Airliners-India Forum Index Airliners-India
Flickr Group & Facebook
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Indo-China war of 1962 and Air Power.
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Airliners-India Forum Index -> Military Aviation & Space
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Spiderguy252
Member


Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 4259
Location: Indian Ocean

PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A couple of points below sound a bit off:

The_Goat wrote:
3. It was Nehru who started this disgusting 'Nati Poti' dynastic rule. He appointed his sister, Vijayalaxmi Pandit , as India's first ambassador to the UN. He gave his inexperienced daughter, Indira Gandhi, a leading position in the Congress party, promoting her above other senior and more capable leaders.


I'm sure we all have a consensus that if not Nehru himself, somebody else would have started the phenomenon. It's the sub-continental way of life and has occurred in Pakistan as well; look across to the Bhuttos (Zulfiqar, Benazir, Bilawal) or the Sharifs (Nawaz, Maryam), so on and so forth.

The_Goat wrote:
6. In the 1950s, the US offered India a permanent seat in the UN Security council, asking in return that India would have to join a military alliance against the USSR.


Is there any definite proof of this? Most likely just a half-truth twisted to suit the author's argument.
_________________
Yeah.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Classified 1962 war report revealed

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/classified-1962-war-report-revealed/article5797268.ece?homepage=true

For the first time, a large section of the still classified Henderson Brooks Report, which details a comprehensive operational review of India’s military debacle in 1962, has been made public.
A more than 100-page section of the first volume of the report, which includes an exhaustive operational review of the India-China war over both western and eastern sectors, has been published by Australian journalist Neville Maxwell on his website.
The now retired Mr. Maxwell was a former correspondent of The Times of London who reported on the war from New Delhi. He authored in 1970 ‘India’s China War’ — a path-breaking, yet controversial, account of the conflict which angered the Indian establishment by drawing upon classified information to highlight the flawed decision-making that led to defeat at the hands of the Chinese.
Explaining his decision to release, for the first time, four chapters of the still-classified report, Mr. Maxwell said he believed he was “complicit in a continuing cover-up” by keeping the report to himself.
“The reasons for the long-term withholding of the report must be political, indeed probably partisan, perhaps even familial,” he wrote in an explanatory note on his website.
The report indicts the highest levels of the government — from then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru's own office and the Defence Ministry — particularly for its Forward Policy, which was enforced, the report reveals, despite considerable concerns and objections from on-the-ground military commands that lacked resources.
It underlines the deep disconnect between Delhi and Army commands on assessing how China would react to the Forward Policy.
The report does not include the second volume and annexures, which contain damning correspondence between army commands and Delhi.
The Indian government’s reluctance to declassify parts of the report even 50 years after the war has been criticised by many scholars, who say the move has prevented a transparent and comprehensive understanding of what led to the 1962 conflict, beyond the narrative of a “surprise betrayal” that was subsequently entrenched by the Nehru government, ignoring India's failures.
"Ultimately the buck stops always at the Prime Miniser's office," said Zorawar Daulet Singh, a scholar at King's College London who has written on the war and has read through the volume released by Mr. Maxwell.
He said the report revealed that the Army "could have put its foot down and prevented the execution of a militarily unsound policy". He also said he did not believe the report in any way had "operational value" or endangered national security - the official reason for keeping the report classified - and pointed out most Western countries, including even the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, declassified documents after a period of three or more decades.
The four chapters show there were many assessments from commanders on the ground to Delhi, which, if considered by the Nehru government, would have led to a revision of the Forward Policy and averted the catastrophic military debacle.
Mr. Maxwell said his attempts to make public the report had been blocked on a number of occasions, starting with an attempt to donate his copy to Oxford's Bodelian library. He said he had also offered it to several Indian editors, who declined.
"Although surprised by this reaction, unusual in the age of Wikileaks, I could not argue with their reasoning," he said. "So my dilemma continued - although with the albatross hung, so to speak, on Indian necks as well as my own. As I see it now I have no option but, rather than leave the dilemma to my heirs, to put the Report on the internet myself."
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Wed Mar 19, 2014 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Report blames Nehru govt and army for misadventure that led to China war defeat http://www.telegraphindia.com/1140319/jsp/nation/story_18094766.jsp

