and the Indians pick the time that China and USSR are having sendoff to challenge china for the territory, people should always view the geopolitics of the whole globe
Mao started this war for internal CCP reasons: his position in China was shaky due to the huge famine caused by his inhuman policies. An external "win" was the tool to boost Chinese popular support for his rule.
Mu grandfather was a Soldier in Indian Army. He used to tell me stories about this war. He was in one of the Indian position and they were able to push back Chinese for 3 days. But on fourth day they were basically rationing bullets to fire. By 5th day their camp was overrun and they had to surrender. They were released after 6 months.
This channel fostered my interest in the Cold War and I'm learning a lot about the period. Would you ever do a video on spy novels that best depict the conflict between East and West?
@@BTScrivinerthe vid didn't mention how India didn't find out about the road in aksai chin until a Chinese newspaper announced it's completion. he is heavily leaning to giving legitimacy to indian side
I think Cold War is fitting since it never turned into a nuclear war or started WW3, which would have been expected given the short time between WW1 and WW2
11:26 Dhola post was a worthless post an advantage it offered was it overlooked the namka chu valley But at the same time this dhola post was overlooked by thagla ridge which was overlooked by chinese . Indian planners blundered here . They send ill equipped indian soldires who were supposed to evict the chinese from thag la ridge and gain heights . Chinese were estimated by indians to be battalion sized hence could be evicted by brigade sized indians . Chinese not only at top but were also much well equipped compared to indians .at end the operation to evict chinese from thag la never came and the 7th brigade had seen chinese grow from just a battalion to 1 division + Result- PLA who were bred from korean war attacked and took the whole namkachu valley and in turn penitrated indian border . They attacked on 3 fronts - walong; aksai chin and thag la. While in aksai chin indian soldires much fought bravely . The real humiliation was in eastern sectors at nefa . PLA marched 160km deep in this sector and reached the plains of assam . PLA litrally pursued and routed retreating indian brigades .
I appreciate how this video gave more information about the specific back-and-forth positions and decisions of the Soviets and Chinese at this time. Other videos I’ve seen haven’t covered that.
The Cold War, can you please make a video on Argentina during the era of Juan Peron. It would mean a lot to me if you made a video on this topic, since your audience will understand how Argentina's economy, politics and society all ended up the way they are today.
A very interesting and informative presentation. The Indians lacked everything except bravery. The seminal work on the conflict is contained in India's China War written by Neville Maxwell who apparently gained access to a secret Indian report that remains classified to this day.
@@changjuma6302 it doesnt matter, india was more stable and richer than china in 1962 sure but china gave a lot more importance to their military (to maintain their commie control) than india did to their military. This was also ended quickly, it never devolved to total war levels, if it did superior indian stability and economy would probably outlast china.
I am from Arunachal Pradesh, one of the states that China and India fought for. And China still claims us. Infact, atheletes from my state couldn't attend the Asian games in China as China would provide us visa because China says "the people of Zangam (i.e. Arunachal Pradesh) are citizens of China, and they don't need a visa to visit their own country".
@@bunnyfreakz what about people’s choice? We people of Arunachal don’t want to leave in china where our culture and languages get killed… its not Cia propaganda. China use to be diverse but han china took over forcefully with power
@@akp3097 What a ridiculous thought! You do not know that the KMT was crueler and claimed an even bigger territory? There would not be an independent Mongolia today if KMT had won the civil war. You think it would have let Tibet leave? Even today, the map in Taiwan's constitution still claim Mongolia and most certainly Tibet. Tibet was legally China's (whichever political party was in power) - even the British acknowledged that. Just that Tibet was having the thought of taking the opportunity of the turmoil in China then, to unilaterally declared independence. But they did not. Otherwise, they would not have agreed that the Simla Agreement 1914 needed to be signed by China for it to have any legal effect. In 1914, the precursor of KMT was in power. Yeah, the same KMT who retreated to Taiwan after they lost the civil war, and set up their government there.
@@SAMARTHSAMANT Maybe. I think I recall it saying something that it was a victory for and the PLA with withdraw from Nathu La and Cho La or Nathula and Sikkim.
@@aayush1174 Laughs in heavy KGB involvement in Bharatvarsh/India and Bharatvarshiya/Indian elections while being a non aligned nation.Although,I support your message that every country should be controlled by its own Government not Washington or Mosow.
I saw the best comment in another channel Never ask a woman her age A man his salary And the British to draw borders. The indo-China war is the result of British drawing border during the colonial era.
China is quite the hypocrite in this case, they do not support the border between China and India but the border between Myanmar and China was also done by the British, and by the same person who drew the border between China-India. China has no problem accepting the Burmese border though. Historical precedence is an excuse, the real issue is the current border arrangement gives significant vantage points to the Indian military which China doesn't like.
@@arijitpalit2756 Same case for Indians? Did India respected the East Pakistan border now Bangladesh drawn by the British? If so why India heavily intervened the war?
@@hwg5039 to stop a genocide???? You are bringing a false equivalence here. India was also facing a refugee crisis because of Operation Searchlight. Many more reasons like that.
Come on, Indian pilots are not going to be trained to fly new Soviet and American jets overnight. Mao dipped into Sunzi's Art of War for his concept of (limited) victory.
Almost nobody knows this in China, since it is a tiny conflict. China mobilized 30,000 troops only according wikipedia. In Korea, China mobilized about 780,000 troops. Later on, war against Vietnam, China mobilized another 1 million troops.
Pretty good video! Minor mispronunciations though, including Aksai Chin (you said "Akai Chin" several times) and Zhou Enlai (Zhou should be pronounced "Jo" not "Jao")
1954: India published a new map showing South Tibet as part of India. The map also shows the two neighbors of China, Sikkim and Bhutan, as part of India. Sikkim has been a neighbor of China for many hundreds of years and has enjoyed good relations. In the 18th century, Sikkim was briefly overrun by the Nepalese Gorkhas, and the Sikkim king fled to China seeking help. The then Qianlong emperor dispatched an expedition to Sikkim, expelled the Gorkhas, and restored Sikkim's sovereignty and independence. Sikkim remained unmolested for the rest of its history until it was annexed by India in 1975. Bhutan is another neighbor of China, and their proximity is evident simply by comparing the flags of Bhutan and the Qing dynasty of China. January 1959: The CCP (Chinese Communist Party) commented for the first time on the issue of South Tibet when Zhou Enlai, in a letter to Nehru, offered to concede South Tibet to India. However, India rejected the offer, as it also claims Aksai Chin as part of India. Aksai Chin is located in an area that is very hard to access from the Indian side due to difficult terrain. This is evidenced by the fact that China was able to build a road there over two years without India even noticing, and India only became aware of it when reading an article from China describing the construction project. This clearly indicates that India not only has no control over the area but also lacks visual access to the region. 1960: India started establishing posts (border markers) north of South Tibet (north of the McMahon Line) and proclaiming that it has the right to unilaterally 'improve' the McMahon Line as it sees fit. October 1962: After years of warning, China attacked India's position in South Tibet and recovered Tawang shortly. Three weeks later, in a second wave, China recovered the whole of South Tibet. November 1962: China unilaterally withdrew back to the north of the McMahon line. 1975: India annexed Sikkim. 1987: India made South Tibet a state and renamed it the so-called Arunachal Pradesh. The Republic of China (Taiwan) put out a statement denouncing India. Here is the statement: "In regard to the issue of the Indian government's illegal occupation of our country's territory and the establishment of the so-called 'Arunachal Pradesh,' the foreign ministry of the Republic of China issued the following announcement at midnight: India's illegal occupation of our country's territory has been repeatedly stated by the Government of the Republic of China as something it will not recognize. Recently, the Indian Congress unilaterally passed the establishment of 'Arunachal Pradesh' to the south of the so-called McMahon Line. The Indian Government also made it a state. The Government of the Republic of China once again solemnly proclaims that the Government of India intends to legitimize its illegal occupation of Chinese territory. The Government of the Republic of China regards this as illegal, void, and absolutely not recognized." 2008: With the return of Hong Kong to China, Britain effectively withdrew from its colonial involvement in Asia, and Tibet lost its utility as a potential bargaining chip in British negotiations with China concerning Hong Kong. With no remaining interests in Tibet, Britain could afford to be forthright for once. The British government issued a statement acknowledging China's sovereignty over Tibet (previously recognized as suzerainty, not sovereignty). This statement, endorsed by both the Conservative and Labour parties, is notable for its candor in admitting Britain's past territorial ambitions in Tibet and adopts an almost apologetic tone. Here is an excerpt: "...But our position is unusual for one reason of history that has been imported into the present: the anachronism of our formal position on whether Tibet is part of China, and whether in fact we harbour continued designs to see the break-up of China. We do not. Our ability to get our points across has sometimes been clouded by the position the UK took at the start of the 20th century on the status of Tibet, a position based on the geopolitics of the time. Our recognition of China's "special position" in Tibet developed from the outdated concept of suzerainty. Some have used this to cast doubt on the aims we are pursuing and to claim that we are denying Chinese sovereignty over a large part of its own territory. We have made clear to the Chinese Government, and publicly, that we do not support Tibetan independence. Like every other EU member state, and the United States, we regard Tibet as part of the People's Republic of China. " 2014: A Tibetan Chinese named Nido Tania from Arunachal Pradesh (occupied South Tibet) went to Delhi and was beaten to death because he 'looked Chinese.' 2024: In the 1990s, India subtly probed the People's Republic of China (PRC), leading to the inference that China's position on South Tibet had hardened, despite the PRC officially maintaining ambiguity on the matter. It has become evident that China's earlier offer to cede South Tibet is no longer available, as China has explicitly stated that South Tibet is part of its territory. This stance mirrors the positions of both the Tibetan Lhasa Government and its civil war rival, the Republic of China (Taiwan). In hindsight, India had a chance to settle its border with China to its advantage, but it was too greedy because it also claims Aksai Chin, an area that neither British India nor India has ever controlled. However, that opportunity has now passed. It's like they say, "never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity." It is evident that India is behaving in a manner reminiscent of how the British might have acted if they had not left the subcontinent. No one would argue that British India was a victim of China's aggression, yet this is the narrative India wishes to propagate. One can understand India's current apprehension towards China, given that it holds onto disputed territory while the rightful owner grows stronger. Nevertheless, this sense of threat from China is entirely self-inflicted, and India has no one to blame but itself.
