Tag: India

Posted on

Book Review: 1962 Border Wars (Full Review)

BOOK REVIEW

1962 BORDER WAR SINO-INDIAN TERRITORIAL DISPUTES AND BEYOND

– By Ismail Vergasseri

 

Review by: Air Marshal Anil Khosla (Retd) PVSM, AVSM, VM

 

China has always been an enigma and is considered to be mysterious riddle to be solved. Her aggressive and belligerent approach and attitude towards the world at large and India in particular during the time of the pandemic has left everyone wondering about her psyche. Scholars have attributed several reasons to it, which include opportunism, power intoxication, diversion of attention and desperation seeing the dream of rejuvenation slipping away.

 

Sixty years ago, on October 20, 1962 China attacked India, apparently provoked by a territorial dispute and tensions over Tibet. The war was brief however, it affected the psyche of both countries and still casts a long shadow over Sino-Indian relations. The historical imprint of the war still affects the attitude and decision making process of the two countries. Like all wars, the 1962 war between China and India had multiple causes. These factors need to be examined dispassionately to learn lessons for the future.

 

The relationship between the two countries was cordial till about 1950 in spite of existing disputed boundaries. Numerous factors led to souring of relations between the two Asian giants finally leading to the armed conflict in 1962. Recent India-China stand-off has generated a renewed interest and debate about the Sino-India relations. The publication of the book on “1962 Border war Sino-Indian territorial disputes and beyond” by Ismail Vergasseri is timely and useful in correlating the present situation with the past as it reveals the historical factors which shaped the Sino-Indian relations and reason for frequent skirmishes along the border. It is a useful book as it revisits the important topic and helps in understanding how such a brief and limited conflict, has had such immense and long lasting political and other consequences. India still sees China as a nationalist, aggressive power which seeks to dominate Asia and one that might once again strike unexpectedly, just as it did in 1962.

 

This 284 page book is a work of contemporary history dealing with the 1962 Sino-Indian war. It brings out historical time lines of relations between the two nations and the factors responsible for souring of relations leading up to the war. The book is divided into nine chapters critically analysing each factor. The work is interdisciplinary in nature and has good references for further research. The author has carried out an analytical study dealing with the subject comprehensively, bringing out the complexities in a lucid manner with absolute clarity. In the end he has summarised it very well listing out the conclusions and making valuable recommendations.

 

In the initial part, the book looks at the available literature on the subject and explains the topography of the area. The author has analysed all the available literature and records in detail. Primary source of the study includes the Henderson Brooks-Bhaga-Report, the official history of conflict with China brought out by GOI, CIA report on Sino-India border dispute, MEA documents on treaties and agreements and digital documents included in historical archives of USA.

 

The topographic review brings out that there is no clearly delineated and marked boundary or accepted line of actual control between the two countries. This causes tension and friction quite often. Sino-Indian border runs along the high altitude of Himalayas and major portion of it is un-demarcated, hardly habitable and inaccessible with steep creeks and deep valleys. It is divided into three sectors: western, central and eastern. Western Sector includes the border between Jammu and Kashmir and Xinjiang and Tibet. India claims that China is illegally occupying large area of land in this sector, including area ceded to it by Pakistan. Central Sector includes borders shared by Himachal Pradesh and Uttrakhand with Tibet. In eastern Sector China disputes India’s sovereignty over entire Arunachal Pradesh.

 

The book covers in great detail the origin and development of border disputes, highlighting that the seeds of dispute were sown due to colonial game played by the British. The origin of the two major disputed areas Aksai Chin and Mc Mahon Line has been deliberated comprehensively, labelling it appropriately as cartographic mischief. It brings out that the British India’s frontier policies had failed to produce a single integrated and well-defined northern boundary separating the Indian subcontinent from Xinjiang and Tibet.

 

It has been rightly observed in the book that the two countries started drifting apart due to the Tibet issue. Long before the war Tibet began to plague Beijing and Delhi’s relationship as China accused India of trying to undermine its rule in Tibet while India charged China with suppressing Tibetan autonomy. Tibetan Uprising in 1954 and the Dalai Lama seeking refuge in India changed the situation for the worse. China’s perception of India as a threat to its rule of Tibet became one of the most prominent reasons for the Sino-Indian War. The Tibet factor combined with few other issues pushed the two nations towards war. However, the war of 1962 sealed the fate of the Tibet issue and it became an eternal source of tension in Sino-Indian relations. The main reason attributed to the cause of the war was dispute over the sovereignty of the widely separated Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh border regions. India claimed at Aksai Chin belonged to Ladakh whereas, China claimed it to be part of Xinjiang.

