Whole Deception – The Deception of Panchsheel Agreement of 1954

Sino-Indian Relations must be reformulated after resolving Tibet-China Border Dispute

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT: 60 YEARS AGO, INDIA AND CHINA SIGNED AN AGREEMENT THAT EXCLUDED TIBET. THIS AGREEMENT IS NULL AND VOID WITHOUT THE PARTICIPATION OF TIBET.
Sino-Indian Relations must be reformulated after resolving Tibet-China Border Dispute
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT: ACHARYA J B KRIPALANI, GANDHIAN THINKER, FREEDOM FIGHTER, SOCIAL WORKER, AND EMINENT INTELLECTUAL OF INDIA IS SEEN IN THIS PHOTO(LEFT) ALONG WITH SARDAR PATEL(MIDDLE) AND SIR SEN(RIGHT). ACCORDING TO ACHARYA KRIPALANI THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT IS BORN IN SIN. I MET THIS NATIONALIST LEADER DURING JUNE 1967 IN NEW DELHI.
Sino-Indian Relations must be reformulated after resolving Tibet-China Border Dispute: ACHARYA J B KRIPALANI, GANDHIAN THINKER, FREEDOM FIGHTER, SOCIAL WORKER, AND EMINENT INTELLECTUAL OF INDIA IS SEEN IN THIS PHOTO (LEFT) ALONG WITH SARDAR PATEL (MIDDLE) AND SIR SEN (RIGHT). ACCORDING TO ACHARYA KRIPALANI THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT IS BORN IN SIN. I MET THIS NATIONALIST LEADER, MEMBER OF INDIAN PARLIAMENT DURING JUNE 1967 IN NEW DELHI.

Seventy years ago, India and Peoples’ Republic of China had signed the Panchsheel Agreement without coming to a proper understanding about the status of Tibet. At that time, both India and Tibet had earnestly believed that China would not oppress Tibet with its military conquest. India and Tibet were hoping that China would respect the traditional governance of Tibet by the Institution called The Dalai Lama or the Ganden Phodrang Government which ruled over Tibet for four centuries since 1642.

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT: IN MY OPINION, THIS PHOTO IMAGE PROVIDES THE EVIDENCE FOR THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF JUNE 1954. CHINA'S PRIME MINISTER CHOU EN-LAI HAD ARRIVED IN NEW DELHI ON AN OFFICIAL VISIT ACCOMPANIED BY THE 14th DALAI LAMA WHO IS RECOGNIZED BY INDIA AS THE HEAD OF THE TIBETAN GOVERNMENT. AT THAT TIME CHINA HAD DELIBERATELY DISTORTED THE TRUTH ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF ITS MILITARY CONQUEST OF TIBET.
Sino-Indian Relations must be reformulated after resolving Tibet-China Border Dispute :IN MY OPINION, THIS PHOTO IMAGE PROVIDES THE EVIDENCE FOR THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF JUNE 1954. CHINA’S PRIME MINISTER CHOU EN-LAI HAD ARRIVED IN NEW DELHI ON AN OFFICIAL VISIT ACCOMPANIED BY THE 14th DALAI LAMA WHO IS RECOGNIZED BY INDIA AS THE HEAD OF THE TIBETAN GOVERNMENT. AT THAT TIME CHINA HAD DELIBERATELY DISTORTED THE TRUTH ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF ITS MILITARY CONQUEST OF TIBET.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF JUNE 1954: AFTER SIGNING THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT, INDIA TRIED ITS BEST TO LOOSEN CHINA'S MILITARY GRIP OVER TIBET. BOTH INDIA, AND TIBET HOPED THAT DIPLOMACY WOULD PREVAIL AND THAT TIBET WOULD ENJOY FULL AUTONOMY DESPITE CHINA'S MILITARY CONQUEST OF TIBET DURING 1950. THIS PHOTO IMAGE OF CHOU EN-LAI'S VISIT TO NEW DELHI ALONG WITH THE 14th DALAI LAMA GAVE HOPE TO BOTH INDIA AND TIBET.
Sino-Indian Relations must be reformulated after resolving Tibet-China Border Dispute: AFTER SIGNING THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT, INDIA TRIED ITS BEST TO LOOSEN CHINA’S MILITARY GRIP OVER TIBET. BOTH INDIA, AND TIBET HOPED THAT DIPLOMACY WOULD PREVAIL AND THAT TIBET WOULD ENJOY FULL AUTONOMY DESPITE CHINA’S MILITARY CONQUEST OF TIBET DURING 1950. THIS PHOTO IMAGE OF CHOU EN-LAI’S VISIT TO NEW DELHI ALONG WITH THE 14th DALAI LAMA GAVE HOPE TO BOTH INDIA AND TIBET.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF 1954: CHINA'S PRIME MINISTER CHOU EN-LAI HAD VISITED INDIA DURING 1956, ABOUT TWO YEARS AFTER THE SIGNING OF THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT. THIS PHOTO IMAGE IS THE EVIDENCE FOR CHINA'S DECEPTION. CHINA GAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WOULD RESPECT THE POLITICAL INSTITUTION OF THE DALAI LAMA THAT RULED OVER TIBET FOR FOUR CENTURIES.
Sino-Indian Relations must be reformulated after resolving Tibet-China Border Dispute: THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF 1954: CHINA’S PRIME MINISTER CHOU EN-LAI HAD VISITED INDIA DURING 1956, ABOUT TWO YEARS AFTER THE SIGNING OF THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT. THIS PHOTO IMAGE IS THE EVIDENCE FOR CHINA’S DECEPTION. CHINA GAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WOULD RESPECT THE POLITICAL INSTITUTION OF THE DALAI LAMA THAT RULED OVER TIBET FOR FOUR CENTURIES.

While India’s Prime Minister Nehru and Tibet’s ruler, His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama had hoped for a peaceful relationship with China, many Indians were not optimistic and had suspected that China had annexed Tibet with its military invasion of 1950. This Panchsheel Agreement, in the words of Acharya Kripalani, is “Born in Sin.” I had expressed a similar view while commenting on the US-China trade relations that were initiated by President Richard Nixon and Dr. Henry Kissinger and described it as an act of “Original Sin” or “Whole Sin.”

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF 1954: INDIA'S VICE-PRESIDENT DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN VISITED PEKING DURING SEPTEMBER 1957 AND MET WITH THE LEADERS OF COMMUNIST CHINA WITH AN EARNEST DESIRE TO SAVE TIBET FROM CHINA'S MILITARY OPPRESSION. THE TRUE INTENTIONS OF CHINA GOT EXPOSED AND THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT BECAME FULLY EVIDENT.
Sino-Indian Relations must be reformulated after resolving Tibet-China Border Dispute: THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF 1954: INDIA’S VICE-PRESIDENT DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN VISITED PEKING DURING SEPTEMBER 1957 AND MET WITH THE LEADERS OF COMMUNIST CHINA WITH AN EARNEST DESIRE TO SAVE TIBET FROM CHINA’S MILITARY OPPRESSION. THE TRUE INTENTIONS OF CHINA GOT EXPOSED AND THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT BECAME FULLY EVIDENT.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF 1954:  TOWARDS THE END OF 1957, BOTH INDIA AND TIBET HAD FULLY RECOGNIZED THE DECEPTION OF THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT THAT WAS INITIATED BY CHINA AFTER ITS MILITARY INVASION OF TIBET IN 1950. A TIBETAN RESISTANCE MOVEMENT TOOK ITS BIRTH TO FACE THE CHALLENGE POSED BY CHINA'S MILITARY OCCUPATION OF TIBET.
Sino-Indian Relations must be reformulated after resolving Tibet-China Border Dispute: THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF 1954: TOWARDS THE END OF 1957, BOTH INDIA AND TIBET HAD FULLY RECOGNIZED THE DECEPTION OF THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT THAT WAS INITIATED BY CHINA AFTER ITS MILITARY INVASION OF TIBET IN 1950. A TIBETAN RESISTANCE MOVEMENT TOOK ITS BIRTH TO FACE THE CHALLENGE POSED BY CHINA’S MILITARY OCCUPATION OF TIBET.

In my opinion, any agreement between China and India would have no validity if it involves the Land of Tibet. The Panchsheel Agreement is void as Tibet has not signed this agreement. India and China do not share a common border and the concern about peaceful coexistence must include the concern for the true aspirations of Tibetan people and their natural rights to their territory and to their right to Freedom from military occupation.To begin with, I ask for resolution of Tibet-China Border Dispute.

Rudra Narasimham Rebbapragada
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162, USA
Special Frontier Force-Establishment 22-Vikas Regiment

MOVING BEYOND THE PANCHSHEEL DECEPTION

Ram Madhav | INDIAN EXPRESS, Saturday, June 28, 2014 12:51 am

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT: Mr. Ram Madhav in his opinion had correctly stated that the Panchsheel Agreement between India and China does not include the Land of Tibet. Without the participation of Tibet, the Agreement has no worth and it will not achieve any purpose.
THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT: Mr. Ram Madhav in his opinion had correctly stated that the Panchsheel Agreement between India and China does not include the Land of Tibet. Without the participation of Tibet, the Agreement has no worth and it will not achieve any purpose.

India and China can cooperate with each other on the principles of sovereign equality and mutual sensitivity.

Summary

India and China must develop a new framework for bilateral relations, unshackled by empty rituals and symbols.

Ram Madhav

The biggest problem in Sino-Indian relations is the utter lack of ingenuity and innovativeness. Six decades after the formal engagement through Panchsheel and five decades after the bloody disengagement due to the 1962 War, leaders of both the countries struggle to come up with new and out-of-the-box answers to the problems plaguing their relationship.

When there are no new ideas, one resorts to symbolism and rituals. These are projected as the great new ideas to kickstart a new relationship. However, there is nothing great or new about them. They are the very same worn out and tried-tested-and-failed actions of the last several decades.

The Panchsheel itself is one ritual that successive Indian governments have unfailingly performed. Vice President Hamid Ansari will be visiting Beijing today to uphold India’s commitment to the ritual. The occasion is the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Panchsheel Agreement.

It was exactly six decades ago, on June 28, 1954, roughly two months after the formal signing of the Panchsheel, that Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai visited India. He and then-prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru had issued a historic statement, reaffirming their commitment to the five principles enshrined in the Panchsheel to “lessen the tensions that exist in the world today and help in creating a climate of peace”.

Contrary to public perception or propaganda, Panchsheel was actually an agreement between the “Tibetan region of China and India” on “trade and intercourse.” It did include five principles, like mutual respect, mutual non-aggression, mutual benefit, peaceful coexistence, etc, but the very title of the agreement was a defeat for India.

The British had, at least from the Simla Accord of 1912 until they left India, not conceded that Tibet was a part of China. Unfortunately, one of the first foreign policy deviations of the Nehru government was the signing of the Panchsheel, wherein India had formally called the Tibetan region as “of China”. Thus the Panchsheel was signed as a treaty of peaceful coexistence over the obituary of Tibetan independence. That was why parliamentarian Acharya Kripalani called the agreement as “born in sin”.

The Panchsheel met its end just three months after its signing, when the Chinese were found violating Indian borders in Ladakh in late-1954. A formal death note was written by Mao Zedong a few months before the 1962 war, when he told Zhou that what India and China should practice is not “peaceful coexistence” but “armed coexistence”. The war followed and ended in humiliation and loss of territory for India. It left behind a massive border dispute that continues to haunt both the countries.

However, this didn’t seem to deter the Indian and, to some extent, the Chinese leadership in continuing with the deception of the Panchsheel. The history of Sino-Indian relations in the last five decades is replete with instances of violations of sovereignty, mutual animosity, attempts to upstage each other and general ill-will.
Mostly the Chinese have been on the wrong side of the so-called Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.

Yet, the ritual continued through the decades and changing governments in India. Nehru to P.V. Narasimha Rao to
Atal Bihari Vajpayee continued paying lip service to the Panchsheel during bilateral visits.

“Only with coexistence can there be any existence,” declared Indira Gandhi in 1983. The next prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi, expressed confidence in 1988 that “the five principles of peaceful coexistence provide the best way to handle relations between nations”. Rao as prime minister declared in 1993 that “these principles remain as valid today as they were when they were drafted”. While Vajpayee too was forced to continue this ritual, he made a significant departure by refusing to falsely credit China for following the Panchsheel. He put extra emphasis on “mutual sensitivity to the concerns of each other” and “respect for equality.”

At a time when Beijing is celebrating six decades of the Panchsheel, it is important to look at a new framework for Sino-Indian relations beyond Panchsheel. Vajpayee laid the foundation for a renewed outlook by emphasising on sensitivity and equality. That can form the basis for the new framework.

The Chinese have a clever way of promoting their superiority and exclusivism. Sinologists describe it as the Middle Kingdom syndrome. While Nehru wanted to take credit for the Panchsheel, Zhou told Richard Nixon in 1973 that “actually, the five principles were put forward by us, and Nehru agreed. But later on he didn’t implement them”.
The Chinese also entered into a similar agreement with Myanmar (then Burma) in 1954, thus ensuring that the Panchsheel wasn’t exclusive to their relationship with India.

For the Beijing event, the Chinese government has invited the president of India as well as the president of Myanmar, General Thein Sein, who will be present. Ansari will lead the Indian delegation. Without any malice towards Ansari, one would notice the downgrading of India’s participation in the Beijing event. Beijing was keen on having the president or prime minister at the event. But for once, the South Block mandarins seem to have done their homework, advising the Indian government against sending either of them. Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj too decided to skip the event and chose to visit Dhaka around the same time, sending a rather strong signal.

If Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping, who is expected to visit India in September, decide to depart from the Panchsheel framework and embark on a new relationship, both countries will benefit.
Both leaders have that ability. Both enjoy the trust and confidence of their countries. Most importantly, both are seen to be out-of-the-box leaders.

India and China can cooperate with each other on the principles of sovereign equality and mutual sensitivity.
China has emerged as an economic superpower, but is exposed to serious internal and external threats. It is facing problems with almost all of its 13 neighbours. The fact that China spends more money on internal security than on external security speaks volumes about its internal vulnerability. So, while India is not as big economically as China, its security apparatus is better-placed.

Modi and Xi can chart a new course in Sino-Indian relations if they are prepared to unshackle themselves from ritualism and symbolism. Both have the ability and the support to do it.

Madhav is a member of the Central Executive, RSS, and
the author of ‘Uneasy Neighbours: India and China after Fifty Years of the War’

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF 1954: INDIA AND TIBET RECOGNIZED THE DECEPTION OF COMMUNIST CHINA AND WERE LEFT WITH NO OPTION. THE TIBETAN RESISTANCE MOVEMENT TOOK ITS BIRTH IN 1957-1958 AND IT SYMBOLIZES THE FAILURE OF THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT. TO CONFIRM THE FACT OF THIS FAILURE, CHINA HAD VICIOUSLY ATTACKED INDIA DURING OCTOBER 1962.
Sino-Indian Relations must be reformulated after resolving Tibet-China Border Dispute: THE DECEPTION OF PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT OF 1954: INDIA AND TIBET RECOGNIZED THE DECEPTION OF COMMUNIST CHINA AND WERE LEFT WITH NO OPTION. THE TIBETAN RESISTANCE MOVEMENT TOOK ITS BIRTH IN 1957-1958 AND IT SYMBOLIZES THE FAILURE OF THE PANCHSHEEL AGREEMENT. TO CONFIRM THE FACT OF THIS FAILURE, CHINA HAD VICIOUSLY ATTACKED INDIA DURING OCTOBER 1962.

Whole Friction – Communism is the source of Friction in India-China-Tibet Relations

The Cold War in Asia – The Spread of Communism to Asia

Whole Friction – Communism is the source of Friction in India-China-Tibet Relations

I am pleased to share the article titled “TIBET IS THE REAL SOURCE OF SINO-INDIAN FRICTION” by Brahma Chellaney that was published by Nikkei Asian Review in its edition dated September 26, 2014.

I speak on behalf of Special Frontier Force and The Living Tibetan Spirits. I often describe about my “Kasturi-Sarvepalli-Mylapore-India-Tibet-US” Connection and I openly promote friendly relations between India and Tibet and support the condition called ‘Natural Freedom’ in the Land of Tibet. The military invasion and occupation of Tibet is not consistent with the principles of Panch Sheela Agreement that India signed during 1954. At that time, both Tibet, and India desired friendly relations with China and had used diplomacy to influence China to relax its military grip over Tibet. Tibetans for centuries enjoyed a natural sense of Freedom in spite of foreign invasions by Mongols and later Manchu China. It may be noted that His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama was not arrested after China’s successful military attack in 1950. He had continued to occupy Patola Palace in Lhasa and had visited New Delhi along with China’s Prime Minister Chou En-Lai and in May 1956 during 2500th Buddha Jayanti (Gautama Buddha’s Birth Anniversary) Celebration.

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - INDIA - CHINA RELATIONS: AFTER INDIA AND CHINA SIGNED THE PANCH SHEELA AGREEMENT IN 1954, HIS HOLINESS THE 14th DALAI LAMA WAS RECEIVED IN NEW DELHI DURING MAY 1956 AS A STATE GUEST. THIS PHOTO IMAGE WAS TAKEN AT ASHOKA HOTEL.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE – INDIA – CHINA RELATIONS: AFTER INDIA AND CHINA SIGNED THE PANCH SHEELA AGREEMENT IN 1954, HIS HOLINESS THE 14th DALAI LAMA WAS RECEIVED IN NEW DELHI DURING MAY 1956 AS A STATE GUEST. THIS PHOTO IMAGE WAS TAKEN AT ASHOKA HOTEL.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - INDIA - CHINA RELATIONS: MAY 26, 1956. 2500th BIRTH ANNIVERSARY OF GAUTAMA BUDDHA, THE BUDDHA JAYANTI CELEBRATION. INDIA'S PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT REAFFIRM INDIA'S FRIENDLY RELATIONS WITH TIBET.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE – INDIA – CHINA RELATIONS: MAY 26, 1956. 2500th BIRTH ANNIVERSARY OF GAUTAMA BUDDHA, THE BUDDHA JAYANTI CELEBRATION. INDIA’S PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT REAFFIRM INDIA’S FRIENDLY RELATIONS WITH TIBET.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - INDIA - CHINA RELATIONS: IN 1956, HIS HOLINESS THE 14th DALAI LAMA WAS RECEIVED IN NEW DELHI WITH DUE HONORS AS THE HEAD OF TIBET ALONG WITH CHINA'S PRIME MINISTER CHOU EN-LAI. CHINA DID NOT ARREST OR OVERTHREW DALAI LAMA FROM HIS OFFICIAL POSITION AFTER ITS MILITARY OCCUPATION OF TIBET IN 1950.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE – INDIA – CHINA RELATIONS: IN 1956, HIS HOLINESS THE 14th DALAI LAMA WAS RECEIVED IN NEW DELHI WITH DUE HONORS AS THE HEAD OF TIBET ALONG WITH CHINA’S PRIME MINISTER CHOU EN-LAI. CHINA DID NOT ARREST OR OVERTHREW DALAI LAMA FROM HIS OFFICIAL POSITION AFTER ITS MILITARY OCCUPATION OF TIBET IN 1950.

