Nehru taken for ride by Chinese

[Gambit]

Nehru taken for a ride by Chinese: CIA Sridhar Krishnaswami in Washington June 29, 2007 16:59 IST In what could be seen as a possible obstacle to the growing ties between India and China, a recently de-classified paper of the Central Intelligence Agency has said that late prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru was consistently taken for a ride by the Chinese in the months and years prior to the 1962 war. The top secret documents of March 1963 were approved for release only in May 2007. The declassification of documents pertaining to several aspects of domestic and international politics has been seen by the current CIA brass as a part of a new transparency as also providing a glimpse into the thinking and workings of the nodal intelligence outfit. One set of documents called the Cesar-Polo-Esau Papers deal with Communist countries notably China and the erstwhile Soviet Union and three sections of which are devoted to an analysis of the Sino-Indian relations leading up to the 1962 debacle. One of the major points of contention of the CIA is that the Chinese premier Zhou en Lai (at the time going by the spelling of Chou en Lai) consistently impressed upon Nehru that Peking (Beijing [Images]) had no territorial ambitions and that the maps that the Chinese were suing to portray vast tracts of Indian territory as theirs were 'old' maps from the Kuomintang era that had no time to be revised. 'The Sino-Indian dispute, as we see it, did not arise as a function of the Sino-Soviet dispute,' the CIA said in its analysis in 1963. According to the CIA analysis the developments between 1950 and late 1959 were marked by Chinese military superiority which, combined with cunning diplomatic deceit, contributed for nine years to New Delhi's reluctance to change its policy from friendship to open hostility toward the Peiping (Beijing) regime. 'It emerges that above all others Nehru himself -- with his view that the Chinese Communist leaders were amenable to gentlemanly persuasion -- refused to change this policy until long after Peiping's basic hostility re-think his China policy, Nehru continued to see a border war futile and reckless course for India,' the CIA analysis said. 'His (Nehru) answer to Peiping was to call for a strengthening of the Indian economy to provide a national power base of effectively resisting an eventual Chinese military attack. In the context of the immediate situation on the border, where Chinese troops had oocupied the Aksai Plain in Ladakh, this was not an answer at all but rather an implicit affirmation that India did not have the military capability to dislodge the Chinese,' the CIA maintained. 'Chou En-lai, in talks with Nehru in 1954 and 1956, treated the Chinese old maps as representing Peiping's claim but, on the contrary, as old maps handed down from the previous mainland regime which had 'not yet' been corrected,' the analysis has said. 'This provided the Chinese premier with a means for concealing Peiping's long-range intention of surfacing Chinese claims at some time in the future (when there would be no longer any necessity to be deceptive about them) while avoiding a dispute with the Indian Prime Minister at the present,' the CIA reasoned. 'As Peiping and New Delhi were generally cordial to each other in these early years, the Chinese had not wanted to change their policy toward Nehru and thereby lose the benefit of an important champion of Peiping's cause in international affairs,' the CIA said. 'They had not wanted to alert the Indian leaders to their move on the road until such time as the Indians could do nothing about it. They apparently believed that like China's other borders, the Sino-Indian border need not be delimited and that the matter could remain in limbo,' the agency surmised. The Central Intelligence Agency also believed that there was a domestic political angle for the fashion in which China acted with Nehru -- a perception that somehow the then Indian prime minister was more positively reconciliatory to the Chinese regime than the opposition in India. 'His (Nehru) prestige is so great in India that the masses in crisis situations merely follow his lead,' the CIA said as being in the minds of Chinese leaders at then time. 'A great political leader with Nehru's enormous prestige could prevent vigorous anti-China outbursts if he so desired. And he if he cannot prevent sharp outbursts he could certainly control them when once they took place,' the agency has said on Beijing's thinking at the time.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/jun/29cia.htm

[Guest dada_rocks]

HE left his imprint on whatver he touched particualrlry related to border issues, be it kashmir or china-border issue.. BTW it's not only Pakistan that bans books ( latest in the long list is Military Inc by Aayesha Siddiqui) which might be unsympathetic to the erstwhile establishment's position. After china war fiasco of 1962 an indian war prisoner wrote a book castigating Nehru's policies and over-all cavalier treatment of war but his book got banned. Read more about that book called "Himalayan B****er". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himalayan_B****er

[gator]

Nehru taken for a ride by Chinese: CIA

and India was taken for a ride by Nehru: Gator

[Guest dada_rocks]