Please make a video on the 1971 Indo-Pakistan war as it is a more important event in the Cold War where a direct confrontation between the US 7th Naval fleet and Soviet Nuclear Submarines occurred in the Bay of Bengal.
1. Complete Niglect on Army modernization by Indian Government, Indian army was Fighting with World war 1 weapons meanwhile chinese were fighting with AK-47 assualt rifles and Russian machine guns. 2. Lack of Defence manufacturing and logistics. 3. making communist Krishna Menon Defence minister 4. Then prime minister selecting army Chief from his Family. These were some reasons why India lost in that War.
Sir can you plz make your content on 1971 Indo-pak war... It's one of the most significant wars fought during cold War having much larger impact on geopolitics....
1971 is my favourite war , I wish more non indian explore this topic , even though it had no big geopolitical affect apart from independence of Bengalis
@@usmanqureshi08 bro it was much bigger geopolitical impact.. The war between India-Pakistan in 1971 could have become global war.... because it also brought USA and Russia at a brink of war.... Because USA was assisting pakistan and Russia led the blockade of US naval ships as it was in India's support....!!!
The war litrally brought whole west in confrontation with soviet Russia. Bangladesh isn't only impact of 1971 war . Borders in kashmir were permemantly redrawn and ceasefire line became loc. Then under shimla agreement of 1971 india gave back 14ksqkm of territory which it annexed from Pakistan in western front While retaining 1000sqkm in kashmir (turtuk ; kargil sector; tithwal ; etc) While Pakistan kept some 100sqkm territory which it annexed from india in chhamb. The territory which india took also included kargil heights which Pakistan occupied in kargil war. The kargil war also brought great possibility of nuclear war between 2 powers
The timing of the war in 1962 was mainly based on two factors: firstly, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and secondly, the climate in the theater of war was just right. The timing for the end is twofold: firstly, the end of the Cuban missile crisis; secondly, the logistical capabilities of the Chinese military cannot keep up. You should know that there are no roads there.
One of Indian delusion is the belief that India is a victim of China's aggression. To understand how this perception arises, we must consider the dramatic shift in India's geopolitical viewpoint after gaining independence from British rule. British historian Arnold Toynbee noted that while Indians were subjects of the British Crown, they were largely indifferent to British India's borders and even condemned the British Empire's annexation of distant territories as immoral. In 1921, India's Congress Party went so far as to urge neighboring states not to enter into treaties with the Imperial Power (the British Raj). However, once Indians assumed sovereignty, their perspective underwent a complete reversal. Suddenly, the once-distant lands of the British Indian Empire were seen as sacred Indian territory. Even more alarmingly, India began asserting territorial claims over areas that had never been claimed, let alone controlled, by the British Raj. In essence, aspiring to emulate the British Raj, India became expansionist in its own right. In Arnold Toynbee's words: "It is queer that lines drawn by British officials should have been consecrated as precious national assets of the British Indian Empire's non-British successor states. At the time when those lines were drawn the transaction produced no stir among the . . . Indian . . . subjects, as they then were, of the British crown. If any of them paid any attention to what Durand and McMahon were doing, they will have written it off as just another move in the immoral game of power politics that the British Imperialists were playing at the Indian tax-payers' expense. The present consecration of these British-made lines as heirlooms in the successor states' national heritages is an unexpected and unfortunate turn of History's wheel." With respect to China, the best way is to give a chronological order of events leading to the present stalemate: 1912: In the first full year of the Republic of China after the fall of the Qing dynasty, the United States National Geographic Magazine dedicated an issue to China. Accompanying the issue is a large and detailed fold-out map of China. The map clearly shows that Dirang Dzong (德讓宗) and Tawang (達旺) are within the boundary of China. 1943: British India likely calculated that dealing with the Lhasa government was easier than with the Republic of China's Nationalist Government in extracting land concessions and proposed to the United States to recognize Tibet's right to exchange diplomatic representatives with other powers. The Americans rejected this proposal: "The Government of the United States has borne in mind the fact that the Chinese Government has long claimed suzerainty over Tibet and that the Chinese constitution lists Tibet among areas constituting the territory of the Republic of China. This Government has at no time raised a question regarding either of those claims." 1944: British India annexed Dirang Dzong (德讓宗), a Tibetan-settled area. Dzong means fort in Tibetan. The Chinese Government (the Nationalist Government of the Republic of China, seated in Kunming at the time because of World War II) protested to the British. So did the Tibetan Lhasa government. 1945: British India intruded into the tribal area of South Tibet. February 1947: The Chinese Nationalist Government lodged a complaint with the Indian mission, which was by then newly established in China, on British India's border intrusions into Chinese territory. August 1947: Britain left South Asia, and India was created as the successor polity to the departed British. India's creation means that a country that historically did not exist suddenly appears on China's doorstep. October 1947: The Tibetan Lhasa Government dispatched a formal request to New Delhi, asking the newly independent Indian Government to withdraw all its predecessors' intrusions into the territory between the McMahon Line and the traditional border beneath the foothills and return a wide swath of territory from Ladakh to Assam, including Sikkim and the Darjeeling district. 1949: When the defeat of the Nationalist Government in China's civil war was imminent, the Republic of China's ambassador in New Delhi reminded the Indian Government that China did not recognize the McMahon Line and held the Simla Convention invalid. October 1949: The CCP (Chinese Communist Party) took control of the mainland, and its civil war rival, the Republic of China, retreated to Taiwan. December 1949: India recognized the People's Republic of China as the legitimate government, effectively cutting off the diplomatic channel the Republic of China used to deliver its protests to India. February 1951: India annexed Tawang (達旺), the birthplace of the Sixth Dalai Lama and home to the four-hundred-year-old Tawang Monastery. The Tibetan authorities in Lhasa protested but were simply informed by the Indian political officer that India was taking over Tawang. The Tibetans protested again, accusing the Indian Government of 'seizing as its own what did not belong to it.' The Tibetans went on to ask New Delhi to withdraw its forces from Tawang immediately. The protests were ignored. The Republic of China (which had already retreated to Taiwan by then and had no diplomatic relation with India) also vehemently denounced India's territorial travesty. Curiously the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) made no noise.
In 1962 india army lacked proper winter cloth, shoes, even rifle is 303 which magazine capacity was 3 round While Chinese got fully automatic ak 47 Neharu was against indian army as a institution he fear army can take over government like Pakistan junta So he drastically cut funding Neharu also change army general and instal puppet officers who lack leadership quality. This is disaster, Neharu don't want enmity with china. In india this episode known as Neharu's himalayan blunder It start from accepting Chinese occupation of Tibet.
