India China War 1962, Where we stand after 50 Years
Many analysts argue that 1962 debacle was a wake up call for India. Political rulers, then onwards have planned and worked to strengthen the National might. Any Nation,s Military power has direct connect with nation’s Economic and Technological growth as well as Politico Social Harmony prevailing in the country.
Since then both countries have moved on. And after half a century where do we stand?
In 1947 when India got freedom, its economy, even after plundering by British rulers, was strong. At the time of Independence India had a positive Balance of Payment. While complete mainland of China came under total Communist rule in 1949 and its economy was a serious concern for new political order.
As in present day World Order it is the Military might which propels the national interest, let us try to understand where does India and China stand at this moment. While listing the Military Might Ranking, as latest as for the year 2011, CIA puts China and India at No. 3 and 4 positions respectively (USA is No.1 and Russia is No. 2). To arrive at these ranking numbers, the Global Fire Power Potential (GFP) analysis has been considered, wherein 45 different parameters are taken into account, [Source: US Library of Congress; Central Intelligence Agency Fighting Forces (Barron's)]. Consider the table below:
Global Military Might Ranking : 2011:
What is the reason for such a striking variance between India and China? In 1947 India was far ahead of China, on all these reference points except population and some other not so influencing parameter for GFP. If anyone looks into the events in the last 60 years or so, in both countries, following points stands out:
Ø Clarity of Political Vision for the welfare and development of state and its subjects.
Ø Long term perspective planning for development of catalysts for force multipliers
Ø Social engineering and its practice in the real sense for social harmony
Ø Individual’s Right and Responsibility towards state
Ø Honesty and Integrity of the Leadership, which at any time is leading the nation
Ø Strength and resolution of the national leadership to tackle any environment or situation which is bound to affect national pride and cause damage to her human and economic wealth.
China, though accused of not concerned about human rights, has done much better and has emerged as a very strong player in the World order. In India we have very sharply divided opinion makers about our perception towards China. As per Dr Subhash Kapila, Consultant, Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group (SAAG):
" [India, both at the Governmental level and at the people’s level stands out uniquely in contrast to China.
At the Governmental level, the impression is that increased trade and economic ties and joint collaboration in energy projects, worldwide, could pave the way for more strategic cooperation between the two countries.
India’s trade and industrial circles are active proponents of enlarging China-India ties in this field, spurred as they are, by the buoyancy in economic relations between the two countries.
At the people’s level, the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict rankles in the psyche. The Indian people are aware of China’s intrusive policies in South Asia, especially with Pakistan.
The Indian strategic analysis community is divided into three different strands which this author (Dr Kapila) labels as
(1) " The China types" i.e. those from institutes closely allied with China; also included would be the Leftist parties
(2) "The JNU Types" i.e. idealistic academics and researchers with Leftist leanings and
(3) "The USA Types" i.e. those whose perceptions on China are solely influenced by the writings of American think-tanks on China. ]
And as per Dr Kapila
"There is yet to emerge a purely "Indian Types" strand, predominantly influenced by India’s national security considerations."
It is now emerging very clearly, due to not very assertive hold and influence on policy makers by the above said "Indian Types" in our political set up who have governed and governing the fate of India, our policy towards China are wanting. In the last 60 years we as a nation have missed out many mile stones due to our own cloudy vision and confused assertive action plan. And these at many occasions have been purely influenced by not so well informed facts.
Also, a comment by Jeff Immelt, Chairman General Electric when his firm had put up revised India vision for investing $8 billion by 2010, is worth understanding by our policy makers. During an interaction with Mumbai’s corporate who’s who, Jeff said "Well, for an economy to grow 8 per cent, you need power, planes. People want basics as power, transport and water supply." And he said, "The government and everything else work in China. The expressways and airports are just like those in Chicago and New York. China has got the macro picture right, India the micro picture. India's pluses are fantastic companies and systems". And he said with a flourish "India had to fix the macro picture. China has to fix the micro picture."
And what our governing system has done in the last 50 years after Chinese aggression in 1962?
Opinion by Dr Subhash Kapila and statement by Jeff as given in above paragraphs say everything about India and China’s journey to acquire greater assertive role in World order. It is for our leadership to ponder over- why we are in this state after more than 60 years of our independence when comparing with China for World role?
Concluding observations:
Having analyzed the position of India and China, in a very limited way, it is felt that the need at the moment for Indian leadership and policy makers is
· Improve the quotient of integrity in all acts of governance,
· Restore the faith of citizens in just and fair resolution of all day to day problems. The present governing system and its implementers, be it the bureaucracy or political masters only reflect a highly compromised system. By and large all the activities of these are guided and influenced by corrupt practices, be it monetary consideration or arrogance of the ruling class.
