India's 1962 debacle!!!

It is seldom discussed here in India.The reason is obvious. India had lost the war.For ages the governments tried to ditch it in history.But I believe with the invent of Internet the facts have come out.Or atleast people have access to the documents and the related infos.I remember speaking to a Muslim old man ,who was an army man,who was ownning one Phone booth, when I met him,I think it was in 1997,he told me we could have won that war and it was simply because of the ill-planning and the lack of will by the then government,the war was lost.He even told me that he and his accomplices could see the warth of Chinese toawrds the Sikhs ,as the Chinese used to severe the heads of Sikh soldiers and used to walk across nfront of their camps,holding the severed heads.(I do not not know to what extent it is true ,especially seeing the attittude and the approach the Chinese adopted right after the war.They issued ceasefire first and then returned all the P.O.W’s and the arms and ammunitions they captured.Also they treated P.O.W’s in a very good manner and invited an Indian emissary to inspect the Indian ammunitions they seized before promptly returning them). I personally believe the war could have been won and moreover let alone war,but India could have saved it’s face and gone for a long lasting peace treaty with Beijing.

The purpose of this thread is also that I want to pay my tributes to all the soldiers who laid down their lives for this timeless nation India and also express my gratitude to those countries that supported India in it’s testing times and also the U.S pilots who flew and airdropped assistance. :salute:

Re: India's 1962 debacle!!!

You didn't mention ISI there, how un-Indian you are.

Re: India's 1962 debacle!!!

India should not bother competing with China on a military kind of level. They need to remember their losses and this time around they will probably take a whole state.

Re: India’s 1962 debacle!!!

Well from my understanding on this conflict I will give a brief description of the Millitary aspects involved which even years later are still a superb example of strategy and the art of fighting. India and China went to war over the disputed region which the Chinese call South Tibet and the Indians refer to as Arunachal Pradesh.

Briefly India believed the region was part of it’s soveriegn state and that Aksai Chin was also a portion of India. Wheras the Chinese believe it to be part of Jingxiang and the Kashmir. I will not get into the politics of the region nor will I start anything that trolls might construe as a que to jump into another Indo Pak battering game… I find this lunacy most tiresome. :chai:

Now As for the fighting. Arlietter Bhai in terms of defensive strategy there are many lessons to learn and Indian Millitary should pick up on this.

The war began almost out of the blue, China at first never wanted any part in the region or so we get the impression from official statements… maybe the crafty fellows in Beijing were merely hiding thier intentions but it’s clear they never openly made any claims to the territory in the 1950’s. India also began very cordially and intended to have a peacefull and prosperous link with it’s old friend.

However the Indian leader Nehru made his first fatal mistake a total millatry blunder in that when the Chinese invaded Northern Tibet and overan Lhasa he chose to support the 14th Dalai Lama. Maybe Nehru did the right thing I wont judge him for his decision but tactically speaking he should have realised that harbouring an enemies enemy makes you his enemy. He did not keep quite his intentions to hide the Tibetan spiritual leader and niether did he make any significant preparations for a possible Chinese move against him believing perhaps the Chinese would not dare invade India or perhaps that more likely the Chinese had always been very carefull as had the Indians to keep good relations and that in the end nothing would come of it.

The Chinese on the other hand under Zhou Enlai who would later be a very important figure in the Indo Pak war of 1965 was more than willing to take the front to India over what he may have presumed to be a deliberate attempt by India to harbour a potentially dangerous Rebel Leader.

To cut a long story short there were many warning sign that China was up to something… the sudden surge of activity in Chinese held Tibet, the vast construction of roads and checkpoints along the Indian border and the build up of Chinese defences wich in the outbreak of war would act as bridgeheads from which Chinese columns could spearhead an attack deep into Indian territory without any worry of a reverse effect.

The Indians however for some unknown reason did not push any changes on thier side of the border, they simply ignored the Chinese roads which would have been a sure sign of intent. More disastrously while the Chinese were readying thier forces the Indians did not even muster enough men to defend the long front which could be breached at any time along many points. The highest ground was lightly defended but vast trackts of Arunachal Pradesh were practically defenceless and reinforcements were miles away from where they would be needed.

Much of the blame for the Indian complacency lies with one man who Nehru personally apointed for the defence of India, General B.M Kaul. Who not only made very little preparations for the possible coming fight but also was responsible for creating serious hostilities. In what we all know as agressive defence policy where you hit the enemy before they hit you… “attack being the better defence and all that” B.M Kaul triggered several skirmishes by sedning his few troops into disputed territory not only was this suicidal in terms of tempting the Chinese to fight but it also betrayed his numbers and when the Chinese commanders including several Pakistan sympathisers and veterans of the civil war such as General Liu Bocheng realized this they did not hessitate to make thier decisions to invade in fact pressing the Chinese high command and political leaders to declare war and get a move on…

General Kaul of India had practically scuppered any chance of avoiding conflict and the results would be devastating.