Quite wrong. The Indian Army had been advancing on the line of actual control before the war, and Nehru was complacent that the Chinese would not retaliate
Nope, the real reason was Nehru was too proud and underestimated the Chinese. Nehru thought the Chinese were too soft. Zhou Enlai offered a peaceful resolution but Nehru refused. The 1962 war was not a surprise. There had been several skirmishes in the few years prior to 1962. To even suggest that the Indian army was unprepared is disingenuous and just making excuses. Even though the Chinese won and actually took back the disputed South Tibet area which the Chinese still regarded as theirs, they withdrew their troops back to pre-war positions after they announced the cease fire. Nehru's himalayan blunder should more properly be applied to his refusal to accept the Chinese solution to end all this border tension. We could have had 60 years of peace between these 2 countries instead of tension; and the Arunachal Pradesh athletes would most certainly have gotten their visa to China.
History is based facts, and thus far the 1962 war has India as the aggressor and breaking the then statut quo, what happened next we all know, it was a short but decisive Chinese victory....
This historical take on the 1962 Sino-Indian War is complete nonsense. Even reading "China's India War", a 2018 attempt by an Indian scholar to state pretty much what was said here, the complaint that India is usually perceived to be the aggressor is frequently stated. Even Henry Kissinger's book, "On China", uses U.S. intelligence sources to explain how India was the clear aggressor. For example, upon Indian troops marching "eyeball to eyeball" with Chinese forces, their immediate reaction was to retreat 18km and continue to plead for peace. Kissinger quotes Indian bloodthirsty politicians from the time taking this retreat as a sign of weakness. In the end, China didn't take any new territory, not even territory which they claim to this day, such as Southern Tibet, because they wanted the world to know that they gained nothing from the war. Simply put, this historical analysis was nonsense.
the split between China and Soviet started in the late 1950s, and China had been blocked from the West since 1949. and the Great Leap Forward was about to end by that time. it won't get worse to have a war with India in 1962. by showing the willingness to wage war to deter enemies' aggressive movements, that's how Mao and other CPC first-generation leaders think about China's border issues. it's consistent, from the Korean War, and the Sino-India War to the Zhenbao Island Incident.
During the 1962 battle, three Chinese cooks captured an Indian battalion. Tens of thousands of Indian soldiers were captured. The Indians were very talkative and vulnerable in actual battles.
Hey there, Captain History Channel! It's always refreshing to see someone rewrite the entire narrative of a historical event with the precision of a toddler trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I mean, who needs accurate information when we can just make up our own version of reality, right? So, according to your highly credible and definitely not fabricated account, three Chinese cooks managed to capture an entire Indian battalion. I can just imagine it now: the fearless chefs, armed with spatulas and ladles, bravely outmaneuvering the clueless Indian soldiers who were presumably too busy discussing their favorite biryani recipes to notice they were being "captured." And tens of thousands of Indian soldiers captured? Wow, it's like the Chinese army stumbled upon a massive group therapy session instead of an actual battlefield. I bet the Chinese soldiers were so impressed with the Indians' talkative skills that they decided to ditch their weapons and enroll in communication workshops instead. But wait, there's more! The Indians were "vulnerable in actual battles." I guess all those fancy weapons, training programs, and military strategies were just for show. Silly Indians, thinking they could actually defend themselves in a real fight. Maybe next time they should consider bringing poets and philosophers to the battlefield for a more intellectually stimulating experience. Thanks for enlightening us with your alternative history lesson. Who needs well-documented facts and credible sources when we can just rely on your vivid imagination and unparalleled storytelling skills? I eagerly await your next masterpiece, perhaps a tale of how unicorns played a crucial role in the space race. Keep 'em coming!
@@您的父上 avg Chinese argument "enemy wrote many memoirs you should read them" but they never link or provide source to which memoirs they talk about, just make claims cause u know even u guys don't have source to claim it.
china has established rule over lands indian claim when even india was a geographic concept ....due to process of china marching torwards republic fr last dynasty, british took chance to move in...then india followed steps...by all despicable moves
Observations: USA: I’m better than everyone! Everyone needs to listen to me! China: I’m better than everyone! Especially USA! India: I’m better than China! Russia: I’m still better than everyone! Result: Conflict
Playing the victim card. 😆🤣 If India had so much spirit, how come it was so easily conquered by a British company with its small military? For more than a hundred years, you were ruled by a company, not even by the British crown.
@@nomooon So? Wellington was still a relative green-horn when he landed in India. India must be proud that it provided Wellington with the training ground for his eventual military achievements.
@@rishisaini5269 nonsense I am from Sikkim. You occupied my country in the pretext of democratic reforms. India have no right to seize the sovereignty of Sikkim whatsoever.
A lot of details were told, but they were all false. The truth is that at that time, China was blockaded by the Soviet Union and the United States. China took advantage of the Cuban Missile Crisis between the United States and the Soviet Union to launch a self-defense counterattack against India (a friend of the United States and the Soviet Union), and achieved complete success.
@@runajain5773 Macau and Goa are former Portuguese colonies. China reclaims Macau through negotiation, while India reclaims Goa by force. This is the civilization gap between China and India.
I am Nationalist Indian 🇮🇳 but I don't Blame on those who say about our Lose in 1962 War and point out at what we lacker during that War.Yes We(INDIA🇮🇳) Lost the 1962 Indo-China War Mainly Because of Our Political Leadership 😤 which failed the nation not our Indian 🇮🇳 Military 🪖.Nehru's shitty Gandhian Policies and his more suspicion towards Army because of Military Coups near Pakistan 🇵🇰 made our Armed Forces Literally Unfunded and Un-equipped.On other side Chinese 🇨🇳 were more trained from latest Korean War and also Well Equipped which resulted in their Victory.But Our Armed Forces were Re-instructed after the Leadership of Nehru Especially During Mrs.Indira Gandhi she transformed the Indian Army 🪖 to tip of Power🔥 and under present Narendra Modi😎 Leadership Again Armed forces are give full and free hand which is the Reason Indian Army is now a Forced to be recokned with in the World Today.Jai Hind 🇮🇳.Jai Bharath🚩.
A correction - no the Chinese were the one out numbered by the indians , the indians were over confident had more heavy weapons and supplies . In the end were out flank by the Chinese PLA and surrendered in massive numbers
Bruh Indian Government was blind in their strawberry paradise that they didn't even recognise China as a threat rather as a Brother and you are saying that they were oVaRconFIdent(that "a" is intentional). Sure buddy.
@@dreamadventure8220 It would be better to divide India into different countries based on different castes, which would result in fewer conflicts and tragedies.
It's basically a sterotype to depict PLA with numerous soilders or human wave. But who could moblize more troops ? India whose captial is close to aksai chin or china who have to supply through the entire Tibet?
A wonderful historical coverage video of the Indian-Chinese conflict issue Cold War proxy War occurred between two neighborhoods in Southeast Asia ...where ever pastor British empirical shadows were notable...border problems amongst niebourhoods and installed were planted
@@chinarise I am not indian, can you please stop using that to deligitimize anyone not 1000% over the top pro-China and actually engage with what I actually say? Thank you.
After watching the full video, I personally think you took the chinese nationalist state perspective a little bit too much at heart (altough not always to put nuance) compared to your other videos. From that really weird Big China map with bits of even Pakistan in it and showing India as claiming Tibet for some reason, to the choice of using the demonizing (around the world) term "separatists", of telling that Tibet tought of itself as independant only during the 1950s when it was since the 1910s and before that as a tributary state, and before that as an independant empire. Everything feels as if to avoid the fate of anyone slightly pissing just a tiny bit the nationalist chinese perspective unlike with other nationalist perspectives, something that has multiple precedents in the past three decades. That's not like your usual selves, guys, your video on Tibet was great. PS : I am not indian, not european, not american. Can the China internet militia not put me in a camp, please?
@@chiaolim7773 my feelings are not hurt, whitewashing history is just unworthy of them. I'm not mad, not offended, simply disappointed. This is the Mao guy behind the "five fingers of Tibet" policy, policy which was never addressed once in this video. The Armchair Historian did a better job covering this I feel. And I mean, c'mon, that map is just really bad. I simply want them to improve.
So where was the Tibetan declaration of independence and the Tibetan nationalist revolutionary movement? Read up on Lhasa's relations with the ROC from 1913 to 1948. ROC Tibetan and Mongolian Affairs Commission had an office in Lhasa (No, it was not an embassy). The Tibetan issue became an issue largely because the Reds decided to change the system, something which earlier Beijing or equivalent preferred to keep the system.
From Chinese perspective, the 1962 Indo China was absolutely not worth to comment. By the way, China us much stronger than India, the Indian problem is negligible !
