The 1962 border war with China was a disastrous event for India, revealing Nehru's misjudgment of geopolitics and the urgent need for a modern army.The 1962 border war with People's Republic of China, I mean with the Red Army of China was definitely a disastrous war for India. That was a total route of Indian Army in NEFA.I mean Northeastern Frontier Agency and in the Ladakh region, though in Ladakh region our soldiers had shown some bravery and managed to halt Chinese advantages. I mean Chinese advances and in NEFA the Indian soldiers displayed its raw courage. The Indian soldiers were fighting with 0.303 rifle with 50 rounds of bullet and that was tragic. I think 3000 soldiers had perished in that war and it was a huge waking up call for our politicians.So before 1962 war the Indian leaders, mainly the Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, who was the undisputed leader of India was living in the world of dreamers. Pandit Nehru dreamed that a non-aligned India would never be attacked by China since the India and China were I mean they were neighbors and they had thousands year old friendship and never in the history of India China attacked India.But that was his biggest mistake.He was incapable of understanding what is called geopolitics. The geopolitics was rapidly changing. He was living in the world of dreamers.He dreamed that India and China would progress together and they would force an everlasting friendship.But in geopolitics such thing never happens because Nehru did not know that the nations had only interest. In geopolitics nations have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies, only interest.So surprisingly a great leader like him failed to understand it.That's why he never allowed the Indian army to be a modern army. At that time in 1962 though Indian army's strength was was nearly four lakhs troops, but they were of World War II vintage. All the basic infantry weapons were of World War II vintage and those weapons were basically had no capability to fight the modern equipments of Chinese Red Army. Where is the Chinese Red Army was rapidly modernizing with help of USSR and Nehru failed to recognize it. And the border dispute between India and China was at that time was heading towards a catastrophic result, especially when nearly 1 lakh square kilometer of our territory were shown as Chinese territory, especially the entire Aksai Chin region was shown as Chinese territory and more than it the NEFA I mean today's Arunachal Pradesh and parts of Assam were shown as Chinese territory. When the Chinese premier Joe and Lai visited India in 1960, the Pandit Nehru though objected, but Chinese leader very clearly managed to get rid of it. But Joe and Lai had a pragmatic solution that India was asked, India was requested to recognize Chinese claim in the Aksai Chin region, an area of approximately 37 square I mean 37,000 square kilometers and in lieu of it China would recognize India's claim on NEFA an area of nearly 83,000 square kilometer that is equal to the Austria. That was a very practical solution because in 50s the Chinese were already constructing a road to connect Tibet province with Turkistan, East Turkistan and without informing China I mean India was sending its patrolling parties which was known as aggressive patrol. So that was Nehru's order to assert India's claim though Indian soldiers were poorly trained and ill equipped.So better result would have been had Indian leaders or his step talked to the Chinese directly.The Chinese premier Joe and Lai offered a very pragmatic solution that Arunachal I mean NEFA would be a part of India and in lieu of it India had to recognize Chinese sovereignty on Aksai Chin because strategically Aksai Chin was not important for India because it was a cold desert region. So India should have conceded it to China.And also to prevent any border skirmishes the Joe and Lai offered that the regular armies of both the countries would go back 20 kilometers from their claim line.So that was a very good solution, but Nehru recognized it as a Chinese ploy to put maximum pressure on him. So when when 1962 border war happened, so Nehru was still living in illusion that China would not advance so rapidly. The moment Chinese forces reached Bomdila and Walong fell, so that uh two incidents were a big shock for Pandit Nehru.Though he was one of the main founding father of non-aligned movement, the same Nehru immediately wrote a letter to then America president John F Kennedy and sought urgent American help.So that was his biggest failure.So both India and USA were democracies.So on that ground I think Nehru wrote a letter. So after that disastrous war when India's nose was bled bleded by Chinese, so Nehru became a broken man.He was mercilessly criticized in India and his station as a world leader was second.So on 27th May 1964 Nehru died of a massive cardiac arrest. But after that war so Nehru realized the importance of a modern army and Indian army was rapidly modernizing.So in 1964 troops strength of India reached nearly 9 lakhs with modern equipment were arriving from western countries, MIG 21s were brought. The basic infantry weapons of soldiers uh were changed. I mean instead of 0.303 rifle a Belgium origin British uh design self-loading rifle uh of heavy caliber rifle, these were made the Indian army's infantry weapons.And they you know several mountain divisions were created. Several divisions well trained to fight the in the desert regions were also created. The top military officers of second world war era, I mean those were the best military officer of Indian Empire in WW2, they were again brought back, especially the generals like Sam Manekshaw, JN Choudhary, Sagat Singh, all were all were again recalled because during Nehru's time they were sidelined.One very inefficient general was appointed as Indian Supreme Commander and that was a terrible decision.And the result of modernization of Indian army was seen in 1965 war when India thought the Pakistani aggression, operation Gibraltar, operation Grand Slam failed to Delhi.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Judicial Conundrum in India