New Delhi, March 18: Key portions of a secret 1962 Indian Army report that have emerged in public for the first time suggest that a mix of strategic and personnel blunders contributed to the humiliating defeat against China that year.
The report, commissioned to pinpoint the reasons for the rout, purportedly identifies two key mistakes. One, an aggressive “forward policy” adopted under then defence minister V.K. Krishna Menon and two, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s decision to handpick Lt General Brij Mohan Kaul to lead operations in the North-East Frontier Province (Nefa).
Authored by Lt General Henderson Brooks and Brigadier P.S. Bhagat, the report is dubbed top secret by the Indian government, which has never declassified the document despite repeated demands by scholars and sections of the military and political establishment.
But veteran Australian journalist Nevill Maxwell, who reported on the 1962 China-India war, uploaded scanned copies of 190 pages from the report online today, sparking a scramble within the Indian government to contain any embarrassing fallout.
Maxwell’s website — where he has uploaded the documents — became inaccessible within hours, triggering speculation that the Centre may have tried to disable access to the report.
But the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (Cert-In) — the government’s top online watchdog — rejected any role, and the revealed sections of the report, downloaded by others from Maxwell’s website, were soon available on other portals.
The defence ministry in a statement said “it would not be appropriate to comment” because of the “extremely sensitive nature of the contents of the report, which are of current operational value”. It also reiterated that for the government, the document remains classified as top secret.
The criticisms expressed in detail in the sections of the report that became public today are not new. Military commanders have made the same arguments in private accounts and landmark books like Brigadier John Dalvi’s controversial 1968 book Himalayan Blunder and Maxwell’s India’s China War, published in 1970.
But the revealed sections confirm that India’s official military review of the 1962 war concurred with these often sharp criticisms.
India had in 1961 begun implementing a plan known as the “forward policy”, under which troops were sent across the McMahon Line — the effective boundary between India and China south of Tibet — to encircle Chinese troops in response to incursions by Chinese forces.
But the Henderson Brooks report, based on internal documents, memos, analyses of meetings between top officials including defence minister Menon, and messages from army units at the frontier concludes that the forward policy was introduced “without the means to implement it effectively”.
“It is obvious that politically the ‘Forward Policy’ was desirable, and presumably the eviction of the Chinese from Ladakh must always be the eventual aim,” the report says on Page 10. “But what is pertinent is whether we were militarily in a position at that time to implement this policy.”

The political and military leaderships, the report says, were convinced that India’s pinpricks would not prompt China into any “major military operation”.
But the “forward policy”, originally intended for the Ladakh sector, spread to Nefa — now Arunachal Pradesh — aggravating tensions.
In particular, the report questions the role of B.M. Kaul, who was chief of the General Staff Branch, Army Headquarters, in the run-up to the war and was then made commanding officer in charge of the army’s Nefa operations.
Kaul, the authors say, remained convinced as late as end-September 1962 that China would not attack. This was days before Chinese troops attacked Indian posts.
“So far, efforts have been made to keep individual personalities out of this review,” the authors say on Page 83. “General Kaul, however, must be made an exception.”
According to the authors, the lack of clear instructions from Kaul, and the muddled messages he sent down the line for the military commanders, “is inexcusable” and “must never be allowed again”.
Kaul’s decision to order operations at a post known as Dhola “despite being fully briefed regarding the grave logistical shortcomings, can at best only be described as wanton disregard of the elementary principles of war”, the authors say.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chinese commentary hits out at Congress over war report

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/chinese-commentary-hits-out-at-congress-over-war-report/article5922853.ece?homepage=true

A commentary in a Chinese paper known for its hard-line views has hit out at the Congress-led UPA government for "attempting to conceal" the history of the 1962 war by barring the declassification of the Henderson Brooks war report.
"In the past, the Congress party once covered up the reality about the border contention with China, distorted the history and misled the general public, in a bid to safeguard its position as the ruling party as well as the moral and just image of India in the international community," said the commentary, authored by Wu Zhaoli, a scholar at the National Institute of International Strategy in the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
"Now," it added, "the government is still attempting to conceal the contents of the [Henderson Brooks] report, citing its contents 'are not only extremely sensitive but are of current operational value'".
As The Hindu reported last month, a 126-page section of the first volume of the report, which includes an operational review of India’s failure in the war, was made public by veteran Australian journalist Neville Maxwell, who published it on his website.
While India has hit out at the move to release the still classified report, Chinese government has not commented on the release, ostensibly viewing it as an internal matter.
The commentary in the Global Times, a tabloid known for its nationalistic views, said the "military debacle once plunged the Congress party led by then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru into unprecedented pressure and crisis".
"Currently with the Lok Sabha elections in full gear, Sino-Indian relations, and in particular the border dispute, may become a hot political issue even though foreign policy issues are often marginalised in Indian general elections," it suggested.
It said the current Congress-led government had "met vehement condemnation" over corruption, adding that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had criticised the government "for refusing to declassify the report, in an attempt to promote its own influence and quell the arrogance of the Congress party".
The scholar said while the border remained a problem for ties, on the whole both countries had made "remarkable breakthroughs" by managing differences.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

India interceptor missile test for strategic deterrence: China

Beijing, Apr 29, 2014, (PTI):

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/403020/india-interceptor-missile-test-strategic.html

India's successful test to intercept an incoming missile at high altitude has evoked mixed reactions among Chinese military and strategic experts who believe that advances made by India in anti-ballistic missile technology are aimed at strategic deterrence.