 

The book also brings out the ulterior forces that acted as a catalyst in spoiling the relations. Role of disruptive elements within polity, internal bureaucratic hurdles, political intrigues and partisan interest has been deliberated. Clandestine work of external forces including impact of Cold War politics, CIA operations on the frontiers and the US strategy of projecting the Tibet factor on these two nations has been revealed. Even the role of Indian press, political opposition and the parliamentary debates has been flagged. Several attempts to resolve the issues are listed chronologically in the book. Indian response was generally accommodating and conciliatory in the spirit of Panch Sheel, however, these attempts did not resolve the issues. It has been concluded that colonial interventions did upset the bilateral relations further.

 

 

Military aspects of the war have also been briefly touched upon in the book calling it a military debacle. It was a debacle due to diplomatic miscalculations, poor defence-preparedness and wrong leadership decisions. The Henderson Brooks-Bhagat Report on the 1962 India-China war, essentially blames the military leadership and intelligence apparatus for the debacle. However, the political leadership was convinced in their minds that there would be no large-scaled armed conflict or full-scale war.

 

Important part of the book is the final conclusion. It has been concluded correctly and summarised that the war served no purpose at all in resolving the issue. Actually it further aggravated the situation and deteriorated the bilateral relations. It also left the region divided, encouraging an arms race and increased military spending. The war has instilled deep mistrust and a strong sense of rivalry between the two sides. To this day China continues to claim the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, while New Delhi lays claim to the Chinese-controlled Aksai Chin territory. This dispute continues to prevent the full normalization of relations. The book also brings out a lesson which is even relevant in present day situation that militarisation and military solution is not an answer to bilateral border disputes. Solution lies in diplomatic talks and negotiations in the spirit of give and take.  Both countries have a lot to lose from a confrontation and an overt armed struggle.

 

          Overall it is a comprehensive research work covering all aspects related to a relevant subject. The multi-disciplinary book is appropriately timed, and is beneficial to people from diverse background. It will be useful for China watchers, analysts, military strategists, security mandarins, political scientists, diplomats, historians and students & scholars of regional security.

 

For regular updates please register here –

https://55nda.com/blogs/anil-khosla/subscribe/

 

Posted on

WAR & WARFARE (PART 2): TYPES OF WAR

In this part of the series we have a look at the types of war. War has been classified into various types over the years depending upon factors like extent, duration, cause, means and domains etc.

TYPES OF WAR

 

Total War. In the mid-19th century, scholars identified total war as a separate class of warfare. The term has been defined as “A war that is unrestricted in terms of the weapons used, the territory or combatants involved, or the objectives pursued, especially one in which the laws of war could be disregarded.” Total war is a war, which a country devotes its entire human, economic and military resources. Targets are not restricted to the army. Civilians also get attacked for the purpose “total” victory over the enemy’s political, social and military structure.

Limited War. Limited war is the opposite concept to total war. A limited war is one in which the belligerents do not expend all of the resources at their disposal, whether human, industrial, agricultural, military, natural, technological, or otherwise in a specific conflict.  The War is limited by geographical area, type of target, weapons or degree of mobilization.

World War. This is “a war engaged in by all or most of the principal nations of the world”. The term is usually reserved to two major international conflicts that occurred during the 20th century: World War I (1914–18) and World War II (1939–45). However, a variety of global conflicts have been subjectively deemed “world wars”, such as the Cold War and the War on Terror.

Civil War. Civil war is war within one’s own geographic boundaries, usually between people of different ethnic or religious groups or with different ideology. Its total chaos with multiple groups randomly fighting against each other, sometimes not really sure who is a friend or foe, but still creating a lot of blood bath. The ultimate goal is often lost in the carnage, with no definite winners. (Most often the only loser is humanity).

Religious War or Holy War.  A war between religions or over religious issues (primarily caused or justified by differences in religion). It is also called jihad or crusade. In the modern period, debates are common over the extent to which religious, economic, or ethnic aspects of a conflict predominate in a given war

Cold War. Cold war is a state of conflict between nations that does not involve direct military action but is pursued primarily through economic and political actions, propaganda, acts of espionage or proxy wars waged by surrogates. This term is most commonly used to refer to the Soviet–American Cold War of 1947–1991. The surrogates are typically states that are satellites of the conflicting nations, i.e., nations allied to them or under their political influence. Opponents in a cold war often provide economic or military aid, such as weapons, tactical support or military advisors, to lesser nations involved in conflicts with the opposing country.

Colonial War. Colonial war is a blanket term relating to the various conflicts that arose as the result of overseas territories being settled by foreign powers creating a colony. The term especially refers to wars fought during the nineteenth century between European armies in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean.

Ideological War. A clash of opposing ideals, ideologies, or concepts through which nations or groups use strategic influence to promote their interests abroad.