Both India, and Tibet had good reasons to entertain an optimistic view about Tibet’s status and had anticipated that China would relent and allow Tibetans to enjoy their natural Freedom and their traditional way of life which is guided by the political philosophy called ‘Isolationism’. The Great 13th Dalai Lama had declared Tibet’s full independence on February 13, 1913 after the fall of Manchu China’s regime during 1911. However, Tibet did not establish formal diplomatic relations with other countries and remained aloof from the events shaping world history.

I am only seeking transparency and full public accountability while nations pursue their foreign policies to promote their own national interests. People’s Republic of China has to make a choice and it can choose to establish friendly relations with Tibet and India and maintain its trade and commerce relations with the United States and the rest of the world.

Rudra Narasimham Rebbapragada
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-4162, USA
Special Frontier ForceEstablishment 22-Vikas Regiment

September 26, 2014 7:00 pm JST

Brahma Chellaney: Tibet is the real source of Sino-Indian friction

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE - INDIA - CHINA RELATIONS: BRAHMA CHELLANEY IS A PROFESSOR OF STRATEGIC STUDIES AT THE INDEPENDENT CENTRE FOR POLICY RESEARCH IN NEW DELHI. HIS ARTICLE ON INDIA - CHINA RELATIONS FAILS TO MENTION ABOUT SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE WHICH PROMOTES FRIENDLY RELATIONS BETWEEN INDIA, THE US, AND TIBET.
INDIA-CHINA-TIBET RELATIONS: BRAHMA CHELLANEY IS A PROFESSOR OF STRATEGIC STUDIES AT THE INDEPENDENT CENTRE FOR POLICY RESEARCH IN NEW DELHI. HIS ARTICLE ON INDIA-CHINA RELATIONS FAILS TO MENTION ABOUT SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE WHICH PROMOTES FRIENDLY RELATIONS BETWEEN INDIA, THE US, AND TIBET.

The sprawling, mountainous country of Tibet was annexed by China in the 1950s, eliminating a historical buffer with India. Today, the region remains at the heart of Sino-Indian problems, including territorial disputes, border tensions and water feuds. Beijing lays claim to adjacent Indian territories on the basis of alleged Tibetan ecclesial or tutelary links, rather than an ethnic Chinese connection.
So when Chinese President Xi Jinping traveled in mid-September to India — home to Tibet’s government in exile — Tibet loomed large. The Tibetan plateau, and the military tensions the issue provokes, will also figure prominently in the Sept. 29-30 summit at the White House between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and U.S. President Barack Obama, who has urged Beijing to reopen talks with the Dalai Lama, the exiled religious leader revered as a god-king by Tibetans.
Xi’s visit to New Delhi began with the visitor toasting Modi’s birthday. But, underlining the deep divide regarding Tibet, the visit was overshadowed by a Chinese military incursion across the traditional Indo-Tibetan border. It was as if the incursion — the biggest in terms of troop numbers in many years and the trigger for a military standoff in the Ladakh region — was Xi’s birthday gift for Modi.

Modi’s government, for its part, allowed Tibetan exiles to stage street protests during the two days that Xi was in New Delhi, including some close to the summit venue. This reversed a pattern that had held since the early 1990s, in which police routinely prevented such protests during the visits of Chinese leaders. During the decade-long reign of Modi’s predecessor, Manmohan Singh, police would impose a lockdown on the Indian capital’s Tibetan quarter and beat up Tibetans who attempted to rally.
Such brutal practices would have befitted a repressive autocracy like China, but not a country that takes pride in being the world’s largest democracy. In any event, the muzzling of protests won India no gratitude from an increasingly assertive China.
It was a welcome change that India permitted members of its large Tibetan community to exercise their legitimate democratic rights. Even the Dalai Lama felt at liberty to speak up during Xi’s visit, reminding Indians: “Tibet’s problem is also India’s problem.” The Tibetan protests, although peaceful, rattled China, which had grown accustomed to Indian authorities doing its bidding.
When Modi took office in May, the prime minister of Tibet’s government in exile, Lobsang Sangay, was invited to the swearing-in event. So Xi sought an assurance that the Modi government regards Tibet as part of China. Modi has yet to speak his mind on this issue in public, but the Chinese foreign ministry, apparently citing private discussions, announced: “Prime Minister Modi said that Tibet is a part of China, and India does not allow any separatist activities on its soil.”

Diplomatic fumbles

Tibet — the world’s highest and largest plateau — separated the Chinese and Indian civilizations until relatively recently, limiting their interaction to sporadic cultural and religious contact, with no political relations. It was only after China forcibly occupied Tibet that Chinese military units appeared for the first time on the Himalayan frontiers.
The fall of Tibet represented the most profound and far-reaching geopolitical development in India’s modern history. It led to China’s bloody trans-Himalayan invasion in 1962 and its current claims to vast tracts of additional Indian land.
Yet Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in 1954 surrendered India’s extraterritorial rights in Tibet — inherited from Britain at independence — and accepted the existence of the “Tibet region of China” with no quid pro quo,not even Beijing’s acknowledgement of the then-prevailing Indo-Tibetan border. He did this by signing a pact mockingly named after the Tibetan Buddhist doctrine of Panchsheela, or the five principles of peaceful coexistence. As agreed in the pact, India withdrew its “military escorts” from Tibet and conceded to China, at a “reasonable” price, the postal, telegraph and public telephone services operated by the Indian government in the region.
Years later, another Indian prime minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, went further. During Vajpayee’s visit to Beijing in 2003, China wrung from India the concession it always wanted — an unambiguous recognition of Tibet as part of China. Vajpayee went so far as to use the legal term “recognize” in a document signed by the two nations’ heads of government, confirming that what China calls the Tibet Autonomous Region was “part of the territory of the People’s Republic of China.”
This opened the way for China to claim the large northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh — three times the size of Taiwan. Please read on..

Whole Friction – Communism is the source of Friction in India-China-Tibet Relations

Whole Deception – The 17-Point Plan to consolidate Occupation of Tibet

Tibet Crisis – The Circular Movement

Tibet Crisis. The Circular Movement. Tibet remains under Communist China’s Military Occupation for there is no Movement to take Tibet Forwards.

Tibet Crisis began soon after the expansion of Communism to Asia with the emergence of the People’s Republic of China on October 01, 1949. Tibetans anticipated great ‘Trouble’ but hoped to ward off belligerent Communist Regime through peaceful negotiations.

Tibet Crisis. The Circular Movement. The Middle Way Approach fails to Move Tibet Forwards.

Tibet, to defend vital national interests, agreed to accept military assistance from the United States with the cooperation and help from India. Communist China used this Tibetan response for nationalistic survival as an excuse to invade Tibet. This illegal invasion of Tibet by Communist China in 1950 precipitated the Tibet Crisis.

Whole Deception – The 17-Point Plan to consolidate Occupation of Tibet was signed on May 23, 1951.

To move forward, Tibet requested “Meaningful Autonomy” to reconcile with China’s military occupation. On May 23, 1951, using deception and intimidation tactics, China forced Tibetans to sign the 17-Point Plan or the Seventeen-Point Agreement for Peaceful Liberation of Tibet. This Agreement grants “Autonomy” to Tibetans to manage their internal affairs. By 1957, Tibetans recognized China’s deception. They watched helplessly as China launched measures to fully consolidate its hold over every aspect of Tibetan National Life.

Tibet Crisis. The Circular Movement. Public Revolt, the Tibetan National Uprising against the Measures for Peaceful Liberation of Tibet.

In 1959, Tibetans launched an unsuccessful, massive, National Uprising to break China’s military grip over Tibet. As a consequence of this public revolt, the Supreme Ruler of Tibet was forced to live in exile. Tibet Crisis remains unresolved as the tyrannical Communist Regime always finds justification to deny the just demands of Tibetan people. Tibetans are not able to move forward to bring the Tibet Crisis to a peaceful conclusion.

Tibet Crisis. The Circular Movement. Umay Lam or the Middle Way. The Way Backwards.

In my analysis, ‘The Middle Way Approach’ or the ‘UMAYLAM’ does not help to move forward. It represents a Circular Movement taking Tibetans Backwards from 2018 to 1951 when Tibet and China agreed upon the grant of Autonomy to Tibetans under the Chinese Rule.

Rudra Narasimham Rebbapragada

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE

Tibetans come up with a film to resolve Tibet crisis

Clipped from: https://www.thestatesman.com/india/tibetans-comes-film-resolve-tibet-crisis-1502717623.html

CTA releases a film titled ‘Umay Lam: Middle Way – The Way Forward’.

Tibet Crisis. The Circular Movement. Umay Lam or the Middle Way. The Way Backwards.

A screenshot of the film Umay Lam Middle Way – The Way Forward. (Photo: SNS)

The Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) on Wednesday released a film titled ‘Umay Lam: Middle Way-The Way Forward’ to resolve Tibet issue.

A CTA official said Umay Lam in Tibetan means the Middle Way Approach and this policy is proposed by Tibetan spiritual leader Dalai Lama to peacefully resolve the issue of Tibet.

The policy also aims to bring about stability and co-existence between the Tibetan and Chinese people based on equality and mutual co-operation.

It is also a policy adopted democratically by the CTA and the Tibetan people through a series of discussions held over a long time, he added.

Produced by Tibet TV and directed by Tibetan filmmaker Tenzin Kalden, the film showcases the relevance of the Middle Way Approach as the Tibetan freedom struggle enters its 60th-year threshold.

The film shows the first generation of Tibetans who lived through the invasion, are now slowly phasing out and the new generation of Tibetans have taken over the mantle of the freedom struggle.

The 18-minute film features leading Tibetan political personalities engaged in Sino-Tibetan negotiations to share their experience and provide commentary on the Middle Way Approach.

The film also highlights how in their own homeland, Tibetans continue to resist the repressive Chinese policies threatening their religion, culture, and identity.

The film illustrates how Umay Lam (Middle Way Policy) which proposes a mutually beneficial solution for Tibet and China wherein Tibetans seek ‘Genuine Autonomy’ within the framework of the People’s Republic of China.

And in return, China maintains, its territorial integrity, is the way forward and the most viable solution to resolving the longstanding Sino-Tibetan issue.

Tibet Crisis. The Circular Movement. Umay Lam or the Middle Way. The Way Backwards.

 

Whole Agency – A Special Tribute to CIA Director Allen Welsh Dulles

A Special Tribute to CIA Director Allen Welsh Dulles

Whole Dude – Whole Agency: Allen Welsh Dulles shaped the history of the Central Intelligence Agency. During World War II, he had served in the Office of Strategic Services (1942-1945), and when CIA formed in 1951, he served as Deputy Director under General Walter Bedell Smith. He was appointed the Director by President Dwight D. Eisenhower during January 1953.
Whole Dude – Whole Agency: Allen Welsh Dulles shaped the history of the Central Intelligence Agency. During World War II, he had served in the Office of Strategic Services (1942-1945), and when CIA formed in 1951, he served as Deputy Director under General Walter Bedell Smith. He was appointed the Director by President Dwight D. Eisenhower during January 1953.

Whole Dude – Whole Agency

Special Frontier Force pays this special tribute to Allen Welsh Dulles (b. April 7, 1893, Watertown, NY – d. January 29, 1969, Washington, DC), US diplomat, intelligence expert who was the  Director of the Central Intelligence Agency during its period of growth. Dulles received M.A. from Princeton in 1916. His service to the nation started during the administration of Woodrow Thomas Wilson (28th President of the US 1913-1921). He served in various diplomatic posts until 1922, and was named chief of the State Department’s Near Eastern Division. He obtained Law degree in 1926, and served as counsellor to the US delegation in Peking. He returned to the US and joined the New York law firm in which his brother John Foster Dulles was a partner. During World War II, Dulles joined the office of Strategic Services (OSS). From October 1942 to May 1945, Dulles served as Chief of OSS office in Bern, Switzerland. He played a critical role in the surrender of German troops in northern Italy. He received the Medal of Merit and Medal of Freedom for his service during the War. In 1948, Dulles served as the Chairman of a three-man committee that surveyed the US intelligence system. After the Central Intelligence Agency was established in 1951, he served as deputy director under General Walter Bedell Smith. In 1953, he was appointed Director of CIA by President Dwight D. Eisenhower (34th President of the US, 1953-1961). He was the first Chairman of U.S. Intelligence Board. Dulles carried out a number of major operations, notably the overthrow of the governments of Mohammad Mossadeq in Iran in 1953, and Jacob Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954. He was reappointed by President John F. Kennedy. Unfortunately, he had to shoulder the blame for the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in April 1961. He was forced to resign to defend the reputation of the presidency. He was awarded the National Security Medal on November 28, 1961 (and the citation for granting this Medal is attached as a pdf file). President Lyndon B Johnson appointed him as one of seven commissioners of the Warren Commission to investigate the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. He authored several books, notably Germany’s Underground (1947), The Craft of Intelligence (1963), and The Secret Surrender (1963).

Whole Dude-Whole Agency: Allen Dulles reveals the secrets of World War II, but remained silent about the secret operation in Tibet which was supported by the US President, Indian Prime Minister, and His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, the spiritual and temporal leader of the autonomous State of Tibet.
Whole Dude-Whole Agency: Allen Dulles reveals the secrets of World War II, but remained silent about the secret operation in Tibet (1958-1964) which was supported by the US President, Indian Prime Minister, and His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, the spiritual and temporal leader of the autonomous State of Tibet.
Whole Dude-Whole Agency: During World War II, Allen Dulles served as the Chief of the OSS Office in Bern from October 1942 to May 1945. He played a role in the surrender of German troops in northern Italy.
Whole Dude – Whole Agency: During World War II, Allen Dulles served as the Chief of the OSS Office in Bern from October 1942 to May 1945. He played a role in the surrender of German troops in northern Italy.
Whole Dude-Whole Agency: Interesting account of the role of Office of Strategic Services in Europe during World War II. Fortunately, now we have interesting accounts of the CIA's Secret War in Tibet. The credit goes to the Director of the CIA.
Whole Dude – Whole Agency: Interesting account of the role of Office of Strategic Services in Europe during World War II. Fortunately, now we have interesting accounts of the CIA’s Secret War in Tibet. The credit goes to the Director of the CIA.
Whole Dude-Whole Agency: Allen Dulles described the 'Craft of Intelligence' but kept the CIA Operation in Tibet as a Secret.
Whole Dude – Whole Agency: Allen Dulles described the ‘Craft of Intelligence’ but kept the CIA Operation in Tibet as a Secret.
Whole Dude – Whole Agency: Allen Welsh Dulles rendered remarkable service to the nation and won the admiration of President John F. Kennedy even though he had to accept the blame for the failed mission in Cuba. I salute him for his support to defend Freedom and Democracy in Tibet. The CIA operation in Tibet had also failed during March 1959, but I would not blame CIA for that failure.
Whole Dude - Whole Agency: On November 28, 1961, Allen Welsh Dulles, the outgoing CIA Director received the National Security Medal from President John F. Kennedy.
Whole Dude – Whole Agency: On November 28, 1961, Allen Welsh Dulles, the outgoing CIA Director received the National Security Medal from President John F. Kennedy.
Whole Dude - Whole Agency: President Lyndon B. Johnson demonstrated his confidence in the former CIA Director Allen Welsh Dulles by appointing him to the Warren Commission that investigated the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. It was indeed      a great honor and speaks of the trust in personal integrity earned by Dulles as the CIA Director.
Whole Dude – Whole Agency: President Lyndon B. Johnson demonstrated his confidence in the former CIA Director Allen Welsh Dulles by appointing him to the Warren Commission that investigated the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. It was indeed a great honor and speaks of the trust in personal integrity earned by Dulles as the CIA Director.
The history of Special Frontier Force – Establishment No. 22: 1957 was a turning point. India recognized that its foreign policy of political neutralism was of no use and started depending upon the United States to address the military threat posed by China’s occupation of Tibet. But, the effort was too modest and both India and the United States had grossly underestimated the strength of the People’s Liberation Army.

Both US Government and the Central Intelligence Agency maintain their silence about the support given to the Tibetan Resistance Movement and the eventual creation of Establishment -22/Special Frontier Force, a military alliance/pact between the US, Tibet, and India to fight the military threat posed by Communist China when it occupied Tibet in 1950 and forced His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama to lead a life in exile.

Whole Dude-Whole Agency: A special tribute to Allen Welsh Dulles, the Director of CIA who organized training of Tibetans at Camp Hale, Colorado(May 1959 to November 1964).
Whole Dude – Whole Agency: A special tribute to Allen Welsh Dulles, the Director of CIA who organized training of Tibetans at Camp Hale, Colorado (May 1958 to November 1964).

However, the US had finally acknowledged the CIA operation in Tibet and India by installing a Commemoration Plaque at the Camp Hale, Colorado training site on September 10, 2010. The Director of CIA was not present at the ceremony to honor the memory of people who were involved in this covert operation.

Whole Dude – Whole Agency: A special tribute to Allen Welsh Dulles, the Director of CIA who organized training of Tibetans at Camp Hale, Colorado (May 1958 to November 1964). Special Service Award presented by all Officers D Sector, Establishment 22 on 19 January 1973.

It is my duty and privilege to pay this special tribute to Allen Welsh Dulles in due recognition of the services he had rendered to defend Freedom, Democracy, and Justice in the occupied Land of Tibet.

Whole Dude-Whole Agency-Allen Welsh Dulles-National Security Medal Citation

Whole Dude – Whole Agency: Allen Welsh Dulles shaped the history of the Central Intelligence Agency. During World War II, he had served in the Office of Strategic Services (1942-1945), and when CIA formed in 1951, he served as Deputy Director under General Walter Bedell Smith. He was appointed the Director by President Dwight D. Eisenhower during January 1953.

Whole Pain – Bitter Memories of April 30, 1975 – Vietnam War’s Never Ending Pain

The Cold War in Asia – The Unfinished Korea-Vietnam War

BITTER MEMORIES OF APRIL 30, 1975 – VIETNAM WAR’S NEVER ENDING PAIN. CIA OFFICER JAMES E. PARKER Jr., IN VIETNAM.

James E. Parker Jr., CIA’s last Vietnam evacuee shares his bitter memories of April 30, 1975 in a story published by The Washington Times. Mr. Parker joined the CIA in 1970. I joined the Indian Army on July 26, 1970 after grant of Short Service Regular Commission during September 1969. Both of us served the CIA’s Mission in Southeast Asia with different expectations. My sadness, and mental pain continue in the context of Tibet’s continued Military Occupation since 1950s. Vietnam War gave me hope of USA’s willingness to engage and contain the threat posed by Communist Expansionism in Southern Asia.

I am still patiently waiting for the US to fulfill its Mission to evict the Military Occupier of Tibet.

Rudra Narasimham Rebbapragada

Special Frontier Force – Establishment 22 – Vikas Regiment

James Parker, CIA’s last Vietnam evacuee, holds bitter memories of fateful day – Washington Times

Sunday, April 30, 2017, 8:18 PM

Last CIA evacuee bitterly recalls U.S. Embassy cowardice, betrayals as Saigon fell to North Vietnam

BITTER MEMORIES OF APRIL 30, 1975 – VIETNAM WAR’S NEVER ENDING PAIN.

James Parker (right) received the CIA’s Intelligence Medal of Merit from CIA Director William Colby in 1975. This photograph is signed: “To James Parker – with thanks and applause for a job well done in Vietnam. William Colby.

By Richard C. Ehrlich – Special to the Washington Times – – Sunday, April 30, 2017

BANGKOK — Time has done little to dull the anger of James Parker James Parker, the last CIA officer to evacuate Vietnam, as the world marks the latest anniversary of the U.S. evacuation of its embassy in Saigon just ahead of advancing North Vietnamese forces in 1975.

When South Vietnam’s capital fell on the last day of April that year, the intelligence officer’s two best military sources committed suicide and the actions of an American diplomat endangered the lives
of escaping diplomats and
CIA personnel, the 73-year-old Mr. Parker recalled in an interview. Off the coast of Danang, panicked South Vietnamese who evacuated onto a U.S. ship shot, stabbed, raped, trampled and executed one another in revenge attacks.

But much of his anger targets Mr. Parker‘s fellow Americans as they stumbled through one of the low points of the postwar era in their nation’s history.

“As for my experiences, back in Vietnam at the end, [I remember] the absolute chickens—t character of the men in the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, how they were so petty and self-indulgent, so pedantic and so distant from the fighting,” Mr. Parker said in an interview with The Washington Times.

He said the attitude in the embassy contributed to the ignominious defeat.

“Their pusillanimity disrespected the men, American and Asian, I had known who died fighting the good fight,” he said. “The State Department people were not folks to look up to in a combat zone.”

Mr. Parker lives in Las Vegas after a 32-year career in the CIA that started in 1970. He has written several books about his experiences in Southeast Asia, including his newest volume published last year, “The Vietnam War: Its Own Self.” The colorful, 706-page book includes photographs of CIA officers, Hmong and Vietnamese soldiers, maps of bomb sites, and pictures of dead bodies and one nude Lao bar girl.

His memories of the bitter end remain especially vivid. One week before the communist North defeated the U.S.-backed South Vietnamese government, the “evacuation plan for the consulate” in Can Tho city where Mr. Parker was based degenerated into chaos.

“Jim D., a career Central Intelligence Operations officer and chief of the CIA base in the Delta of South Vietnam” insisted that the safest, most reliable evacuation would be in helicopters, Mr. Parker said in the interview, declining to reveal Jim D.’s full name. But Consul General Terry McNamara
did not trust that the CIA‘s battle-hardened Air America pilots would fly them to a waiting U.S. Navy ship.

Mr. McNamara yelled: “They could leave us all here. They are wild, uncontrollable animals, the Air America people. We control our own destiny if we go out by boat” on a 60-mile Bassac River route to the South China Sea.

Jim D. replied: “I have my people to protect, and I have [Air America] helicopters. My people go out by helicopter.”

Mr. Parker‘s and his CIA colleagues’ escape was also at risk.

“Mr. McNamara’s plan did not provide for the safety of the CIA officers,” he wrote. “We had no cover. If we were captured by the North Vietnamese, as was entirely possible, McNamara suggested we tell them that we were USAID engineers, which would not have held up during any type of serious interrogation.”

Mr. McNamara, his diplomatic staff and some South Vietnamese nationals went on boats down the “extremely dangerous” river, Mr. Parker said in the interview. “He must have known his plan would leave CIA agents behind. And I don’t think he cared.”

The State Department eventually overruled Mr. McNamara and cleared an evacuation by air.

This allowed Mr. Parker, Jim D. and others to arrange Air America helicopter flights to U.S. Navy ships for themselves, the consulate, embassy and CIA, plus more than 100 CIA key local allies during the final 48 hours.

LOSING SOURCES

One week before the war’s end, Mr. Parker‘s best South Vietnamese source, Gen. Tran Van Hai, predicted the April 30 deadline of North Vietnam’s victory. But the CIA station chief in Saigon, Tom Polgar, and CIA head analyst Frank Snepp refused to believe Mr. Parker.

backed South Vietnamese Rangers also climbed aboard.

“The Vietnamese Rangers took over my ship. Killed, raped, robbed. You could hear gunshots all the time. Soldiers were walking around with bloody knives,” Capt. Flink told Mr. Parker. “We had to lock ourselves in the pilot house. I only had a crew of 40 plus some security, but there were thousands of those wild, crazy Vietnamese people.

They insisted that North Vietnam would allow Saigon and the southern Delta to remain under U.S. protection after a cease-fire, he said.

On May 1, 1975, Gen. Hai was found dead.

“General Hai lay face down at his desk. Alone during the night, without saying good-bye to anyone, he had committed suicide. A half-empty glass of brandy, laced with poison, was near an outstretched hand,” Mr. Parker wrote.

“That report Hai gave me [predicting] the day Saigon would fall to the NVA” probably helped Mr. Parker win a top citation from his Langley bosses, the agent bitterly recalled in the interview.

Hours after Hanoi’s victory, South Vietnamese Gen. Le Van Hung — Mr. Parker‘s other top intelligence source — saluted his troops “and then shook each man’s hand. He asked everyone to leave. Some of his men did not move, so he pushed them out the door, shook off his wife’s final pleas and finally was alone in his office.

“Within moments there was a loud shot. General Hung was dead,” he wrote.

There were other bitter memories in those final days. One month before the final defeat, Merchant Marine Capt. Ed Flink aboard the Pioneer Contender — a U.S. ship chartered to the Military Sealift Command — was evacuating Americans and thousands of South Vietnamese civilians from Danang when it fell to the communists. As the mission proceeded, however, some U.S.-

“They finally shot some of the worst, once we docked but I’ll tell you, son, it was hell. We found bodies all over the ship after everyone got off. Babies, old women, young boys. Cut, shot and trampled to death.”

Mr. Parker said in the interview: “It was Vietnamese officials who shot the rioters.”

Capt. Flink later told interviewers that Vietnamese conducted onboard “kangaroo courts” and executed suspected communists.

Mr. Parker was the last CIA officer to evacuate Vietnam, escaping on May 1, 1975, two days after the U.S. abandoned the embassy in Saigon.

He joined the CIA in 1971 as a paramilitary case officer fighting alongside ethnic Hmong guerrillas and Thai forces against Lao and North Vietnamese communists inside Laos until 1973. In 1974, he became a CIA intelligence officer in South Vietnam handling Vietnamese agents and South Vietnam’s military.

He retired in 1992 but returned to the CIA on Sept. 11, 2001, as a contractor to “teach tradecraft to new hires” and work inside Cambodia, Afghanistan and elsewhere before retiring again in 2011.

All site contents © Copyright 2017 The Washington Times, LLC|3600 New York Avenue NE | Washington, DC 20002 |202-636-3000

 Inserted from <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/30/james-parker-cias-last-vietnam-evacuee-holds-bitte/>

BITTER MEMORIES OF APRIL 30, 1975 – VIETNAM WAR’S NEVER ENDING PAIN. CIA OFFICER JAMES E. PARKER Jr., IN VIETNAM.

Whole Master – A Special Tribute to Spymaster John Alexander McCone

Whole Master: This is a special tribute to Spymaster John Alexander McCone who served as CIA's 6th Director from November 1961 to April 1965.
Whole Master: This is a special tribute to Spymaster John Alexander McCone who served as CIA’s 6th Director from November 1961 to April 1965.

Excerpt: Establishment -22 is the child of CIA’s Secret War in Tibet and it will be correct to recognize CIA as the ‘Mastermind’ of this operation to defend Freedom, and Democracy in the occupied Land of Tibet. Special Frontier Force take this opportunity to pay a special tribute to its ‘Master’, John Alexander McCone (b. January 04, 1902 – d. February 14, 1991) who served as the Director of CIA from November 1961 to April 1965.

EXCOMM meeting at the White House Cabinet Room...
Whole Master: A special tribute to Spymaster John Alexander McCone, the 6th CIA Director who played a leading role during the Cuban Missile Crisis. EXCOMM meeting at the White House Cabinet Room during the Cuban Missile Crisis on October 29, 1962. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Whole Dude – Whole Master:

Whole Dude – Whole Master: A special tribute to Spymaster John Alexander McCone, the 6th CIA Director who played a leading role during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Special Service Award presented by all Officers D Sector, Establishment -22 on 19 January 1973.

Establishment No. 22 is a military establishment that represents a military pact/alliance between the United States, India, and the Tibetan Government -in-Exile. It came into existence during November 1962 and during 1966, this organization was named Special Frontier Force. Between the Central Intelligence Agency and the members of Special Frontier Force there has been a Master-Student relationship. Establishment – 22 is the child of CIA’s Secret War in Tibet and it will be correct to recognize CIA as the ‘Mastermind’ of this operation to defend Freedom, and Democracy in the occupied Land of Tibet. Special Frontier Force take this opportunity to pay a special tribute to its ‘Master’, John Alexander McCone (b. January 04, 1902 – d. February 14, 1991) who served as the Director of CIA from November 1961 to April 1965.

John A. McCone obtained a bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering from University of California at Berkeley. He built his career in the steel, construction, shipping, shipbuilding, and aircraft production industries. He founded the Bechtel-McCone Steel Company and his role in shipbuilding, and military aircraft production had attracted the attention of President Harry S. Truman who had appointed him to the Air Policy Commission in 1947 to develop strategy for American military airpower. During 1948, he was appointed as the Special Deputy to the Secretary of Defense. In 1950, he was appointed as Undersecretary of the Air Force. President Dwight Eisenhower appointed him as the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission during 1958 and he held that position until 1961.

Whole Dude-Whole Master: In this photo taken during 1958, John A. McCone, Chairman of the World Affairs Council is seen with General Lauris Norstad, Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers in Europe.
Whole Master: In this photo taken during 1958, John A. McCone, Chairman of the World Affairs Council is seen with General Lauris Norstad, Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers in Europe.
Whole Dude-Whole Master: U.S. delegates to the Fourth General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria 1960. Left to Right:- Ambassador John S. Graham, Vice Admiral Paul F. Foster, US Navy(Retd), the Permanent U.S. Representative to the IAEA, and John A. McCone, Chairman of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
Whole Master: U.S. delegates to the Fourth General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria 1960. Left to Right:- Ambassador John S. Graham, Vice Admiral Paul F. Foster, US Navy(Retd), the Permanent U.S. Representative to the IAEA, and John A. McCone, Chairman of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.

During his tenure as the Chairman of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, John McCone made very significant disclosures about Israel’s nuclear capabilities. After the disaster of the Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba, President Kennedy forced the resignation of the CIA director Allen Welsh Dulles and Richard Bissell, the Deputy Director for Plans and Operations who had a major role in making the plan for this CIA’s Black Operation. In a very surprising, and sudden move, President Kennedy called John McCone, a Republican to take charge of the Central Intelligence Agency disregarding the fact that McCone had no prior experience in Intelligence.

Whole Dude-Whole Master: President John F. Kennedy's selection of Spymaster during 1961. Left to Right:- Allen Welsh Dulles, 5th Director of CIA, Richard Bissell, Deputy Director of Plans/Operations, President John F. Kennedy, and the newly selected 6th Director of CIA, John A. McCone.
Whole Master: President John F. Kennedy’s selection of Spymaster during 1961. Left to Right:- Allen Welsh Dulles, 5th Director of CIA, Richard Bissell, Deputy Director of Plans/Operations, President John F. Kennedy, and the newly selected 6th Director of CIA, John A. McCone.
Whole Dude-Whole Master: September 27, 1961. President Kennedy with CIA Director Allen Dulles and his new pick, John A. McCone.
Whole Master: September 27, 1961. President Kennedy with CIA Director Allen Dulles and his new pick, John A. McCone.
Whole Dude-Whole Master: November 29, 1961. President John F. Kennedy with outgoing CIA Director Allen Dulles.
Whole Master: November 29, 1961. President John F. Kennedy with outgoing CIA Director Allen Dulles.
Whole Dude-Whole Master: November 29, 1961. President John F. Kennedy welcomes the 6th Director of CIA, John Alexander McCone.
Whole Master: November 29, 1961. President John F. Kennedy welcomes the 6th Director of CIA, John Alexander McCone.
Whole Dude-Whole Master: John Alexander McCone gets the task of "rebuilding" CIA after the Bay of Pigs debacle.
Whole Master: John Alexander McCone gets the task of “rebuilding” CIA after the Bay of Pigs debacle.
Whole Dude-Whole Master: A new chapter in the history of CIA. John Alexander McCone became the "Government's principal foreign intelligence Officer" and he would work the heads of all departments and agencies, such as the State, Defense, the Attorney General, and the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, that have responsibilities in the foreign intelligence field. In this photo McCone is seen with Robert Kennedy, the Attorney General. The DCI would coordinate and direct the total intelligence community.
Whole Master: A new chapter in the history of CIA. John Alexander McCone became the “Government’s principal foreign intelligence Officer” and he would work the heads of all departments and agencies, such as the State, Defense, the Attorney General, and the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, that have responsibilities in the foreign intelligence field. In this photo McCone is seen with Robert Kennedy, the Attorney General. The DCI would coordinate and direct the total intelligence community.

John McCone played a leading role in strengthening the intelligence gathering abilities of CIA by launching a technological revolution. On August 05, 1963, he created the Directorate of Science and Technology.

Whole Dude-Whole Master: May 01, 1964. Presidential candidate, New York State Governor, Nelson a. Rockefeller gets Intelligence briefing. Left to Right:-John McCone, DIC; Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller; Robert S. McNamara, Defense Secretary; Dean Rusk, Secretary of State. Photo credit: Francis Miller/Time & Life.
Whole Master: May 01, 1964. Presidential candidate, New York State Governor, Nelson A. Rockefeller gets Intelligence briefing. Left to Right:John McCone, DIC; Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller; Robert S. McNamara, Defense Secretary; Dean Rusk, Secretary of State. Photo credit: Francis Miller/Time & Life.

McCone was responsible for a number of covert operations in Vietnam, Laos, Cuba, Ecuador, and Brazil. John McCone was present in the meeting held at The White House on November 19, 1962 to enter into an agreement/pact with India, and the Tibetan Government-in-Exile to formulate Establishment 22/Special Frontier Force to address the military threat posed by People’s Republic of China’s military occupation of Tibet. This operation that involves India and Tibet remains a secret.

Gyalo Thondup, the elder brother of His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama played a critical role in raising the Tibetan Force and in formulating the trilateral military alliance with India and the U.S.
Desmond FitzGerald was serving as the Far Eastern CIA Chief in November 1962 at the time of raising Establishment 22 and Special Frontier Force

McCone was a key figure during the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. He had predicted that the Soviet Union would place offensive nuclear weapons in Cuba. However, he had differences with President Lyndon B. Johnson and had resigned from his post during April 1965 and was replaced by  Admiral William F. Raborn. President Ronald Reagan during 1987 presented John McCone with the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Whole Master: A special tribute to Spymaster John Alexander McCone, the 6th CIA Director who played a leading role during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

I say that John McCone was one of the best Spymasters that CIA ever had. What do you want to say?

Whole Master: Spymaster John Alexander McCone created the Directorate of Science and Technology on August 05, 1963 and launched technological revolution in Intelligence.

Whole Tyrant – Red China – Trojan Horse

Red China – Trojan Horse if not Jackass

I describe Red China’s Communist Face using terms such as Evil, Aggressor, Public Enemy No. 1,Tyrant, Occupier, Subjugator, Wicked, Cunning, Jackal, Expansionist, Neocolonialist, Obstructionist, Jackass, and Trojan Horse.

Red China’s global ambitions cannot be trusted because of her One-Party Governance with no Public Accountability and Transparency. I describe Red China’s Communist Face using terms such as Evil, Aggressor, Public Enemy No. 1,Tyrant, Occupier, Subjugator, Wicked, Cunning, Jackal, Expansionist, Neocolonialist, Obstructionist, Jackass, and Trojan Horse.

Rudra Narasimham Rebbapragada

Special Frontier Force – Establishment 22 – Vikas Regiment

CHINA’S GLOBAL AMBITIONS: ARE THERE LESSONS TO BE LEARNT FROM TIBET?

Clipped from: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/chinas-global-ambitions-are-their-lessons-to-be-learnt-from-tibet-20170820-gy0dk0.html

I describe Red China’s Communist Face using terms such as Evil, Aggressor, Public Enemy No. 1,Tyrant, Occupier, Subjugator, Wicked, Cunning, Jackal, Expansionist, Neocolonialist, Obstructionist, Jackass, and Trojan Horse.

The man who replaced the Dalai Lama as the head of Tibet’s government-in-exile has brought a troubling message to Australia. The Chinese military forcibly annexed Tibet in the 1950s, sending the Dalai Lama into hasty exile in India. The Dalai Lama retains his role as spiritual leader. But the Tibetan diaspora elected Lobsang Sangay as their political leader six years ago. He spoke at the National Press Club in Canberra earlier this month. The Harvard-educated lawyer’s message to Australia: “It happened to Tibet – you could be next.”

This is a disturbing idea, but surely a fanciful one? As president of the Tibetan government-in-exile, Sangay’s main agenda is to stir international empathy for Tibet. Encouraging us to identify with Tibet, putting us in Tibet’s shoes, is surely a clever technique for achieving his aim.

Does have anything to support his assertion? His case: “If you understand the Tibetan story, the Chinese government [before the military takeover] started building a road – our first ever highway in Tibet.

“Now, we were promised peace and prosperity with the highway, and our parents and grandparents joined in building the road. In fact, they were paid silver coins to help them build the road…

I describe Red China’s Communist Face using terms such as Evil, Aggressor, Public Enemy No. 1,Tyrant, Occupier, Subjugator, Wicked, Cunning, Jackal, Expansionist, Neocolonialist, Obstructionist, Jackass, and Trojan Horse.

“So my parents told me the Chinese soldiers with guns were so polite, so nice, the kids used to taunt them and taunt them, they always smiled. They never said anything. Then they built the road. Once the road reached Lhasa – the capital city of Tibet – first trucks came, then guns came, then tanks came. Soon, Tibet was occupied. So it started with the road.

“Then another strategy that they deployed was divide and rule, co-opting our ruling elite… They were paid, I think, in Australian context, huge consultation fees.” This brought knowing guffaws from the Australian audience.

“So,” Sangay concluded, “what you see in Australia and around the world – co-optation of ruling elites, getting high consultation fees, business leaders supporting the Chinese line of argument, and even the religious figures – we have seen all that in Tibet. So it started with the road.”

And he compared China’s current international infrastructure project with that road: “So that was the consequence of One Belt, One Road in Tibet.”

One Belt, One Road is President Xi Jinping’s signature foreign policy project. So far, 68 countries have signed up to the mighty vision of an interconnected system of road, rail, ports and bridges embracing most of the world’s population and connecting Europe to Asia and the Pacific through China on land and at sea.

I describe Red China’s Communist Face using terms such as Evil, Aggressor, Public Enemy No. 1,Tyrant, Occupier, Subjugator, Wicked, Cunning, Jackal, Expansionist, Neocolonialist, Obstructionist, Jackass, and Trojan Horse.

However, this is just a beginning; One Belt, One Road was only launched formally in May. Beijing’s plan ultimately encompasses more than 100 countries and at an estimated total cost of between $US1 trillion ($1.26 trillion) and $US4 trillion or more. China has offered to link it with Australia’s Northern Australia Infrastructure Fund, although the Turnbull government has so far declined.

I describe Red China’s Communist Face using terms such as Evil, Aggressor, Public Enemy No. 1,Tyrant, Occupier, Subjugator, Wicked, Cunning, Jackal, Expansionist, Neocolonialist, Obstructionist, Jackass, and Trojan Horse.

In the weekend edict from Beijing clamping down on Chinese foreign investment for fear of excess capital flight, Xi’s government nonetheless encouraged Chinese firms to redirect their money into projects in the One Belt, One Road plan.

Could Chinese infrastructure be a Trojan horse for Chinese takeover of foreign countries? In May, Pakistan’s English-language newspaper Dawn exposed a detailed, 231-page Chinese plan for its 15-year infrastructure rollout in Pakistan. The newspaper’s Khurram Husain described it as “a deep and broad-based penetration of most sectors of Pakistan’s economy as well as its society by Chinese enterprises and culture”.

In Australia, some of China’s proposed infrastructure investments have been prohibited on national security grounds. Last year the Turnbull government blocked a $10 billion Chinese plan to buy into NSW power distribution company Ausgrid. China’s Huawei communications firm has been barred from any investment in Australia’s National Broadband Network. And, as Fairfax’s David Wroe reported on the weekend, the federal intelligence agencies are troubled by Huawei’s buy-in to the proposed 4500 kilometer fiber optic cable connecting the Solomon Islands to Sydney. They fear it is a Chinese state-sponsored effort to find a backdoor into Australia’s critical infrastructure.

A Chinese firm’s purchase of the Port of Darwin raised deep concerns in Washington. Ructions over the decision moved the federal government to change the way the Foreign Investment Review Board reviews proposals – the board is now chaired by a former head of ASIO.

I describe Red China’s Communist Face using terms such as Evil, Aggressor, Public Enemy No. 1,Tyrant, Occupier, Subjugator, Wicked, Cunning, Jackal, Expansionist, Neocolonialist, Obstructionist, Jackass, and Trojan Horse.

Chinese soldiers with fixed bayonets attend the flag-raising ritual at dawn in Tiananmen Square.

Is Sangay right? Geremie Barme, former head of ANU’s Centre for China in the World, is both deeply knowledgeable about China and highly skeptical of its party-state apparatus. He says that Sangay is wrong on two counts. First, says Barme, it’s a “false comparison” to put Tibet with Australia and other countries in the Chinese worldview. “China went into Tibet to extract resources and for military reasons, it was not a big market for China,” says Barme, now an independent scholar and publisher of chinaheritage.net. “China as an economic and political entity is deeply implicated with global economics and politics and it needs not only resources, it needs markets.” Tibet was about resources, in other words, while it sees most of the rest of the world as markets.

I describe Red China’s Communist Face using terms such as Evil, Aggressor, Public Enemy No. 1,Tyrant, Occupier, Subjugator, Wicked, Cunning, Jackal, Expansionist, Neocolonialist, Obstructionist, Jackass, and Trojan Horse.

Second, the Chinese ruling class has not yet decided the scope of their global ambitions, according to Barme. “There is a debate in China at the moment – what responsibilities will they take in the world, and what can they afford?

“They have been studying the US imperium closely for 70 years, and studying why the Soviet Union collapsed. They do know that imperial expansion comes at a very heavy price, and are they prepared to pay that price? They don’t know yet. They do debate it.”

Depending on China’s choice, Lobsang Sangay will turn out to be either a far-seeing prophet or Chicken Little.

Peter Hartcher is the international editor.

I describe Red China’s Communist Face using terms such as Evil, Aggressor, Public Enemy No. 1,Tyrant, Occupier, Subjugator, Wicked, Cunning, Jackal, Expansionist, Neocolonialist, Obstructionist, Jackass, and Trojan Horse.

Whole Review – JFK’s Forgotten Crisis – CIA’s Failed Operation in Tibet

Bruce Riedel Reveals the Failed CIA Operations in Tibet

Whole Review – JFK’s Forgotten Crisis, Book by Bruce Riedel. I reject Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s analysis of Prime Minister Nehru’s Policy since 1947.

U.S. President John F. Kennedy faced two great crises in 1962 – the Cuban missile crisis and the Sino-Indian War. While his part in the missile crisis that threatened to snowball into a nuclear war has been thoroughly studied, his critical role in the Sino-Indian War has been largely ignored. Bruce Riedel fills that gap with JFK’s Forgotten Crisis: Tibet, the CIA, and the Sino-Indian War. Riedel’s telling of the president’s firm response to China’s invasion of India and his deft diplomacy in keeping Pakistan neutral provides a unique study of Kennedy’s leadership. Embedded within that story is an array of historical details of special interest to India, remarkable among which are Jacqueline Kennedy’s role in bolstering diplomatic relations with Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistan President Ayub Khan, and the backstory to the China-India rivalry – what is today the longest disputed border in the world.

In my analysis, the climax of CIA’s covert Tibet operation was the Tibetan Uprising of 1959. Its failure culminated in the India-China War of 1962. The Crisis during the presidency of John F. Kennedy was the direct result of CIA’s miscalculation of the Enemy’s intelligence and military capabilities and making false assumptions about the Enemy’s intentions. It is important to note that China did not retaliate against Pakistan for supporting the Tibetan Resistance Movement.

Bruce Riedel is senior fellow and director of the Brookings Intelligence Project. He joined Brookings following a thirty-year career at the CIA. His previous books include The Search for al Qaeda: Its Leadership, Ideology, and Future; Deadly Embrace: Pakistan, America, and the Future of the Global Jihad; and Avoiding Armageddon: America, India, and Pakistan to the Brink and Back.

The Beginning of the Tibetan Resistance Movement: History of the US-India-Tibet trilateral relationship began on October 11, 1949 when Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru met with the US President Harry Truman.

The great conspiracy hatched by the UK and the US to dismember India in 1947 is not mentioned in JFK’s Forgotten Crisis Book Review. The First Kashmir War of 1947-48 is not because of Nehru’s incompetence. Following this unfair and unjust attack on India in 1947, Nehru acted in the interests of India and obtained the Soviet support for Kashmir without any concern for his own policy of Non-Alignment. He was indeed a great diplomat who performed a balancing act. The Communist takeover of mainland China and Chairman Mao Zedongs’s Expansionist Doctrine compelled Nehru to visit Washington D.C. in 1949 to initiate the Tibetan Resistance Movement and Nehru kept it as a covert operation to avoid provoking the Soviets. Nehru offered the UN Security Council seat to Red China to please the Soviets for they are the only people who fully supported India on the Kashmir issue.

It is the US policy which helped Red China to occupy Aksai Chin area of Ladakh. The US claims Kashmir as the territory of Pakistan. The US policy does not recognize India’s right to Kashmir.

It is the US policy which helped Red China to occupy Aksai Chin area of Ladakh. The US claims Kashmir as the territory of Pakistan. Even today, the official maps of the US show Kashmir as Pakistan’s territory and the US continues to support Pakistan with an aim to dismember India. These covert operations have extended to Punjab and to the Northeast.
Nehru kept his cool and obtained the US support to defend the Northeast Frontier. Kennedy did not hesitate to use the Nuke threat and it forced Red China to declare unilateral ceasefire. India regained the full control of the Northeast Frontier while the Chinese still occupy Ladakh which clearly reveals the nature of the US policy which does not recognize India’s right to Kashmir.
Too much attention is given by Indian readers to Mrs. Kennedy’s sleeping arrangements during her visit to New Delhi in March 1962. She came with two other ladies. I know the man who cleans the trash cans of that suite. She was experiencing her monthly period during her stay in New Delhi. Nehru may wear a Red Rose but he was not fond of mating women during their monthly periods. Feel free to ask the CIA or Bruce Riedel to refute my account. The evidence is in the trash can, the dust bin called History.

The Climax of CIA’s Covert Operations in Tibet: Tibetan Resistance Movement. A Day to Remember. March 10, 1959. The Tibetan Uprising failed as CIA lacked intelligence capabilities to know the Enemy occupying Tibet.

All said and done, the CIA failed in 1959 for they underestimated the capabilities of the Enemy in Tibet. The Tibet Uprising of 1959 was brutally crushed and CIA helped the Dalai Lama to find shelter in India. The CIA again failed in Cuba for they underestimated the capabilities of the Enemy in Cuba. Basically, the CIA lacks intelligence capabilities and gave false assurances to Nehru about China’s intentions and preparedness to wage a war across the Himalayan Frontier. Ask Chairman Mao Zedong as to why he attacked India in 1962. What did he say about his own attack?
Indians keep repeating the false narrative shared by Neville Maxwell, a communist spy. What about Indian Army Chief? What was his name? Was he related to Nehru clan? Who appointed him to that position? Was there any favoritism? India honored all the military leaders who defended Kashmir.

Tell me about the Battlefield casualties. How many killed and wounded during the 1962 War? Ask Red China to give me its numbers. What is the secret about it? Ask Red China to declassify its War Record to get a perspective on the Himalayan Blunders of Nehru.

Whole Review – JFK’s Forgotten Crisis, Book by Bruce Riedel. On behalf of Special Frontier Force – Vikas Regiment, I reject Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s interpretation of Prime Minister Nehru’s Policy since 1947.

Rudra Rebbapragada

Special Frontier Force/Establishment 22/Vikas Regiment

The Himalayan Blunders of Nehru

As Stated In ‘JFK’s Forgotten Crisis’

Jaideep A Prabhu

Feb 06, 2025,

https://swarajyamag.com/books/the-failure-of-nehru-the-initiative-of-jfk

Whole Review – JFK’s Forgotten Crisis, Book by Bruce Riedel. I reject Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s interpretation of Prime Minister Nehru’s Policy since 1947.

PM Modi urged the MPs to read ‘JFK’s Forgotten Crisis’ in his Parliament speech.

JFK’s Forgotten Crisis: Tibet, the CIA, and the Sino-Indian War, Bruce O. Riedel, Brookings Institution, 2015

Bruce Riedel’s book is written in an accessible style and adds considerably to our understanding of the limitations of Nehru, the India-friendliness of JFK, and the Sino-Indian War of ’62.

Occurring in the shadows of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Sino-Indian War of 1962 is a forgotten slice of history that is remembered vividly only in India.

With it is buried an important episode of US president John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s diplomacy, an intriguing ‘what-if’ of Indo-US relations, and perhaps the most active chapter in the neglected history of Tibet’s resistance to China’s brutal occupation.

The war, however, brought about significant geopolitical changes to South Asia that shape it to this day. Bruce Riedel’s JFK’s Forgotten Crisis: Tibet, the CIA, and the Sino-Indian War is a gripping account of the United States’ involvement in South Asia and Kennedy’s personal interest in India.

In it, he dispels the commonly held belief that India was not a priority of US foreign policy in the early 1960s and that Kennedy was too preoccupied with events in his own backyard to pay any attention to a “minor border skirmish” on the other side of the world.

Except perhaps among historians of the Cold War, it is not widely known that the United States cosied up to Pakistan during the Eisenhower administration not to buttress South and West Asia against communism but to secure permission to fly reconnaissance missions into the Soviet Union, China, and Tibet.

Initiated in 1957, the US-Pakistan agreement allowed the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to operate U-2 reconnaissance planes from Lahore, Peshawar, and other airbases in West Pakistan over Communist territory. Airfields in East Pakistan, such as at Kurmitola, were also made available to the United States. Some of the missions were flown by the Royal Air Force as well.

These overflights provided a wealth of information about the Soviet and Chinese militaries, economies, terrain, and other aspects important to Western military planners. Particularly useful was the information on China, which was otherwise sealed off to Western eyes and ears.

Ayub Khan, the Pakistani president, claimed his pound of flesh for the agreement – Washington and Karachi signed a bilateral security agreement supplementing the CENTO and SEATO security pacts that Pakistan was already a member of and American military aid expanded to include the most advanced US jet fighter of the time, the F-104.

In addition to intelligence gathering, the United States was also involved – with full Pakistani complicity – in supporting Tibetan rebels fight the Chinese army.

The history of Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22: 1957 was a turning point. India had recognized that its foreign policy of political neutralism was of no use and had started depending upon the United States to address the military threat posed by China’s occupation of Tibet. But, the effort was too modest and both India and the United States had grossly underestimated the strength of the People’s Liberation Army.

The CIA flew out recruits identified by Tibetan resistance leaders, first to Saipan and then on to Camp Hale in Colorado or to the Farm – the CIA’s Virginia facility – to be trained in marksmanship, radio operations, and other crafts of insurgency. The newly-trained recruits were then flown back to Kurmitola, from where they would be parachuted back into Tibet to harass the Chinese military.

No one in Washington had any illusion that these rebels stood any chance against any professionally trained and equipped force, especially one as large as the People’s Liberation Army, but US policymakers were content to harass Beijing in the hope of keeping it off balance.

Jawaharlal Nehru knew of US activities in Tibet, for his Intelligence Bureau chief, BN Mullick, had his own sources in Tibet. It is unlikely, however, that he knew of Pakistan’s role in the United States’ Tibet operations.

In any case, Nehru did not believe that it was worth antagonising the Chinese when there was no hope of victory; India had to live in the same neighbourhood and hence be more cautious than the rambunctious Americans.

Furthermore, it was the heyday of non-alignment and panchsheel, and the Indian prime minister did not wish to upset that applecart if he could help it. In fact, Nehru urged US President Dwight Eisenhower during their 1956 retreat to the latter’s Gettysburg farmhouse to give the UN Security Council seat held by Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist China to Mao Zedong’s Communist China.

As Nehru saw it, a nation of 600 million people could not be kept outside the world system for long, but Ike, as the US president was known, still had bitter memories of the Chinese from Korea fresh in his mind. Yet three years later, when Ike visited India and Chinese perfidy in Aksai Chin had been discovered, the Indian prime minister’s tone was a contrast.

To most, Cuba defines the Kennedy administration: JFK had got off to a disastrous start in his presidency with the Bay of Pigs fiasco in Cuba, an inheritance from his predecessor’s era.

His iconic moment, indisputably, came two years later in the showdown with Nikita Khrushchev over Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba. Less well known is the president’s interest in South Asia and India in particular.

Riedel explains how, even before assuming the presidency, Kennedy had made a name for himself in the US Senate with his powerful speeches on foreign policy.

In essence, he criticised the Eisenhower government for its failure to recognise that the era of European power was over; Kennedy wanted to fight a smarter Cold War, embracing the newly liberated peoples of Asia and Africa and denying the Communists an opportunity to fan any residual anti-imperialism which usually manifested itself as anti-Westernism.

Riedel points to a speech in May 1959 as a key indicator of the future president’s focus:

In May 1959, JFK declared, “…no struggle in the world today deserves more of our time and attention than that which now grips the attention of all Asia. That is the struggle between India and China for leadership of the East…” China was growing three times as fast as India, Kennedy went on, because of Soviet assistance; to help India, the future president proposed, NATO and Japan should put together an aid package of $1 billion per year that would revitalise the Indian economy and set the country on a path to prosperity.

The speech had been partially drafted by someone who would also play a major role in the United States’ India policy during Kennedy’s presidency: John Kenneth Galbraith.

Riedel shows how, despite his Cuban distraction, Kennedy put India on the top of his agenda. A 1960 National Intelligence Estimate prepared by the CIA for the new president predicted a souring of India-China relations; it further predicted that Delhi would probably turn to Moscow for help with Beijing.

After a failed National Uprising of Tibetan people on March 10, 1959, The Head of the autonomous State of Tibet arrived in India and established a Tibetan Government-in-Exile with the support of the people of the United States of America.

However, the border dispute with the Chinese had shaken Nehru’s dominance in foreign policy and made Indian leaders more sympathetic of the United States. The NIE also projected the military gap between India and China to increase to the disadvantage of the former.

The PLA had also been doing exceedingly well against Tibetan rebels, picking them off within weeks of their infiltration. By late 1960, a Tibetan enclave had developed in Nepal; Mustang, the enclave was called, became the preferred site for the CIA to drop supplies to the rebels.

Galbraith, the newly appointed ambassador to India, disapproved of the CIA’s Tibetan mission, which had delivered over 250 tonnes of arms, ammunition, medical supplies, communications gear, and other equipment by then.

Like Nehru, he thought it reckless and provocative without any hope of achieving a favourable result. There were, however, occasional intelligence windfalls coming from Tibet and Kennedy overruled Galbraith for the moment.
JFK’s Forgotten Crisis shows how Galbraith was far more attuned to India than he is usually given credit for. He is most famously remembered – perhaps only among Cold War historians – for nixing a Department of Defence proposal in 1961 that proposed giving India nuclear weapons.

Then, he predicted – most likely accurately – that Nehru would denounce such an offer and accuse the United States of trying to make India its atomic ally. Now, the Harvard professor pushed for Nehru and Kennedy to meet.

This would give the Indian prime minister, Galbraith hoped, an opportunity to remove any lingering suspicions he may have had about US foreign policy in South Asia. The large aid package Washington had planned for India would only sweeten the meeting.

This was not to be: Nehru remained most taciturn and almost monosyllabic during his visit to Jacqueline Kennedy’s home in Newport. However, he was quite enamoured by the First Lady, and Jackie Kennedy later said that she found the Indian leader to be quite charming; she, however, had much sharper things to say about the leader’s daughter!

November 07, 1961: The alliance between the United States, India, and Tibet dates back to late 1950s and early 1960s. This is an alliance in response to the military threat posed by People’s Republic of China’s occupation of Tibet.

Washington’s outreach to Delhi annoyed Karachi. Though ostensibly the US-Pakistan alliance was to fight communism, the reality was that Pakistan had always been preoccupied with India.

Ayub Khan felt betrayed that the United States would give India, a non-aligned state, economic assistance that would only assist it in developing a stronger military to be deployed against Pakistan. Riedel’s account highlights the irresistible Kennedy charm – when Pakistan suspended the Dragon Lady’s flights from its soil, JFK was able to woo Khan back into the fold.

However, the Pakistani dictator had a condition – that Washington would discuss all arms sales to India with him. This agreement would be utterly disregarded during the Sino-Indian War and Pakistan would start looking for more reliable allies against their larger Hindu neighbour.

Riedel reveals how Pakistan had started drifting into the Chinese orbit as early as 1961, even before China’s invasion of India, an event commonly believed to have occurred after India’s Himalayan humiliation.

When India retook Goa from the Portuguese, a NATO country, it caused all sorts of difficulties for the United States.

On the one hand, Kennedy agreed with the notion that colonial possessions should be granted independence or returned to their original owners but on the other, Nehru and his minister of defence, Krishna Menon, had not endeared themselves to anyone with their constant moralising; their critics would not, now, let this opportunity to call out India’s hypocrisy on the use of force in international affairs pass.

Too much attention is given by Indian readers to Mrs. Kennedy’s sleeping arrangements during her visit to New Delhi in March 1962. She came with two other ladies. I expect Intelligence analysts to give attention to the US Kashmir Policy rather than speculating about the First Lady’s Charm Offensive.

The brief turbulence in relations was set right, oddly, by the First Lady again. On her visit to India, she again charmed the prime minister and he insisted that he stay with him instead of the US embassy and had the room Edwina Mountbatten had often used on her visits readied. The play of personalities, an often ignored facet of diplomacy, has been brought out well by Riedel.

ST-C117-T74-62 14 March 1962

Too much attention is given by Indian readers to Mrs. Kennedy’s sleeping arrangements during her visit to New Delhi in March 1962. She came with two other ladies. I expect Intelligence analysts to give attention to the US Kashmir Policy rather than speculating about the First Lady’s Charm Offensive. First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy’s (JBK) trip to India and Pakistan: New Delhi, Delhi, India, fashion show at Cottage Industries Emporium

Please credit “Cecil Stoughton. White House Photographs. John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, Boston”

Ironically, China believed that the Tibetan resistance movement was being fuelled by India with US help. India’s granting of asylum to the Dalai Lama did not help matters either, even though it was Nehru who had convinced the young Dalai Lama to return to Tibet in 1956 and have faith in Beijing’s promises of Tibetan autonomy.