Speaking from a fighting perspective the Indian forces lacked support and were actually outnumbered quite considerably. The mainstay of the Indian soldier was still the classic British firearm the 303. Enfield, though the Bren and Sten Machine gun and Sub Machine respectively were both handy weapons for the Indians. The Soviet Uninion supplied both nations with the AK 47 assault rifle which was the universall gun and still is probably the greatest assault rifle ever made :champ:

Unfortunately for India it had to import all it’s Ak47 rifles and native copies were not licensed and often inferior to the originals. The Chinese however not only imported large numbers of this crucial weapon they also had thier own built type 56 which on looks is a copy of the Ak47 but actually it’s a better version in my opinion as the Type 56 was ussualy fitted with a modified milled reciever instead of the original cheap stamped ones that were used on the Ak47. The Chinese and Indian forces made extensive use of armour and limited use of air support but most of the fighting was a brutal infantry onslaught.

The Indian forces actually conducted a supperb defence and much of the credit goes to General Pran Nath Thapar who’s bold tactics of a fighting retreat saved many Indian lives, he was not able to change the incompetent decisions of General Kaul but he did make a brilliant fighting retreat which is the hardest millitary manouver to master and Indian forces could still learn a lot from him.

The Chinese would have done Sun Tzu proud becuase they used all the typical tactics that the philoshoper had laid down over a millenia ago. However we must also remember that they had the advantage of better leadership, equipment and planning.

Politically Nehru was ruined and he never seemed to fully recover from the set back since many Indians to this day blame him for the bunders. To be fair however and speaking from a historical and millitary perspective I lay much of the blame on General Kaul who was the real reason India lost the war and he died a lonely and bitter man in 1972, despite being the first ever recipient of the Param Vishist Sheva Medal. As a fellow soldier I am tempted to overlook his failings becuase it must have been most stressfull for a man who rose so quickly and maybe the pressure must have got to him but despite that, the fact remains India lost due to his incompetance if he had only prepared better defences the outcome might have been more bloody but at least India would not have lost as badly as it did.

Arlietter bhai this is a most interesting episode of recent Indian history and it’s failings can be compared to those of Pakistan in 1971.

Both nations have made many errors and I pray that Allah helps both nations find a lasting peace and not just Paksitan, India and the imediate neighbours but the whole world should be at peace one day… for tis the soldiers dream. Ameen. :slight_smile:

Re: India's 1962 debacle!!!

Please lets not make this another Pak-India bashing thread... there are plenty of other threads to that purpose.

Re: India’s 1962 debacle!!!

very interesting post…thanks for sharing…

Re: India's 1962 debacle!!!

No problem I also need to correct one point after checking severl weapons and I need to clarify one important mistake I made.

When i mentiond the Chinese rifle copies of the AK47 they used to versions actually the Type 56 and type 58 as well as other non standard models.

Original type 56 rifles were almost exactly like the AK47 except they were at first made from stamped parts and the original Walnut Stock was replaced using native and more available woods that were slightly inferior but which were later replaced anyway when the Chinese got thier hands on Soviet and modifeid home made AKMs which are Basically the same reciever as the AK47 but with a metal stock rather than wooden one.

Also the Chinese refined the Type 56 Rifle in 1958 to make the heavy duty type 58. The Type 58 looks the same as it's previous cousin the type 56 except the crucial difference is that instead of a stamped reciever this model was the first to have a specially milled reciever and the weapon was a lot more accurate as a result.

Over the last Weekend I actually got my hands on some of the small arms used in the 1962 conflict. At the time the ageing Lee Enfield 303 rifle was in it's Mark 4 stage with a shorter heavy duty weapon the SMLE. It was not quite a carbine but it was considerably shorter than the traditional 303 hunting rifle and the ones exported to India could take a range of ammunition from original .303 cartidge to the .300 cartidge of the US standard rifles as well since the bullets would shrink as they passed through the gun anyway... however this reduced accuracy so the best round to have used was .303 British Standard rifle cartridge. Co incidentally the Indians also used the smae cartridge for the Bren Gun which was the classic World War 2 Light machine gun for British forces. Both the Enfield and Bren were by 1962 out of date but both nations used the Bren and Indian troops still carried the Enfield SMLE during which explains why thier positions which at first were lightly gaurded by garrison troops armed with the older weapons were so effectively overrun by the Chinese in the early phases of 1962 War.

The Soviet made Kalashnokov rifles were the decisive weapon of this conflict but China had the edge not only becuase it was producing more of the native built versions of this rifle... but becuase of timing as well. In 1950s and 60s Korean and Vietnam wars meant that China and other communist countries were massively helped by the Soviet Union. India was not only out bid in the market for the AK47 and it's variants but it's slow moving home industry let the side down.

That said it taught India to build up a better small arms Industry and I can say that since 1962 India now produces not only large quantities of Soviet licenced AK class weaponry but it has several native small arms that are well known internationally and I love the simplicity of some of the INSAS rifles which are good weapons despite the fact they are Indian. :)

As an example of Tzun Su stratgey employed in the 20th Century the 1962 War is very interesting from a Military analysts view.

If you look at it from a Socialogists eyes I guess it goes to show the resilience of Indians as well and how they struggled back to still come out strong and the lessons of this brief conflict are many. :)