When the PRC inherited the borders of the ROC, it also inherited more than a dozen border disputes with virtually every nation around it To date, it has basically resolved most of these disputes peacefully via negotiations, including with India's neighbours like Pakistan, Myanmar and Nepal If Pakistan, Myanmar, and Nepal were all able to peacefully resolve their disputes with China, consider that maybe India is the problem
Sir, just to make a correction, the indians never entered into chinese territory, u might say, the indian army established outposts in the "occupied" territory which is claimed by India, but forcefully occupied by china and technically belongs to India, since the Tibetan govt accepted these lines with the british indian govt, irrespective of whether the kuomintang or the communists liked it or not, coz at that point, the tibetans in everyway were independent. Edit: Also, India was only initially outnumbered and outgunned... in technical terms, India was in everyway superior to the chinese counterpart, by the time of the unilateral ceasefire from china, the chinese army had almost no rations left to feed the army, so if the indian govt wanted, they could have prolonged the conflict at will.... however the indian govt was weak, lead by a person who lived in his daydreams... so the indians lost the conflict.
So why was the ROC gov invited to the Simla Convention if Tibet was already deemed independent? Read up on earlier treaties between Qing China and Britain. Britain recognized ROC as successor to Qing. The Simla Convention said nothing about Tibetan independence. It was about giving the Brits a sphere of influence in Tibet. Of course the Brits did not want an indpendent Tibet. ROC was considered easier to be manipulated than Tsarist Russia. Neither were the Tibetans interested. As Tibetologist Dawa Nobu later described it, independence was not political independence but independent way of life. The Kashag governing system set up by Qing China continued minus the Imperial Commissioner.
Play War Thunder now with my link, and get a massive, free bonus pack including vehicles, boosters and more: playwt.link/thecoldwar
Warthunder is a fun game to play but it is defiantly not relaxing lol
Crazy that this border crisis with India and China happened during the missile crisis in Cuba
Not by accident! China took the opportunity this provided while the USSR was busy
and the Indians pick the time that China and USSR are having sendoff to challenge china for the territory, people should always view the geopolitics of the whole globe
And the border dispute was directly caused by the sneakiness of the British and subsequently India.
The only crazy thing is your lack of awareness.
Mao started this war for internal CCP reasons: his position in China was shaky due to the huge famine caused by his inhuman policies. An external "win" was the tool to boost Chinese popular support for his rule.
Mu grandfather was a Soldier in Indian Army.
He used to tell me stories about this war.
He was in one of the Indian position and they were able to push back Chinese for 3 days. But on fourth day they were basically rationing bullets to fire. By 5th day their camp was overrun and they had to surrender. They were released after 6 months.
The Chinese treat prisoners well. If they're captured by the Russians, they send them to Siberia to work as slave labor.
In the eyes of China people, the Indian army is weak and ineffective.
Thats story was cool
如果你去了解下这场战争的军事细节你就知道为什么印度军队的后勤问题如此严重了，印度准将达尔维（John Dalvi）写过回忆录
@@您的父上
This is a minor conflict that isn't talked about enough. Nicely done video.
No, it was a war.
Skirmish in scale, but consequential. Shaped western rhetoric about Tibet, and the very foundation of the animosity between India and China.
approx. 10000 troops (both sides included) got perished definitely not a skirmish.
But it left a serious psychological shadow on India
Almost all the war China fought since 1900 were bigger in scale than this 1962 war, this war was too childish compared with Korean war.
This channel fostered my interest in the Cold War and I'm learning a lot about the period. Would you ever do a video on spy novels that best depict the conflict between East and West?
I hope he does a podcast one day or put this into podcast format because I really need to listen to more of it while I’m driving.
This channel is a western propaganda piece
@@BruceWayne-ii5th Bless your simple-minded heart.
@@BruceWayne-ii5th
Dude woke up and decided to spew baseless accusations. Can't have nice things in TH-cam.
@@BTScrivinerthe vid didn't mention how India didn't find out about the road in aksai chin until a Chinese newspaper announced it's completion. he is heavily leaning to giving legitimacy to indian side
It's interesting to note that Anastas Mikoyan's younger brother Artem, was the namesake of the MiG design bureau and lead designer of the MiG-21.
I think Cold War is fitting since it never turned into a nuclear war or started WW3, which would have been expected given the short time between WW1 and WW2
11:26
Dhola post was a worthless post an advantage it offered was it overlooked the namka chu valley
But at the same time this dhola post was overlooked by thagla ridge which was overlooked by chinese .
Indian planners blundered here .
They send ill equipped indian soldires who were supposed to evict the chinese from thag la ridge and gain heights .
Chinese were estimated by indians to be battalion sized hence could be evicted by brigade sized indians . Chinese not only at top but were also much well equipped compared to indians .at end the operation to evict chinese from thag la never came and the 7th brigade had seen chinese grow from just a battalion to 1 division +
Result- PLA who were bred from korean war attacked and took the whole namkachu valley and in turn penitrated indian border .
They attacked on 3 fronts - walong; aksai chin and thag la.
While in aksai chin indian soldires much fought bravely .
The real humiliation was in eastern sectors at nefa . PLA marched 160km deep in this sector and reached the plains of assam .
PLA litrally pursued and routed retreating indian brigades .
印度第七旅作为前锋，是最惨的
不过我要补充一点，中国军队并不是靠人数击败的印军，而是靠非常强大的战术，一晚上让一个步兵师急行军几百里，通过及其险峻的山路绕进了印度主力的后方，与前线配合从许多方向同时发动进攻，因此印度军队（包括朝鲜战争的美军）都会喊“为什么中国人无处不在！”，同样的事情发生在了印度所有爆发战斗的地方，中国军队即便找不到山路，也会专门挑两个军队的结合部快速突破，中国军队的战术运用毫无疑问是当时最强大的
@user-fi4km2jm5l
是的，你是对的..最近经过详细的研究，我明白了一切。关于巨大赔率和数字的讨论仅适用于针对第七旅的第一阶段行动。拥有 2400 人的第 7 旅正在与拥有约 11000 人的中国 z 419 师作战。但在行动的第二阶段，印第安人的人数很多。第4师+一个旅的近12000名印度人对抗大约22000名中国人。中国人在塞拉博姆迪拉路上攻击第四师，派遣一支可能是营规模的军队穿过大麦田--一片未开发的山区。他们躲在第4师的后方，引起准将们的巨大恐慌。他们很快就会命令整个第四师撤退。撤军将变成溃败，并很快溃败。
I appreciate how this video gave more information about the specific back-and-forth positions and decisions of the Soviets and Chinese at this time. Other videos I’ve seen haven’t covered that.
@1:00 "looking for ways to relax..."
Then you don't want to play War Thunder. lol.
"Best use of your scarce spare time" also isn't a Russian game with months-long grind and monetisation more agressive than WOT
@@nvelsen1975 Years...
"No longer BFFs... or maybe BIFFs?"
BCFs. Best Comrades Forever.
To mention Vault 21 instead of Vault 101 shows Obsidian supremacy over Bethesda. FNV over Fallout 3. Nice.
Maybe he just likes casinos
The Cold War, can you please make a video on Argentina during the era of Juan Peron. It would mean a lot to me if you made a video on this topic, since your audience will understand how Argentina's economy, politics and society all ended up the way they are today.
A very interesting and informative presentation. The Indians lacked everything except bravery. The seminal work on the conflict is contained in India's China War written by Neville Maxwell who apparently gained access to a secret Indian report that remains classified to this day.
Neville is banned by indian ..because he presented truth
U don't know what happened in china 1962,it's said about 10 million chinses starve to death due to famine ,even though we can easily defeat india
@@changjuma63021962 China started to recover from this great famine (1959 - 1961）
@@changjuma6302 it doesnt matter, india was more stable and richer than china in 1962 sure but china gave a lot more importance to their military (to maintain their commie control) than india did to their military. This was also ended quickly, it never devolved to total war levels, if it did superior indian stability and economy would probably outlast china.
@@jewishmafiosiandganglord6930原来1962年印度这么厉害呀
I am from Arunachal Pradesh, one of the states that China and India fought for. And China still claims us. Infact, atheletes from my state couldn't attend the Asian games in China as China would provide us visa because China says "the people of Zangam (i.e. Arunachal Pradesh) are citizens of China, and they don't need a visa to visit their own country".
Yes, as long as you can break through the Indian army's blockade and enter China and submit your birth certificate, you can get a Chinese ID card.
@@lainfonetwe will never submit to genocidal regime.. Tibet would have stopped opposing if Taiwan was in power in china..
@@akp3097 Ahh " CIA textbook" the most loved on the internet.
