So it wasn’t for a lack of determination by our forces. The fall of Tawang, Walang, Se La and Bomdi La could perhaps have been prevented if only India’s military brass hats in Delhi and Tezpur had stood up to Nehru’s arrogant defence minister Krishna Menon—who had once boasted that he alone could handle the Chinese—and prevented him from micro-managing the conflict. The odd ones who did, like Lt Gen Umrao Singh, GoC 33 Corps, were marginalised and a new corps was raised in Tezpur to accommodate New Delhi’s man, Lt Gen B.M. Kaul. But once the Chinese attacks began, it was clear Kaul was out of his depth. He soon took ill but insisted on commanding his forces from a hospital bed. Though China’s aggression of 1962 lasted only a month—October 19 to November 21—it has left scars that are yet to heal. The reason is that the causes of India’s defeat—largely in Se La and Bomdi La on the eastern front, and in Aksai Chin in the west—have been hushed up, and the nation hasn’t had a chance to understand who all were guilty for the debacle.
After the war, the new army chief, Gen J.N. Chaudhuri, ordered Lt Gen T.B. Henderson Brooks, a second generation Indian army officer, and Brigadier (later Lt Gen) Prem Bhagat, VC, to find out what went wrong. But as the government clearly didn’t want to fix responsibility on individuals, their report was restricted to mundane tactical issues like training, equipment, physical fitness of troops and the role of military commanders. Moreover, even if Brooks and Bhagat had wanted to, they had no access to records of meetings in the MoD, as Krishna Menon had categorically disallowed any notes or minutes to be kept of his conferences, saying these were top secret. But they still produced an unforgiving analysis of the problems along the entire Sino-Indian border and squarely blamed army headquarters for its direct interference. However, this report lies locked in a vault in South Block on the misplaced fear that it could further sully Pandit Nehru’s reputation. It has apparently (by one account) been accessed by Jaswant Singh, the historian Neville Maxwell, and some others at the defence ministry’s historical division, tasked to research and write the official history of the 1962 conflict (which is yet to be made public).
Interestingly though, we learnt another lesson 25 years ago. While the use of the Indian air force in 1962 was limited largely to ferrying casualties (an offensive role was curtailed for fear of escalating the conflict), in 1986, General Sundarji used the IAF’s heli-lift capabilities to respond swiftly to a Chinese build-up at Sumdorong Chu, to move troops north of Tawang and across the Namka Chu—where the Chinese began the 1962 invasion—to stare down the Chinese. While Rajiv Gandhi felt India must back off, Sundarji refused to so. He apparently offered to resign, saying, “Please make alternate arrangements if you think you are not getting adequate professional advice.” The Chinese eventually pulled back. Herein lies a lesson on how to deal with a belligerent China. And although India is today militarily well placed to defend itself, the bigger question is: does India’s political leadership have the nerve to look the Chinese in the eye? The answer: perhaps, no. To that extent, we are where we were 50 years ago.
(Maroof Raza is associated with Times Now and is the publisher of Salute)
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
It was the army, who must have given the reasons for the perception of the report, on the Indo-China war. The reasons seem to be fair. The war was not started by India, and we had to fight a war. Why China invaded India, when India did not want a war, is not the question, any Indian report can answer. Again, if india did not want a war, and we were invaded, could we have stopped the invasion? China was perhaps feeling that her troops were needed in Tibet, when the Dalai Lama had taken refuge in India, not a long while ago. It does seem, Mr. Krishna Menon, when he felt pique at Chinese troops at the border, did not factor this in, he must have thought, that the Chinese leadership, did not understand what Indian democracy stood for. Very soon later, Indians were also confused, about this.
You are on the dot,Maroof. The smart civilians have always let down the naive Faujis. Can you imagine what would have happened to menon ifhe was a fauji. If nothing else,at least utter disgrace for life. But he was allowed to leave the scene ' scot-free' , because of his friendship with Nehru.
As far as I see, the army is the caretaker of it's own reputation. No one knows how the army operates. It seems, pretty extraordinary, that one can fight for the life of a soldier, just nearby, and then have differences later. I did read about the COAS during the China War, in Mr. Nayar's book.
If this Govt has the respect that it says very often it has for the Armed Forces, let the country know who the architects for the Debacle of 1962 were. Does Dr Manmohan Singh have the guts to tell us the truth, given that he is supposed to have immense integrity.
The biggest threat to India is not from Pakistan, not from China, not from terrorists, but from our corrupt politicians. A couple of hundred people died in the horrific terroritsts attacks on Mumbai, several years ago. However, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Indian's die of malaria, diaorrahea, jaundice and other treatable diseases - because of lack of proper sanitation and drinking water. Hundreds of thousands of girls are raped or killed each year. The Delhi police commissioners response to the unsafe environment for women in the capital was " Don't venuture out after 8:00 pm..." The politicans have meddled in every sphere and now even the army is getting corrupted in scams and irregularities. Politicans are the new maharajas of India - they believe it to be their right to take from the people and after them their sons or daughters will take over the throne. This is now becoming more and more entrenched. The recent remarks by the Union Law minister against Kerjwal are a case in point - where he publicly used shocking language and velied threats about blood and death - this from the country's foremost lawmaker. Where is the prime minster? Even if he was the greates financial genius in the history of the world (which he is not...), the fact that he is silent when his team is busy running amock, cheating and stealing and threatening the very people they are supposed to guard - this is corruption by association. The average age of the leaders is above 60 and the average age of age of the people they are supposed to protect is 25 - a real disconnect, made worse by chronic narcissim and corruption. Meanwhile in Mumbai, a trumped up middle ranking cop is running amock, declaring war on the middle class who dare to frequent pubs and bars or god forbid, engage in making choclate liqueir choclates without a liquior permit (as per a law dating back to more than 125 years!). So my friends, the threats real or perceived from across the border are very minute compared to what is happening within .......
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT