INSTITUTIONAL INTENTION:

 

Institutional Intention:

Galgotias University in the explanation on the situations cropped out of a disputable technological display, mentioned on their “Institutional Intention”. It cannot be taken as an inadvertent natural manner of expression, instead depicts the core sets of the philosophical basis of the University.  More than an explanation, the timing used to apply such a phrasing indeed raises a question on the entire   Institutionalism in the education system of the country. In another way, it raises a question on the entire governmental structure and policy approaches in the education and technology development in the country.

Visibly, the personnel of the Galgotias University who explained the controversial display was not giving details out of her own knowledge or working experience on the Project. She was addressing the camera in the language of a preconceived written material, that probably would have been in tally with the description of the item given to the Organizers of the event and description of the item in the booklets for the visitors. The sudden jump into conclusions and actions led to loss of material construction on the course of the events, including why a government recognized institution entered into such a misadventure, or,  is it a calculated cake walk for a show piece and technological expertise of the faculty or a fabrication crystallized   in the limited faculties of some student or teacher? Or is it a well calculated collective decision on such a venture by the management of the University? Who gave clearances from the university for the article and the description? Equally important is the question on the conventions adopted by the Organizers of the AI Summit who gave clearance for the ‘Exhibits’ ?

What has come to the fore before a vast international audience is the audacity of the faculties of the university and the organizers. The trust deposed on the Indian Institutions and development centres cannot be drawn to infirmities in original thinking with such an incident. India, not limiting the glorious and outstanding graduates from Engineering and other science and technological disciplines would be rolling out not less than a few thousand innovative brains, who land up as mere workforce in some PSUs, Manufacturing segments or even get strayed into lucrative other professions. There may be few brilliant ones who dropped out of the monotony of the academic system and lost in the crowd. But who cares?

In between looms the aspirations and high ambitions of the managements and Faculty leaders of the Institutes who may leap over any norms to prove the excellence and the investments they have lured into their centres. The Pressure mounted on the students and faculties lead to disasters of the kind reflected in the February AI Summit.  If it was so, Idia would never have achieved self reliance in Chemical technology. The country remains indebted to the calibre and high quality of technical expertise created by the Faculty of the University Department of Chemical Technology created in 1933- set into motion by two stalwarts -Sir Visweswaraya and KM Munshi.  The linkage of technical education  to industrial production stemmed from the vision of VN Chandravarkar, the then Vice Chancellor of the Bombay University. If the beginners of the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research had not set a the cardinal foundations of Ethics in Nuclear applications, the country would have been different. They had to first make gadgets and tools for experimentation as the country dis not have much investments or keen interest in innovative Research.  The beginning of Computational Research in the 1960s and Physical research were all carried out under the stress of financial constraints and the limited technological expertise. The state or the political governments cannot take much claim on the vision behind these massive structures that stand tall today.

 Yet, the question of ethical practices and the Institutional Intent” need to be looked into with a deeper perspective. How serious are Research Establishments, Universities and their regulatory mechanisms in the government on the Institutional Intent and Ethics of technological education and research. The country seems to have turned its face away from the voluminous malpractices in this segment in which both the Government owned and Private institutions are equal contributors. The retraction of research papers by the Scientific and Academic Personnel are a regular feature. Recently reports on the retraction 43 papers by a former CSIR Scientist were reported. After retirement, the same scientist through successive extensions continues as an industry sponsored scientist- a strong signal enough for the Government to employ a rigid regulatory mechanism to stream line the Emeritus Professors under the Research Development and Innovation Schemes.

Publications by the Universities of India is a booming sector. By the turn of the century, the number of published papers were little over a quarter lakh, in the first decade a steady progress was made reaching the count little less than a lac and then by the period between 2010 to 2020 the figures cross 3 lac publications. Between 2020 and 2025, the tabulation may seem difficult somewhat over 16 lac papers!

