US promised India help if China attacked during 1971 Indo-Pak war

[utubekhiladi]

What do you think?

yep,, i think it is good for them.. but bad for you..

and we are happy with where we stand. )

 

[asianobserve]

no, i do not think that china can claim to be on equal footing to any superpower like the usa or the former ussr.

not for several decades more.

Almost (which is sending shivers down my spine).

 

[pmaitra]

Kissinger invented the declassified document to be released by GOI? I don't get it. The rest I agree with.

I think it was not put properly. I guess the following post explains it better, especially the red text. After all, deception is an art of war! The only US govt. entity that was friendly with India then was the US Congress; the rest of the US govt. was hostile.

Uhh....if anything, this proves even more that the US was committed to war against India. Earlier declassified US documents show that the US (Kissinger) personally travelled to Beijing to convince the Chinese to go to war against India in 1971. The Chinese did not heed the US advice. On the other hand, they were falsely assuring India of help against the Chinese in event of a war. In reality, they actually sent a nuclear armed aircraft carrier to the Bay of Bengal to deter the Indian attack on East Pukistan.

The only REAL friend India had in 1971 was the USSR, which not only used their veto in the UNSC more than 20 times to block any resolutions against India, but also sent 2 nuclear armed submarines to follow the USS Enterprise into the Bay of Bengal to deter the US from launching war against India.

These new revelations only show what kind of two-faced liars both Nixon and Kissinger were, and to what lengths they were willing to go to stoke WWIII in the subcontinent.

 

[asianobserve]

yep,, i think it is good for them.. but bad for you..

and we are happy with where we stand. )

Don't worry we have positive BOT with China.

 

[Ray]

Maybe she was acting like one during their conversation. I don't think such a consumate diplomat as Mr. Kissinger will knowingly throw out that expletive for no reason at all. Maybe by then the US was already so exhausted with the impossibility of Indian position against it that frustrations were already boiling over.

It is a well known fact that Nixon hated the guts of Mrs Indira Gandhi!

In diplomacy, diplomats lie through their teeth and are normally chameleons.

Kissinger is the avatar of Machiavelli. He could juggle many contradictions and still come out smelling of roses.

Indian diplomats have been fooled historically.

Heard of Kavalam Madhava Panikkar, the Indian Ambassador to China?

Panikkar and the Tibetan blunder

It is stated by another Malayali - Mathai, the secretary of Pt Nehru and many others that a parliamentary cable sent to Panikkar was fudged by him before presentation to the Chinese. The claim is that he changed India's recognition of Chinese 'suzerainty' over Tibet to 'sovereignty' thus legitimizing China's claim over Tibet. It is clearly stated in many other documents that the cable came wrongly worded to Panikkar from Nehru and the astonished Panikkar reluctantly acted upon the command of his boss. Panikkar himself goes on record to say that if indeed he had done wrong, why did the foreign affairs ministry and Nehru not correct the mistake immediately? From this one clarification you can imagine who the fall guy was. Sardar Patel was another person who attacked Panikkar's actions whenever a chance arose. Patel hated both Menon and Panikkar with fervor. (In fact the Patel-Menon-Sudhir Ghosh story is a classic Delhi polemic where Nehru had to get involved to signal peace.)

Now who is right? Pannicker, Mathai, Patel, Nehru or who?

This is the world of diplomats and diplomacy.

 

[asianobserve]

I think it was not put properly. I guess the following post explains it better, especially the red text. After all, deception is an art of war! The only US govt. entity that was friendly with India then was the US Congress; the rest of the US govt. was hostile.

If the US government was innately hostile to India then how can it offer to it China's UN seat?

 

[Ray]

The above is from

Maddy's Ramblings: Sardar KM Panikkar, a luminary

 

[pmaitra]

If the US government was innately hostile to India then how can it offer to it China's UN seat?