@@bunnyfreakz what about people’s choice? We people of Arunachal don’t want to leave in china where our culture and languages get killed… its not Cia propaganda. China use to be diverse but han china took over forcefully with power
@@akp3097 What a ridiculous thought! You do not know that the KMT was crueler and claimed an even bigger territory? There would not be an independent Mongolia today if KMT had won the civil war. You think it would have let Tibet leave? Even today, the map in Taiwan's constitution still claim Mongolia and most certainly Tibet.
Tibet was legally China's (whichever political party was in power) - even the British acknowledged that. Just that Tibet was having the thought of taking the opportunity of the turmoil in China then, to unilaterally declared independence. But they did not. Otherwise, they would not have agreed that the Simla Agreement 1914 needed to be signed by China for it to have any legal effect. In 1914, the precursor of KMT was in power. Yeah, the same KMT who retreated to Taiwan after they lost the civil war, and set up their government there.
Indian nationalists incoming in 3.......2.......1
Yea
They are insufferable and cringe
Which will trigger them more? Losing a war or a map showing accurate control in the Kashmir?
It won’t be a fair fight. The Chinese ones can’t get on TH-cam
@@LookToWindwardand Chinese can use TH-cam mostly won't support CCP
Very interesting piece of history. Thanks for the Video :)
Himalayan blunder a curtomraiser by brigadier john h dalvi.
Its best book on 1962 war .
Sir john dalvi was a pow in PLA pow camp in tibet.
A very non-bias talk about the Sino-Indian war of 1962.
Love the fallout reference
Thumbs up for the Fallout Reference!
"maximise the use of your free time" Sir I have 3k hours in War Thunder, I don't have free time
Always good stuff, and gotta give a comment so the algo can give you some love.
Not sure but I think another conflict occurred in 1967.
Indians have a very narrow understanding of war and conflict.
Those were skirmishes
@@SAMARTHSAMANT Maybe. I think I recall it saying something that it was a victory for and the PLA with withdraw from Nathu La and Cho La or Nathula and Sikkim.
@@Seouldrift7 after 1962 , endiia had learn how to create fake victory to fulfil their wetdreams
@@adityaramachandran591 I guess so.
The episode is a good reminder that the so called “non-aligned movement” was nonsense.
It totally was
It wasn't, independent countries should be ruled by their governments and not Washington or Moscow
@@annan7728 East bloc , West bloc was non sense ....so as hypocritical NAM.
Exactly. That's why India became a Soviet ally after this war.
@@aayush1174 Laughs in heavy KGB involvement in Bharatvarsh/India and Bharatvarshiya/Indian elections while being a non aligned nation.Although,I support your message that every country should be controlled by its own Government not Washington or Mosow.
I saw the best comment in another channel
Never ask a woman her age
A man his salary
And the British to draw borders.
The indo-China war is the result of British drawing border during the colonial era.
China is quite the hypocrite in this case, they do not support the border between China and India but the border between Myanmar and China was also done by the British, and by the same person who drew the border between China-India. China has no problem accepting the Burmese border though. Historical precedence is an excuse, the real issue is the current border arrangement gives significant vantage points to the Indian military which China doesn't like.
@@arijitpalit2756 Same case for Indians? Did India respected the East Pakistan border now Bangladesh drawn by the British? If so why India heavily intervened the war?
@@hwg5039 to stop a genocide???? You are bringing a false equivalence here. India was also facing a refugee crisis because of Operation Searchlight. Many more reasons like that.
@@arijitpalit2756 LOL I wonder who's the hypocrite now???🤣
No the isuse is that they should border each other they need a burfer zone , like mongolia is to china and russia
Come on, Indian pilots are not going to be trained to fly new Soviet and American jets overnight. Mao dipped into Sunzi's Art of War for his concept of (limited) victory.
Learned something new!
Knowledge is power
Almost nobody knows this in China, since it is a tiny conflict. China mobilized 30,000 troops only according wikipedia. In Korea, China mobilized about 780,000 troops. Later on, war against Vietnam, China mobilized another 1 million troops.
Pretty good video!
Minor mispronunciations though, including Aksai Chin (you said "Akai Chin" several times) and Zhou Enlai (Zhou should be pronounced "Jo" not "Jao")
One more,in "Hindi Cheeni Bhai Bhai" slogan,he pronounced Hindi as Hindu.
so basically india poked the dragon with stick and got chewed, got it
And the teeth broke 😂..
@@vikramgurung3043Indian spotted
@@LanguorousEngineerbutthurt spotted
1954: India published a new map showing South Tibet as part of India. The map also shows the two neighbors of China, Sikkim and Bhutan, as part of India. Sikkim has been a neighbor of China for many hundreds of years and has enjoyed good relations. In the 18th century, Sikkim was briefly overrun by the Nepalese Gorkhas, and the Sikkim king fled to China seeking help. The then Qianlong emperor dispatched an expedition to Sikkim, expelled the Gorkhas, and restored Sikkim's sovereignty and independence. Sikkim remained unmolested for the rest of its history until it was annexed by India in 1975. Bhutan is another neighbor of China, and their proximity is evident simply by comparing the flags of Bhutan and the Qing dynasty of China.
January 1959: The CCP (Chinese Communist Party) commented for the first time on the issue of South Tibet when Zhou Enlai, in a letter to Nehru, offered to concede South Tibet to India. However, India rejected the offer, as it also claims Aksai Chin as part of India. Aksai Chin is located in an area that is very hard to access from the Indian side due to difficult terrain. This is evidenced by the fact that China was able to build a road there over two years without India even noticing, and India only became aware of it when reading an article from China describing the construction project. This clearly indicates that India not only has no control over the area but also lacks visual access to the region.
1960: India started establishing posts (border markers) north of South Tibet (north of the McMahon Line) and proclaiming that it has the right to unilaterally 'improve' the McMahon Line as it sees fit.
October 1962: After years of warning, China attacked India's position in South Tibet and recovered Tawang shortly. Three weeks later, in a second wave, China recovered the whole of South Tibet.
November 1962: China unilaterally withdrew back to the north of the McMahon line.
1975: India annexed Sikkim.
1987: India made South Tibet a state and renamed it the so-called Arunachal Pradesh. The Republic of China (Taiwan) put out a statement denouncing India. Here is the statement:
"In regard to the issue of the Indian government's illegal occupation of our country's territory and the establishment of the so-called 'Arunachal Pradesh,' the foreign ministry of the Republic of China issued the following announcement at midnight: India's illegal occupation of our country's territory has been repeatedly stated by the Government of the Republic of China as something it will not recognize. Recently, the Indian Congress unilaterally passed the establishment of 'Arunachal Pradesh' to the south of the so-called McMahon Line. The Indian Government also made it a state. The Government of the Republic of China once again solemnly proclaims that the Government of India intends to legitimize its illegal occupation of Chinese territory. The Government of the Republic of China regards this as illegal, void, and absolutely not recognized."
2008: With the return of Hong Kong to China, Britain effectively withdrew from its colonial involvement in Asia, and Tibet lost its utility as a potential bargaining chip in British negotiations with China concerning Hong Kong. With no remaining interests in Tibet, Britain could afford to be forthright for once. The British government issued a statement acknowledging China's sovereignty over Tibet (previously recognized as suzerainty, not sovereignty). This statement, endorsed by both the Conservative and Labour parties, is notable for its candor in admitting Britain's past territorial ambitions in Tibet and adopts an almost apologetic tone. Here is an excerpt:
"...But our position is unusual for one reason of history that has been imported into the present: the anachronism of our formal position on whether Tibet is part of China, and whether in fact we harbour continued designs to see the break-up of China. We do not.
Our ability to get our points across has sometimes been clouded by the position the UK took at the start of the 20th century on the status of Tibet, a position based on the geopolitics of the time. Our recognition of China's "special position" in Tibet developed from the outdated concept of suzerainty. Some have used this to cast doubt on the aims we are pursuing and to claim that we are denying Chinese sovereignty over a large part of its own territory. We have made clear to the Chinese Government, and publicly, that we do not support Tibetan independence. Like every other EU member state, and the United States, we regard Tibet as part of the People's Republic of China. "
2014: A Tibetan Chinese named Nido Tania from Arunachal Pradesh (occupied South Tibet) went to Delhi and was beaten to death because he 'looked Chinese.'
2024: In the 1990s, India subtly probed the People's Republic of China (PRC), leading to the inference that China's position on South Tibet had hardened, despite the PRC officially maintaining ambiguity on the matter. It has become evident that China's earlier offer to cede South Tibet is no longer available, as China has explicitly stated that South Tibet is part of its territory. This stance mirrors the positions of both the Tibetan Lhasa Government and its civil war rival, the Republic of China (Taiwan).