Recently one fire incident in the official resident of Justice Yashwanta Varma led to recovery of crores of burnt notes not only  shocking but also shook people's confidence in higher Judiciary as an infallible institution .One store room of justice Yashwanta Sinha was caught fire while he was not in his resident,and fire brigade came to extinguish fire and crores of burnt notes were recovered.Justice Varma was not in Delhi for any kind of comments at that time.Once he was a contacted ,he immediately denied his involvement in that incident rather he alleged that it was a conspiracy to tarnish his image.The Chief Justice Of India constituted a high powered committe ,consisting of two Chief Justices of High Courts and one sitting judge of a High Court.to enquire the alleged recovery of money.The Supreme Court Collegium recommended his immediate  transfer to Allahabad High Court ,which triggered a hugh protest initiated by Allahabad Bar Association against that transfer,that Alla...
Read more

Hungarian revolution of 1956Is Revolution was also known as the Hungarian uprising, an attempted Rebellion against the communist government , that came into existence after the World War II. Hungry was an axis ally of Nazi Germany. The USSR occupied Hungary and April 28 government was established. Hungary became a satellite state of USSR. Soviet government was actually a totalitarian government. Hungarian people are descendants of Slavic and Huns. In disrespect remember the cruel rule Attila the Hun. The Hungerian revolution of lasted for l 15 days, until it was crushed by Soviet tanks. Several thousands hungarians lost their lives m several hundred Russians also lost their lives.On 23rd of October 1956, some University students appealed to the civilian population to protest against Russian authoritarian rule the domination of USSR in its geopolitical interest. At that time, Hungary was ruled by a Stalinist government. The students demanded reform on 16 points, but all the students were detained by security guards. The Hungarian people rose against the Communist Party and the secret police of Hungary. And the local communists and secret policemen were executed. A new government was formed under Imrey Negi, who was the liberal man. Under his leadership hungry had withdrawn from Warshaw pact. The new government agreed to hold new election, hungry was heading towards democracy.Initially the USSR agreed negotiate with the new government and accordingly delete Army withdrew. Russians apprehended Hungary embrace the Western block live by USA would be a big threat two dog communist block. So the Russians betrayed the hungarians and hungry was invaded by several Russian divisions. The Hungarian Army was no match before the might of Russian army and after Fierce resistance the hungarians were defeated. The free hungarians were expecting Western help but that did not come. Finally the new government was rendered useless the leaders were arrested and executive latter. The communist government again was installed in Hungary and hungry again became is satellite state of USSR . The Communist rule finally collapse in 1989 after destruction of Berlin Wall. Now Hungary is a Democratic state.