· Develop and put in place a holistic Integrated National Security doctrine.
· Bring more transparent professionalism in the working of law enforcing set up.
· All political masters should understand China’s threat to our National interests in this region in particular and globally in general. "Indian Type" strategic analysis community has a very important role to play in this regard. They do not have the luxury of not asserting and failing the nation in coming decades.
The 12 year old boy of 1960’s, today is in retirement age. He hopes and expects that present day 10 or 15 year old youth does not see the present type of Military Might Ranking for India in coming decades. Responsibility for this rests mainly with Political leadership as well as assertive groups working for National Respect and Pride. They must rise above the petty tricks, practiced day after day by them, for self advancement.
And big question at this juncture, for the Nation and its subjects is, CAN THEY?
By Col Ravindra Tripathi, M Tech, FIE
Half a century has passed since Indo China War of 1962. Then a12 year old child has a faint memory of those days when the only source of knowing the developments of Indo China War (20 Oct to 21 Nov 1962) was "Akashvani" and very few vernacular news papers. English media reach was very limited. And those days, what that child heard or read in papers, "It is stab in the back by China", "Panchsheel principles have been murdered by China", "Indian Defence Forces are fighting very bravely, they have repulsed Chinese forces on many fronts", "World leaders have condemned this act of China". Only open visible support for India came from "Tunku Abdul Rehman", then Prime Minister of Malaysia. Incidentally at that time Malaysia did not matter much in global power chess board.Many analysts argue that 1962 debacle was a wake up call for India. Political rulers, then onwards have planned and worked to strengthen the National might. Any Nation,s Military power has direct connect with nation’s Economic and Technological growth as well as Politico Social Harmony prevailing in the country.
Since then both countries have moved on. And after half a century where do we stand?
In 1947 when India got freedom, its economy, even after plundering by British rulers, was strong. At the time of Independence India had a positive Balance of Payment. While complete mainland of China came under total Communist rule in 1949 and its economy was a serious concern for new political order.
As in present day World Order it is the Military might which propels the national interest, let us try to understand where does India and China stand at this moment. While listing the Military Might Ranking, as latest as for the year 2011, CIA puts China and India at No. 3 and 4 positions respectively (USA is No.1 and Russia is No. 2). To arrive at these ranking numbers, the Global Fire Power Potential (GFP) analysis has been considered, wherein 45 different parameters are taken into account, [Source: US Library of Congress; Central Intelligence Agency Fighting Forces (Barron's)]. Consider the table below:
Global Military Might Ranking : 2011:
INDIA | CHINA | |
CURRENT GFP RANK | 4 | 3 |
Total Population | 1,189,172,906 | 1,336,718,015 |
Military Manpower Available | 615,201,057 | 749,610,775 |
Fit for Military Service | 489,571,520 | 618,588,627 |
Reaching Military Age Yearly | 22,896,956 | 19,538,534 |
Active Military Personnel | 1,325,000 | 2,285,000 |
Active Military Reserves | 1,747,000 | 800,000 |
Total Aircraft | 2,462 | 4,092 |
Total Land-Based Weapons | 75,191 | 22,795 |
Total Naval Units | 175 | 562 |
Towed Artillery | 10,000 | 2,950 |
Merchant Marine Strength | 324 | 2,010 |
Major Ports and Terminals | 7 | 8 |
Aircraft Carriers | 1 | 0 |
Destroyers | 8 | 26 |
Frigates | 12 | 58 |
Submarines | 15 | 55 |
Patrol Coastal Craft | 31 | 937 |
Mine Warfare Craft | 8 | 391 |
Amphibious Operations Craft | 20 | 544 |
Defense Budget / Expenditure | $36,030,000,000 | $100,000,000,000 |
Foreign Reserves | $284,100,000,000 | $2,662,000,000,000 |
Purchasing Power | $4,060,000,000,000 | $10,090,000,000,000 |
Oil Production | 878,700 bbl | 3,991,000 bbl |
Oil Consumption | 2,980,000 bbl | 8,200,000 bbl |
Proven Oil Reserves | 5,800,000,000 bbl | 20,350,000,000 bbl |
Total Labor Force | 478,300,000 | 780,000,000 |
Roadway Coverage | 3,320,410 km | 3,860,800 km |
Railway Coverage | 63,974 km | 86,000 km |
Waterway Coverage | 14,500 km | 110,000 km |
Coastline Coverage | 7,000 km | 14,500 km |
Major Serviceable Airports | 352 | 502 |
Square Land Area | 3,287,263 km | 9,596,961 km |
How come these comparative reference points given above, show such an alarming variance?
