Probably I shouldn't be cold starting my blog during election season. The occupational hazards of the job include being branded as a secret follower of a family firm, an enthusiastic keyboard warrior for a demagogue or for an eccentric maverick who protests too much. But the uninformed journalism which has erupted following the leak of the Henderson Brooks report prompts me to write this. Frankly, the report is no secret since Neville Maxwell has been writing and speaking on the subject for many years.
Let me start off by asking simple questions and presenting a complex perspective briefly. I do not wish to present facts here since they are available in abundance elsewhere. Since yours truly is a serving official in the Government I shall refrain from commenting on individuals and focus on the big picture
1. Was Nehru taken for a ride by the Chinese ?
Yes and no. He had a series of talks with Zhou En Lai in the environment of a new emerging post colonial world. Arun Shourie's latest Book on the subject concluded that Nehru showed his naivete. That would be an oversimplification if one considers the military adventurism that both China (in the western sector) and India (forward policy in retaliation and political one upmanship) indulged in. Well, the fact that the Dalai Lama chose India as a safe abode and India readily gave refuge made things worse. However the democrat in Nehru played a huge role in shaping public opinion, steering informed parliamentary debates and giving media a free hand. India found itself in the middle of a situation caused by the confluence of these factors.
2. Was the war of India's making?
Well, the Chinese saw the forward policy as grave provocation. The seeds for it were certainly laid by the Chinese by building a road across Aksai chin linking Tibet with Xin Jian territory in China through dry land which was unpatrolled- but land, nevertheless was claimed by the British as part of their Indian empire. This is one of the issues where Neville Maxwell loses the plot- He justifies the actions by the Chinese solely on the ground that the British (and post colonial Indian) claim on Johnson line was wrong. He forgets that the least India could do as a free nation was to cling on to the land they had inherited. However, the Indians too blundered on several counts- for a very late discovery of Chinese road construction in the borders, for not communicating our concerns immediately, etc etc. On the eastern sector, Gen Umrao Singh, commander of the XXIII Corps gave his objections to the forward policy in writing. He was shunted out. The Army Chief Thapar's own reservations on military feasibility of proposed actions were disregarded. Indians embarked on a disastrous plan to aggressively patrol areas which could at best be described as cartographic grey areas; And that too without establishing proper supply bases. One needed to appreciate the Himalayan territory to understand how difficult is the exercise of delineating a border. Many Officers warned of lack of military preparedness. A new IV Corps was set up with a willing Napolean Bonaparte in the form of B M Kaul at the helm. What followed could at best be described as a war fought more with bluster and less with men, equipment, planning, training and acclimatization.
At one stage during the run up to war the Chinese were willing to accept Mc Mahon line in return for India accepting their gains in Aksai Chin. Somehow the noises in the media and Parliament would not permit Indian Government to even think on those lines. But it is I guess, something which India would like to extract now- Unfortunately times have changed and the Chinese are superciliously laying claim to Arunachal Pradesh now. Also, the China Border is intricately linked to the Pakistan question. Subsequently Bhutto graciously handed over a part of the disputed state of J&K to China on a platter- a fact that many Indian strategic thinkers tend to forget. And we wouldn't be able to turn around and say that we do not accept the annexation of Tibet by Chinese after 64 years.
3. What are good books to read on the subject ?
Neville Maxwell's India's China war (once banned; but freely available now) would be a good starting point. The book is objective but the author's virulently anti- India utterances in subsequent years renders his credentials suspect. There are several juicy bits of shenanigans of Politicos/Bureaucrats/
Army Officers in Maxwell's book. You could try reading War on the High Himalayas by D K Palit, an Army Officer who worked in Directorate General of Military Operations during the critical period, to get a balanced picture. If you want to read a heart breaking story of a soldier on the line of fire, then The Himalayan Blunder by Brig J P Dalvi would be a great starting point. The Officer was held by the Chinese as prisoner of war and the book was also once banned, I understand. The above three books should give you enough insights on the war. Shri K N Raghavan (Another civil servant) has written 'Dividing Lines- Contours of India- China conflict', a concise book recently. If you are hard pressed for time, that would be the ideal start. I modestly claim to have read most of the books on the subject, and own
several of them. If any one has a copy of the untold story by B M Kaul,
autobiography of the Lt General who spearheaded the disastrous war, please send me a scanned copy. The book is out of print. I haven't read Dorothy Woodman's Himalayan Frontiers either. Neville Maxwell's book is probably the most well written. It re-creates the atmosphere well and is a scathing critique of India's role. But unfortunately the old man has become venomous in old age and has become an unabashed apologist for the middle kingdom. I heard him speak in the Australian National University during my stint there in 2009. Here is the link to the recording. http://splashurl.com/pxz37u9. It is extremely provocative. Maxwell had also imperiously claimed that the 1966 elections would be the last and India as the country we know of would be finished. He is today a Sinophile and an apologist for the Chinese.
4. Whom would you blame for the whole fiasco?
Too many actors. In hindsight, one could be more forgiving if one could try to live in the times. At the risk of sounding like a an apologist of Indian politicians, I must say that we had a very articulate leadership which communicated its' concerns and priorities continually, in an age where there was no internet, Facebook or twitter. A far cry from our times when MPs rush to the well and hold Parliament to ransom. The whole run up to the war and the environment prevailing then couldn't have prevented the catastrophe. Also a humanist/democrat was leading India. Nehru was no match for Mao, the warlord who wrested a large country against all odds. While Indians were playing around with words in media and Parliament, the Chinese were quietly preparing for war. The situation isn't very different today. Our leaders like sound bytes. Our media is raucous. The Chinese are waiting and watching. As one General remarked during the war, we ought to have consolidated our gains and spent time preparing instead of launching the forward policy with an ill equipped force. One must understand that the politicians of those days were also deeply suspicious of the Army which was dangerously tilted towards western values- Polished brass, shiny shoes, quaint accent etc. Also in neighbouring Pakistan the Army had already taken over a country. So Indian politicians liked Generals who said what they liked to hear. B M Kaul, a Supply Corps Officer, with no battle experience, flaunted his Kashmiri connections and was willing to spearhead the campaign. The politicians readily fell for it.
5. Henderson Brooks Report ?
I worked in the Ministry of Defence for 5 years. I haven't seen a copy and it would have been improper to access it without reason. I was curious but thought it highly improper since my job didn't require a reading of that. A colleague of mine was issuing letters to prominent journalists and correspondents citing lame reasons for denying access to public under the Right to Information Act. But MoD being an assorted bunch of non specialists in a highly specialized domain, I suspect that the decision to deny publication was taken without much consideration and thought. Maybe we should reconsider. (I am treading on thin ground here as a serving Government Official). I got a copy downloaded from abroad, without the annexure. I shall not name my partner in crime here.
6. Military failure or Political disaster ?
Difficult to put a finger on that. Each fed on the other. I am not truly a military man to comment on the various skirmishes and the planning that went into the forward policy. But military experts are unequivocal that the forward policy was an ill advised move. Nehru articulated our stance on several occasions and opposition was unsparing in calling for accountability from the government. Maxwell acknowledges the help he received from the open society that is India.
One learns lot more from failures in life, than from the heady successes
of the past. We ought to modestly reflect and
ruminate over our debacle in high Himalayas.