In hindsight, India had a chance to settle its border with China to its advantage, but it was too greedy because it also claims Aksai Chin, an area that neither British India nor India has ever controlled. However, that opportunity has now passed. It's like they say, "never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity." It is evident that India is behaving in a manner reminiscent of how the British might have acted if they had not left the subcontinent. No one would argue that British India was a victim of China's aggression, yet this is the narrative India wishes to propagate. One can understand India's current apprehension towards China, given that it holds onto disputed territory while the rightful owner grows stronger. Nevertheless, this sense of threat from China is entirely self-inflicted, and India has no one to blame but itself.
Your story is all one sided
China launched the attack first
They are working hard to ensure said two countries jump at each other again.
Comment for the algorithm
Please also make a video explaining 1967 skirmishes
Please make a video on the 1971 Indo-Pakistan war as it is a more important event in the Cold War where a direct confrontation between the US 7th Naval fleet and Soviet Nuclear Submarines occurred in the Bay of Bengal.
1. Complete Niglect on Army modernization by Indian Government, Indian army was Fighting with World war 1 weapons meanwhile chinese were fighting with AK-47 assualt rifles and Russian machine guns.
2. Lack of Defence manufacturing and logistics.
3. making communist Krishna Menon Defence minister
4. Then prime minister selecting army Chief from his Family.
These were some reasons why India lost in that War.
Ladakh is NOT in the northeastern part of India. Attack was on NEFA or northeastern frontier agency, now known as Arunachal Pradesh
USSR America China and India... all looking at each other with surprised Pikachu faces
Sir can you plz make your content on 1971 Indo-pak war...
It's one of the most significant wars fought during cold War having much larger impact on geopolitics....
1971 is my favourite war , I wish more non indian explore this topic , even though it had no big geopolitical affect apart from independence of Bengalis
@@usmanqureshi08 bro it was much bigger geopolitical impact.. The war between India-Pakistan in 1971 could have become global war.... because it also brought USA and Russia at a brink of war.... Because USA was assisting pakistan and Russia led the blockade of US naval ships as it was in India's support....!!!
The war litrally brought whole west in confrontation with soviet Russia.
Bangladesh isn't only impact of 1971 war .
Borders in kashmir were permemantly redrawn and ceasefire line became loc.
Then under shimla agreement of 1971 india gave back 14ksqkm of territory which it annexed from Pakistan in western front
While retaining 1000sqkm in kashmir (turtuk ; kargil sector; tithwal ; etc)
While Pakistan kept some 100sqkm territory which it annexed from india in chhamb.
The territory which india took also included kargil heights which Pakistan occupied in kargil war.
The kargil war also brought great possibility of nuclear war between 2 powers
@@SAMARTHSAMANT Yup 👍👍👍
@@SaumyaRanjnaSwain1948 and 1965 and 27 February also had massive impact
The timing of the war in 1962 was mainly based on two factors: firstly, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and secondly, the climate in the theater of war was just right. The timing for the end is twofold: firstly, the end of the Cuban missile crisis; secondly, the logistical capabilities of the Chinese military cannot keep up. You should know that there are no roads there.
Good video, but really is aksai chin, not akai chin
One of Indian delusion is the belief that India is a victim of China's aggression. To understand how this perception arises, we must consider the dramatic shift in India's geopolitical viewpoint after gaining independence from British rule. British historian Arnold Toynbee noted that while Indians were subjects of the British Crown, they were largely indifferent to British India's borders and even condemned the British Empire's annexation of distant territories as immoral. In 1921, India's Congress Party went so far as to urge neighboring states not to enter into treaties with the Imperial Power (the British Raj). However, once Indians assumed sovereignty, their perspective underwent a complete reversal. Suddenly, the once-distant lands of the British Indian Empire were seen as sacred Indian territory. Even more alarmingly, India began asserting territorial claims over areas that had never been claimed, let alone controlled, by the British Raj. In essence, aspiring to emulate the British Raj, India became expansionist in its own right.
In Arnold Toynbee's words:
"It is queer that lines drawn by British officials should have been consecrated as precious national assets of the British Indian Empire's non-British successor states. At the time when those lines were drawn the transaction produced no stir among the . . . Indian . . . subjects, as they then were, of the British crown. If any of them paid any attention to what Durand and McMahon were doing, they will have written it off as just another move in the immoral game of power politics that the British Imperialists were playing at the Indian tax-payers' expense. The present consecration of these British-made lines as heirlooms in the successor states' national heritages is an unexpected and unfortunate turn of History's wheel."
With respect to China, the best way is to give a chronological order of events leading to the present stalemate:
1912: In the first full year of the Republic of China after the fall of the Qing dynasty, the United States National Geographic Magazine dedicated an issue to China. Accompanying the issue is a large and detailed fold-out map of China. The map clearly shows that Dirang Dzong (德讓宗) and Tawang (達旺) are within the boundary of China.
1943: British India likely calculated that dealing with the Lhasa government was easier than with the Republic of China's Nationalist Government in extracting land concessions and proposed to the United States to recognize Tibet's right to exchange diplomatic representatives with other powers. The Americans rejected this proposal:
"The Government of the United States has borne in mind the fact that the Chinese Government has long claimed suzerainty over Tibet and that the Chinese constitution lists Tibet among areas constituting the territory of the Republic of China. This Government has at no time raised a question regarding either of those claims."
1944: British India annexed Dirang Dzong (德讓宗), a Tibetan-settled area. Dzong means fort in Tibetan. The Chinese Government (the Nationalist Government of the Republic of China, seated in Kunming at the time because of World War II) protested to the British. So did the Tibetan Lhasa government.
1945: British India intruded into the tribal area of South Tibet.
February 1947: The Chinese Nationalist Government lodged a complaint with the Indian mission, which was by then newly established in China, on British India's border intrusions into Chinese territory.
August 1947: Britain left South Asia, and India was created as the successor polity to the departed British. India's creation means that a country that historically did not exist suddenly appears on China's doorstep.
October 1947: The Tibetan Lhasa Government dispatched a formal request to New Delhi, asking the newly independent Indian Government to withdraw all its predecessors' intrusions into the territory between the McMahon Line and the traditional border beneath the foothills and return a wide swath of territory from Ladakh to Assam, including Sikkim and the Darjeeling district.
1949: When the defeat of the Nationalist Government in China's civil war was imminent, the Republic of China's ambassador in New Delhi reminded the Indian Government that China did not recognize the McMahon Line and held the Simla Convention invalid.
October 1949: The CCP (Chinese Communist Party) took control of the mainland, and its civil war rival, the Republic of China, retreated to Taiwan.
December 1949: India recognized the People's Republic of China as the legitimate government, effectively cutting off the diplomatic channel the Republic of China used to deliver its protests to India.
February 1951: India annexed Tawang (達旺), the birthplace of the Sixth Dalai Lama and home to the four-hundred-year-old Tawang Monastery. The Tibetan authorities in Lhasa protested but were simply informed by the Indian political officer that India was taking over Tawang. The Tibetans protested again, accusing the Indian Government of 'seizing as its own what did not belong to it.' The Tibetans went on to ask New Delhi to withdraw its forces from Tawang immediately. The protests were ignored. The Republic of China (which had already retreated to Taiwan by then and had no diplomatic relation with India) also vehemently denounced India's territorial travesty. Curiously the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) made no noise.
In 1962 india army lacked proper winter cloth, shoes, even rifle is 303 which magazine capacity was 3 round
While Chinese got fully automatic ak 47
Neharu was against indian army as a institution he fear army can take over government like Pakistan junta
So he drastically cut funding
Neharu also change army general and instal puppet officers who lack leadership quality. This is disaster, Neharu don't want enmity with china.
In india this episode known as
Neharu's himalayan blunder
It start from accepting Chinese occupation of Tibet.
Quite wrong. The Indian Army had been advancing on the line of actual control before the war, and Nehru was complacent that the Chinese would not retaliate
@@ekitochin6059 it is CCP who first invade Tibet, india just send soldier to petrol border due to suspicious Chinese movements.
Nope, the real reason was Nehru was too proud and underestimated the Chinese. Nehru thought the Chinese were too soft. Zhou Enlai offered a peaceful resolution but Nehru refused. The 1962 war was not a surprise. There had been several skirmishes in the few years prior to 1962. To even suggest that the Indian army was unprepared is disingenuous and just making excuses.
Even though the Chinese won and actually took back the disputed South Tibet area which the Chinese still regarded as theirs, they withdrew their troops back to pre-war positions after they announced the cease fire.
Nehru's himalayan blunder should more properly be applied to his refusal to accept the Chinese solution to end all this border tension. We could have had 60 years of peace between these 2 countries instead of tension; and the Arunachal Pradesh athletes would most certainly have gotten their visa to China.