There has to be some restraint and regulation on the nature of publications as it will affect the reliability of High Impact Researches of the country. Retraction of research papers from the International Journals will raise questions on the overall credibility of the R&D Sector. Duplication of Data, unreliable Data, Euphemisms, Duplication, falsification and Fabrication of Images, errors in data analysis and interpretations, issues about authorship, doubtful inferences and results are some of the concerns which the Government of India has to take note of and find effective remedial measures. It is happening elsewhere is not an excuse or an acceptable tender. Research Articles numbering 161 from a university and its affiliates were reported to have been retracted between 2019 t0 2024. Galgotias University also figures in the list of papers retracted, those authored by the IT faculties or coauthored with other universities in India and abroad.

 

India is a country of ambitions thrown open to the rest of the world. Indian ambitions plunge deep into every technological arena to create a wider space for the highly qualified technical faculties that grow year by year.  Though the Education is a part of the planning in India, in 1976, the subject was transferred from state list to the concurrent list and holds some Institutions of National Importance in the Union List which among others include Inian Institutes of Technology, Information Technology, Engineering Science and technology, Science Education and Research and a few central Universities.  Some of the Institutes are under the Department of Science and Technology and administered by the state Governments.  Private Engineering colleges fall under the directives and regulations of AICTE and UGC would step in to deemed Universities. Accreditation Boards have another role to play.  All these are matters pertaining to regulation and operationalization of Engineering Education in the Country.

The present question of “Institutional Intent” does not find any erroneous interludes in the whole operational process of Institutional Operationalization of Engineering Education. The “Intent” is a question that has to be in tune with the Intent of the  Department of Science and Technology. The Fund for Improvement of Science and Technology certainly would be a milestone in transforming our Technical Institutions in hubs of Innovative and applicational initiatives. However, our Technocrats are from the same classic school of thought, who received PhDs and DScs following the line of research of the Guides and head of the Departments. It is quite natural that every Programme that is devised by these lineages will have its own drawbacks, who will leave ample space for rusted and mundane faculties to stick on to chairs. The reason for all these failures, is the Political system of the country, that takes least time and care to understand the realities of scientific research and Development. Following the FIST , Anusandhan National Research Foundation was created in 2023.

Again, would it be proper to say that India delves on the mistaken identity between Engineering advancement, Process Development and Technological Development with that of innovative Research and Technological Development? India has achieved substantial Technological advancement and growth. However, the growth and expansion cannot be linked to innovative developments in nascent technologies and their applications. Most of the research’s confine to adaptations, modifications, improvements or parallel operational mechanisms. It would cover a wide range of intermediary design and devising which draws a phenomenal volume of patents. 

The state of R&D in the country is narrowed down by the narratives that are enough to blink the eyes of the political leadership depending on the same mouths for their briefings. Advisories are the adversaries. Not even a single person have seen the fag end of the day, who have questioned the credibility of these big bluffs who have scores and scores and publications to their credit. The ill fate is that the same data is explained under different heads and slight modification and finds space even in the international publications.

Nothing more needs to be said. What happened in such a programme of National importance in the international stage cannot be explained due to oversight or due to misrepresentation of facts. It is time for our political leadership to draw a line between Academic Research and applicational research for the manufacturing sector.  What has to be done at a doctoral level cannot be thrown open to undergraduate courses. Faculty advancement and improvement do not mean process development. It requires a Philosophy, concept, objective, Utility, space for application and commercial requirement and value, gaps in the existing technological knowhow, design, components and structuring and modelling to begin with.

It is true that students develop brilliant ideas and they may not have the right methodology to develop those into a workable reality. That is where the faculties need to take up matters along the right direction.  Most university departments have a line of approach that is well set by the concerned head of the Departments and the institutions as such. It would be very difficult for any student with an innovative idea to find a space in the Indian situations. Some of the Professors on new posting to the universities used to take along with them their PhD scholars. The same is the case of our Research laboratories, During the Tenure of each of the Director General, a major shift in the themes would not be incidental. So is the case with the Directors down to each departmental head. The sickness of the Indian R&D sector remains unanswered. On paper the presentations are beautiful and the appear great.

But did any Prime Minister of the Country raise a question on why India could not be a forerunner in Frontier Technology development?