Off topic, but in any case, that offer of UN seat was long time back, informal and unofficial, long before 1971-72 war and before India became a Soviet ally. India did collaborate with CIA at one stage helping Tibetan refugees against PLA, but then India was non-aligned and Indo-US relations had not started spiralling which reached the abyss in 1971-72.

 

[Yusuf]

If the US government was innately hostile to India then how can it offer to it China's UN seat?

Debateable. Apparently there never was an offer. Some links are there to say so but still.

Anyways that seat was "offered" during Nehrus time. He decline (allegedly)

The pro china Pak tilt started after that as Nehru didn't play ball.

 

[Tianshan]

If the US government was innately hostile to India then how can it offer to it China's UN seat?

please read this.

The Hindu : Miscellaneous / This Day That Age : 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 second part is also very important to read.

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.''

 

[pmaitra]

please read this.

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



the second part is also very important to read.

Thank you. While there are many reports that say that an offer was made which Nehru declined, there is no official communique or documentary evidence to back than claim. Even if that was true, that was long before the 1971-72 war.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Maybe she was acting like one during their conversation. I don't think such a consumate diplomat as Mr. Kissinger will knowingly throw out that expletive for no reason at all.

He actually called her a chaleria. :-D

Maybe by then the US was already so exhausted with the impossibility of Indian position against it that frustrations were already boiling over.

"Meh keyn brechen!"

 

[asianobserve]

(self-deleted - petty)

 

[pmaitra]

Maybe she was acting like one during their conversation. I don't think such a consumate diplomat as Mr. Kissinger will knowingly throw out that expletive for no reason at all. Maybe by then the US was already so exhausted with the impossibility of Indian position against it that frustrations were already boiling over.

He actually called her a chaleria. :-D

No offense to my US friends; from an Indian (as well as Asian or European) perspective, the American lingo can sound rather crude and abrasive. I don't want to sound judgmental here, but there are certain differences. Like in India and in the UK of recent past, it was inappropriate to address an acquaintance called John Smith as 'John' and it was expected that one should use 'Mr. Smith' instead. I was hanging out with a lady one evening and jokingly she told me, 'I'm your b!tch tonight!' Of course, it's not always taken seriously. I was at Myrtle Beach last year and I saw a girl wearing a bikini with the following words on the posterior of her bikini bottom: 'I know I'm a b!tch, just not yours!'

"Meh keyn brechen!"

What does that mean (Irish)?

 

[Ray]

pmaitra,

Americans have an unique way of using the English language.

It appears embarrassing to Indians but it apparently is natural to them.

I get confused most of the times when interacting with Americans.

Another set of words that confused me is the total misuse of the word, 'strategy' and 'logistics'.

Planning for what one has to do that day becomes 'strategy for the day' and how to go about that becomes 'logistics'!!

When I compare the terms with the military connotation, I am not only aghast, but I do this -

I will be going to Pune shortly and so I will 'touch base' out there!

No offence meant to anyone, but I presume, every culture has its own way with expressions!

Meh keyn brechen!"

Could that be Irish?

 

[Known_Unknown]

What does that mean (Irish)?

^^ Means you can vomit from this.

Oops I was wrong. It sounds very much like German. Especially Brechen. Not Meh or keyn though.

 

[Ray]

Checked through Google Search

Meh keyn brechen -"You can vomit from this!" "Go to your sister's house for dinner? Forget it! I don't know which makes me brech more"¦ her food or her décor!"

Ketchup as a Weapon of Mass Distraction | Wake Up From Your Slumber

Still don't know which language it is!

 

[pmaitra]

^^ Means you can vomit from this.

Oops I was wrong. It sounds very much like German. Especially Brechen. Not Meh or keyn though.

In German, brechen does not mean vomit. It means to break something.

Could that be Irish?

That's my guess.

 

[Known_Unknown]

^^Yea, but the word exists in German. Meh and keyn don't.

 

[amitkriit]

I smell conspiracy, If I am not wrong source of this document is the Government of India is it possible that our government has launched a PR campaign to make USA look good and friendly in the eyes of our people? Who is paying them?