@@Wann-zo7rn2qn4i who saved Zhou El Lei in 1958 from Taiwanese assassination!
@@Wen25h Well, I am all ears to hear your claims. And just to clarify , it was a Taiwanese + CIA attempt.
So basically Chinese gained consent from Soivet Union to engage Indian Troops.😒
History is based facts, and thus far the 1962 war has India as the aggressor and breaking the then statut quo, what happened next we all know, it was a short but decisive Chinese victory....
This historical take on the 1962 Sino-Indian War is complete nonsense. Even reading "China's India War", a 2018 attempt by an Indian scholar to state pretty much what was said here, the complaint that India is usually perceived to be the aggressor is frequently stated. Even Henry Kissinger's book, "On China", uses U.S. intelligence sources to explain how India was the clear aggressor. For example, upon Indian troops marching "eyeball to eyeball" with Chinese forces, their immediate reaction was to retreat 18km and continue to plead for peace. Kissinger quotes Indian bloodthirsty politicians from the time taking this retreat as a sign of weakness. In the end, China didn't take any new territory, not even territory which they claim to this day, such as Southern Tibet, because they wanted the world to know that they gained nothing from the war. Simply put, this historical analysis was nonsense.
在YT上是不能讲中国好话的，中国必须是邪恶的，具有扩张性的
@@您的父上2012年以后媒体的客观中立视角完全没有了。和当初日本一样，经济上要超过美国了就会各种制裁和批评，哪怕是盟友。一直到2008年中国都作为准盟友配合了美国几乎所有的经济和军事行为。
Yeah China was in the right for this one, and in the wrong with Russia. It's just the not approved narrative.
Please also provide sources and further readings
the split between China and Soviet started in the late 1950s, and China had been blocked from the West since 1949. and the Great Leap Forward was about to end by that time. it won't get worse to have a war with India in 1962. by showing the willingness to wage war to deter enemies' aggressive movements, that's how Mao and other CPC first-generation leaders think about China's border issues. it's consistent, from the Korean War, and the Sino-India War to the Zhenbao Island Incident.
you are correct.
Plz make video on indopak wars
Probably could be titled "India's insane wars against Pakistan [10 hours part 1 / 387]" 😆
@@nvelsen1975 😀
During the 1962 battle, three Chinese cooks captured an Indian battalion. Tens of thousands of Indian soldiers were captured. The Indians were very talkative and vulnerable in actual battles.
Hey there, Captain History Channel! It's always refreshing to see someone rewrite the entire narrative of a historical event with the precision of a toddler trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I mean, who needs accurate information when we can just make up our own version of reality, right?
So, according to your highly credible and definitely not fabricated account, three Chinese cooks managed to capture an entire Indian battalion. I can just imagine it now: the fearless chefs, armed with spatulas and ladles, bravely outmaneuvering the clueless Indian soldiers who were presumably too busy discussing their favorite biryani recipes to notice they were being "captured."
And tens of thousands of Indian soldiers captured? Wow, it's like the Chinese army stumbled upon a massive group therapy session instead of an actual battlefield. I bet the Chinese soldiers were so impressed with the Indians' talkative skills that they decided to ditch their weapons and enroll in communication workshops instead.
But wait, there's more! The Indians were "vulnerable in actual battles." I guess all those fancy weapons, training programs, and military strategies were just for show. Silly Indians, thinking they could actually defend themselves in a real fight. Maybe next time they should consider bringing poets and philosophers to the battlefield for a more intellectually stimulating experience.
Thanks for enlightening us with your alternative history lesson. Who needs well-documented facts and credible sources when we can just rely on your vivid imagination and unparalleled storytelling skills? I eagerly await your next masterpiece, perhaps a tale of how unicorns played a crucial role in the space race. Keep 'em coming!
Source: winnie the pooh jinping bedroom funds
@@web_devs印度人后来写了很多回忆录，推荐你去看一下，中国对印度的碾压就是全方位的，而且战役后来印度国防部自己也做了战争总结，印度也一直没否认过中国宣传的战争过程
@@您的父上 avg Chinese argument "enemy wrote many memoirs you should read them" but they never link or provide source to which memoirs they talk about, just make claims cause u know even u guys don't have source to claim it.
@@pajeet_slayer really？JohnDalvi：what can i say？
Looking at the current events right now in the world, i can say we're in a cold war right now.
in what ways?
The first one never really ended.
The cold war can you please make video about the civil war in el salvador
Can you please do a video on Sparky the Clown and his irrelevance to the Cold War?
When Indians crossed the line according to forward policy they were went not in chinese territory but in Indian territory
According to a line drawn unilatarily by a Brit
China: the real control line is more reasonable now. India: No, it's all mine
The Indians started it by provoking China over the disputed border as well as giving sanctuary to the Dalai Lama.
china has established rule over lands indian claim when even india was a geographic concept ....due to process of china marching torwards republic fr last dynasty, british took chance to move in...then india followed steps...by all despicable moves
Ladakh is not in NEFA..it's in Jammu and Kashmir.. @11:44
The Sino-Indian war is not hot at all in China, because no chinese will feel proud of defeating a weak country.😂😂😂😂
Which strong country you ever defeated ?
@@dreamadventure8220 UN.
Tito, Nasser, Nkrumah and Sukarno.
Really interesting movie. And discussed problem is still far from be solved
Yòu should cover 1965 and 1971 Indo Pak wars
They had far more relevance for cold war geopolitics
Nice Fallout reference lol
Observations:
USA: I’m better than everyone! Everyone needs to listen to me!
China: I’m better than everyone! Especially USA!
India: I’m better than China!
Russia: I’m still better than everyone!
Result:
Conflict
事实上中国有更详细记载，印度要求西藏建国然后想办法并入印度，而且印度还要求驻军成都，把四川变成缓冲区。中国觉得不可理喻，直接不谈了
How about cut the crap and let Tibet stands as Nation. No china no India
@@dreamadventure8220 how about letting india be ruled by british again?
@@dreamadventure8220 Stop talking nonsense and let India break up into multiple countries.
@@dreamadventure8220 Why not return south Tibet to the Tibet?
Pain Thunder > War Thunder.
*ptsd in war thunder*
So many countries have done India bad, and yet we still persevere.. That should tell you all about the resolve of the Indian spirit.
Playing the victim card. 😆🤣 If India had so much spirit, how come it was so easily conquered by a British company with its small military? For more than a hundred years, you were ruled by a company, not even by the British crown.
Lol what a joke
@@adityaramachandran591lol name a single global famous Indian rebellion tho
@@Wann-zo7rn2qn4inot just any company.... They even sent Duke of Wellington to fight India, the person who beat Napoleon.
@@nomooon So? Wellington was still a relative green-horn when he landed in India. India must be proud that it provided Wellington with the training ground for his eventual military achievements.
Remember Sikkim?
What are you referring?
@@chakraborty1989
Yeah, marched in and taken away.
@@wsmithe2209from an autocratic monarch and then transferred into Republic by democratic measures.
@@rishisaini5269 nonsense I am from Sikkim. You occupied my country in the pretext of democratic reforms. India have no right to seize the sovereignty of Sikkim whatsoever.
A lot of details were told, but they were all false. The truth is that at that time, China was blockaded by the Soviet Union and the United States. China took advantage of the Cuban Missile Crisis between the United States and the Soviet Union to launch a self-defense counterattack against India (a friend of the United States and the Soviet Union), and achieved complete success.
True
False
source, lain?
Butthurt
"But if you go carryin' pictures of Chairman Mao / You ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow...!"
Or pictures of Nehru.
Or Dalai Lama.
You are a bot with no awareness of where the quotation comes from, aren't you?@@LarzGustafsson
It is obvious that India was the aggressive part.
How
@@runajain5773 supporting Tibetan separtists and forward base policy, also 1961 invasion of Goa
@@Dorae-ur-mom I know goa part Portuguese colony but it was part of india and forward policy is defensive mode why we invade the Tibet
@@runajain5773 Dhola Post was made 3km north of mcmohan line
@@runajain5773 Macau and Goa are former Portuguese colonies. China reclaims Macau through negotiation, while India reclaims Goa by force. This is the civilization gap between China and India.
Where’s India confidence coming from after Chinese army just beaten US army in Korea war.
Well nehru might have lost the war in 62 but his daughter sure won the war in 1967 when china tried to took sikkim please make a video on that
Free sikkim
Insignificant
@@KinLee919 free Tibet !.
@@widodoakrom3938 : Unsolved and tense topic, can't ignore chinese worms !!..