A look into the revenue generated from R&D segment will be self-explanatory.

A look into the revenue generated from R&D segment will be self-explanatory.  From the Financial Year 2000-’01 to 2004-’05, the Government of India had revenue from R& D segment 921, 736,696,839 and 4068 crores. From 2004 ’05 to 2006-’07 it came down suddenly 104.96, 117.34 and 111.9 crores where as from 2011 –’12 to 2015 16 realization seemed better , 669.75, 725,57, 632,92, 703.22, 8423,38 and revised estimate of 2015-16 was around 930.4 crores. The receipts from R&D showed better prospects in 2022-23 at 3554.84 cr.  Estimates for 2024-25 and 2025 -26 stood at 1272.43 and 2046.27 respectively.

During the 2021 period the production linked Incentive Scheme was introduced and till December 2025, the Government had disbursed 28,748 crores for core sectors. 

Sustainability of the manufacturing segment is the key component of a stable economy in a self-reliant country. Technological self-reliance is the key to economic stability and market strength. The biggest contributor in the and player in the niche carved out by the government for the R&D sector is a well-supported manufacturing segment for global competitiveness. However, the figures of the revenue from the R&D sector do not prove such a vibrant economy. It can be seen from the present budget demands from the R&D governing establishment, the Department of Science and Technology.  It raises the eyebrows a little when the Research and Development is estimated at 48.41 cr.  And R&D invention scheme at 20,000 cr, and Loans for other scientific Research to the same amount as for innovation.

Self Sufficiency in technology is the key to economic growth and diversification. India is still in the process of expansion of the manufacturing segment, which shows the deficit in technological innovations and process design and development.

If not anything, the “Institutional Intent” as projected by Galgotias is a wakeup call to the planners and architects of Scientific and Industrial Research and Development.

MiG 21- In the Coldness of Cold War.

 As MiG 21 is off the Indian  Sky….

New Delhi, a Hot summer day towards the last week of  May 1962. The Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru was on the move for holidaying out at his favorite destination-the Vale of Kashmir. Behind the hectic activities to send him off  who, a couple of months before had recovered from a health condition, was leaving behind an important decision. India was to take a decision to find an alternative strategic partner other than the United Kingdom for air superiority over communist China and Pakistan. The United States had already delivered a batch of F 104 aircrafts to Pakistan. India had a sizable number of Folland Gnats; yet, the combat preparedness demanded a larger buildup of supersonic aircrafts to deal with the situation.  Military operation, a year before carried out in Goa, had turned the North Atlantic Treaty countries against India. Together with a red faced US, was not a favourable political climate for India. Raisina Hills was divided between two strong lobbies of VK Krishna Menon in favour of the Soviet Union and the other a Pro USA lobby led by Morarji Desai.

 At the airport, a curious ring of Journalists was awaiting Nehru with the question on the procurement of US aircrafts. Before Jawaharlal Nehru could reply, the Defence Minister, VK Krishna Menon intervened –“    “Remember, this country is free, we have the right to purchase any equipment or arms from anybody we like." The answer did not give enough  fodder for the US diplomats to signal anything to the White House.  The United States was strongly against the purchase of MiG21 aircrafts from the Soviet Union, which the White House figured out to be against the neutrality India was displaying, keeping equidistance with the key players of the Cold War.

China had already made propaganda on the Indian troops mounting attack fire on their troops. Both NEFA and Ladakh Divisions were under Chinese military buildup. The vacation of Nehru for the second time following his health issues, indeed delayed the decision on the procurement of fighter aircrafts. With this delay, India failed to capitalize the ideological rift between China and the Soviet Union. Despite being committed to NAM, again New Delhi could not take advantage of the US objectives to equip India as a strong ally against Communist China.  