Although Indian actions did factor into the Chinese decision to invade India in October 1962, records from Eastern European archives indicate that the Sino-Soviet split was also partly to blame. Humiliating India served two purposes for Mao: first, it would secure Chinese access to Tibet via Aksai Chin, and second, it would expose India’s Western ties and humiliate a Soviet ally, thereby proclaiming China to be the true leader of the communist world.

Riedel’s treatment of the war and the several accounts makes for interesting reading, though his belief that there is rich literature on the Indian side about the war is a little puzzling.

Most of what is known about the Sino-Indian War comes from foreign archives – primarily the United States, Britain, and Russia but also European archives as their diplomats recorded and relayed to their capitals opinions they had formed from listening to chatter on the embassy grapevine.

There is, indeed, literature on the Indian side but much of it seeks to apportion blame rather than clarify the sequence of events. Records from the Prime Minister’s Office, the Ministry of External Affairs, or the Ministry of Defence are yet to be declassified, though the Henderson-Brooks-Bhagat Report was partially released to the public by Australian journalist Neville Maxwell.

Chinese records, though not easily accessible, have trickled out via the most commendable Cold War International History Project. The Parallel History Project has also revealed somewhat the view from Eastern Europe.

Riedel dispels the notion of Nehru’s Forward Policy as the cassus belli. According to Brigadier John Dalvi, a prisoner of war from almost the outset, China had been amassing arms, ammunition, winter supplies, and other materiel at its forward bases since at least May 1962.

This matches with an IB report Mullick had provided around the same time. Furthermore, the Indian forces were outnumbered at least three-to-one all along the border and five-to-one in some places. The troops were veterans of the Korean War and armed with modern automatic rifles as compared to Indian soldiers’ 1895 issue Lee Enfield.

Though Riedel exonerates Nehru on his diplomacy, he does not allow the prime minister’s incompetence to pass: the political appointment of BM Kaul, the absolute ignorance of conditions on the ground, and the poor logistics and preparation of the troops on the border left them incapable of even holding a Chinese assault, let alone breaking it.

JFK’s Forgotten Crisis brings out a few lesser known aspects of the Sino-Indian War. For example, India’s resistance to the PLA included the recruitment of Tibetan exiles to harass the PLA from behind the lines. Nehru was approached by the two men most responsible for the debacle on the border – Menon and Kaul – with the proposal which Nehru promptly agreed.

A team, commanded by Brigadier Sujan Singh Uban and under the IB (Intelligence Bureau, later Research and Analysis Wing or R&AW) was formed. A long-continuing debate Riedel takes up in his work is the Indian failure to use air power during the conflict in the Himalayas.

THE SPIRITS OF SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE: WE ARE OPENLY SHARING THIS PHOTO ILLEGALLY OBTAINED BY A CHINESE SPY. THE PHOTO WAS TAKEN AT CHAKRATA ON 03 JUNE, 1972 WHILE HIS HOLINESS THE 14th DALAI LAMA WAS PRESENTED A GUARD OF HONOR BY MAJOR GENERAL SUJAN SINGH UBAN, AVSM, INSPECTOR GENERAL, SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE. MY INDIAN ARMY CAREER BEGAN AT THIS LOCATION AND I WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY IN THE OCCUPIED LAND OF TIBET.

It has been suggested that had Nehru not been so timid and fearful of retaliation against Indian cities but deployed the Indian air force, India may have been able to repel or at least withstand the Chinese invasion. One wonders how effective the Indian Air Force really might have been given the unprepared state of the Army.

In any case, Riedel points out that the Chinese air force was actually larger than the IAF – the PLAAF had over 2,000 jet fighters to India’s 315, and 460 bombers to India’s 320. Additionally, China had already proven its ability to conquer difficult terrain in Korea.

Throughout the South Asian conflict, the United States was also managing its relationship with Pakistan. Despite the Chinese invasion, the bulk of India’s armies were tied on the Western border with Pakistan and Ayub Khan was making noises about a decisive solution to the Kashmir imbroglio; it was all the United States could do to hold him back.

However, Ayub Khan came to see the United States as a fair-weather friend and realised he had to look elsewhere for support in his ambitions against India: China was the logical choice. Thus, the 1962 war resulted in the beginning of the Sino-Pakistani relationship that would blossom to the extent of Beijing providing Islamabad with nuclear weapon and missile designs in the 1980s.

The Chinese had halted after their explosive burst into India on October 20. For a full three weeks, Chinese forces sat still while the Indians regrouped and resupplied their positions. On November 17, they struck again and swept further south. The Siliguri corridor, or the chicken neck, was threatened , and India stood to lose the entire Northeast.

In panic, Kaul asked Nehru to invite foreign armies to defend Indian soil. A broken Nehru wrote two letters to Washington on the same day, asking for a minimum of 12 squadrons of jet fighters, two B-47 bomber squadrons, and radar installations to defend against Chinese strikes on Indian cities.

These would all be manned by American personnel until sufficient Indians could be trained. In essence, India wanted the United States to deploy over 10,000 men in an air war with China on its behalf.

There is some doubt as to what extent the United States would have gone to defend India. However, that November, the White House dispatched the USS Kitty Hawk to the Bay of Bengal (she was later turned around as the war ended).

After the staggering blows of November 17, the US embassy, in anticipation of Indian requests for aid, had also started preparing a report to expedite the process through the Washington bureaucracy.

THE 1962 INDIA – CHINA WAR AND THE US FACTOR. PRESIDENT KENNEDY PLANNED TO NUKE CHINA IN 1962.

On November 20, China declared a unilateral ceasefire and withdrew its troops to the Line of Actual Control. A cessation of hostilities had come on Beijing’s terms, who had shown restraint by not dismembering India.

Riedel makes a convincing case that Kennedy would have defended India against a continued Chinese attack had one come in the spring of the following year, and that overt US support may have influenced Mao’s decision.

In the immediate aftermath of the war, the United States sent Averell Harriman of Lend-Lease fame to India to assess the country’s needs. Washington had three items on its agenda with India:

1. Increase US economic and military aid to India;

2. Push India to negotiate with Pakistan on Kashmir as Kennedy had promised Ayub Khan; and

3. Secure Indian support for the CIA’s covert Tibetan operations.

The first met with little objection, and though Nehru strongly objected to talks with Pakistan, he obliged. Predictably, they got to nowhere. On the third point, Riedel writes that India agreed to allow the CIA to operate U-2 missions from Char Batia.

The CIA covert operations inside Tibet led to the creation of a military organization called Establishment Number. 22, or Special Frontier Force which was formed in 1962 during the presidency of John F. Kennedy.

This has usually been denied on the Indian side though one senior bureaucrat recently claimed that Nehru had indeed agreed to such an arrangement but only two flights took off before permission was revoked.

Special Frontier Force, Establishment 22, Vikas Regiment is a regular, fighting force and the military personnel trained using the US Marine Corps Service Rifle.

Nonetheless, the IB set up a Special Frontier Force of Tibetans in exile and the CIA supported them with equipment and air transport from bases in India. All this, however, withered away as relations again turned sour after the Indo-Pakistan War of 1965 and the election of Richard Nixon.

Most of the sources JFK’s Forgotten Crisis uses are memoirs and prominent secondary sources on South Asia and China. Riedel also uses some recently declassified material from the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library that sheds new light on the president’s views on South Asia.

Despite the academic tenor of the book, it is readily accessible to lay readers as well; personally, I would have preferred a significantly heavier mining of archival documents and other primary sources but that is exactly what would have killed sales and the publisher would not have liked!

Overall, Riedel gives readers a new way to understand the Kennedy years; he also achieves a fine balance in portraying Nehru’s limitations and incompetence. The glaring lack of Indian primary sources also reminds us of the failure of the Indian government to declassify its records that would inform us even more about the crisis.

As Riedel notes, the Chinese invasion of India created what they feared most and had not existed earlier: the United States and India working together in Tibet. This was largely possible also because of the most India-friendly president in the White House until then.

Yet Pakistan held great sway over American minds thanks to the small favours it did for the superpower. It was also the birth of the Sino-Pakistani camaraderie that is still going strong. The geopolitical alignment created by the Sino-Indian War affects South Asian politics to this day. Yet it was a missed opportunity for Indo-US relations, something that had to await the presidency of George W. Bush.

There are two things Indian officials would do well to consider.

First, Pakistan’s consistent ability to extract favours from Washington is worth study: if small yet important favours can evince so much understanding from the White House, it would be in Indian interests to do the same.

Second, Jaswant Singh’s comment to Strobe Talbott deserves reflection: “Our problem is China, we are not seeking parity with China. we don’t have the resources, and we don’t have the will.” It is time to develop that will.

Special Frontier Force Pays Tribute to President John F. Kennedy

The History of Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22: People’s Republic of China could not alter the course of India’s foreign policy. The 1962 War launched by China ended very abruptly when China declared unilateral ceasefire and withdrew from the captured territory on November 21, 1962. President Kennedy played a decisive role by threatening to “NUKE” China.

While sharing an interesting story titled Cold War Camelot published by The Daily Beast which includes excerpts from the book JFK’s Forgotten CIA Crisis by Bruce Riedel, I take the opportunity to pay tribute to President John F. Kennedy for supporting the Tibetan Resistance Movement initiated by President Dwight David Eisenhower. Both Tibet, and India do not consider Pakistan as a partner in spite of the fact of Pakistan permitting the use of its airfields in East Pakistan. Red China has formally admitted that she had attacked India during October 1962 to teach India a lesson and to specifically discourage India from extending support to Tibetan Resistance Movement. Red China paid a huge price. She is not able to truthfully disclose the human costs of her military aggression in 1962. She failed to achieve the objectives of her 1962 War on India. President Kennedy threatened to “Nuke” China and forced her to declare unilateral cease-fire on November 21, 1962. China withdrew from territories she gained using overwhelming force. People’s Liberation Army (PLA) sustained massive casualties and their brief victory over India did not give them any consolation.

Red China’s 1962 misadventure forged a stronger bonding between Tibet, India, and the United States. The 1962 War does not provide legitimacy to Communist China’s occupation of Tibet.

Special Frontier Force, a military organization in India was established during the Cold War Era while the US fought wars in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam. In my view, Special Frontier Force is the relic of Unfinished Vietnam War, America’s War against the spread of Communism in South Asia.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during the presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

Special Frontier Force, a military organization in India was established during the Cold War Era while the US fought wars in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam. In my view, Special Frontier Force is the relic of Unfinished Vietnam War, America’s War against the spread of Communism in South Asia.

Cold War Camelot

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN K. KENNEDY. SUPPORTING TIBET WAS PRESIDENT KENNEDY’S MAIN REASON FOR HOSTING A STATE DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.

Bruce Riedel

11.08.1512:01 AM ET

JFK’s Forgotten CIA Crisis

During a spectacular dinner at Mount Vernon, Kennedy pressed Pakistan’s leader for help with a sensitive spy operation against China.

At Mount Vernon

The magic of the Kennedy White House, Camelot, had settled in at Mount Vernon. It was a dazzling evening, a warm July night, but a cool breeze came off the Potomac River and kept the temperature comfortable. It was Tuesday, July 11, 1961, and the occasion was a state dinner for Pakistan’s visiting president, General Ayub Khan, the only time in our nation’s history that George Washington’s home has served as the venue for a state dinner.

President John F. Kennedy had been in office for less than six months, but his administration had already been tarnished by the failed CIA invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs and a disastrous summit with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in Vienna, Austria. Ayub Khan wrote later that the president was “under great stress.” The Kennedy administration was off to a rocky start: It needed to show some competence.

The idea of hosting Ayub Khan at Mount Vernon came from Kennedy’s wife, Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy, who was inspired by a dinner during the Vienna summit held a month earlier at the Schönbrunn Palace, the rococo-style former imperial palace of the Hapsburg monarchy built in the seventeenth century. Mrs. Kennedy was impressed by the opulence and history displayed at Schönbrunn and at a similar dinner held on the same presidential trip at the French royal palace of Versailles. America had no royal palaces, of course, but it did have the first president’s mansion just a few miles away from the White House on a bluff overlooking the Potomac River. The history of the mansion and the fabulous view of the river in the evening would provide a very special atmosphere for the event.

On June 26, 1961, the First Lady visited Mount Vernon privately and broached the idea with the director of the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association, which manages the estate. It was a challenging proposal. The old mansion was too small to host an indoor dinner so the event would have to take place on the lawn. The mansion had very little electricity in 1961 and was a colonial antique, without a modern kitchen or refrigeration, so that the food would have to be prepared at the White House and brought to the estate and served by White House staff. But the arrangements were made, with the Secret Service and Marine Corps providing security, and the U.S. Army’s Third Infantry Regiment from Fort Myers providing the colonial fife and drum corps for official presentation of the colors. The National Symphony Orchestra offered the after-dinner entertainment. Tiffany and Company, the high-end jewelry company, provided the flowers and decorated the candlelit pavilion in which the guests dined.

The guests arrived by boat in a small fleet of yachts led by the presidential yacht, Honey Fitz, and the secretary of the navy’s yacht, Sequoia. They departed from the Navy Yard in Washington and sailed the fifteen miles down river to Mount Vernon past National Airport and Alexandria, Virginia; the trip took an hour and fifteen minutes. On arrival the most vigorous guests, such as the president’s younger brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, climbed the hill to the mansion on foot, but most took advantage of the limousines the White House provided.

Brookings Institution

The guest list was led by President Ayub Khan and his daughter, Begum Nasir Akhtar Aurangzeb, and included the Pakistani foreign minister and finance minister, as well as Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States, Aziz Ahmed, and various attaches from the embassy in Washington. Initially the ambassador was upset that the dinner would not be in the White House, fearing it would be seen as a snub. The State Department convinced Ahmed that having it at Mount Vernon was actually a benefit and would generate more publicity and distinction.
The Americans invited to the dinner were the elite of the new administration. In addition to the president, attorney general, and vice president and their wives, Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, Secretary of the Navy John Connally, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Lemnitzer, and their wives joined the party. Six senators, including J. W. Fulbright, Stuart Symington, Everett Dirksen, and Mike Mansfield were joined by the Speaker of the House and ten congressmen, including a future president, Gerald Ford, and their wives. The U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, William Roundtree; the chief of the United States Air Force, General Curtis Lemay; Assistant Secretary of State Phillip Talbott; Peace Corps Director Sargent Shriver; and the president’s military assistant, Maxwell Taylor, were also in attendance. Walter Hoving, chairman of Tiffany, and Mrs. Hoving, and a half-dozen prominent Pakistani and American journalists, such as NBC correspondent Sander Vanocur, attended from outside the government. In total more than 130 guests were seated at sixteen tables.

Perhaps the guest most invested in the evening, however, was the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Allen W. Dulles. The Kennedys had long been friends of Allen Dulles. A few years before the dinner Mrs. Kennedy had given him a copy of Ian Fleming’s James Bond novel, From Russia, with Love, and Dulles, like JFK, became a big fan of 007. Dulles was also a holdover from the previous Republican administration. He had been in charge of the planning and execution of the Bay of Pigs fiasco that had tarnished the opening days of the Kennedy administration, but Dulles still had the president’s ear on sensitive covert intelligence operations, including several critical clandestine operations run out of Pakistan with the approval of Field Marshal Ayub Khan.

Before sitting down for dinner just after eight o’clock, the guests toured the first president’s home and enjoyed bourbon mint juleps or orange juice. Both dressed in formal attire for the occasion, Kennedy took Ayub Khan for a walk in the garden alone. At that time, the CIA was running two very important clandestine operations in Pakistan. One had already made the news a year earlier when a U-2 spy plane had been shot down over the Soviet Union by Russian surface-to-air missiles; this plane had started its top-secret mission, called Operation Grand Slam, from a Pakistani Air Force air base in Peshawar, Pakistan. The U-2 shoot down had wrecked a summit meeting between Khrushchev and President Eisenhower in Paris in 1960 when Ike refused to apologize for the mission. The CIA had stopped flying over the Soviet Union, but still used the base near Peshawar for less dangerous U-2 operations over China.

The history of Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22: 1957 was a turning point. India had recognized that its foreign policy of political neutralism was of no use and had started depending upon the United States to address the military threat posed by China’s occupation of Tibet. But, the effort was too modest and both India and the United States had grossly underestimated the strength of the People’s Liberation Army.

The second clandestine operation also dated from the Eisenhower administration, but was still very much top-secret. The CIA was supporting a rebellion in Communist China’s Tibet province from another Pakistani Air Force air base near Dacca in East Pakistan (what is today Bangladesh). Tibetan rebels trained by the CIA in Colorado were parachuted into Tibet from CIA transport planes that flew from that Pakistani air base, as were supplies and weapons. U-2 aircraft also landed in East Pakistan after flying over China to conduct photo reconnaissance missions of the communist state.

Ayub Khan had suspended the Tibet operation earlier that summer. The Pakistani president was upset by Kennedy’s decision to provide more than a billion dollars in economic aid to India.
Pakistan believed it should be America’s preferred ally in South Asia, not India, and shutting down the CIA base for air drops to Tibet was a quiet way to signal displeasure at Washington without causing a public breakdown in the U.S.-Pakistan relationship. Ayub Khan wanted to make clear to Kennedy that an American tilt toward India at Pakistan’s expense would have its costs. In his memoirs, Khan later wrote that he sought to press Kennedy not to “appease India.”

Before the Mount Vernon dinner, Allen Dulles had asked Kennedy to meet alone with Ayub Khan, thinking that perhaps a little Kennedy charm and the magic of the evening would change his mind. The combination worked; the Pakistani dictator told Kennedy he would allow the CIA missions over Tibet to resume from the Pakistani Air Force base at Kurmitula outside of Dacca.

Ayub Khan did get a quid pro quo for this decision later in his visit: Kennedy promised that, even if China attacked India, he would not sell arms to India without first consulting with Pakistan. However, when China did invade India the following year, Kennedy ignored this promise and provided critical aid to India, including arms, without consulting Ayub Khan, who was deeply disappointed.

The main course for dinner was poulet chasseur served with rice and accompanied by Moët and Chandon Imperial Brut champagne (at least for the Americans), followed by raspberries in cream for dessert. President Kennedy hosted a table at which sat Begum Aurangzeb, who wore a white silk sari. Khan enjoyed the beauty of a Virginia summer evening with America’s thirty-one-year-old First Lady; he sat next to Jackie, who wore a Oleg Cassini sleeveless white organza and lace evening gown sashed at the waist in Chartreuse silk. In his toast the Pakistani leader warned that “any country that faltered in Asia, even for only a year or two, would find itself subjugated to communism.” In turn Kennedy hailed Ayub Khan as the George Washington of Pakistan. After midnight the guests were driven back to Washington down the George Washington Parkway.

The CIA operation in Tibet had its detractors in the Kennedy White House, including Kennedy’s handpicked ambassador to India, John Kenneth Galbraith, who called it “a particularly insane enterprise” involving “dissident and deeply unhygienic tribesmen” that risked an unpredictable Chinese response. However, the operation did produce substantial critical intelligence on the Chinese communist regime from captured documents seized by the Tibetans at a time when Washington had virtually no idea what was going on inside Red China. The U-2 flights from Dacca were even more important to the CIA’s understanding of China’s nuclear weapon development at its Lop Nor nuclear test facility.

