原文标题：China did not expect India to give up so easily in 1962
NAGPUR: China did not expect India to give in so easily in the 1962 war, so much so that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) overran Indian posts and reached deep into Tezpur in the plains of Assam, said Colonel (retd) Abhay Patwardhan. He was delivering a lecture as part of a series organized at the Dharampeth College of Arts.
Even fifty years after the war, scars of the debacle remain fresh and the ex-serviceman came up with some rare declassified documents related to the war. Addressing a small audience of mainly senior citizens, Colonel Patwardhan showed a letter citing an admission by then Chinese Premier Chou En-lai to a veteran journalist. Chou En-lai had gone on record saying Chinese leaders were surprised at the feeble resistance of the Indian Army.
Patwardhan, now a defence analyst, also showed a telegram shot off to US President John F Kennedy by Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, in which the latter pleaded for more help from the superpower. As the PLA was over running post after post, Nehru sent the frantic cable depicting the situation and asked for jet fighters and transport planes to stem the Chinese tide.
Nehru’s telegram mentions India was grateful for the help it earlier received from the US. He says that Bomdila, the headquarters of North Easter Frontier Agency (NEFA), was already surrounded by the Chinese and Indian forces amounting to two divisions (18 infantry battalions) were fighting a grim battle. Nehru had expressed uncertainty about how many of them would be able to find their way back safely to the Corps headquarters in Tezpur. Nehru added for emphasis that the Chinese forces were heading toward Leh and there was nothing to stop them after that.
Patwardhan brought memories of the war alive with his presentation to an audience that might have only heard radio broadcasts as teenagers as that time. A 1971 war veteran himself, Patwardhan was 15 years old at the time. He also showed a picture depicting an Indian jawan cooking in a makeshift kitchen, showing how the Army was low on rations besides other equipment.
09 Jan, 2012 03:58 AM
Another example of what congress and spineless politicians have been doing to India for decades….. Time to bring in some major changes
Vinod Dawda (Aligarh)
09 Jan, 2012 04:23 AM
The spineless response to Chinese by the Indian leadership which was essentially naive Nehru at the time set the trend for the future with Pakistan being used as a proxy by the Chinese. There was no need to use its own forces against such a feeble force. This ensured that Pakistan can get hormonal every now and then and India will give some shrill response. How right they have been so far. We can look at a grim future with totally clueless political leadership for some time.
sree (kochi) replies to AM
09 Jan, 2012 02:00 PM
yup.. we could try anna hazare as a single powerful leader for india. His penchant for violence might scare the chinese to leave tib%t and xinjiang.
Valentine Anthony (Baguio City, Philippines)
09 Jan, 2012 05:07 AM
Is it surprising that India gave up “so easily”? For this it is a big NO! But it is nothing to do with non-alignment and Indian democracy. India simply lacked the socio-economic-political mettle in 1961.
lol “urrr… we didn’t expect the gandus to raise their hand like that, I thought he’s tossing a grenade so I shot him” or “we are running out of food because we captured too many gandus”
GlobeSon (Sydney) replies to Valentine Anthony
13 Jan, 2012 07:26 AM
It actually has to do with all that… Nehru was a idealist and felt there would be no aggression against non-aggressive, non-aligned democratic India. He did not see the chinese has a dagger in the other hand while they extended one hand for friendship. He was too naive to be a PM and paraded around the world as a leader of the democratic movement that was sweeping across the world.
Valentine Anthony replies to GlobeSon
13 Jan, 2012 08:12 AM
Thank you for your comment, which is correct on Nehru. The onus was on him as the first PM of India. Is it his “Tryst with destiny….”, the eloquent speech on the eve of India’s independence?
09 Jan, 2012 08:05 AM
NEHRU WAS PATHETIC…..A SHAME TO THE COUNTRY…..
09 Jan, 2012 09:04 AM
The next Chinese attack would not be of the same fashion as before where human waves attacked posts but would rather be a massive missile and artillery barrage on forward posts followed by lightning ground strikes all across the front. This is the scenario the Chinese have practiced so far in their war games and it is prudent to realize that this probably what they plan to use in any future engagement with Indian forces. It is bizarre to claim that Indian response was “weak” or “meager” by the Chinese because, compared to the forces thrown at the Indian border by the Chinese, the Indian side was quite small in size and moreover poorly equipped. Most of the forward posts that were over run had used all their ammunition and had to finally resort to bayonets!
sree (kochi) replies to JAY
09 Jan, 2012 01:57 PM
because of him india exists. No one expected india to last as a country back then.
