Discussion in 'China' started by jon88, Mar 31, 2014.
I thought we Indians are living in a democracy
Phew.. fortunately I found my previous comments.
In new interview, Neville Maxwell says India was aggressor in 1962, not China : India, News - India Today
Now we know why Henderson Brooks report was classified even after half a century. I don't know what to think. Our own Indian government created an imaginary enemy so that we can expand our borders. What a lot of us have suspected, especially after reading so many articles about the 1962 war that implicated India as the aggressor, but our very own report suggesting the same just made me speechless. Made my nearly a lifetime hatred towards China so senseless.....almost like a fool. We were the thief. I wonder how many classified secrets are there in our government vault. The government played us like a puppet.
Here is the link to HB report
We should try to make ammends.
The Indian government should apologise to China for lying about the 1962 war which India started and lost, it should also apologise to the Indian people for misleading them for 52 years about the 1962 war. The Indian government blaming China for a war it started and lost and then lying about it to the Indian people is really dishonourable.
At least end the whole hostility between the two countries honourably.
We all know Nehru and his forward policy... if someone wants to follow such a policy then he needs to have a good backup of military(which India didn't have against a large China) and do not pull out when the game starts.
That move proved to be another blunder of Nehru after Kashmir.
It's new when you grew up thinking it was China who attacked us unprovoked. It's new when you think that every single gadget made in China have spy bug devices in them. It has been 52 years and only now we learn the truth that we, Indians were the aggressor. It's like we have been living based on a lie all these years.
We were aggressor in same way Pandavas were against Kauravas.Read about happening in 1959 and also how China deployed so many troops outnumbering Indians, how they constructed roads through Aksai Chin and how they wiped out entire Tibet opposition which was just a buffer nation.
That dog Maxwell asks to believe that Tibet should be China's possession and does not talk about chinese actions there and concentrates on what happened in September and October of 1962. Chinese had been violating our frontiers, Indians thought that they could be checked and lost in face of determined assault from Hans who are biggest land grabbers in history.
Still... it does not absolve the government for lying to the general Indian public. The British grab their land first, we want to have a free handout, and the Chinese took it back. Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Maldives have always been our sphere of influence just as Tibet has always been China's sphere of influence. What Maxwell (and please refrain from name calling) believe is based on the report and is our Indian actions and deeds any honourable? We forcibly annexed Goa while China took HongKong and Macau peacefully. Are we not land grabbers too? Of course China, just like our India have done a lot of misdeeds too. But the question here is why do we unnecessarily have an abrasive relationship with China when 1962 war was initiated by us. Many countries have wars and are the best of friends now. Why do we have to always harp on a war that happened half a century ago....especially when we were the aggressor and we lied about it.
If we have decades ago, "regretted" (ok, we don't have to apologize) the 1962 war and don't lie to the Indian public, the Indian and Chinese population would not be hostile with each other.
Roads, oil & gas pipelines, electricity, highways and railways would crisscross across the Himalayas. Border trade towns would flourish. China would bank in India to internationalize their manufactured goods. Indians will be teaching English to the Chinese. China would not need Pakistan and the only ally Pakistan would have is USA.
India and China, together will ensure their diaspora in Southeast Asia are not discriminated at. China would become the first country to support India in our bid for a permanent seat at the UN security council. The possibilities would have been endless....... if we didn't let the politicians cover-up the truth of 1962. It is not that our economy will be any better, but at least we have more options . Even our military can be more focused and vigilant in keeping Pakistan in check.
There are far more serious lies than this which our Government has sold to Indian public like about genocide in 1971. Chinese " took back " Tibet which was never their as Tibetans are not Chinese . Case closed.
Here you are showing your stupidity. Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal have been our lands primarily because of ethnic and civilizational relations. All these belong to Indo Aryans unlike Tibet whose people are not Hans.You are comparing land of Panini with Tibet and China. China had as much right to rule Tibet as I have over you. There is no thing as " sphere of influence"
Yes our deeds were not honourable because it was stupid. As early as 1955 JP Narayan asked our government to do something regarding humanitarian crisis in Tibet. A nation swallows up a buffer country and that gives us every right to evict them from there.
