Months before the India-China war in 1962, an Army platoon held on to a post in Galwan despite being surrounded. The Chinese later moved back by about 200 m.
The Chinese foreign ministry said Indian govt has the responsibility to uphold legitimate & legal rights of the international investors including the Chinese ones.
The NCP chief's comments came in response to a query about Rahul Gandhi's charge that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had surrendered Indian territory to the Chinese aggression.
In an interview with PTI, Vikram Misri said it was entirely Beijing's responsibility to take a careful view of the relations and decide which direction the bilateral ties should move.
New bill aims to fix key issues with IBC 2016, including delays & patchy implementation, and protect creditors, with window for genuine promoters to retain control of their companies.
New Delhi: Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi Tuesday pushed for a “dual-track” progress for ties with India, separating economic ties from the boundary question,...
Now that both IAF and PAF have made formal claims of having shot down the other’s aircraft in the 87-hour war in May, we can ask a larger question: do such numbers really matter?
It is the military leadership that must accept responsibility because the decisions of strength, operational viability and logistics rest with military commanders. Moral and professional challenge. In case of failure natural for us to blame others . Happened in 62 may happen again unless institutional mechanism formalised.
General Panag in his honest forthright approach is following in the footsteps of another GOC Lt.Genral Gurbaksh Singh who wrote not just an article but an entire book “War Dispatches” giving an unvarnished account of the 1965 war with the sole intention that future generations benefit by learning the real facts rather than hubris. General Panag as an army man laments that the defense budget is too less but when I as a citizen find that the defense budget is Rs 450000 crores and the health budget just Rs 69000 crores I am appalled. I am appalled at the difference between the two allocations and I am appalled that the army still feels that like Oliver Twist it needs more. How do we avoid making the defense department a bottomless pit?
For a balanced view point we must go back to 1947 rather than 1962 . Article 370 and special status of J &K was a concession to the fact that Jammu and Kashmir which includes Ladakh was not a part of the Radcliffe Award.Nehru was fully aware of this as he had to manoeuvre deftly sometimes with Sheikh Abdullah and Mountbatten,sometimes at the UN and sometimes with Russia as a non aligned to obtain a Russian veto to secure the State for India.This was something that only Nehru was capable of. This wheeling dealing ( sometimes skulduggery as in 1953) came at a certain price. This price was that not only the feelings of the people of J&K but of neighbors had to be taken into account. Thus in Nehru’s time the J & K State had a Prime Minister.The forward policy of 1962 was rhetoric which got out of hand. The present dispensation by abolishing Article 370, fragmenting J&K into Union Territories and showing off the 56 inch chest in general has acted like a bull in a china shop. I personally do not think that the broken pieces can be put back again. The politics of the subcontinent,for better or for worse, has moved beyond an inflection point. It is quite possible that President Xi or General Bajwa or Prime Minister Oli or any of the other rulers of the neighboring States for that matter might also have a 56 inch chest.
It is the military leadership that must accept responsibility because the decisions of strength, operational viability and logistics rest with military commanders. Moral and professional challenge. In case of failure natural for us to blame others . Happened in 62 may happen again unless institutional mechanism formalised.
General Panag in his honest forthright approach is following in the footsteps of another GOC Lt.Genral Gurbaksh Singh who wrote not just an article but an entire book “War Dispatches” giving an unvarnished account of the 1965 war with the sole intention that future generations benefit by learning the real facts rather than hubris. General Panag as an army man laments that the defense budget is too less but when I as a citizen find that the defense budget is Rs 450000 crores and the health budget just Rs 69000 crores I am appalled. I am appalled at the difference between the two allocations and I am appalled that the army still feels that like Oliver Twist it needs more. How do we avoid making the defense department a bottomless pit?
For a balanced view point we must go back to 1947 rather than 1962 . Article 370 and special status of J &K was a concession to the fact that Jammu and Kashmir which includes Ladakh was not a part of the Radcliffe Award.Nehru was fully aware of this as he had to manoeuvre deftly sometimes with Sheikh Abdullah and Mountbatten,sometimes at the UN and sometimes with Russia as a non aligned to obtain a Russian veto to secure the State for India.This was something that only Nehru was capable of. This wheeling dealing ( sometimes skulduggery as in 1953) came at a certain price. This price was that not only the feelings of the people of J&K but of neighbors had to be taken into account. Thus in Nehru’s time the J & K State had a Prime Minister.The forward policy of 1962 was rhetoric which got out of hand. The present dispensation by abolishing Article 370, fragmenting J&K into Union Territories and showing off the 56 inch chest in general has acted like a bull in a china shop. I personally do not think that the broken pieces can be put back again. The politics of the subcontinent,for better or for worse, has moved beyond an inflection point. It is quite possible that President Xi or General Bajwa or Prime Minister Oli or any of the other rulers of the neighboring States for that matter might also have a 56 inch chest.