But Galbraith was in the end correct to be skeptical. The operation did have an unpredicted outcome: The CIA operation helped persuade Chinese leader Mao Zedong to invade India in October 1962, an invasion that led the United States and China to the brink of war and began a Sino-India rivalry that continues today. It also created a Pakistani-Chinese alliance that still continues. The contours of modern Asian grand politics thus were drawn in 1962.
The dinner at Mount Vernon was a spectacular social success for the Kennedys, although they received some predictable criticism from conservative newspapers over its cost. It was also a political success for both Kennedy and the CIA, keeping the Tibet operation alive. As an outstanding example of presidential leadership in managing and executing covert operations at the highest level of government, it is an auspicious place to begin an examination of JFK’s forgotten crisis.

From JFK’s FORGOTTEN CRISIS: TIBET, THE CIA, AND THE SINO-INDIAN WAR, by Bruce Riedel, Brookings Institution Press, November 6, 2015.

© 2014 The Daily Beast Company LLC

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR HIS SUPPORT TO TIBET. DINNER HOSTED AT PRESIDENT GEORGE WASHINGTON’S MOUNT VERNON ESTATE ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.mountvernon.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY WHO HOSTED STATE DINNER AT GEORGE WASHINGTON’S MOUNT VERNON ESTATE ON JULY 11, 1961 TO GET SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS FROM PRESIDENT AYUB KHAN OF PAKISTAN.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY. A STATE DINNER HOSTED ON JULY 11, 1961 WAS USED TO GET SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS FROM PRESIDENT AYUB KHAN OF PAKISTAN.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING THIS DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961. On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING THIS DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR GETTING PAKISTAN’S SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR GETTING PAKISTAN’S SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.mountvernon.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR GETTING PAKISTAN’S SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961. On www.jfklibrary.org

Special Frontier Force Remembers the Legacy of 35th US President

Special Frontier Force, a military organization in India was established during the Cold War Era while the US fought wars in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam. In my view, Special Frontier Force is the relic of Unfinished Vietnam War, America’s War against the spread of Communism in South Asia.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

Special Frontier Force, a military organization in India was established during the Cold War Era while the US fought wars in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam. In my view, Special Frontier Force is the relic of Unfinished Vietnam War, America’s War against the spread of Communism in South Asia.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

Remembering John F. Kennedy’s Legacy on his 100th birthday

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE REMEMBERS JOHN F KENNEDY’S LEGACY ON 35th PRESIDENT’S 100th BIRTHDAY.

Published May 29, 2017

Fox News

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

In this Feb. 27, 1959 file photo, Sen. John F. Kennedy, D-Mass., is shown in his office in Washington. Monday, May 29, 2017 marks the 100-year anniversary of the birth of Kennedy, who went on to become the 35th President of the United States. (AP Photo, File) (AP 1959)

As Americans celebrate this Memorial Day, they also will remember the life and legacy of President John F. Kennedy who was born 100 years ago this Monday.

While the 35th president left a mixed legacy following his assassination in Dallas in 1963, Kennedy remains nearly as popular today as he did during his time in office, and he arguably created the idea of a president’s “brand” that has become commonplace in American politics.

“President Kennedy and First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy worked hard to construct a positive image of themselves, what I call the Kennedy brand,” Michael Hogan, author of ‘The Afterlife of John Fitzgerald Kennedy: A Biography.’ “And because history is as much about forgetting as remembering, they made every effort to filter out information at odds with that image.”

In commemoration of JFK’s 100th birthday, Fox News has compiled a rundown on the life of the 35th president:

Born on May 29, 1917 in Brookline, Massachusetts to Joseph “Joe” Kennedy and Rose Elizabeth Fitzgerald Kennedy.

In 1940, Kennedy graduated cum laude from Harvard College with a Bachelor of Arts in government.

From 1941 to 1945, Kennedy commanded three patrol torpedo boats in South Pacific during World War II, including the PT-109 which was sunk by a Japanese destroyer.

In 1946, Kennedy was elected to Congress for Massachusetts’s 11th congressional district and served three terms.

Elected to the U.S. Senate to represent Massachusetts in 1952.

Kennedy marries Jacqueline Bouvier, a writer with the Washington Times-Herald, in 1953

Receives the Pulitzer Prize in 1957 for his book “Profiles in Courage”

Elected President of the United States in 1960, becoming the youngest person elected to the country’s highest office, and the first Roman Catholic president.

He is credited with overseeing the creation and launch of the Peace Corps

Sent 3,000 U.S. troops to support the desegregation of the University of Mississippi after riots there left two dead and many others injured

Approved the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in April 1961 intending to overthrow Cuban leader Fidel Castro

In 1962, Kennedy oversaw the Cuban Missile Crisis — seen as one of the most crucial periods of the U.S.’s Cold War with the Soviet Union

Signed a nuclear test ban treaty with the Soviet Union in July 1963

Asked Congress to approve more than $22 billion for Project Apollo with the goal of landing an American on the moon by the end of the 1960s

Escalated involvement in the conflict in Vietnam and approved the overthrow of Vietnam’s President Ngô Đình Diệm. By the time of the war’s end in 1975, more than 58,000 U.S. troops were killed in the conflict

Assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.
On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

Whole Legacy – The Legacy of John F. Kennedy, the 35th US President

Special Frontier Force Remembers the Legacy of 35th US President

Special Frontier Force, a military organization in India was established during the Cold War Era while the US fought wars in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam. In my view, Special Frontier Force is the relic of Unfinished Vietnam War, America’s War against the spread of Communism in South Asia.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

Special Frontier Force, a military organization in India was established during the Cold War Era while the US fought wars in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam. In my view, Special Frontier Force is the relic of Unfinished Vietnam War, America’s War against the spread of Communism in South Asia.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

Remembering John F. Kennedy’s Legacy on his 100th birthday

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE REMEMBERS JOHN F KENNEDY’S LEGACY ON 35th PRESIDENT’S 100th BIRTHDAY.

Published May 29, 2017

Fox News

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

In this Feb. 27, 1959 file photo, Sen. John F. Kennedy, D-Mass., is shown in his office in Washington. Monday, May 29, 2017 marks the 100-year anniversary of the birth of Kennedy, who went on to become the 35th President of the United States. (AP Photo, File) (AP 1959)

As Americans celebrate this Memorial Day, they also will remember the life and legacy of President John F. Kennedy who was born 100 years ago this Monday.

While the 35th president left a mixed legacy following his assassination in Dallas in 1963, Kennedy remains nearly as popular today as he did during his time in office, and he arguably created the idea of a president’s “brand” that has become commonplace in American politics.

“President Kennedy and First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy worked hard to construct a positive image of themselves, what I call the Kennedy brand,” Michael Hogan, author of ‘The Afterlife of John Fitzgerald Kennedy: A Biography.’ “And because history is as much about forgetting as remembering, they made every effort to filter out information at odds with that image.”

In commemoration of JFK’s 100th birthday, Fox News has compiled a rundown on the life of the 35th president:

Born on May 29, 1917 in Brookline, Massachusetts to Joseph “Joe” Kennedy and Rose Elizabeth Fitzgerald Kennedy

In 1940, Kennedy graduated cum laude from Harvard College with a Bachelor of Arts in government

From 1941 to 1945, Kennedy commanded three patrol torpedo boats in South Pacific during World War II, including the PT-109 which was sunk by a Japanese destroyer

In 1946, Kennedy was elected to Congress for Massachusetts’s 11th congressional district and served three terms

Elected to the U.S. Senate to represent Massachusetts in 1952

Kennedy marries Jacqueline Bouvier, a writer with the Washington Times-Herald, in 1953

Receives the Pulitzer Prize in 1957 for his book “Profiles in Courage”

Elected President of the United States in 1960, becoming the youngest person elected to the country’s highest office, and the first Roman Catholic president.

He is credited with overseeing the creation and launch of the Peace Corps

Sent 3,000 U.S. troops to support the desegregation of the University of Mississippi after riots there left two dead and many others injured

Approved the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in April 1961 intending to overthrow Cuban leader Fidel Castro

In 1962, Kennedy oversaw the Cuban Missile Crisis — seen as one of the most crucial periods of the U.S.’s Cold War with the Soviet Union

Signed a nuclear test ban treaty with the Soviet Union in July 1963

Asked Congress to approve more than $22 billion for Project Apollo with the goal of landing an American on the moon by the end of the 1960s

Escalated involvement in the conflict in Vietnam and approved the overthrow of Vietnam’s President Ngô Đình Diệm. By the time of the war’s end in 1975, more than 58,000 U.S. troops were killed in the conflict

Assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

Inserted from <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/29/john-f-kennedys-life-and-legacy-remembered-on-35th-presidents-100th-birthday.html>

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

Bruce Riedel Reveals the Failed CIA Operations in Tibet and Cuba

Whole Review – JFK’s Forgotten Crisis, Book by Bruce Riedel. I reject Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s interpretation of Prime Minister Nehru’s Policy since 1947. In fact, Bruce Riedel reveals the failed CIA operations in Tibet and Cuba.

U.S. President John F. Kennedy faced two great crises in 1962 – the Cuban missile crisis and the Sino-Indian War. While his part in the missile crisis that threatened to snowball into a nuclear war has been thoroughly studied, his critical role in the Sino-Indian War has been largely ignored. Bruce Riedel fills that gap with JFK’s Forgotten Crisis: Tibet, the CIA, and the Sino-Indian War. Riedel’s telling of the president’s firm response to China’s invasion of India and his deft diplomacy in keeping Pakistan neutral provides a unique study of Kennedy’s leadership. Embedded within that story is an array of historical details of special interest to India, remarkable among which are Jacqueline Kennedy’s role in bolstering diplomatic relations with Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistan President Ayub Khan, and the backstory to the China-India rivalry – what is today the longest disputed border in the world.

Bruce Riedel is senior fellow and director of the Brookings Intelligence Project. He joined Brookings following a thirty-year career at the CIA. His previous books include The Search for al Qaeda: Its Leadership, Ideology, and Future; Deadly Embrace: Pakistan, America, and the Future of the Global Jihad; and Avoiding Armageddon: America, India, and Pakistan to the Brink and Back.

In my analysis, Indian Prime Minister Nehru and the US President John F. Kennedy are not accountable for the Failed CIA Operations in Tibet and Cuba. THE 1962 INDIA – CHINA WAR AND THE US FACTOR. PRESIDENT KENNEDY PLANNED TO NUKE CHINA IN 1962.

The great conspiracy hatched by the UK and the US to dismember India in 1947 is not mentioned in JFK’s Forgotten Crisis Book Review. The First Kashmir War of 1947-48 is not because of Nehru’s incompetence. Following this unfair and unjust attack on India in 1947, Nehru acted in the interests of India and obtained the Soviet support for Kashmir without any concern for his own policy of Non-Alignment. He was indeed a great diplomat who performed a balancing act. The Communist takeover of mainland China and Chairman Mao Zedongs’s Expansionist Doctrine compelled Nehru to visit Washington D.C. in 1949 to initiate the Tibetan Resistance Movement and Nehru kept it as a covert operation to avoid provoking the Soviets. Nehru offered the UN Security Council seat to Red China to please the Soviets for they are the only people who fully supported India on the Kashmir issue.

It is the US policy which helped Red China to occupy Aksai Chin area of Ladakh. The US claims Kashmir as the territory of Pakistan. The US policy does not recognize India’s right to Kashmir.

It is the US policy which helped Red China to occupy Aksai Chin area of Ladakh. The US claims Kashmir as the territory of Pakistan. Even today, the official maps of the US show Kashmir as Pakistan’s territory and the US continues to support Pakistan with an aim to dismember India. These covert operations have extended to Punjab and to the Northeast.
Nehru kept his cool and obtained the US support to defend the Northeast Frontier. Kennedy did not hesitate to use the Nuke threat and it forced Red China to declare unilateral ceasefire. India regained the full control of the Northeast Frontier while the Chinese still occupy Ladakh which clearly reveals the nature of the US policy which does not recognize India’s right to Kashmir.
Too much attention is given by Indian readers to Mrs. Kennedy’s sleeping arrangements during her visit to New Delhi in March 1962. She came with two other ladies. I know the man who cleans the trash cans of that suite. She was experiencing her monthly period during her stay in New Delhi. Nehru may wear a Red Rose but he was not fond of mating women during their monthly periods. Feel free to ask the CIA or Bruce Riedel to refute my account. The evidence is in the trash can, the dust bin called History.
All said and done, the CIA failed in 1959 for they underestimated the capabilities of the Enemy in Tibet. The Tibet Uprising of 1959 was brutally crushed and CIA helped the Dalai Lama to find shelter in India. The CIA again failed in Cuba for they underestimated the capabilities of the Enemy in Cuba. Basically, the CIA lacks intelligence capabilities and gave false assurances to Nehru about China’s intentions and preparedness to wage a war across the Himalayan Frontier. Ask Chairman Mao Zedong as to why he attacked India in 1962. What did he say about his own attack?
Indians keep repeating the false narrative shared by Neville Maxwell, a communist spy. What about Indian Army Chief? What was his name? Was he related to Nehru clan? Who appointed him to that position? Was there any favoritism? India honored all the military leaders who defended Kashmir.

Tell me about the Battlefield casualties. How many killed and wounded during the 1962 War? Ask Red China to give me its numbers. What is the secret about it? Ask Red China to declassify its War Record to get a perspective on the Himalayan Blunders of Nehru.

Whole Review – JFK’s Forgotten Crisis, Book by Bruce Riedel. On behalf of Special Frontier Force – Vikas Regiment, I reject Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s interpretation of Prime Minister Nehru’s Policy since 1947.

Rudra Rebbapragada

Special Frontier Force/Establishment 22/Vikas Regiment

The Himalayan Blunders of Nehru

As Stated In ‘JFK’s Forgotten Crisis’

Jaideep A Prabhu

Feb 06, 2025,

https://swarajyamag.com/books/the-failure-of-nehru-the-initiative-of-jfk

Whole Review – JFK’s Forgotten Crisis, Book by Bruce Riedel. I reject Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s interpretation of Prime Minister Nehru’s Policy since 1947.

PM Modi urged the MPs to read ‘JFK’s Forgotten Crisis’ in his Parliament speech.

JFK’s Forgotten Crisis: Tibet, the CIA, and the Sino-Indian War, Bruce O. Riedel, Brookings Institution, 2015

Bruce Riedel’s book is written in an accessible style and adds considerably to our understanding of the limitations of Nehru, the India-friendliness of JFK, and the Sino-Indian War of ’62.

Occurring in the shadows of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Sino-Indian War of 1962 is a forgotten slice of history that is remembered vividly only in India.

With it is buried an important episode of US president John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s diplomacy, an intriguing ‘what-if’ of Indo-US relations, and perhaps the most active chapter in the neglected history of Tibet’s resistance to China’s brutal occupation.

The war, however, brought about significant geopolitical changes to South Asia that shape it to this day. Bruce Riedel’s JFK’s Forgotten Crisis: Tibet, the CIA, and the Sino-Indian War is a gripping account of the United States’ involvement in South Asia and Kennedy’s personal interest in India.

In it, he dispels the commonly held belief that India was not a priority of US foreign policy in the early 1960s and that Kennedy was too preoccupied with events in his own backyard to pay any attention to a “minor border skirmish” on the other side of the world.

Except perhaps among historians of the Cold War, it is not widely known that the United States cosied up to Pakistan during the Eisenhower administration not to buttress South and West Asia against communism but to secure permission to fly reconnaissance missions into the Soviet Union, China, and Tibet.

Initiated in 1957, the US-Pakistan agreement allowed the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to operate U-2 reconnaissance planes from Lahore, Peshawar, and other airbases in West Pakistan over Communist territory. Airfields in East Pakistan, such as at Kurmitola, were also made available to the United States. Some of the missions were flown by the Royal Air Force as well.

These overflights provided a wealth of information about the Soviet and Chinese militaries, economies, terrain, and other aspects important to Western military planners. Particularly useful was the information on China, which was otherwise sealed off to Western eyes and ears.

Ayub Khan, the Pakistani president, claimed his pound of flesh for the agreement – Washington and Karachi signed a bilateral security agreement supplementing the CENTO and SEATO security pacts that Pakistan was already a member of and American military aid expanded to include the most advanced US jet fighter of the time, the F-104.

In addition to intelligence gathering, the United States was also involved – with full Pakistani complicity – in supporting Tibetan rebels fight the Chinese army.

The CIA flew out recruits identified by Tibetan resistance leaders, first to Saipan and then on to Camp Hale in Colorado or to the Farm – the CIA’s Virginia facility – to be trained in marksmanship, radio operations, and other crafts of insurgency. The newly-trained recruits were then flown back to Kurmitola, from where they would be parachuted back into Tibet to harass the Chinese military.

No one in Washington had any illusion that these rebels stood any chance against any professionally trained and equipped force, especially one as large as the People’s Liberation Army, but US policymakers were content to harass Beijing in the hope of keeping it off balance.

Jawaharlal Nehru knew of US activities in Tibet, for his Intelligence Bureau chief, BN Mullick, had his own sources in Tibet. It is unlikely, however, that he knew of Pakistan’s role in the United States’ Tibet operations.

In any case, Nehru did not believe that it was worth antagonising the Chinese when there was no hope of victory; India had to live in the same neighbourhood and hence be more cautious than the rambunctious Americans.

Furthermore, it was the heyday of non-alignment and panchsheel, and the Indian prime minister did not wish to upset that applecart if he could help it. In fact, Nehru urged US President Dwight Eisenhower during their 1956 retreat to the latter’s Gettysburg farmhouse to give the UN Security Council seat held by Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist China to Mao Zedong’s Communist China.

As Nehru saw it, a nation of 600 million people could not be kept outside the world system for long, but Ike, as the US president was known, still had bitter memories of the Chinese from Korea fresh in his mind. Yet three years later, when Ike visited India and Chinese perfidy in Aksai Chin had been discovered, the Indian prime minister’s tone was a contrast.

To most, Cuba defines the Kennedy administration: JFK had got off to a disastrous start in his presidency with the Bay of Pigs fiasco in Cuba, an inheritance from his predecessor’s era.

His iconic moment, indisputably, came two years later in the showdown with Nikita Khrushchev over Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba. Less well known is the president’s interest in South Asia and India in particular.

Riedel explains how, even before assuming the presidency, Kennedy had made a name for himself in the US Senate with his powerful speeches on foreign policy.

In essence, he criticised the Eisenhower government for its failure to recognise that the era of European power was over; Kennedy wanted to fight a smarter Cold War, embracing the newly liberated peoples of Asia and Africa and denying the Communists an opportunity to fan any residual anti-imperialism which usually manifested itself as anti-Westernism.

Riedel points to a speech in May 1959 as a key indicator of the future president’s focus:

In May 1959, JFK declared, “…no struggle in the world today deserves more of our time and attention than that which now grips the attention of all Asia. That is the struggle between India and China for leadership of the East…” China was growing three times as fast as India, Kennedy went on, because of Soviet assistance; to help India, the future president proposed, NATO and Japan should put together an aid package of $1 billion per year that would revitalise the Indian economy and set the country on a path to prosperity.

The speech had been partially drafted by someone who would also play a major role in the United States’ India policy during Kennedy’s presidency: John Kenneth Galbraith.