Hongkong and Macau was not settled by hans when British and Portuguese came there and people of these regions did not want to go back to Chinese.You are calling Indian action to take back Goa as land grabbing? What right did Portuguese have to hold it? Read about Goa and freedom movement there. A land belongs to its ethnic native groups not states so keep your porn of states to yourself. The concept of state is nonsense in our case.
" Our India" has committed many misdeeds but it does not involve sitting on lands of Uighurs, Tibetans and Manchurians. We did not ethnically cleanse a community of 5 million manchu speakers and did not swallow up any land which is not rightfully ours. We had deepest civilizational relations with all lands and British times enabled us to convert those civilizational realities into a centralized political state.
Because of Chinese history of grabbing land. The idea of India being aggressor is as much lie as that of Jews attacking Nazis first. There were a chain of events. Killing of our soldiers by Chinese did not lead to war so tell me you troll how some posts extending into territory held by Chinese resulted in war? Why when Chinese killed our soldiers in 1959 , it did not lead into war? Why war took place in time world was locked in Cuban crisis? Ever read about Korean war? Who was aggressor there?
This is way OT but whom do you support Pandavas or Kauravas.(not in context of Sino Indian war)
Manchu population has doubled in China.
Oh yes poor baby China was attacked by aggressive India and so an Indian who has troubled times in Malaysia at hands of Malay bumiputras want us to befriend poor hans just because he was helped there by Chinese.
China is lucky not to have guys like you.
Bhima was first fed poison and then Kauravas tried to kill all Pandavas in Lakshagriha. Answer is clear.
There is alternative view about Neville Maxwell view of 1962 war.
He was Dead set against Nehru/Krishana Menon, hence skewed his book to blame them. We India like critics more than the true story tellers. It was China who built a road in Ladakh in 1955 when Hindu-Chinni Bhai Bhai slogan was being coined. Mao & Chou were smiling at Nehru's face but occupying Indian land. This all ignored by the Neville Maxwell.
Here is an alternative view another journalist of that era, who was also in Delhi and knew Neville well. His views were published in Deccan Herald recently.
'Blaming Nehru a superficial way of looking at India-China war'
Nikhil Kanekal, March 26, 2014, DHNS
One journalistâ€™s claim to distill the reasons for the 1962 war between India and China caused a storm in New Delhiâ€™s power corridors last week. But another seasoned journalist has questioned this premise and expressed his views on the Henderson Brooks report.
Bertil-Lintner, a Swedish journalist and former correspondent of the Far Eastern Economic Review, who has been reporting on East Asia for nearly four decades, believes the Henderson Brooks report doesnâ€™t mean much in the larger geopolitics which led to the 1962 Indo-China war. In an email interview to Nikhil Kanekal of Deccan Herald, Lintner, who lives in Chiang Mai, explains why he thinks Neville Maxwell was wrong for the conclusions in his book Indiaâ€™s China War and why it would be myopic to blame the Nehru administration and the Indian Army for the debacle.
What was the prevailing political situation in China in the early 1960s? What was the thinking in the Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai administration?
One has to put the 1962 border war in context. In 1959, Mao Zedong launched the disastrous Great Leap Forward to modernise China. By 1961, anywhere between 18 and 32 million people died as a result of Mao's policies. He was discredited and on his way out. He felt he had to regain power -- and the best way to do that was to unify the nation and, especially, the armed forces, against an outside enemy. India was a â€˜softâ€™ target. After all, India had granted the Dalai Lama asylum after the failed uprising in Lhasa in 1959 and his subsequent flight south, first into what was then NEFA (the Northeast Frontier Agency; a territory claimed by China) and then, eventually, to McLeodganj, where he set up a government in exile. Mao did manage to regain power and several of his political enemies were sidelined. Some remained, of course, so in 1966 Mao launched the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, during which all his political enemies were eliminated and he was elevated to a God-like status in Chinese society.
Was India's Forward Policy really flawed or did separate factors influence Maoâ€™s China into engaging in combat?
