficiencies caused by our military commanders and Nehru/ Menon combine.
The 1962 PLA operations are a classical case for study and learning, and the dangers of politicising the armed forces a lesson for politicians of any country.
The PLA operations were a type of mountain warfare blitz, the fall of the Indian 7 Brigade within the first 5 days of fighting is an achievement for the PLA, that few armies can boast of. The reasons for the fall of 7 Brigade is a different matter.
Adux
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 3,856
- Reaction score
- 0
Its already released, the report is available to the public, i wil try to dig it out for you
Its is still classified since one of the causes for the debacle mentioned in the report is political interference in military affairs. Nehru was playing around and put his pet fav Lt. General BJ Kaul, who was a clot. Kauls only qualification was his association with the Nehru family, and the nation paid the price.
You will laugh when you read that Nehru/ Menon were dictating deployment locations combat troops from Delhi. Defeat was inevitable, the only saving grace was the tenacity of troops and battalion level officers.
The Henderson Brooks-Bhagat Singh report will remain "classified" as long as the Nehru hangup remains. The Congress party will be shamed and Nehru's reputation ruined once the report is made public.
It is still classified. The version in the media is a "leaked report" to the Indian Express/ Times of India. The original papers are not accessable. So we cannot consider the version available in the media as authentic.
Bull
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 6,850
- Reaction score
- 0
Still i will like to read it, Adu if you dont mind.
kvLin
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 710
- Reaction score
- 0
seems you guys have had a pretty good time here.
In China there are tons of researching works on this border confilict,and the war report has been released for years but it doesn't answer the question about PLA's withdrawer after victory in 1962. Victories in this report contains every notable conflicts through the whole period from 1962 to 1987. thus the result of 1967 and 1986 conflict are actually differently perorated by two sides. I also hope to read your file at its release.
In the Sino-Indian Conflict column of Chinese Military (http://military.china.com/dljl/zhongyin/) there is an inofficial analysis that I would relatively agree to, and put up summary over here only for your reference:
Why withdraw?
1. The gasping logistics (you all know that)
2. Pressure both from the US and Soviet Union, plus China's nuclear plan.
3. To meet the the strategic needs of breaking mondial block.
And I will also translate this thread back to Chinese readers,if you dont mind.
In China there are tons of researching works on this border confilict,and the war report has been released for years but it doesn't answer the question about PLA's withdrawer after victory in 1962. Victories in this report contains every notable conflicts through the whole period from 1962 to 1987. thus the result of 1967 and 1986 conflict are actually differently perorated by two sides. I also hope to read your file at its release.
In the Sino-Indian Conflict column of Chinese Military (http://military.china.com/dljl/zhongyin/) there is an inofficial analysis that I would relatively agree to, and put up summary over here only for your reference:
Why withdraw?
1. The gasping logistics (you all know that)
2. Pressure both from the US and Soviet Union, plus China's nuclear plan.
3. To meet the the strategic needs of breaking mondial block.
And I will also translate this thread back to Chinese readers,if you dont mind.
Similar threads