I would say gandhi after-aall he was the one who supplanted this person ahead of others.. Mind You when voting was done for PM's post he got just one vote yes u guessed it pother than he voting for himself noone thought this guy worthy enough.. So tradition of cult figure deciding who will become PM is old Sonia hasn't invented anything new

[theguyinallblue]

sardar patel would have been a great PM for independent india... but luck had other plans...Nehru's noble peace prize dream...was the reason for his downfall..and of india's as well... we can only dream now..about having politicians like sardar patel..or Netaji

[Lurker]

I wonder if I in the past 15-20 years I have seen authors/journalist/agencies write a single good thing about Pt. Nehru? The only person that I have seen talk Nehru is a very positive mode has been Shashi Tharoor, the UN diplomat. Not very surprising considering Nehru was in essence a good man, sure a Politician with ills, as any other Politician but at the heart he was a good man. It is ridiculous to even suggest Nehru did his peaceniks to get Nobel prize. I mean Hello this was the man instrumental for creation of Non Aligned Movement! The NAM movement was a means for nations to refuse to kowtow to any Power Block and Indians who are quick to harp about their "self-independence" should do well to realize that NAM gave them that identity. When powerful countries, then and now, were falling head over heels for US/USSR, India could well stand on its feet and refuse to join the bandwagon. Now do help me understand how such an assertion would help Nehru get Nobel prize which at the time was heavily Western World(read NATO) influenced. The difference between Nehru and any other Indian PM till date is the man had a vision. Sure he made some mistakes, specially in trusting Chinese, but at the end if India is held together and thrives with any success a good part of that is owed to Nehru. He was the one PM every Indian supported from all his heart and still he was the one man who never misused it. Heck he did not even push his daughter into mainstream politics until after the fact so stop using every single incident to throw dirt on him. Lastly, this CIA revealation has been largely bells and whistles. There are hiding some real "true" revealations. Even then the truth about Castro assassination and the likes have come out. No less a person than Allen Dules, CIA headhoncho, sponsored Fidel Castro assassination attempt and a few of the other head of the nations. It makes me wonder why other countries have not yet drag the USA to court. I mean how does a country plan to kill the Head of other country and talk f***g proudly about it? xx

[CC1981]

Bondhu, the latest craze of the saffron brigade is to potray Nehru and Gandhi in as negetive light as possible and potray retards like VD Savarkar and MS Golwalkar. Basically, nehru & Gandhi were centrist politicians while saffron brigade is right-wing. They cannot pull their hogwash and twisted 'hinduism' message under the infernal banner of RSS or VHP without first attacking the character of Gandhi & Nehru. As with most desi-isms, Gandhi i find is far more respected worldwide than in India, thanks to the spread of fascist hinduvta in indian society. RSS and VHP are basically hindu version of Wahhabists, Salafists, etc. Exactly same type of re-writing history and re-interpreting history for their ideological superiorist ways. Had these morons here any idea of India-US animosity in the 1940s-1990s, they'd have seen the bias of CIA when it comes to Indian commentary. This was first noted by Francois Mitterand and he publicly said so. I can also bet you that the SKC-america bootlickers here arnt aware that America is the nation that has come CLOSEST to nuking us in the past- not Pakistan. Ironically its the same retards who moan about SKC while being the biggest SKCs around.

[Guest dada_rocks]

And u buy the argument that we were not in USSR camp, eye-wash of NAM aside we were firmly in that camp. Every leader has a vision yes even laloo has one. You don't judge a leader based on what Vision he/she had u judge them based on what they achieved. Hindu rate of growth is well and truely nehru's creation. Yes many give him Brownie points for IIT etcs creation. Of course if someone rules uniterrupted for 15 years he/she will change sthg, that's nothing extra-ordinary. If one really wants to gauge how he did then compare India's performance with the countries which started the jounrney in same time-frame and where they stand today. You will see we scrwed up big time. He was a good man romatic but lousy statesman and leader. Each and every member of CWC knew this hence didn;t bother to cast vote in his favour but fellow remonatic Gandhiji used his veto.

[CC1981]

If one really wants to gauge how he did then compare India's performance with the countries which started the jounrney in same time-frame and where they stand today. You will see we scrwed up big time.

Name a nation then ! And i hope you arnt dumb enough to go 'South Korea!'- a nation with nowhere close the security issues of India ( they literally got US protecting their a$$!), the population, diversity or size.