Revolutionary War. A war fought with the aim of overthrowing a corrupt or ineffective government.

 

Military classifications

Military conflict. When armies of two groups fight with weapons to gain supremacy on its opponent. It may be to grab territory, extend borders, extend influence, or to become more powerful. It’s as old as humanity and the list is endless.

Insurgency. Insurgency is a violent, armed rebellion against authority. An insurgency can be fought via counter-insurgency warfare, and may also be opposed by measures to protect the population and by political and economic actions of various kinds, as well as propaganda aimed at undermining the insurgents’ claims against the incumbent regime. As a concept, insurgency’s nature is ambiguous. Not all rebellions are insurgencies.

Proxy War.  Proxy war is an armed conflict between two states or non-state actors which act on the instigation or on behalf of other parties that are not directly involved in the hostilities. In order for a conflict to be considered a proxy war, there must be a direct, long-term relationship between external actors and the belligerents involved. The aforementioned relationship usually takes the form of funding, military training, arms, or other forms of material assistance which assist a belligerent party in sustaining its war effort.

Guerrilla War.  Guerrilla war is usually a hit-and-run war waged by an apparently weaker army, against a relatively much larger but less mobile highly organised army. Usually undertaken by a militia group of the defeated or near defeated people who are desperate to drive the invaders away. For them, its total war, whereas for the standing army it’s only a partial war, who are less motivated, and actually, pretty wary.

Militancy. Militancy is a war of terrorists with a desire to inflict damage to those they hate the most, but can’t directly win with a full-scale armed military conflict. They create maximum nuisance at minimum cost and kill as many innocents as they can and claim victory.

 

Domains Wise Classification

Besides the domains of land (ground war), Air (air war) and sea (naval war), other domains are as follows:

Economic war.  You don’t fire bullets and mortars, but use economic strength to throttle the other nation to submission. This is a sophisticated modern day invasion strategy. Strategy of sanctions, unfair trade practices  and debt traps are used in this type of warfare.

Diplomatic Wars.  It is the typical war that goes on between hostile nations at an apparently civilised international platform, like the UN. It’s all about gaining a few brawny points in a war of words in front of an international audience, most of whom are generally biased. 

Nuclear Warfare. This is a  war fought with nuclear weapons. It is too risky and mutual destruction is assured. So far it is restricted to threats and as a deterrent.

Cyber war. Cyber warfare involves the actions by a nation-state or international organization to attack and attempt to damage another nation’s computers or information networks through, computer viruses or denial-of-service attacks. Computer technology is used to disrupt the activities of a state or organization, especially the deliberate attacking of information systems for strategic or military purposes and cyber espionage.

Space war.  Space warfare is combat that takes place in outer space. The scope of space warfare therefore includes ground-to-space warfare, such as attacking satellites from the earth; space-to-space warfare, such as satellites attacking satellites; and space-to-ground warfare, such as satellites attacking earth-based targets.

Psychological warfare.  Literally, a war of words and nerves. You try to wrestle your opponent by wearing him down through constant threats of violence.

 

The nature of war is changing very rapidly. New classifications are being made to describe the prevailing situations. More about these changes and classifications later.

 

Coming up next: Warfare definition and types

Value additions are most welcome

References:

  1. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/12857871.pdf
  2. https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/what-is-war-a-new-point-of-view
  3. Brian Orend, “War”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta, accessed September 18, 2012.
  4. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/war/.
  5. Carl von Clausewitz, On War, ed. and trans. Michael Howard and Peter Paret (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976), 75
  6. Joseph S. Nye, The Future of Power, (New York, NY: Public Affairs), 113.
  7. Thomas L. Friedman, The World is Flat: A Brief History of the 21stCentury, 2005 (New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux).
  8. Michael Howard, The Causes of War from the Causes of War and Other Essays, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983), 16.
  9. United States Government, The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report, January 2011, (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office), 417-420.
  10. Jack Sine, Defining the ‘Precision weapon’ in effects-based terms, Air & Space Power Journal, Spring 2006, accessed March 3, 2011, http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/Air-Space-Power-Journal/154817984.html.
  11. General Norton A. Schwartz and Admiral Jonathan W. Greenert, “Air-Sea Battle: Promoting Stability in an Era of Uncertainty”, The American Interest, February 12, 2012, accessed September 12, 2012.
  12. http://www.the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=1212.
  13. Robert C. Nation, U.S. Army War College Seminar Lecture, September 6, 2012.
  14. Gene Sharp, The Role of Power in Nonviolent Struggle, (Boston, MA: The Albert Einstein Institution, 1990), 9.Sun Tzu, The Art of War, trans. Samuel B. Griffith (New York: Oxford University Press, 1963).