India's anti-missile test on Sunday intercepting targets outside the atmosphere is more aimed at "strategic deterrence", as this technology will make its enemies feel the strike power of their missiles is diminished, Wang Ya'nan, a senior editor at Aerospace Knowledge magazine, told state-run Global Times.

The Indian interceptor missile was test-fired from the launch complex-IV on Wheeler Island, just over a minute after the target missile was fired from a ship located nearly 70 km off the Paradip coast.
India is developing a two-tier missile defence system, which will destroy an incoming missile outside the earth's atmosphere, and if that fails, go on to intercept it within the atmosphere.

The missile is capable of destroying an incoming missile with a strike range of around 2,000 km outside the atmosphere.

While some Chinese military experts agreed that India has made progress in missile interception technology, others cast doubt over the significance of the latest launch.

"It's hard to conclude whether India's anti-missile technology has reached a certain level, as they also launched the target missile, so the launch time and ballistic data are all readily available," the daily quoted an unidentified Chinese missile expert.

He said China has developed relatively mature anti-ballistic missile capabilities based on Russia's S300 system which are ready for combat, but India is still experimenting with it.

China bid to sell its Red Flag-9 anti-missile system to Turkey last year in a potential USD 3.44 billion deal, although NATO then exerted pressure on Ankara to abandon the deal, which still hangs in the balance.

Song Zhongping, a former lecturer on missile technology and now military affairs commentator in Beijing, said India's new interceptor missile "could only be similar to the level of Chinese missiles in the 1990s".

He said that the target missile was not advanced and lacks effective evasive techniques which had made it easier for the interceptor to strike the target.

In real combat, however, it is hard for even the most advanced interceptors produced by the US, such as the Patriot missile, to hit Chinese missile targets, another missile expert said.

India has tested seven interceptor missiles in recent years of which six were successful.

The expert admitted China's anti-missile technology is at least 15-20 years away from the US, in terms of the response time, target accuracy and comprehensive information technology.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Thu May 29, 2014 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nehru's great legacy blotted by China defeat

While Nehru remains an icon for many, including his critics, for the stellar role he played in building institutions of democracy, the 1962 humiliation blots Nehru's copybook, says Colonel Anil A Athale (retd).

More : http://www.rediff.com/news/column/nehrus-great-legacy-blotted-by-china-defeat/20140527.htm
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssbmat
Member


Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 1710

PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2014 8:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sabya99 wrote:
Nehru's great legacy blotted by China defeat

While Nehru remains an icon for many, including his critics, for the stellar role he played in building institutions of democracy, the 1962 humiliation blots Nehru's copybook, says Colonel Anil A Athale (retd).

More : http://www.rediff.com/news/column/nehrus-great-legacy-blotted-by-china-defeat/20140527.htm


The first blot on Nehru was that he was the "Chosen" leader by Gandhi, whereas PAtel and Bose, were far more popular mass leaders. Nepotism in India began with this event.
The second blot was that he offered to ceasefire at the (now) LoC with Pakistan and ask for plebiscite for Kashmiris in 1947- when Sardar and others were pleading with him for the Army to "finish" the job effectively.

The third blot was in creating Soviet style 5 year plans ONLY because he was personally fascinated with Socialism.

This sort of hubris is the root of all of modern India's problems.

This Gandhi Nehru family has run the country like their personal fiefdom.
I hope this is truly the end of their inglorious days.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why China does not fear desi missiles: http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-defence-news-why-china-does-not-fear-indias-missiles/20140715.htm
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

'Incursions along China border due to perception difference'

New Delhi, Jul 17, 2014, (PTI)

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/420206/incursions-along-china-border-due.html
In the wake of reported incursion attempts by China, India today said such incidents take place due to difference of perception about boundary and leaders of both the countries are in talks to resolve the issue.

"Incursions along the border take place due to the difference of perception about boundary," Home Minister Rajnath Singh told reporters here.