I believe that the 1962 war had much more to do with internal power struggles in China at the time than the border dispute, or Indiaâ€™s forward policy. Those were pretexts for the assault on India, it was not a â€˜spur-of-the-momentâ€™ kind of action because of some â€˜provocationâ€™ by India. Just look at the forbidding terrain in Tibet across the border. In the early 1960s the infrastructure there was almost non-existent. It would have taken months to move tens of thousands of troops and military equipment up to the MacMahon Line.
It is also worth remembering what China did in the years before the 1962 war. In January 1961, a combined force of three divisions, or 20,000 men, of regulars from the Chinese People's Liberation Army launched a very similar attack across the northeastern border of Myanmar. The target was a string of secret, Nationalist Chinese Kuomintang camps on the Myanmar side of the border, from where those had launched raids into China. The campaign was code-named â€˜the Mekong River Operation,â€™ and was sanctioned by the Myanmar government, which also wanted to rid the country of the sanctuaries that the Kuomintang forces had established in this remote part of the country - although no Myanmar government has ever acknowledged that this operation took place. It was swift and over in a matter of weeks. Then, the Chinese troops withdraw to their side of the border. I often look at the 1961 the Mekong River Operation as a â€˜rehearsalâ€™ for what happened in 1962.
Why were you not excited about the Henderson Brooks report?Did it not reveal anything new?
I read the report several years ago - it was passed on to me by another journalist - and, though interesting, it wasn't all that exciting from my point of view. It analysed the weaknesses in Indiaâ€™s defence of the border and other policy shortcomings. Naturally, the Henderson Brooks report did not go into the main reasons for the war, i e what I have outlined above: power struggles within the Chinese leadership at the time.
Do you think the Henderson Brooks report was an accurate depiction and analysis of what happened in 1962?
As government enquiries go, it is actually quite good. It deals with the situation on the ground, and what India did wrong at the time. But it leaves too many questions unanswered, especially the actual reason why China attacked in 1962.
Do you think Neville Maxwell was wrong about his conclusions in his book India's China War? Please explain why.
Maxwell puts the whole blame on India, Nehru, and the Forward Policy.-That is a very superficial way of looking at the issue, which must be seen in a much broader perspective. Apart from power struggles in Beijing at the time, there was also a brewing conflict between China and the Soviet Union -- and India was seen by the Chinese leadership as a Soviet ally. China didn't dare to attack the Soviet Union militarily, but by launching a war against India, Beijing wanted to show Moscow that it was a military force to be reckoned with. Maxwell just harps on and on about minor issues and his book, therefore, clouds the bigger picture.
How relevant are the recent revelations to the geopolitics in the region?-Do you think the Indian's government's position that the report should continue to remain classified is valid?
After reading the Henderson Brooks report, I couldn't understand why it was still classified. What it says has been written elsewhere and, apart from showing weaknesses in the Indian position on the ground at the time, it is not damaging to broader issues of national security.
Could you briefly tell us about the book that you said you are working on?
I am working on a book about the 1962 war as seen in the context of power struggles in China during the post-Great Leap Forward era, and the Sino-Soviet conflict. It is my hope that this book will shed more light on the 1962 war than Maxwell's deeply flawed account does.
@ Pratap...I am so sorry for my stupidity that I cannot differentiate the Indo-Aryan race from the Sino-Tibetan race. Guess I don't understand what sub-groups of Han, Tamil, Bengali, Manchu, Mongol,Tibetan and Singhalese are. Yes, since we Indians sit at a higher moral pedestal than the Chinese, Chinese intentions and history should be judged and interpreted through Indian eyes, and not through their own. Some people called it arrogance, but what do they know......
Whats your problem? Did I insult you personally?
You should be but since all Indians use this retarded logic, you should perhaps not feel much bad. When some guy in India sees Akbar as a foreigner Turk, people like you start making ridiculous arguments like only tribals are Indians, we all have come from Africa, Rajputs are huna etc.
The stupidity is that equivalent of Sino Tibetan race is Indo European race not Indo Aryan. Equivalent of Indo Aryan race is Sinitic race meaning Hans. Since you can not differentiate between Sino Tibetan race and Indo Aryan race, let me do that.