Read more

[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: A K Gopalan v The State(1950,S.C.R.88) was a momentous case in the Constitutional history of India.Any discussion/ lecture on the Constitutional law is incomplete without first examining this case, whether critically or analytically.This case was decided at a time When the Country got independence from British rule and The Constitution of India had come into force,and more than it , for the first timea chapter on Fundamental Rights had been incorporated in the Constitution .The Supreme Court got a golden opportunity to interpret the Article 19,21 and 22 expansively against Executive or legislative power of the state.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: Brief Fact of the case-A K Gopalan,a radical leftist of the Madras Province was detained under the Preventive Detention Act ,1950,and in fact he was detained for several times under the Act.Under Entry 9 of Union list ,the Parliament has the power to enact law on Preventive Detention.Though Preventive Detention is an anathema in modern time,it was justified as a necessary evil to protect the unity and integrity of the state.Even in Britain and America it was used only during the war time ,that too against suspected enemy aliens[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: A K Gopalan filed a habeas Corpus writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution and challenged the detention ordering a wide ground that the Detention Act ,under which he was detained was void for violating Articles 19 and 21 and also on a narrow ground that it did comply with the requirements of Article 22.Article 22 prescribes certain procedural safeguards against it.Learned Counsel M K Nambiyar on behalf of Gopalan contended that the Detention Act 1959 violated Article 21 and was void on following grounds1.Personal liberty included the freedoms conferred by Article 19(1)(a) to (e) and (g) and the impunged act ( detention act) did not satisfy the test of Article 19(2) to (6).2.The Preventive Detention Act directly violated Gopalans right to move freely , because the freedom of movement is of essence of personal liberty.3.Article 19 (1) and 21 should be read together because Article 19 dealt with substantive rights and Article 21 dealt with procedural rights.4.The reference in Article 21 to Procedure established by law meant due process of law and the Act did not satisfy the requirements of due process of law.5.The word law in Article 21 meant not the state made law but jus naturale ,of the principles of natural justice.The law did not comply with the requirements of Natural justice[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: It will be seen that from 1 to 5 that the proposition that Article 21 applied to the Preventive Detention ,was the foundation of all the reasons,and learned Attorney General M C Seetlevad countered by contending that Article 22 was a complete code and Article 21 didnot apply to Preventive Detention law.All the questions raised some points of immense Constitutional importance and a Six Judge Bench comprising CJI H L J Kania ,Justices P .Shastri ,M C Mahajan,B K Mukherjee ,SS Das and Fazl Ali S was constituted to hear the matters .All the six judges delivered separate judgments after a lengthy hearings .Five learned judges( Fazl Ali dissenting) held that Article 19 did not apply to Preventive Detention thought the freedoms as a result of detention freedoms may be curtailed.Fazl Ali dissented and held that Preventive Detention was a direct infringement of Article 19 and was subject to Judicial review even it was narrowly construed The majority judges did not hold that Article 22 was a complete code ,so they disagreed with learned Attorney General contention and only M C Mahajan alone held Article 22 was a complete code on Preventive Detention.Fazl Ali dissented by holding that " No calamitous or untoward result would follow even if the Provisions of Penal code became justiciable".CJI Kania, and Justices Shastri, Mukherjee and SS Das held the concept of right to move freely throughout the territory of India was entirely different from the Concept of the right to personal liberty.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: Except Justice M C Mahajan who held that Article 22 was a complete code, majority held that Articles 19 (1) and Article 21 did not operate in the same field, because Article 18 conferred rights only one citizens, article 21 conferred rights on all persons. Again if article 21 conferred only procedural rights then the most precious right the Right to life was nowhere found in our Constitution. Therefore the majority held that Article 21 also conferred substanrive rights also. It may be observed that far from holding that fundamental rights were mutually exclusive, Mukherjee held that a substantive law authorizing the deprivation of life must conform to the requirements of Article 20.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: CJI Kania, Justices Mukherjee and SR Das held that law in Article 21 had been used in the sense of State made law and not in the embodying the Principle of Natural Justice, and Procedure established by law meant a law made by Union Parliament or by State legislatures. Justice Shastri held that the law meant Positive or state made law and did not mean jus naturale, but the procedure meant well established criminal procedure. Justice Fazl Ali dissented by holding that whatever Procedure established by law may mean, and must include 1 . Notice 2.opportunity to be heard 3.impartial tribunal 4.orderly procedure. So according to fazl Ali a positive law must include jus naturale.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: The majority judges held that the Procedure established by law didnot mean due process of law as understood in United States of America. The report of Drafting Committe showed that the words Procedure established by law were substituted for the words without due process of law. Our founding fathers were well aware of its abuse by American judges during the New Deal period.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: So in this case, different views were expressed by different judges, so no common points emerged on the correlation of articles 19 to 20,21 and 22 or the meaning of the expression personal liberty.[10/10/2024, 8:51 PM] Sisir Kumar Gogoi: But Justice Fazl Ali dissenting points are regarded as one of the greatest dissents of all time. Justice R Nariman paid a rich tribute to Fazl Ali foresight by saying "simply takes our breath away".

Read more