Behind the curtains, both VK Krishna Menon and Nehru faced the backlash from the Soviet Union under Nikita Khrushchev who was all out to dismantle the Stalinist policies. He was a close confidant of Joseph Stalin and  was well aware of the undercurrents  behind the Political transition in Delhi, using a duo from Malabar, the region slipping into the fold of communist lobby, VK Krishna Menon and ACN and Nambiar. Both of them maintained a non-diplomatic channel between Stalin and Nehru.  It was well known in the days of  Berlin  operations that Nambiar   was a spy  of Nehru on Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose  and came into prominence after Indian Legion was dismantled His role in the elimination of Abbanni and Chato during the Great Purge is yet disputed and India will have to believe Vijay Lakshmi Pandit.  Khrushchev knew it well that China had taken a very aggressive stand against its neighbours from the incidents of Sino Indian Borders in 1954 and 1958. The exchange of fire had already taken place at a few segments, which New Delhi down played as stray incidents at few outposts, even when 2800 square miles of India was already taken over by China. After Joseph Stalin, New Delhi did not get the same red cover from the Soviets and India was becoming more and more vulnerable to the designs of Mao.  

The relationship with Mao and Khrushchev was becoming bitter. At this point of time, together with the Cuban Missile crisis, the delivery of the first squadron of MiG 21 was cancelled. India had to face a crushing defeat in the first phase of the Chinese aggression in NEFA.  China consolidated their position in Aksai Chin.

Nehru was caught between Non Alignment and was indecisive on the strategic partnerships between US and Soviet Union, while continuing procurements with France and Britain.  Folland Gnat had already been inducted to the service of IAF in 1959. Yet,   India was not prepared to face any full scale war with organized armies like the PLA of Communist China.

It seemed as if the Soviet Union opened the doors of a new Strategic partnership. But, India seems to have not read the political considerations behind the decision. Soviet Union decided to support India and agreed to make way for the MiG 21 Aircrafts under liberal conditions, not because of any political affiliation or friendly relationship. The decision was taken to teach Mao  a lesson after he took a sharp turn against the decision of  Khrushchev for a dialogue with the US President Eisenhower. The USSR was to settle scores with the US to avert a nuclear catastrophe. Mao felt it as a deceptive stand against the aspirations for a communist centric world that would dictate the global politics over the Capitalist and imperial Western Powers.

Khrushchev felt offended at the bloodthirsty mindset of Mao and acted fast calling back all the engineers and staff working on various defence projects in China.  In a quick move, he decided to help the countries under the threat of the revanchist designs of China. Khrushchev took note of the widening rift between China and India along borders with Ladakh and NEFA.  India was facing an acute shortage of Foreign exchange reserves and was finding it difficult to get into terms with the US. At this juncture, the Soviet  Premier made the conditions liberal, agreed to accept payments in Indian Currency and through trade, besides agreeing for indigenous production of the aircrafts. The plans of China for a preemptive strike was already in the knowledge of Leningrad and swiftly entered into agreement in 1961 to supply a squadron of MiG 21 aircrafts to India and the rest for indigenous production.

At any time, India will have to accept that the “Forward Policy” of Nehru failed.

Seemingly, New Delhi was unaware of the rift between Moscow and Peking over Communist dominance.  The Chinese Communist Party took stock of the consequences of the event India got equipped with the supersonic aircrafts from the soviets and Zhou en Lai stepped in.  He signaled his Diplomats in New Delhi.

Matters went off the track for India faster than expected. The Ministry of External Affairs, perhaps did not find anything unusual in the meetings between Chinese and Soviet Diplomats engaging in frequent exchanges. The negotiations between the  Diplomats paid well in resolving the  ideological deadlock between  the two Communist powers.  After the matters were sorted out between the diplomats at New Delhi, Zhou en Lai summoned the Soviet Ambassador to Beijing  and gave  a description as if the Indian Military intruded into the borders of  China, inflicting heavy casualties to the PLA. He then directed his Ambassador in Moscow to meet Khrushchev to cancel the delivery of MiG 21 Aircrafts to India,  It has to be understood that following the brief from his envoy in New Delhi, Khrushchev invited the Ambassador of China to Moscow for dinner. This marked the  end of the diplomatic deadlock with China, after Khrushchev had deviated from the Stalinist stand against capitalist US and imperialist European countries. The Soviet leader assured Liu Xiao, the Chinese Ambassador, that the Soviet Union fully supported China in their initiative against India.