He was a good man romatic but lousy statesman and leader.

he may've been a lousy politician but he was a better statesman than ANY of his era, save Gandhi, Bose and Vallabhai Patel.

Each and every member of CWC knew this hence didn;t bother to cast vote in his favour but fellow remonatic Gandhiji used his veto.

One of the best things Gandhi ever did was overrule SC Bose's election.

[Guest dada_rocks]

Why not if Nunawat can be an example in Indian context I guess south korea qualifies as being next door neighbour. And yes read history before jumping gun on everything what is being talked about here is selection of PM god knows where from SC Bose came into picture there. Statesman: That's why he screwed up every thing he touched in foreign affairs..Panchsheel gave 1962 war Kashmir gave problem which still is keeping India bogged by comparison whatever Patel touched he finsihed the job. If he was a statesman and leader then well CWC members who worked closely with him ( unlike you :haha:) didn't see it otherwise at least one of them would have bothered to vote for him. So I will put ur assertion in the usual cluelessness bracket.

[CC1981]

Why not if Nunawat can be an example in Indian context I guess south korea qualifies as being next door neighbour.

Nunavut was in proper context ( democratic process granting more rights & autonomy to a sub-national unit). Your South Korea is not in proper context because scale is an issue here. It isnt in my example of democratic voting. Go join the America-SKC syndrome of your fellow 'wolf-in-sheep's clothes' morons. Its not unnoticed that fundie hinduvta fascists like you and various historically named characters here are total fans of the monstrous Yankee regimes. Ironically, you lot know the least about America...nothing more than SKC and worshipping the greenback and then pretending to be a desh-bhakt.

[Lurker]

Lurks they will do whatever it takes to protect their interests .... and quite rightly so ... We (Indians) like the tails between the legs type of leaders who come off Gentlemanly and all that meaningless craap (Our current PM is the best Example) .... Not Americans .... they have been blessed with a nonstop production line of Go Getters .... people who wake up every day scratch their balls and do whatever it takes to protect American interests .... if it means gunning down a retarded commie then so be it. And they dont give a tiny ants rump as to what others might think (log kya soochenge) . Thats the difference between us and them.

That is a very slippery slope BB. As history is the witness, CIA adventures have been coming home to bite US in their nuts. Prime example of course being Osama and Pakistan. Yeah sure so long as things work its all good but when it doesnt then what do you do? In the case of Fidel Casto assassination CIA was clearly wrong. In the end they lost face due to numerous assassination attempt and USSR put its Missile brigade right next to USA. Not to mention the conspiracy theory that Fidel Castro was one of the prime persons that got JFK killed. xxx

[Guest dada_rocks]

Other than name calling I don't think u have got anything in ur post. Talking of alibi of scale.. Do u want me to put population of Nunawat and India or even kashmir, that will put things in perspective ( I guess democracy has sthg to do with population).:haha: Will see where u hide then next.

[Guest dada_rocks]

That is a very slippery slope BB. As history is the witness, CIA adventures have been coming home to bite US in their nuts. Prime example of course being Osama and Pakistan. Yeah sure so long as things work its all good but when it doesnt then what do you do? In the case of Fidel Casto assassination CIA was clearly wrong. In the end they lost face due to numerous assassination attempt and USSR put its Missile brigade right next to USA. Not to mention the conspiracy theory that Fidel Castro was one of the prime persons that got JFK killed. xxx

You be content in the belief that u took ur best shot .

[Lurker]

And u buy the argument that we were not in USSR camp, eye-wash of NAM aside we were firmly in that camp.

Okay. Prove it that under Nehru India was a NAM country but under USSR influence. Dont give me later PM's era. This is about Nehru so show me where you are coming from.

Every leader has a vision yes even laloo has one. You don't judge a leader based on what Vision he/she had u judge them based on what they achieved.

And what did Nehru not achieve? He was the PM till early 60's. The most important 15 years of India. This was the first time there was India, and if today India remains it is because Nehru engrained Democracy in Indians. He could have been Dictator, right at our borders Pakistan and China, we had leaders like them but one thing he never did was exactly that.

Hindu rate of growth is well and truely nehru's creation. Yes many give him Brownie points for IIT etcs creation. Of course if someone rules uniterrupted for 15 years he/she will change sthg, that's nothing extra-ordinary. If one really wants to gauge how he did then compare India's performance with the countries which started the jounrney in same time-frame and where they stand today. You will see we scrwed up big time.