@@wonderworld7721 crying and jealous endian lol
I am Nationalist Indian 🇮🇳 but I don't Blame on those who say about our Lose in 1962 War and point out at what we lacker during that War.Yes We(INDIA🇮🇳) Lost the 1962 Indo-China War Mainly Because of Our Political Leadership 😤 which failed the nation not our Indian 🇮🇳 Military 🪖.Nehru's shitty Gandhian Policies and his more suspicion towards Army because of Military Coups near Pakistan 🇵🇰 made our Armed Forces Literally Unfunded and Un-equipped.On other side Chinese 🇨🇳 were more trained from latest Korean War and also Well Equipped which resulted in their Victory.But Our Armed Forces were Re-instructed after the Leadership of Nehru Especially During Mrs.Indira Gandhi she transformed the Indian Army 🪖 to tip of Power🔥 and under present Narendra Modi😎 Leadership Again Armed forces are give full and free hand which is the Reason Indian Army is now a Forced to be recokned with in the World Today.Jai Hind 🇮🇳.Jai Bharath🚩.
Second commentor
Excellent video!
Still watching btw
Holy crap Lois it's tony pro!
yes comrade@@vroomkaboom108
A correction - no the Chinese were the one out numbered by the indians , the indians were over confident had more heavy weapons and supplies . In the end were out flank by the Chinese PLA and surrendered in massive numbers
Entirely incorrect. Plz provide sources when trying to claim bullshit. Lol
"Over-confident" india never wanted war but friendship with china
Bruh Indian Government was blind in their strawberry paradise that they didn't even recognise China as a threat rather as a Brother and you are saying that they were oVaRconFIdent(that "a" is intentional). Sure buddy.
额，中印1962战争甚至没有出现在我们的教科书上，一方面印度不是中国的主要敌人。另一方面，这冲突范围太小，是西藏军区这样的偏师就完成计划了。课本上就没提过，只有跟日本人打过，跟美国人打过这样的战争才会出现在教科书上。
Prior to 1962 India has already gobbled up South Tibet in 1951 under the CCP's watch. South Tibet became India's so -called Arunachal Pradesh.
@@PomegranateChocolate let Tibet stands as nation. Stop this savages game of Imperialism
@@dreamadventure8220 It would be better to divide India into different countries based on different castes, which would result in fewer conflicts and tragedies.
Can you make a video about Bangladesh Liberation War 1971
🍿
"Mao's trolling" hahahahha this is awesome
Cries angl00rgime parrot😂😂
It's basically a sterotype to depict PLA with numerous soilders or human wave. But who could moblize more troops ? India whose captial is close to aksai chin or china who have to supply through the entire Tibet?
你怎么能这么说呢？就得顺着他们说，跟我说“人海战术”，“人海战术”，“人海战术”... ...
@@nicholaswhite9760 一提PLA就是人海战术，也不提当时战术、武器方面的优势，太经典了
He mentioned in the video China mobilized far more troops
Trans Himalaya the victim of Indian and chinese imperialism
A wonderful historical coverage video of the Indian-Chinese conflict issue Cold War proxy War occurred between two neighborhoods in Southeast Asia ...where ever pastor British empirical shadows were notable...border problems amongst niebourhoods and installed were planted
It has little to with Britain,
The Chinese government was the one which forcefully annexed tibet and started this whole issue.
@@jj591 Britain is the father of India.
Teach part war siachen glacier
麦克马洪线甚至是不存在的，在有英国有记录的条约中根本没有找到这一条线，这根本就是印度单方面的侵略行为
中国的一个四人小队深入敌后 击垮并俘虏了一个营 事后小队长曾说： 他们非但不投降还胆敢向我们还击
There's a Indian movie regarding this conflict called Paltan.
The actors from both side literally says "Indo-Chini bhai bhai".
So why didn't China retreat from Aksai Chin and everywhere else if India became so powerful with all that foreign aid?
There are big roads
3:26 Wait what? What is this map? Since when has Pakistan ceded that part to China? And since when does India claim Tibet in its modern borders?
I see you are an Indian �
@@chinarise I am not indian, can you please stop using that to deligitimize anyone not 1000% over the top pro-China and actually engage with what I actually say? Thank you.
Video mentioned: indi 🚩🚩🚩🕉️🚩🕉️🔥🕉️🇮🇳💪🏿🇮🇳💪🏿🔥.....a
After watching the full video, I personally think you took the chinese nationalist state perspective a little bit too much at heart (altough not always to put nuance) compared to your other videos. From that really weird Big China map with bits of even Pakistan in it and showing India as claiming Tibet for some reason, to the choice of using the demonizing (around the world) term "separatists", of telling that Tibet tought of itself as independant only during the 1950s when it was since the 1910s and before that as a tributary state, and before that as an independant empire. Everything feels as if to avoid the fate of anyone slightly pissing just a tiny bit the nationalist chinese perspective unlike with other nationalist perspectives, something that has multiple precedents in the past three decades. That's not like your usual selves, guys, your video on Tibet was great.
PS : I am not indian, not european, not american. Can the China internet militia not put me in a camp, please?
Facts can hurt your feelings
@@chiaolim7773 my feelings are not hurt, whitewashing history is just unworthy of them. I'm not mad, not offended, simply disappointed. This is the Mao guy behind the "five fingers of Tibet" policy, policy which was never addressed once in this video. The Armchair Historian did a better job covering this I feel. And I mean, c'mon, that map is just really bad. I simply want them to improve.
@@Game_Hero 但凡你去搜索一下维基百科，就知道西藏自元朝开始是中国直辖，所谓的朝贡国是日本越南琉球，印度人都像你一样无知且自大吗
印度入侵了海得拉巴、锡金、巴基斯坦和孟加拉
So where was the Tibetan declaration of independence and the Tibetan nationalist revolutionary movement?
Read up on Lhasa's relations with the ROC from 1913 to 1948. ROC Tibetan and Mongolian Affairs Commission had an office in Lhasa (No, it was not an embassy).
The Tibetan issue became an issue largely because the Reds decided to change the system, something which earlier Beijing or equivalent preferred to keep the system.
中国指苏联出现修正主义，主要还是根据苏联在世界扩张野心，以及苏联内部出现官僚主义，他们出现了等级森严的官僚制度，这与中国理想的人人平等社会，官兵一致，为人民服务的理念有冲突。思想方面，一个社会主义领头国家自己反对自己曾经至高无上的领袖，而且是全盘否定，动摇了民心，对于东欧共产国家起了坏的宣传作用。赫鲁晓夫与美国亲密，间接坑了中东，古巴，这是有目共睹的。出于种种目的，中国需要与其划清界限。
From Chinese perspective, the 1962 Indo China was absolutely not worth to comment. By the way, China us much stronger than India, the Indian problem is negligible !
Lol love how all the Chinese commenters try their hardest to make themselves appear condescending
True
@@rishkebab5092 They really do. Any questions?
When the PRC inherited the borders of the ROC, it also inherited more than a dozen border disputes with virtually every nation around it
To date, it has basically resolved most of these disputes peacefully via negotiations, including with India's neighbours like Pakistan, Myanmar and Nepal
If Pakistan, Myanmar, and Nepal were all able to peacefully resolve their disputes with China, consider that maybe India is the problem
❤❤❤❤
Algorithm
Sir, just to make a correction, the indians never entered into chinese territory, u might say, the indian army established outposts in the "occupied" territory which is claimed by India, but forcefully occupied by china and technically belongs to India, since the Tibetan govt accepted these lines with the british indian govt, irrespective of whether the kuomintang or the communists liked it or not, coz at that point, the tibetans in everyway were independent.
Edit: Also, India was only initially outnumbered and outgunned... in technical terms, India was in everyway superior to the chinese counterpart, by the time of the unilateral ceasefire from china, the chinese army had almost no rations left to feed the army, so if the indian govt wanted, they could have prolonged the conflict at will.... however the indian govt was weak, lead by a person who lived in his daydreams... so the indians lost the conflict.
So why was the ROC gov invited to the Simla Convention if Tibet was already deemed independent? Read up on earlier treaties between Qing China and Britain.
Britain recognized ROC as successor to Qing.
The Simla Convention said nothing about Tibetan independence. It was about giving the Brits a sphere of influence in Tibet.
Of course the Brits did not want an indpendent Tibet. ROC was considered easier to be manipulated than Tsarist Russia.
Neither were the Tibetans interested. As Tibetologist Dawa Nobu later described it, independence was not political independence but independent way of life.
The Kashag governing system set up by Qing China continued minus the Imperial Commissioner.
1962年 阿三再硬一点 印度就不存在啦😂
as usual , all wars were won by India on TH-cam comment section
Nehru Forwar Policy, remember?
@@LYW-su3ol Better than China winning wars on Paper Maps lol