1. Indo Aryan race has had common gods of its own( except among Islmaized Indo Aryans) like Indra and Shiva but Sino Tibetan never had
2. Indo Aryan race has had a sacred language of its own unlike Sino Tibetan race
3. Indo Aryan race is united by common gotras( clan name) , common scriptures and common descent whereas Sino Tibetan race is not
4. Indo Aryan names are all similar. In pre Islamic times and even now among non Islamic Indo Aryans, names like Jayanti are as much common in Kashmir as in Assam. Could you please tell me common Sino Tibetan names?
5. All Indo Aryans have had a unique social system unique to them but common to all Indo Aryans viz caste system. Brahmans were as much there in Kashmir as in Assam. Were confucian bureaucrats common to Tibet or Sino Tibetan race?
6. Indo Aryans royal houses always claimed descent from figures which were common to Indo Aryan race, can you tell me some figures which were common to Sino Tibetan race?
People who can not distinguish between Romance people and Indo Europeans are beyond help.
Irrelevant comment of an Indian tortured by Malaysians.
It should be judged by normal eyes. Let your Chinese fulfil my criteria and I won't regard their rule as foreign to Tibet. Hakka language is also not intelligible to a normal speaker of Mandarin but I am not calling a Hakka as non Chinese . I use common standards. Manchus, Mongols and Tibetans have nothing to do with Chinese and are just being oppressed and are in risk of getting ethnically cleansed.
Where did I insult you? Have I used abusive language? You did insult a larger identity to which I belong. It seems that you indeed have had hard times with Malay bumiputras.
Indian history of redrawing maps to steal Chinese land
From The Hindu Archives, we see "the official [Indian] map as on August 15, 1947." This official 1947 Indian map does not include China's Aksai Chin.
From The Hindu Archives, we see "the [new Indian] map in 1950, with the colour wash. The maps were published under the authority of India's Surveyor General, Brigadier G.F. Heaney." This official 1950 Indian map magically claims China's Aksai Chin.
From 1947 to 1950, India decided it would unilaterally redraw the Sino-Indian boundary map and claim Aksai Chin. I like this Indian trick. I think China should redraw its maps Indian-style and claim whatever we want of Indian territory.
The Indians are doing it and we should copy them. If the Indians are shameless, we should become just as shameless. The only way to deal with an aggressive and expansionist neighbor is to use their own dirty trick of redrawing maps (without any relation to history) against them.
Indian perfidy causing problems along Sino-Indian border
I intentionally picked the official Indian government maps from 1947 and 1950 in The Hindu Archives.
You Indians refuse to acknowledge the official maps from your own government. This is ridiculous.
Your government has been hiding the truth from the Indian people and that's why you Indian nationalists are all brainwashed.
1. After 50 years, the Indian government refuses to release the archives on the events of 1962. It will show that you Indians are the aggressors.
2. The official Indian government maps from 1947 and 1950 clearly show that India decided to REDRAW them to include China's Aksai Chin between August 15, 1947 and 1950.
3. You Indians also REDREW the map for South Tibet/Arunachal Pradesh to swallow Chinese territory into India. On pre-Independence maps, the Indian border clearly excluded South Tibet (see Global Security map below from 1916-1937 of self-delimited Indian border).
It is Indian perfidy that has been causing problems along the Sino-Indian border.
In the future, there will be a Sino-Indian war when China reclaims the territory that has been stolen by India. I want all of you Indians to know your country is at fault.
Global Security: Arunachal Pradesh "claim is not reflected on pre-Independence maps"
"Arunachal Pradesh...claim is not reflected on pre-Independence maps." Prior to the land-grab of Chinese territory after Indian independence in 1947, Indian maps clearly excluded China's South Tibet/Arunachal Pradesh.
Reference: India-China Border | GlobalSecurity
I see it is pointless arguing with you. You are are just too presumptious, making your own assumptions as actual facts as you go. As far as I know China has been a single country and people far longer than India has ever been. India to me is an entity created by the British. Before that, there was never an Indian nation.
India, in my humble opinion is perhaps the most fractious nation on earth, even more so than the former Soviet Union.
Separate names with a comma.