Singh was reacting to reports that Chinese troops had made two incursion attempts in the past few days in Demchok and Chumar areas of Ladakh sector in Jammu and Kashmir.
The incursion bids by the Chinese People's Liberation (PLA) came even as Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping emphasised on the need to find a solution to the Boundary Question during their meeting in Fortaleza in Brazil on Tuesday on the sidelines of the BRICS summit.

The Home Minister said heads of both the countries are in talks on border issues and how to resolve it.
Singh said such incursions had taken place in the past too when the Chinese side entered into Indian territory and were pushed back by Indian security personnel. "Sometimes they enter and our forces push them back," he said.

The latest incident occurred in Charding Nilu Nullah Junction in Demchok sector on Tuesday when PLA personnel entered the area on their vehicles in the wee hours claiming it to be Chinese territory, official sources had said.

The PLA soldiers who wanted to have a round of the area were stopped by the Indian army and personnel of Indo Tibetan Border Police, a force which guards the India-China border.

After a 30-minute long stand-off followed by a banner drill where armies of both the countries warned each other against moving a step forward, the PLA personnel returned to their side, the sources said.

The Chinese troops, riding on horses, had earlier entered through Chumar, located 300 km east of Leh, on July 13 only to be confronted by Indian soldiers and after the usual banner drill between the two sides, the PLA patrol went back.

Chumar has been an epicentre of heightened activities of the PLA who had been making increased attempts to enter through this region as India has a dominance in this sector.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nehru sought U.S. help during 1962 Indo-China war: book


THE HINDU : http://www.thehindu.com/news/nehru-sought-us-help-during-1962-indochina-war-book/article7761071.ece?homepage=true

Former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had sought American assistance and wrote to the then U.S. President, John F. Kennedy, to provide India jet fighters to stem the Chinese tide of aggression during the 1962 Sino-India war, according to a new book titled, "JFK’s Forgotten Crisis: Tibet, the CIA and the Sino-Indian War," written by Bruce Riedel, a former CIA official. British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan also received a similar letter from Nehru, the American scholar writes.