The Soviets Accepted the Chinese theory that India had attacked the Chinese soldiers and  China deserves the right for a preemptive strike on India. The USSR withdrew support to India in the war. China could win over Russia through diplomacy .

Khrushchev refused to deliver the first batch of MiG 21 Fighter aircrafts before the forces of Mao crossed the borders.

Within seven days of this meeting, an attack on India was launched.  

On 20th of October China launched a full scale offensive against India. They consolidated  in Aksai Chin  in the west and penetrated deep into NEFA. After the initial withdrawal, much to the brave fights single handedly put by soldiers like Jaswant Singh Rawat,  and Major Shaitan Singh  could delay the advancement of the PLA, giving time for the reinforcements of the Indian Army . Chinese troops faced an unexpected set back, retreated and  fell in large numbers. The casualty was not estimated, that is another episode..

The unilateral ceasefire was declared by Chou en Lai on 21st November 1962.  NEFA was retained without any change in the borders. More than a ceasefire, it has to be seen as a carefully, methodologically planned and well timed pull out. Nehru failed to understand the dynamics of the Chinese communist party in taking a decision to attack India and to pull out. It was a well-planned test fire on the Communist  strategy of Khrushchev on the capitalist forces of the US and UK backed regimes.  More than the projected claims on allowing the Dalai Lama in, it was a test of ideology with  Russia with a war.

Exit of MiG 21 from IAF draws the same political significance. US and India differed on Trade relations,    Prime Minister Narendra Modi was In China, Russian Air defence system tested its agility at war with India. The Ukraine War realigned the Communist axis of Russia –China- North Korea again. October 7 raid of Israel again split Europe along Pro US and Russian sides. The threat of Nuclear  War is mooted from the nose tip of the US president by a Pakistan General.

MiG 21- Made India Great to the 21st Century – on the path of Self Reliance and self Sustainable Economy.

Before US Hit Nuclear facilities of Iran

 BEFORE US HIT IRAN

 

21 June 2025

 

Earthquake in Iran .

 

Earthquake of 5.2 M in Semnan at with epicenter nearly 50 Km South West of Semnan has raised quite a few doubts.

Semnan had attained international attention as early as 2006 with the Iranian space program. Semnan Region then caught attention in 2008 as SPND, the Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research came under the row for upscaling Iranian Nuclear warhead Programs. Rangin Kaman - or the Raibow project was started in the desert region of Garmsar. The location was ideal for Long and Extended Range Missile Programs beginning with ICBMS of 3000 km range onwards. Iran developed a massive area here, at Ivanaki into a highly sensitive belt under the cover of extreme security with the extraction and purification of Tritium began around 2008. Iranian Revolutionary Guards - IRGC created five ancillary companies around the time of which PETSAR , Pishtazan e Tosee Sanati Aria Razi came under the eyes of the international observers and the Journalists. It needs no high tech education in the beginning of the 21st century to understand the role of Tritium in the making of Hydrogen Bombs.

When Donald Trump Administration and IAEA , distances Iran's nuclear weapon capabilities to be months away from the time of Israel mounting attack , the question remains. Why did Iran initiate development of ICBMs capable of delivering nuclear war heads as early as 2013?

Presumably the major earthquake occurred near to the Ivanaki site , 50 to 60 kms away from Teheran, the site of Rainbow Project. The project area falls on the valley of mount Kalraz in Kuh e Seffid Region.

Whatever the FBI findings may be, no one in the world can take the matters as accidental on the forgetfulness Wheeler.

The Hydrogen bomb Technology was said to be forgotten in the toilet of a Train by the physicist JA Wheeler in 1953. There were later reports of a Classified key nuclear technology that remained left out in some other Library. Other matters related to as many as a few hundred Dirty Bombs made of Nuclear wastes that disappeared during the Breakdown of the Soviet Union. China and Iran have made advancements in the Hydrogen Bomb development and nonnuclear Explosions. In 1980s , there were reports that China made Neutron Bombs with technology stolen from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. Also, US had alleged that China improved the Neutron Bombs through the technology stolen again in 1995.