After change of guard in 1947 and 1950, India and China respectively choose two distinct political management systems, which fuelled the aspirations of population. The happiness of people is directly influenced by economic growth, positive social factors, harmony within & confidence in the integrated national security doctrine and practice, for the nation as well as her citizen achieved by the political doctrine in place. In all likelihood we do not have to analyze these factors with a magnifying glass. All the things under each category are clearly visible.What is the reason for such a striking variance between India and China? In 1947 India was far ahead of China, on all these reference points except population and some other not so influencing parameter for GFP. If anyone looks into the events in the last 60 years or so, in both countries, following points stands out:
Ø Clarity of Political Vision for the welfare and development of state and its subjects.
Ø Long term perspective planning for development of catalysts for force multipliers
Ø Social engineering and its practice in the real sense for social harmony
Ø Individual’s Right and Responsibility towards state
Ø Honesty and Integrity of the Leadership, which at any time is leading the nation
Ø Strength and resolution of the national leadership to tackle any environment or situation which is bound to affect national pride and cause damage to her human and economic wealth.
China, though accused of not concerned about human rights, has done much better and has emerged as a very strong player in the World order. In India we have very sharply divided opinion makers about our perception towards China. As per Dr Subhash Kapila, Consultant, Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group (SAAG):
" [India, both at the Governmental level and at the people’s level stands out uniquely in contrast to China.
At the Governmental level, the impression is that increased trade and economic ties and joint collaboration in energy projects, worldwide, could pave the way for more strategic cooperation between the two countries.
India’s trade and industrial circles are active proponents of enlarging China-India ties in this field, spurred as they are, by the buoyancy in economic relations between the two countries.
At the people’s level, the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict rankles in the psyche. The Indian people are aware of China’s intrusive policies in South Asia, especially with Pakistan.
The Indian strategic analysis community is divided into three different strands which this author (Dr Kapila) labels as
(1) " The China types" i.e. those from institutes closely allied with China; also included would be the Leftist parties
(2) "The JNU Types" i.e. idealistic academics and researchers with Leftist leanings and
(3) "The USA Types" i.e. those whose perceptions on China are solely influenced by the writings of American think-tanks on China. ]
And as per Dr Kapila
"There is yet to emerge a purely "Indian Types" strand, predominantly influenced by India’s national security considerations."
It is now emerging very clearly, due to not very assertive hold and influence on policy makers by the above said "Indian Types" in our political set up who have governed and governing the fate of India, our policy towards China are wanting. In the last 60 years we as a nation have missed out many mile stones due to our own cloudy vision and confused assertive action plan. And these at many occasions have been purely influenced by not so well informed facts.
Also, a comment by Jeff Immelt, Chairman General Electric when his firm had put up revised India vision for investing $8 billion by 2010, is worth understanding by our policy makers. During an interaction with Mumbai’s corporate who’s who, Jeff said "Well, for an economy to grow 8 per cent, you need power, planes. People want basics as power, transport and water supply." And he said, "The government and everything else work in China. The expressways and airports are just like those in Chicago and New York. China has got the macro picture right, India the micro picture. India's pluses are fantastic companies and systems". And he said with a flourish "India had to fix the macro picture. China has to fix the micro picture."
And what our governing system has done in the last 50 years after Chinese aggression in 1962?
Opinion by Dr Subhash Kapila and statement by Jeff as given in above paragraphs say everything about India and China’s journey to acquire greater assertive role in World order. It is for our leadership to ponder over- why we are in this state after more than 60 years of our independence when comparing with China for World role?
Concluding observations:
Having analyzed the position of India and China, in a very limited way, it is felt that the need at the moment for Indian leadership and policy makers is
· Improve the quotient of integrity in all acts of governance,
· Restore the faith of citizens in just and fair resolution of all day to day problems. The present governing system and its implementers, be it the bureaucracy or political masters only reflect a highly compromised system. By and large all the activities of these are guided and influenced by corrupt practices, be it monetary consideration or arrogance of the ruling class.
· Develop and put in place a holistic Integrated National Security doctrine.
· Bring more transparent professionalism in the working of law enforcing set up.
· All political masters should understand China’s threat to our National interests in this region in particular and globally in general. "Indian Type" strategic analysis community has a very important role to play in this regard. They do not have the luxury of not asserting and failing the nation in coming decades.
The 12 year old boy of 1960’s, today is in retirement age. He hopes and expects that present day 10 or 15 year old youth does not see the present type of Military Might Ranking for India in coming decades. Responsibility for this rests mainly with Political leadership as well as assertive groups working for National Respect and Pride. They must rise above the petty tricks, practiced day after day by them, for self advancement.
And big question at this juncture, for the Nation and its subjects is, CAN THEY?
No comments:
Post a Comment