Bruce Riedel says Mao's decision to attack India was to "humiliate Nehru."
Former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had sought American assistance and wrote to the then U.S. President, John F Kennedy, to provide India jet fighters to stem the Chinese tide of aggression during the 1962 Sino-India war, according to a new book.
The main objective of Mao Zedong, founding father of the People’s Republic of China, to attack India in 1962 was to “humiliate” Nehru who was emerging as a leader of the third world, it said.
Major provocation:
“India’s implementation of the Forward Policy served as a major provocation to China in September 1962,” Bruce Riedel, a former CIA official, wrote the book titled JFK’s Forgotten Crisis: Tibet, the CIA and the Sino-Indian War.’
“Mao’s focus was on Nehru, but a defeat of India would also be a setback for two of Mao’s enemies: [Nikita] Khrushchev and Kennedy,” Mr. Riedel wrote.
Heavy casualty :
As India was losing its territory to China fast and suffering heavy casualty, Nehru in a letter to Kennedy in November 1962 said India needed “air transport and jet fighters to stem the Chinese tide of aggression.”
“A lot more effort, both from us and from our friends will be required.”
Nehru wrote another letter to Kennedy in quick succession, Mr. Riedel writes.
This letter written by Nehru in a state of panic was hand-delivered by the then Indian Ambassador to the U.S., B.K. Nehru, to Kennedy on November 19.
‘Request to join in air war’ :
“Nehru was thus asking Kennedy to join the war against China by partnering in an air war to defeat the PLA [Peoples Liberation Army of China]. It was a momentous request that the Indian Prime Minister was making. Just a decade after American forces had reached a ceasefire with the Chinese Community Forces in Korea, India was asking JFK to join a new war against Community China,” Mr. Riedel wrote in his book.
Ahead of Nehru’s letter, the then U.S. Ambassador to India, J.K. Galbraith, sent a telegram to the White House giving the President an advance notice that such a request was coming from Nehru.
Sought 12 U.S. air force squadrons :
In the letter, Nehru asked for 12 squadrons of US air forces, Mr. Riedel told the Washington audience during the preview of the book at an event organised by the Brookings Institute — a top American think-tank — on Tuesday.
“A minimum of 12 squadrons of supersonic all-weather fighters are essential. We have no modern radar cover in the country. The United States Air Force personnel will have to man these fighters and radar installations while our personnel are being trained,” Nehru wrote in the letter, which has been quoted by Mr. Riedel in the book.
In addition, Nehru also requested “two squadrons of B-47 Bombers” to strike in Tibet, the author says quoting the letter.
Assurance :
In the letter, Nehru assured Kennedy that these bombers would not be used against Pakistan, but only for “resistance against the Chinese.”
The stakes were “not merely the survival of India”, Nehru told Kennedy “but the survival of free and independent Governments in the whole of this subcontinent or in Asia.”
Mr. Riedel said in the second letter that Nehru was, in fact, asking Kennedy for some 350 combat aircraft and crews: 12 squadrons of fighter aircraft and crews: 12 squadron of fighter aircraft with 24 jets in each and two bomber squadrons.
“At least 10,000 personnel would be needed to staff and operate jets, provide radar support and conduct logistical support for the operation,” Mr. Riedel said adding this was a substantial force, large enough to make it a numbered air force in the American order of battle.
Even a letter to British PM :
The British Prime Minister received a similar letter from Nehru, the American scholar writes.
Referring to the subsequent instructions passed by Kennedy to his administration, Mr. Riedel described them as the one that of a President preparing for war.
But before the U.S. would take further steps, China announced unilateral ceasefire.
China rattled by U.S., U.K. support to India :
After making major advances and being in a strong position to annex entire of North-East and reach as far as Kolkata, the Chinese leadership surprised the world by announcing a unilateral ceasefire fearing that both Britain and the United State were getting ready to provide material support to India in the war.
“Of course, we will never know what the specifics of American assistance to India would have been if the war continues,” he wrote in the book set to be officially released in the first week of November.
“We can be reasonably certain that America, India and probably Great Britain would have been at war together with China,” Mr. Riedel concludes.
‘JFK thwarted Pak. attack’ :
The book also notes that Kennedy played a “decisive role” in “forestalling a Pakistani attack” on India, even as Islamabad then was clearly capable of initiating war with India and taking advantage of the situation — New Delhi’s vulnerability.
Nehru, Mr. Riedel argues, ignored the advice of his general on the scene and instead listened to the top brass in New Delhi.
“Nehru’s serious mistake” :
“This was a serious mistake. Having surrounded himself in New Delhi with ‘courtiers’ who told him ‘only what his top military advisors believed he wished to hear,’ Nehru took their bad advice,” he wrote.
Mr. Riedel writes that Mao probably finalised the decision to go to war in a meeting in Beijing on October 6, 1962 with his senior generals. Mao told them that China had defeated Chiang Kai-Shek and the Nationalists Imperial Japan, and the United States in Korea, he wrote.
“For a painful blow to India” :
Responding to a question, at the Brookings panel discussion, the former CIA official said: “The PLA was ordered to impose a ‘fierce and painful’ blow on India and expel India from the territory of China claimed in Kashmir west of the Johnson Line and in NEFA South of McMahon Line.
According to Mr. Riedel, on October 8 the Chinese Foreign Minister informed the Soviet Ambassador in Beijing that a massive attack by China was eminent.
“Russia didn’t dissuade China” :
“Because the Soviets were engaged in their own high-stakes gamble in Cuba, Moscow did not discourage the Chinese, despite Khrushchev’s close relationship with Nehru,” he said in the book.
““At the same time defeating India would answer the question Kennedy had raised in his 1959 speech in the Senate about which country, democratic India or communist China, was poised to win the race for great power status in Asia. For Mao, the conflict with India provided a surrogate for his rivalry with Moscow and with Washington,” Mr. Riedel wrote in his book.
“On October 28, 1962, the day before Nehru asked for American military help, the U.S. Ambassador in Pakistan, Walter McConaughy met with the then Pakistani ruler Ayub Khan.
U.S. wanted Pak. to assure India :
“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 seek the surrender of Indian territory just as the Chinese were grabbing land. This the U.S. considered as ‘blackmail,’” Mr. Riedel said.
Galbraith immediately sent an “alarming telegram” to Washington and Karachi “asking for God’s sake that they keep Kashmir out” of any American message to Pakistan, Mr. Riedel said in the book, adding that Washington sided immediately with Galbraith on Kashmir. At the advice of the U.S., 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,” Mr. Riedel writes.
“Mao’s move dangerous” :
“Kennedy’s message to Ayub Khan, reinforced by similar message from [British] Prime Minister [Harold] 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.
Mr. Riedel, a well-known American expert of South Asia and advisers to four successive U.S. Presidents including Barack Obama, is a senior fellow and director of the Brookings Intelligence Project
Comment : Yes Mao’s move was dangerous, but very carefully planned. They disengaged at their convenient time! Also Mr. Nehru demoralized Indian army chain of command by installing his relatives and cronies. This is a bad habit of Nehrus !
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Airliners-India Forum Index -> Military Aviation & Space All times are GMT + 5.5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group. Hosted by phpBB.BizHat.com