GlobeSon (Sydney) replies to sree
13 Jan, 2012 07:22 AM
Credit goes to the democratic fabric of India society and the (largely) tolerant Indians. Else you can see whats happenned to our estranged brother Pakistan that is on the verge of disintegration.
npk (B’lore) replies to sree
09 Jan, 2012 04:34 PM
Politicians hide behind the soldier’s gun…i never respect them…might be in Kochi CONG still rule…but years are numbered for Nehru and his Family…wait and watch
Rajaruban Rajindram (Klang)
As everyone of us knows, China claims Arunachal Pradesh solely because the area is part of southern Tibet. Thus it claim it has historical rights on this area, thus seeking to annexing it into China. If we say this claim is valid, then we should look into other side of story. Tibet, historically and culturally has more links to India, It’s way of life mostly influenced by Buddhist doctrine. Tibet was also northern part of Kushan Empire, which its Capital was Benares, which is in India. To know more of this, try googling Kushan Empire.
Apart from this China never had any historical footprints in Tibet as what it claims now. If China still claims that Arunachal Pradesh is part of China, then India has every rights to claim whole of China as It’s territory. The reason, China is predominantly Buddhists, with heavy Buddhism culture which was heavily influenced by India. Apart from that, China’s prestigious martial art, Shaolin Kung Fu, is originated from southern India, history claims that Indian monk, Bodhidharma, who taught the Chinese to fight, was a prince from Pallava Empire. So why not Indians turn the table now, and assert itself to protect It’s integrity and honour by teaching the Chinese once again in history a valuable lesson. For this I personally feel India should be more bold and strong politically and mentally.
Kunwar (melbourne) replies to Rajaruban Rajindram
09 Jan, 2012 11:06 AM
It may be far fetched to suggest that China itself can be claimed by India on cultural grounds, but some facts generally obscured need be noted. Tibet was not part of the Chinese nation or state in history. The Chinese emperor received some tribute from the Tibetan head of state in acknowledgement of its power and overlordship as a SUZERAIN,asdistinguished from a SOVEREIGN. Tibet had an autonomy as good as independence. Secondly, Tibet itself has been at times part of kingdoms in India e.g., Kashmir. Thirdly, Arunachal area was under British control from India, not under Tibet for over a century — no question of China at all — and under International law such a situation lasting for over fifty years is treated as tenable. Arunachal area, as Nehru had shown in his communication to Chou en Lai, has inseparable cultural and historical bonds with India (see Parashuram Kund etc.) Very reasonably, India could and should ask for the area extending from Lake Mansarovar and along the river Tsangpo(Brahmaputra) which are India,s water lifeline. But a weak entity cannot push for its claims. Diplomacy without military strength is music without instrument.
India’s Prime Minister was much more surprised than Chinese when they drove us back and enforced a humiliating defeat. Our visionary(?) leader with his matured experience thought that the his order to drive out the Chinese would be an extension of Hyderabad annexation or Goa liberation. So strong was the thrashing that our leaders are always in denial mode when asked about the frequent advancement and provocation by the Chinese.
09 Jan, 2012 10:44 AM
Indian Army could not had done any better- with no equipment ,no rations not even snow clothing. Armed forces were neglected then and we paid a price. The situation is the same now….
Agree (21)Disagree (4)Recommend (7)
09 Jan, 2012 01:58 PM
Whatever the reasons they can give for the armed forces retreat, but its a shame for them to call themselves a soldier. A true soldier/warrior will stand and fight no matter how big the enemy is. Thats the true ethics of a soldier. Not running away and silly giving excuses. its a honor to die in the battlefield rather dying in late life with humilation and running away from ones duty.
Agree (1)Disagree (14)Recommend (0)
09 Jan, 2012 04:49 PM
Nehru completely lacked military understanding. His flawed policy of Non Alignment led China to invade Indian in midst of the Cuban Missile Crisis between US and USSR. If Nehru was vigilant, Tibet would never have been occupied by China after British left India. Nehru also messed up Kashmir issue taking it to UN, against Sardar Patel’s advice. This emboldened China further. Nehru’s tenure as PM was unprecedented and lasted 15 years. Subhash Chandra Bose easily could have become the PM, but Nehru did not allow it to happen. It is not a coincidence that Nehru copied Stalins five year plans model of development.
R Kumar (London)
09 Jan, 2012 10:26 PM
China does not have the need to attack. It knows that it can achieve the same results by bribing Indians to do the job for them!