Riedel shows how, despite his Cuban distraction, Kennedy put India on the top of his agenda. A 1960 National Intelligence Estimate prepared by the CIA for the new president predicted a souring of India-China relations; it further predicted that Delhi would probably turn to Moscow for help with Beijing.

However, the border dispute with the Chinese had shaken Nehru’s dominance in foreign policy and made Indian leaders more sympathetic of the United States. The NIE also projected the military gap between India and China to increase to the disadvantage of the former.

The PLA had also been doing exceedingly well against Tibetan rebels, picking them off within weeks of their infiltration. By late 1960, a Tibetan enclave had developed in Nepal; Mustang, the enclave was called, became the preferred site for the CIA to drop supplies to the rebels.

Galbraith, the newly appointed ambassador to India, disapproved of the CIA’s Tibetan mission, which had delivered over 250 tonnes of arms, ammunition, medical supplies, communications gear, and other equipment by then.

Like Nehru, he thought it reckless and provocative without any hope of achieving a favourable result. There were, however, occasional intelligence windfalls coming from Tibet and Kennedy overruled Galbraith for the moment.
JFK’s Forgotten Crisis shows how Galbraith was far more attuned to India than he is usually given credit for. He is most famously remembered – perhaps only among Cold War historians – for nixing a Department of Defence proposal in 1961 that proposed giving India nuclear weapons.

Then, he predicted – most likely accurately – that Nehru would denounce such an offer and accuse the United States of trying to make India its atomic ally. Now, the Harvard professor pushed for Nehru and Kennedy to meet.

This would give the Indian prime minister, Galbraith hoped, an opportunity to remove any lingering suspicions he may have had about US foreign policy in South Asia. The large aid package Washington had planned for India would only sweeten the meeting.

This was not to be: Nehru remained most taciturn and almost monosyllabic during his visit to Jacqueline Kennedy’s home in Newport. However, he was quite enamoured by the First Lady, and Jackie Kennedy later said that she found the Indian leader to be quite charming; she, however, had much sharper things to say about the leader’s daughter!

Washington’s outreach to Delhi annoyed Karachi. Though ostensibly the US-Pakistan alliance was to fight communism, the reality was that Pakistan had always been preoccupied with India.

Ayub Khan felt betrayed that the United States would give India, a non-aligned state, economic assistance that would only assist it in developing a stronger military to be deployed against Pakistan. Riedel’s account highlights the irresistible Kennedy charm – when Pakistan suspended the Dragon Lady’s flights from its soil, JFK was able to woo Khan back into the fold.

However, the Pakistani dictator had a condition – that Washington would discuss all arms sales to India with him. This agreement would be utterly disregarded during the Sino-Indian War and Pakistan would start looking for more reliable allies against their larger Hindu neighbour.

Riedel reveals how Pakistan had started drifting into the Chinese orbit as early as 1961, even before China’s invasion of India, an event commonly believed to have occurred after India’s Himalayan humiliation.

When India retook Goa from the Portuguese, a NATO country, it caused all sorts of difficulties for the United States.

On the one hand, Kennedy agreed with the notion that colonial possessions should be granted independence or returned to their original owners but on the other, Nehru and his minister of defence, Krishna Menon, had not endeared themselves to anyone with their constant moralising; their critics would not, now, let this opportunity to call out India’s hypocrisy on the use of force in international affairs pass.

The brief turbulence in relations was set right, oddly, by the First Lady again. On her visit to India, she again charmed the prime minister and he insisted that he stay with him instead of the US embassy and had the room Edwina Mountbatten had often used on her visits readied. The play of personalities, an often ignored facet of diplomacy, has been brought out well by Riedel.

Ironically, China believed that the Tibetan resistance movement was being fuelled by India with US help. India’s granting of asylum to the Dalai Lama did not help matters either, even though it was Nehru who had convinced the young Dalai Lama to return to Tibet in 1956 and have faith in Beijing’s promises of Tibetan autonomy.

Although Indian actions did factor into the Chinese decision to invade India in October 1962, records from Eastern European archives indicate that the Sino-Soviet split was also partly to blame. Humiliating India served two purposes for Mao: first, it would secure Chinese access to Tibet via Aksai Chin, and second, it would expose India’s Western ties and humiliate a Soviet ally, thereby proclaiming China to be the true leader of the communist world.

Riedel’s treatment of the war and the several accounts makes for interesting reading, though his belief that there is rich literature on the Indian side about the war is a little puzzling.

Most of what is known about the Sino-Indian War comes from foreign archives – primarily the United States, Britain, and Russia but also European archives as their diplomats recorded and relayed to their capitals opinions they had formed from listening to chatter on the embassy grapevine.

There is, indeed, literature on the Indian side but much of it seeks to apportion blame rather than clarify the sequence of events. Records from the Prime Minister’s Office, the Ministry of External Affairs, or the Ministry of Defence are yet to be declassified, though the Henderson-Brooks-Bhagat Report was partially released to the public by Australian journalist Neville Maxwell.

Chinese records, though not easily accessible, have trickled out via the most commendable Cold War International History Project. The Parallel History Project has also revealed somewhat the view from Eastern Europe.

Riedel dispels the notion of Nehru’s Forward Policy as the cassus belli. According to Brigadier John Dalvi, a prisoner of war from almost the outset, China had been amassing arms, ammunition, winter supplies, and other materiel at its forward bases since at least May 1962.

This matches with an IB report Mullick had provided around the same time. Furthermore, the Indian forces were outnumbered at least three-to-one all along the border and five-to-one in some places. The troops were veterans of the Korean War and armed with modern automatic rifles as compared to Indian soldiers’ 1895 issue Lee Enfield.

Though Riedel exonerates Nehru on his diplomacy, he does not allow the prime minister’s incompetence to pass: the political appointment of BM Kaul, the absolute ignorance of conditions on the ground, and the poor logistics and preparation of the troops on the border left them incapable of even holding a Chinese assault, let alone breaking it.

JFK’s Forgotten Crisis brings out a few lesser known aspects of the Sino-Indian War. For example, India’s resistance to the PLA included the recruitment of Tibetan exiles to harass the PLA from behind the lines. Nehru was approached by the two men most responsible for the debacle on the border – Menon and Kaul – with the proposal which Nehru promptly agreed.

A team, commanded by Brigadier Sujan Singh Uban and under the IB, was formed. A long-continuing debate Riedel takes up in his work is the Indian failure to use air power during the conflict in the Himalayas.

It has been suggested that had Nehru not been so timid and fearful of retaliation against Indian cities but deployed the Indian air force, India may have been able to repel or at least withstand the Chinese invasion. One wonders how effective the Indian Air Force really might have been given the unprepared state of the Army.

In any case, Riedel points out that the Chinese air force was actually larger than the IAF – the PLAAF had over 2,000 jet fighters to India’s 315, and 460 bombers to India’s 320. Additionally, China had already proven its ability to conquer difficult terrain in Korea.

Throughout the South Asian conflict, the United States was also managing its relationship with Pakistan. Despite the Chinese invasion, the bulk of India’s armies were tied on the Western border with Pakistan and Ayub Khan was making noises about a decisive solution to the Kashmir imbroglio; it was all the United States could do to hold him back.

However, Ayub Khan came to see the United States as a fair-weather friend and realised he had to look elsewhere for support in his ambitions against India: China was the logical choice. Thus, the 1962 war resulted in the beginning of the Sino-Pakistani relationship that would blossom to the extent of Beijing providing Islamabad with nuclear weapon and missile designs in the 1980s.

The Chinese had halted after their explosive burst into India on October 20. For a full three weeks, Chinese forces sat still while the Indians regrouped and resupplied their positions. On November 17, they struck again and swept further south. The Siliguri corridor, or the chicken neck, was threatened , and India stood to lose the entire Northeast.

In panic, Kaul asked Nehru to invite foreign armies to defend Indian soil. A broken Nehru wrote two letters to Washington on the same day, asking for a minimum of 12 squadrons of jet fighters, two B-47 bomber squadrons, and radar installations to defend against Chinese strikes on Indian cities.

These would all be manned by American personnel until sufficient Indians could be trained. In essence, India wanted the United States to deploy over 10,000 men in an air war with China on its behalf.

There is some doubt as to what extent the United States would have gone to defend India. However, that November, the White House dispatched the USS Kitty Hawk to the Bay of Bengal (she was later turned around as the war ended).

After the staggering blows of November 17, the US embassy, in anticipation of Indian requests for aid, had also started preparing a report to expedite the process through the Washington bureaucracy.

On November 20, China declared a unilateral ceasefire and withdrew its troops to the Line of Actual Control. A cessation of hostilities had come on Beijing’s terms, who had shown restraint by not dismembering India.

Riedel makes a convincing case that Kennedy would have defended India against a continued Chinese attack had one come in the spring of the following year, and that overt US support may have influenced Mao’s decision.

In the immediate aftermath of the war, the United States sent Averell Harriman of Lend-Lease fame to India to assess the country’s needs. Washington had three items on its agenda with India:

1. Increase US economic and military aid to India;

2. Push India to negotiate with Pakistan on Kashmir as Kennedy had promised Ayub Khan; and

3. Secure Indian support for the CIA’s covert Tibetan operations.

The first met with little objection, and though Nehru strongly objected to talks with Pakistan, he obliged. Predictably, they got to nowhere. On the third point, Riedel writes that India agreed to allow the CIA to operate U-2 missions from Char Batia.

This has usually been denied on the Indian side though one senior bureaucrat recently claimed that Nehru had indeed agreed to such an arrangement but only two flights took off before permission was revoked.

Nonetheless, the IB set up a Special Frontier Force of Tibetans in exile and the CIA supported them with equipment and air transport from bases in India. All this, however, withered away as relations again turned sour after the Indo-Pakistan War of 1965 and the election of Richard Nixon.

Most of the sources JFK’s Forgotten Crisis uses are memoirs and prominent secondary sources on South Asia and China. Riedel also uses some recently declassified material from the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library that sheds new light on the president’s views on South Asia.

Despite the academic tenor of the book, it is readily accessible to lay readers as well; personally, I would have preferred a significantly heavier mining of archival documents and other primary sources but that is exactly what would have killed sales and the publisher would not have liked!

Overall, Riedel gives readers a new way to understand the Kennedy years; he also achieves a fine balance in portraying Nehru’s limitations and incompetence. The glaring lack of Indian primary sources also reminds us of the failure of the Indian government to declassify its records that would inform us even more about the crisis.

As Riedel notes, the Chinese invasion of India created what they feared most and had not existed earlier: the United States and India working together in Tibet. This was largely possible also because of the most India-friendly president in the White House until then.

Yet Pakistan held great sway over American minds thanks to the small favours it did for the superpower. It was also the birth of the Sino-Pakistani camaraderie that is still going strong. The geopolitical alignment created by the Sino-Indian War affects South Asian politics to this day. Yet it was a missed opportunity for Indo-US relations, something that had to await the presidency of George W. Bush.

There are two things Indian officials would do well to consider.

First, Pakistan’s consistent ability to extract favours from Washington is worth study: if small yet important favours can evince so much understanding from the White House, it would be in Indian interests to do the same.

Second, Jaswant Singh’s comment to Strobe Talbott deserves reflection: “Our problem is China, we are not seeking parity with China. we don’t have the resources, and we don’t have the will.” It is time to develop that will.

Special Frontier Force Pays Tribute to President John F. Kennedy

The History of Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22: People’s Republic of China could not alter the course of India’s foreign policy. The 1962 War launched by China ended very abruptly when China declared unilateral ceasefire and withdrew from the captured territory on November 21, 1962. President Kennedy played a decisive role by threatening to “NUKE” China.

While sharing an interesting story titled Cold War Camelot published by The Daily Beast which includes excerpts from the book JFK’s Forgotten CIA Crisis by Bruce Riedel, I take the opportunity to pay tribute to President John F. Kennedy for supporting the Tibetan Resistance Movement initiated by President Dwight David Eisenhower. Both Tibet, and India do not consider Pakistan as a partner in spite of the fact of Pakistan permitting the use of its airfields in East Pakistan. Red China has formally admitted that she had attacked India during October 1962 to teach India a lesson and to specifically discourage India from extending support to Tibetan Resistance Movement. Red China paid a huge price. She is not able to truthfully disclose the human costs of her military aggression in 1962. She failed to achieve the objectives of her 1962 War on India. President Kennedy threatened to “Nuke” China and forced her to declare unilateral cease-fire on November 21, 1962. China withdrew from territories she gained using overwhelming force. People’s Liberation Army (PLA) sustained massive casualties and their brief victory over India did not give them any consolation. Red China’s 1962 misadventure forged a stronger bonding between Tibet, India, and the United States.

Special Frontier Force, a military organization in India was established during the Cold War Era while the US fought wars in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam. In my view, Special Frontier Force is the relic of Unfinished Vietnam War, America’s War against the spread of Communism in South Asia.

On behalf of Special Frontier Force, I feel honored to share John F Kennedy’s Legacy. Due to Cold War Era secret diplomacy, Kennedy’s role in Asian affairs is not fully appreciated both in the US and India. In 1962, during the presidency of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the second President of Republic of India, Kennedy joined hands with India and Tibet to transform the Tibetan Resistance Movement into a regular fighting force.

Special Frontier Force, a military organization in India was established during the Cold War Era while the US fought wars in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam. In my view, Special Frontier Force is the relic of Unfinished Vietnam War, America’s War against the spread of Communism in South Asia.

Cold War Camelot

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN K. KENNEDY. SUPPORTING TIBET WAS PRESIDENT KENNEDY’S MAIN REASON FOR HOSTING A STATE DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.

Bruce Riedel

11.08.1512:01 AM ET

JFK’s Forgotten CIA Crisis

During a spectacular dinner at Mount Vernon, Kennedy pressed Pakistan’s leader for help with a sensitive spy operation against China.

At Mount Vernon

The magic of the Kennedy White House, Camelot, had settled in at Mount Vernon. It was a dazzling evening, a warm July night, but a cool breeze came off the Potomac River and kept the temperature comfortable. It was Tuesday, July 11, 1961, and the occasion was a state dinner for Pakistan’s visiting president, General Ayub Khan, the only time in our nation’s history that George Washington’s home has served as the venue for a state dinner.

President John F. Kennedy had been in office for less than six months, but his administration had already been tarnished by the failed CIA invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs and a disastrous summit with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in Vienna, Austria. Ayub Khan wrote later that the president was “under great stress.” The Kennedy administration was off to a rocky start: It needed to show some competence.

The idea of hosting Ayub Khan at Mount Vernon came from Kennedy’s wife, Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy, who was inspired by a dinner during the Vienna summit held a month earlier at the Schönbrunn Palace, the rococo-style former imperial palace of the Hapsburg monarchy built in the seventeenth century. Mrs. Kennedy was impressed by the opulence and history displayed at Schönbrunn and at a similar dinner held on the same presidential trip at the French royal palace of Versailles. America had no royal palaces, of course, but it did have the first president’s mansion just a few miles away from the White House on a bluff overlooking the Potomac River. The history of the mansion and the fabulous view of the river in the evening would provide a very special atmosphere for the event.

On June 26, 1961, the First Lady visited Mount Vernon privately and broached the idea with the director of the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association, which manages the estate. It was a challenging proposal. The old mansion was too small to host an indoor dinner so the event would have to take place on the lawn. The mansion had very little electricity in 1961 and was a colonial antique, without a modern kitchen or refrigeration, so that the food would have to be prepared at the White House and brought to the estate and served by White House staff. But the arrangements were made, with the Secret Service and Marine Corps providing security, and the U.S. Army’s Third Infantry Regiment from Fort Myers providing the colonial fife and drum corps for official presentation of the colors. The National Symphony Orchestra offered the after-dinner entertainment. Tiffany and Company, the high-end jewelry company, provided the flowers and decorated the candlelit pavilion in which the guests dined.

The guests arrived by boat in a small fleet of yachts led by the presidential yacht, Honey Fitz, and the secretary of the navy’s yacht, Sequoia. They departed from the Navy Yard in Washington and sailed the fifteen miles down river to Mount Vernon past National Airport and Alexandria, Virginia; the trip took an hour and fifteen minutes. On arrival the most vigorous guests, such as the president’s younger brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, climbed the hill to the mansion on foot, but most took advantage of the limousines the White House provided.

Brookings Institution

The guest list was led by President Ayub Khan and his daughter, Begum Nasir Akhtar Aurangzeb, and included the Pakistani foreign minister and finance minister, as well as Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States, Aziz Ahmed, and various attaches from the embassy in Washington. Initially the ambassador was upset that the dinner would not be in the White House, fearing it would be seen as a snub. The State Department convinced Ahmed that having it at Mount Vernon was actually a benefit and would generate more publicity and distinction.
The Americans invited to the dinner were the elite of the new administration. In addition to the president, attorney general, and vice president and their wives, Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, Secretary of the Navy John Connally, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Lemnitzer, and their wives joined the party. Six senators, including J. W. Fulbright, Stuart Symington, Everett Dirksen, and Mike Mansfield were joined by the Speaker of the House and ten congressmen, including a future president, Gerald Ford, and their wives. The U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, William Roundtree; the chief of the United States Air Force, General Curtis Lemay; Assistant Secretary of State Phillip Talbott; Peace Corps Director Sargent Shriver; and the president’s military assistant, Maxwell Taylor, were also in attendance. Walter Hoving, chairman of Tiffany, and Mrs. Hoving, and a half-dozen prominent Pakistani and American journalists, such as NBC correspondent Sander Vanocur, attended from outside the government. In total more than 130 guests were seated at sixteen tables.

Perhaps the guest most invested in the evening, however, was the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Allen W. Dulles. The Kennedys had long been friends of Allen Dulles. A few years before the dinner Mrs. Kennedy had given him a copy of Ian Fleming’s James Bond novel, From Russia, with Love, and Dulles, like JFK, became a big fan of 007. Dulles was also a holdover from the previous Republican administration. He had been in charge of the planning and execution of the Bay of Pigs fiasco that had tarnished the opening days of the Kennedy administration, but Dulles still had the president’s ear on sensitive covert intelligence operations, including several critical clandestine operations run out of Pakistan with the approval of Field Marshal Ayub Khan.

Before sitting down for dinner just after eight o’clock, the guests toured the first president’s home and enjoyed bourbon mint juleps or orange juice. Both dressed in formal attire for the occasion, Kennedy took Ayub Khan for a walk in the garden alone. At that time, the CIA was running two very important clandestine operations in Pakistan. One had already made the news a year earlier when a U-2 spy plane had been shot down over the Soviet Union by Russian surface-to-air missiles; this plane had started its top-secret mission, called Operation Grand Slam, from a Pakistani Air Force air base in Peshawar, Pakistan. The U-2 shoot down had wrecked a summit meeting between Khrushchev and President Eisenhower in Paris in 1960 when Ike refused to apologize for the mission. The CIA had stopped flying over the Soviet Union, but still used the base near Peshawar for less dangerous U-2 operations over China.

The history of Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22: 1957 was a turning point. India had recognized that its foreign policy of political neutralism was of no use and had started depending upon the United States to address the military threat posed by China’s occupation of Tibet. But, the effort was too modest and both India and the United States had grossly underestimated the strength of the People’s Liberation Army.

The second clandestine operation also dated from the Eisenhower administration, but was still very much top-secret. The CIA was supporting a rebellion in Communist China’s Tibet province from another Pakistani Air Force air base near Dacca in East Pakistan (what is today Bangladesh). Tibetan rebels trained by the CIA in Colorado were parachuted into Tibet from CIA transport planes that flew from that Pakistani air base, as were supplies and weapons. U-2 aircraft also landed in East Pakistan after flying over China to conduct photo reconnaissance missions of the communist state.