One rules interrupted for 15 years or so means he will change something? Okay show me any other leader(Indira Gandhi included) who has done half of what Nehru did to Indian education. You are free to take example of Jyoti Basu, Laloo Yadav etc etc. Go ahead prove me wrong. By the way the IITs you talked about are still Nehru's vision. How many have we opened since Nehru passed away? Like 2-3 more? xxxx

[Lurker]

edited...read all wrong.

[CC1981]

Other than name calling I don't think u have got anything in ur post. Talking of alibi of scale.. Do u want me to put population of Nunawat and India or even kashmir, that will put things in perspective ( I guess democracy has sthg to do with population).:haha: Will see where u hide then next.

As i said- my example was in context- your's isnt. My example dealt with the ideology that if a group of people want autonomy/independence, it should be put on vote (referrendum) in true democratic fashion. This has NOTHING whatsoever to do with scale- this is valid for a country of 1 billion to 1000. Your example of progress of countries IS very much a function of scale. So nice try, chump. But as usual, your effort to obfuscate the issue has been outed by me.

[CC1981]

What US went through WWII ? Pfffffft. US had the EASIEST of times in WWII...they didnt do 1/1000th of what USSR did and they didnt face anything remotely to the scale of destruction and re-construction that Asia, Europe & Africa did. As per Breznew going gung-ho at America- America STARTED it by going gung-ho and putting nukes 10 miles from the Soviet border in Turkey FIRST! Typical smokecreen by our fellow US SKCs here. Indian stragegy with commies are FAR more sensible and no different than Canada or UK's strategy with commies- they dont just outlaw it coz their rich capitalist decadents dont like it- they let the party exist and get it whatever votes it can earn- and if it comes to power, so be it- in true democratic fashion. Its sad to hear 'oh what we've been thru' from the Yankees...depression + WWII...pfffft. They didnt have it 1/1000th as bad as Europe did. Fact. Yankees and their SKCs should get one fact right - Nazi Germany was beaten by USSR. Not by UK or US. US's only contribution to WWII in any meaningful way is to defeat the MUCH weaker (compared to Germany) Japanese military. WWII in Europe is a complete Soviet victory. Easten front was 4 times larger than the western front in manpower and about six times larger in terms of mechanized warmachines in use. The biggest & bloodiest battles of WWII (and in ALL human history) is between the Russians and Germans. The genesis of cold war is in Churchill's actions- by delaying the opening of the western front (post Dunkirk) when Russia was PLEADING that all it needed to save Moscow was the British & Americans sending a 20,000 men landing party in Normandy to distract the Nazis, Churchill contributed to the rise of cold war distrust the most. Churchill's simple MO was 'let Nazis and commies fight- whoever remains will be severely weakened and we can take them over later'. Good thing it didnt work out that way or second colonial era would've started right after WWII.

[Lurker]

that is peanuts compared to what they went thru during depression+WW-II and the cold war era ..... anybody with lesser balls would have bent over backwards on a red carpet (hmmmm red) when the commies lead by Breznev were going gung ho at Amreeka ....nukes and all. Compare that to Indias strategy against the commies within their own territory and you see the difference.

That is not even half-right BB. America has started to become a World Power by late 19th century. Russia on the other hand was coming through a Russian Revolution in that and early 20th century. To add to this after WWs USA was undisputed when it came to Industrial might while Russia was seriously pulverised thanks to German onsluaght. Indeed if a country has lost most in a war it is USSA in WWII. And similarly if a country has lost least in a major war it is USA in WWII. So I am definitely not going to agree that CIA was facing this hammer and tong situation that you describe. That is plain paranoia and media speculation.

The thing with Foreign policy is that it takes looooooong time to bear fruit ... even tin pot harami nations that surround our country know that.

Fair enough. Also I dont neccessarily disagree with your point of every country looking after his/her interest. However where I am stopping short is to go about killing Head of States in the name of National Interest. That is plain criminal. A question to you now. It was often rumoured that CIA was out to kill a Indian PM because of India's pro-Russian stance. Would you still say the same thing - they looked after their interest - had such an action actually happened? xxx

[CC1981]

That is plain paranoia and media speculation.

Plain capitalist propaganda too...just like how they will NEVER publicize the FACT that Cuban missile crisis was started by the US- not by USSR- USSR putting nukes in Cuba 200 miles from US territorry happened more than a YEAR after US put nukes in Turkey 50 miles from USSR territorry. Greatest weapon of US is its propaganda...and our SKC greenback lovers fall hook, line & sinker for it.