Ayub Khan had suspended the Tibet operation earlier that summer. The Pakistani president was upset by Kennedy’s decision to provide more than a billion dollars in economic aid to India.
Pakistan believed it should be America’s preferred ally in South Asia, not India, and shutting down the CIA base for air drops to Tibet was a quiet way to signal displeasure at Washington without causing a public breakdown in the U.S.-Pakistan relationship. Ayub Khan wanted to make clear to Kennedy that an American tilt toward India at Pakistan’s expense would have its costs. In his memoirs, Khan later wrote that he sought to press Kennedy not to “appease India.”

Before the Mount Vernon dinner, Allen Dulles had asked Kennedy to meet alone with Ayub Khan, thinking that perhaps a little Kennedy charm and the magic of the evening would change his mind. The combination worked; the Pakistani dictator told Kennedy he would allow the CIA missions over Tibet to resume from the Pakistani Air Force base at Kurmitula outside of Dacca.

Ayub Khan did get a quid pro quo for this decision later in his visit: Kennedy promised that, even if China attacked India, he would not sell arms to India without first consulting with Pakistan. However, when China did invade India the following year, Kennedy ignored this promise and provided critical aid to India, including arms, without consulting Ayub Khan, who was deeply disappointed.

The main course for dinner was poulet chasseur served with rice and accompanied by Moët and Chandon Imperial Brut champagne (at least for the Americans), followed by raspberries in cream for dessert. President Kennedy hosted a table at which sat Begum Aurangzeb, who wore a white silk sari. Khan enjoyed the beauty of a Virginia summer evening with America’s thirty-one-year-old First Lady; he sat next to Jackie, who wore a Oleg Cassini sleeveless white organza and lace evening gown sashed at the waist in Chartreuse silk. In his toast the Pakistani leader warned that “any country that faltered in Asia, even for only a year or two, would find itself subjugated to communism.” In turn Kennedy hailed Ayub Khan as the George Washington of Pakistan. After midnight the guests were driven back to Washington down the George Washington Parkway.

The CIA operation in Tibet had its detractors in the Kennedy White House, including Kennedy’s handpicked ambassador to India, John Kenneth Galbraith, who called it “a particularly insane enterprise” involving “dissident and deeply unhygienic tribesmen” that risked an unpredictable Chinese response. However, the operation did produce substantial critical intelligence on the Chinese communist regime from captured documents seized by the Tibetans at a time when Washington had virtually no idea what was going on inside Red China. The U-2 flights from Dacca were even more important to the CIA’s understanding of China’s nuclear weapon development at its Lop Nor nuclear test facility.

But Galbraith was in the end correct to be skeptical. The operation did have an unpredicted outcome: The CIA operation helped persuade Chinese leader Mao Zedong to invade India in October 1962, an invasion that led the United States and China to the brink of war and began a Sino-India rivalry that continues today. It also created a Pakistani-Chinese alliance that still continues. The contours of modern Asian grand politics thus were drawn in 1962.
The dinner at Mount Vernon was a spectacular social success for the Kennedys, although they received some predictable criticism from conservative newspapers over its cost. It was also a political success for both Kennedy and the CIA, keeping the Tibet operation alive. As an outstanding example of presidential leadership in managing and executing covert operations at the highest level of government, it is an auspicious place to begin an examination of JFK’s forgotten crisis.

From JFK’s FORGOTTEN CRISIS: TIBET, THE CIA, AND THE SINO-INDIAN WAR, by Bruce Riedel, Brookings Institution Press, November 6, 2015.

© 2014 The Daily Beast Company LLC

SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR HIS SUPPORT TO TIBET. DINNER HOSTED AT PRESIDENT GEORGE WASHINGTON’S MOUNT VERNON ESTATE ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.mountvernon.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY WHO HOSTED STATE DINNER AT GEORGE WASHINGTON’S MOUNT VERNON ESTATE ON JULY 11, 1961 TO GET SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS FROM PRESIDENT AYUB KHAN OF PAKISTAN.
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY. A STATE DINNER HOSTED ON JULY 11, 1961 WAS USED TO GET SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS FROM PRESIDENT AYUB KHAN OF PAKISTAN.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING THIS DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961. On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING THIS DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR ENLISTING SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR GETTING PAKISTAN’S SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.jfklibrary.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR GETTING PAKISTAN’S SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961.On www.mountvernon.org
SPECIAL FRONTIER FORCE PAYS TRIBUTE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY FOR GETTING PAKISTAN’S SUPPORT FOR TIBET OPERATIONS DURING DINNER AT MOUNT VERNON ON JULY 11, 1961. On www.jfklibrary.org

Whole Failure – The Failure of the Intelligence Gathering Mission of the US, India, and Tibet

Vikas Regiment, Special Frontier Force, Establishment 22 – The Problem of Espionage:

Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: The Chinese military philosopher in a military treatise known as PING-FA(The Art of War) written c. 400 BC mentions the use of secret agents and the importance of good intelligence.
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: The Chinese military philosopher in a military treatise known as PING-FA(The Art of War) written c. 400 BC mentions the use of secret agents and the importance of good intelligence.

The term ‘intelligence’ is used to describe government operations that involve evaluation of information concerning the strength, activities, and probable course of action of its opponents. Espionage involves the gathering of ‘intelligence’ information which is further used in evaluation to design a political or a military course of action to deter the enemy. Radug Ngawang had exposed his participation in espionage by releasing the following photo images that were taken at Establishment No. 22/Special Frontier Force during 1971-1975 prior to his dismissal from Service in 1976. He clearly understands that the possession of these images is illegal and he is fully aware of the fact that the people shown in the images had no clue that they were being secretly photographed and did not know that the photo images will be released without official permission.

Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: Establishment No. 22 or Special Frontier Force represents a military alliance/pact between the United States, India, and Tibet to confront the military threat posed by the Communist Red Dragon's occupation of Tibet since 1950. It is no surprise that at Special Frontier Force we have constantly experienced the problem of espionage orchestrated by the People's Republic of China.
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: Establishment 22 or Special Frontier Force represents a military alliance/pact between the United States, India, and Tibet to confront the military threat posed by the Communist Red Dragon’s occupation of Tibet since 1950. It is no surprise that at Special Frontier Force we have constantly experienced the problem of espionage orchestrated by the People’s Republic of China.

To obtain knowledge of the enemy’s intentions intelligence systems have been in use from ancient times. The concept of intelligence is not new. The military treatise “PING-FA” (The Art of War) written c. 400 BC by the Chinese philosopher Sun-Tzu mentions the use of secret agents and the importance of good intelligence. The intelligence service of the People’s Republic of China is known as the Social Affairs Department. The term espionage describes the process of obtaining information using spies, secret agents, and involves the use of illegal monitoring devices. At Vikas Regiment, Establishment 22 or Special Frontier Force the evidence for espionage conducted by the People’s Republic of China is revealed by the photo images obtained by spies and secret agents. After an investigation, the Department of Security of Central Tibetan Administration had dismissed from Service its top military leader/Political Leader/Dapon Radug (or Ratuk) Ngawang during 1976. Another Senior Political Leader Jamba Kalden had voluntarily retired from Service during 1977 after admitting that he had failed to stop or prevent the acts of espionage. It is very interesting to mention that Dapon Ratuk Ngawang had actually escorted His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama on his way to India after the failed National Uprising Day (March 10, 1959 ) in Lhasa, Tibet. Ratuk Ngawang, is currently 85-years old (in 2013, the original date of this article), is not formally charged for any crime or illegal activity by the Government of India or Tibetan Government-in-Exile. After his retirement, he was permitted to live in India in the Capital City of New Delhi and he draws a modest amount of pension for the years he spent in Service. I worked with him at Establishment 22/Special Frontier Force from September 1971 to December 1974. His wife was in charge of the camp where we trained the female paratroopers of SFF. She released some of the prohibited, illegal photo images captured by the enemy agents sheltered by Ratuk Ngawang. I am fully convinced that he supported espionage activity at my military organization. It is not surprising to find Communist China is always ahead of the combined Intelligence Gathering Mission of the United States, India and Tibet.

Special Frontier Force – The Problem of Espionage. January 21 is Squirrel Appreciation Day. My reflections on “Chakrata Karma” with the help of a Squirrel Story. During January 1974, there was an attempt on my life at the Military Hospital Wing, Chakrata. This type of Charcoal burner was placed in my duty room in an attempt to poison me. I suspect the involvement of Political Leader Ratuk Ngawang and his wife who could have used a Tibetan female nurse to place this burner in the small duty room.
Special Frontier Force - The Problem of Espionage: Chinese Intelligence correctly guessed that the 14th Dalai Lama had escaped from Lhasa to seek asylum in India after the failed Day of National Uprising in Tibet. Peking(Beijing) had announced that the 14th Dalai Lama had arrived in India, a day before New Delhi could make a formal announcement. The Chinese intelligence always remained ahead of the United States, India, and Tibet.
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: Chinese Intelligence correctly guessed that the 14th Dalai Lama had escaped from Lhasa to seek asylum in India after the failed Day of National Uprising in Tibet. Peking (Beijing) announced that the 14th Dalai Lama had arrived in India, a day before New Delhi could make a formal announcement. Chinese intelligence always remained ahead of the United States, India, and Tibet.
Special Frontier Force - The Problem of Espionage: 54 years ago, His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama had arrived in India on March 31, 1959. A Guard of Honor was presented by the Assam Rifles after he crossed into India's North East Frontier Agency(Arunachal Pradesh) at Chutangmu/Khenzimani in TAWANG sector.  The Chinese intelligence pursued him constantly monitoring his movements and activities all these years.
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: 54 years ago, His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama had arrived in India on March 31, 1959. A Guard of Honor was presented by the Assam Rifles after he crossed into India’s North East Frontier Agency(Arunachal Pradesh) at Chutangmu/Khenzimani in TAWANG sector. The Chinese intelligence pursued him constantly monitoring his movements and activities all these years.
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: Dapon/Political Leader Radug Ngawang had served at Establishment No. 22 or Special Frontier Force after arriving in India along with His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama. The Tibetan Government-in-Exile had simply dismissed him from Service and had spared him from punitive retaliatory action even after knowing that he had harbored Communist spy or spies. His Holiness had treated him with mercy and compassion in due recognition of his past performance before falling prey to Chinese influence.
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: Dapon/Political Leader Radug Ngawang served in Establishment No. 22 or Special Frontier Force after arriving in India along with His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama. The Tibetan Government-in-Exile had simply dismissed him from Service and had spared him from punitive retaliatory action even after knowing that he had harbored Communist spy or spies. His Holiness treated him with mercy and compassion in due recognition of his past performance before his falling prey to Chinese influence.
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: This is the photo image of Ratuk or Radug Ngawang at 84-years of age. While giving interviews to Indian news media and other writers, Ngawang had shared photo images that were illegally taken at Establishment No. 22 or Special Frontier Force where such photography is strictly forbidden. I have no hesitation to identify him as a Communist Agent who had supported espionage activity.
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: This is the photo image of Ratuk or Radug Ngawang at 84-years of age. While giving interviews to Indian news media and other writers, Ngawang had shared photo images that were illegally taken at Establishment No. 22 or Special Frontier Force where such photography is strictly forbidden. I have no hesitation to identify him as a Communist Agent who supported espionage activity.

The term ‘intelligence’ is used to describe government operations that involve evaluation of information concerning the strength, activities, and probable course of action of its opponents. Espionage involves the gathering of ‘intelligence’ information which is further used in evaluation to design a political or a military course of action to deter the enemy. Radug Ngawang had exposed his participation in espionage by releasing the following photo images that were taken at Establishment No. 22/Special Frontier Force during 1971-1975 prior to his dismissal from Service in 1976. He clearly understands that the possession of these images is illegal and he is fully aware of the fact that the people shown in the images had no clue that they were being secretly photographed and did not know that the photo images will be released without official permission.

Special Frontier Force-Operation Eagle-Battle Plan
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage-Photo provided by Dapon/Political Leader Ratuk Ngawang. In this illegally taken photo image, Gyalo Thondup, the 14th Dalai Lama’s elder brother is seen addressing the Tibetan men who serve in Establishment No. 22/Special Frontier Force and had encouraged them to join the War of Liberation of Bangladesh 1971. From right to left the persons seated is 1. Brigadier T S Oberoi, Commandant Establishment No. 22, 2. Mr. R. N. Kao, the Secretary, Directorate General of Security and RAW(Research and Analysis Wing), and 3. Major General Sujan Singh Uban, the Inspector General Special Frontier Force. None of us were aware that this photo was taken. Photography was strictly forbidden.
The Failure of Intelligence Gathering Mission at Vikas Regiment, Special Frontier Force, Establishment 22. THE PROBLEM OF ESPIONAGE. DAPON/POLITICAL LEADER RATUK NGAWANG OF ESTABLISHMENT 22 DIED ON FEBRUARY 07, 2016 AT AGE 90. HE SHARED THIS PHOTO IMAGE WITH INDIAN NEWS MEDIA. This photo image was illegally captured without the knowledge of Gaylord Thondup, the elder brother of His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama who is seen standing next to Dapon Ratuk Ngawang.
Exile-Tibet-Establishment 22
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: This is an illegal photo image shared by Political Leader Ratuk Ngawang who is at far left. His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama (right), Major General Sujan Singh Uban, the Inspector General Special Frontier Force (second from right), and Senior Political Leader Jamba Kalden (third from right). A Chinese spy (later discovered in the robes of a Buddhist monk) secretly took this photo on June 03, 1972 when His Holiness visited Establishment No. 22 for the very first time after its inception in November 1962. These Political Leaders lost their jobs because of the problem of espionage.
Spirits of Special Frontier Force-A Chinese Spy in the Camp
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: Political Leader Ratuk Ngawang is seen standing at right looking towards the photographer. This illegal photo image was shared by Ratuk Ngawang and it helps me to identify him as a Communist Agent who had harbored Chinese spy/spies at Establishment No. 22. Other people, Major General Sujan Singh Uban Inspector General Special Frontier Force (second from right), Mr. R. N. Kao Secretary Directorate General of Security-Research and Analysis Wing-RAW (third from right), and Brigadier T S Oberoi Commandant Establishment No. 22 (far left). I served with these people including Ratuk Ngawang from September 1971 to December 1974 and I can very easily confirm that this photo is the evidence of the problem of espionage.
The Spirits of Special Frontier Force-Establishment No.22
Special Frontier Force-The Problem of Espionage: For the first time in the history of our military pact and alliance with Tibet, His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, the Head of Tibetan Government-in-exile had accepted our invitation to visit Establishment No. 22. This was entirely a private visit and it was kept as a ‘top secret’. Photography during this visit on June 03, 1972 was strictly forbidden. However, Political Leader Ratuk Ngawang had a copy of this photo and he had shared the same with a news reporter who had interviewed him at his house in New Delhi several years after his dismissal from Service during 1976. Senior Political Leader Jamba Kalden had become a victim of this espionage and had to retire from Service for he had failed to prevent this crime.
Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22 - The Problem of Espionage - Illegal photo image taken on June 03, 1972.
Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22 – The Problem of Espionage – Illegal photo image was taken on June 03, 1972. His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama maintained a safe distance from the activities of Establishment No. 22/Special Frontier Force. However, during 1971-72 he had to make an exception as he had granted his permission to train his men by allowing their participation in the Liberation War of Bangladesh 1971. I participated in this military action known as ‘Operation Eagle’. In an attempt to stall this military operation, Dr. Henry Alfred Kissinger, the US Secretary of State had personally urged China’s Prime Minister Zhou Enlai to attack India across the Himalayan frontier(North East Frontier Agency-NEFA-Arunachal Pradesh). China did not comply with that request as China gave a high priority to secure the defeat of the US Army in Vietnam.
Special Frontier Force - Establishment No. 22 - The Problem of Espionage - Illegal photo image taken on June 03, 1972.
Special Frontier Force – Establishment No. 22 – The Problem of Espionage – Illegal photo image was taken on June 03, 1972. This was a historical moment and yet it was not expected to be captured in a photo image. A Chinese spy dressed in the robes of a Buddhist monk was later arrested at Establishment No. 22. I was informed about the death of this spy on January 10, 1973. I do not know the exact date of death. The body was cremated according to Buddhist rites and the cause of death was not confirmed by an autopsy. Indian Intelligence Bureau official had expressed his sense of indignation and was totally dismayed by the attitude of Political Leader Ratuk Ngawang who had failed to deliver the spy to Indian Intelligence Bureau for their interrogation and investigation of the problem of espionage. The fact that this photo image exists is the clearest evidence of the Chinese espionage at Establishment No. 22-Special Frontier Force.
Special Frontier Force – Establishment No. 22 – The Problem of Espionage – Illegal photo image was taken during Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s visit to recognize the female paratroopers of SFF. This was a historical moment and yet it was not expected to release this photo image. I can easily identify Political Leader/Dapon Ratuk Ngawang (seated at extreme Left and his wife seated Third from Right, next to Major General T S Oberoi, the Inspector General of SFF.
Special Frontier Force – Establishment No. 22 – The Problem of Espionage – Illegal photo image was taken during Secretary R N Kao’s visit to recognize the female paratroopers of SFF. This was a historical moment and yet it was not expected to release this photo image. I can easily identify Political Leader/Dapon Ratuk Ngawang standing at extreme Left with his wife in front of him.

While I served in Special Frontier Force-Establishment No. 22 from September 1971 to December 1974, I interacted with Political leader Ratuk Ngawang on numerous occasions during our routine training activities. I never had the opportunity to medically examine him or interview him at my Medical Inspection Room/Hospital Wing of Establishment No. 22. I am not surprised to know about his dismissal from Service during 1976 after the Tibetan Government-in-Exile had decided not to frame any charges against him. I have no doubt in my mind that he is not fit to be a member of the Tibetan Resistance Movement. He lost his desire to resist the Enemy.

Rudra N. Rebbapragada, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.,

Organization: The Spirits of Special Frontier Force.

The Failure of Intelligence Gathering Mission at Establishment 22. This photo image of a Screen Shot from Movie TE3N released in 2016 is the evidence for espionage activity at Establishment 22. The image is obtained from my stolen Indian Army Picture ID.

In the Indian traditions of my Telugu or Andhra Family, such a framed portrait seen mounted on a wall in a living room is often used to show respect to a deceased person. TE3N Movie used my stolen Indian Army Picture ID photo image to prepare this framed portrait in a manner to indirectly claim the death of the person shown in the image. It is reasonable to assume that TE3N Movie Producer and Director have counted me among War Dead while knowing that I am a living person. In other words, the display of a portrait of a living person on a wall implies a non-verbal death threat or death wish.

The photo evidence for my affiliation and service at a secret military organization known as Vikas Regiment, Special Frontier Force and Establishment 22. Silver Plate presented by all Officers, D-Sector, Establishment 22 in appreciation of my Service in the North East Frontier Agency/Arunachal Pradesh in January 1973.
Establishment No. 22 – Operation Eagle: This badge represents a military alliance/pact between India, Tibet, and the United States of America. Its first combat mission was in the Chittagong Hill Tracts which unfolded on 03 November 1971. It was named Operation Eagle. It accomplished its mission of securing peace in the region that is now knownas Republic of Bangladesh.