Earthquake in Semnan becomes doubtful of a Nuclear Implosion only if an accident can occur while handling, as Iran, like Pakistan has not much trained hands to handle assemblage of Nuclear Warheads with Long range Missiles. Due to the sanctions and other constraints, Iran could not conduct enough test launches to have careful handling of the assembly lines.

 

16 June 2025

Fordow Nuclear Facility Iran.

With a clear data on a 2.5 M Earthquake jolting the area of Fordow, the consequences of striking a nuclear facility becomes more reinforced.

With the earth quake of Fordow following a strike by Israel, the inferences of induced seismic activity becomes more prominent.

In the first round of attacks last week, Israel had inflicted heavy damages to Iranian Nuclear Facilities in Isfahan and Natanz..

Meanwhile, Kalat and Sistan areas of Baluchistan near to the Iran Border had experienced Tremors of 3.1, 2.90 and 4.40 M respectively.

  

Friday, October 11, 202

OCTOBER WAR:  Made Together to Hit?

On 05 October 2024 two earthquakes occurred in Central Iran. The first one was 4.48 M at 8.59 AM at a depth of 6. 2 miles and the second one of 4.1 strength happened at 1.13 pm at a depth of 9.3 miles.

These two earthquakes led to a host of speculations on   probable nuclear tests carried out by Iran in the wake of a counter offensive in retaliation for raining Missiles to Israel. Amidst these high pitched notes on weapon grade nuclear arsenal tests, another earthquake occurred on 06 October 2024, at 12.45 AM  of 4.6 M struck Semnan Region of Iran at a depth of 6.2 miles.  If at all Iran had conducted nuclear tests, it would be a question on the   International assessment on the Nuclear Programme of Iran. If the seismological station of Norway situated over 3500kms from the Soviet Nuclear test location in Kazakhstan could pick up a small explosion of a quarter kiloton, today with thermal radiation mapping through satellite imaging together with highly sensitive Seismography can be integrated to detect nuclear tests of any dimension. Better diagnosis can give a clear picture  to differentiate between chemical explosions and detonations for mining and nuclear explosions. There would be a marked difference between the wave pattern and travel time of waves in an earthquake and explosion. The time of signal generation is in the fraction of a microsecond in a nuclear explosion may be to the scale of 0.0000001 seconds, whereas the earthquake waves by the friction of plates or   rock formations would be longer to the extent of quite a few seconds or minutes .  Here, a speculation of any kind would have been unnecessary , as the Iranian nuclear programme was under watch.  

 The tunnels of Hamas were made open to the world by Israel in Gaza exposes the capability of Iran to employ the “Decoupling” method in nuclear tests, more effectively than any other country.  Horizontal drilling at very lower depths forming chambers to hold test devices could deceive the seismic observatories. The signals would not be as sharp as that from a vertical   well.  In such a case, Iran can have the capability to conduct concealed tests of massive dimensions to the extent of a few kilotons, without being noticed.  Earthquakes in Iran on 5^th and ^th October were reported to have the same depth of 6.2 miles and almost near magnitudes seismic intensity of little over 4 M. This  can certainly  be a reason for speculations on the probable nuclear test unless it is a repeat of the explosion.

The sounding of nuclear tests by Iran surfaces amidst apprehensions in the American and European media on  the possible  attack by Israel on the Nuclear Installations of Iran.  Four decades back, Israel had proven the capability to strike the nuclear facilities in Iraq, where Iran could not be successful in their effort .   It was the first ever successful strike against any nuclear installation in the world.  Nuclear reactor at Osiraq in Iraq was hit on 07 June 1981.

Saddam Hussain had been vigorously working on the Nuclear Programme and achieved much progress by 1980 working    in collaboration with Italy and France.  Around the same time the term of US President Jimmy Carter had ended and Ronal Regan had won the elections.  The political change in US administration was expected to revamp the 1978 Nuclear Nonproliferation Act of Carter.  Osiraq strike   was visibly not acceptable to Regan administration and to make matters worse, Israel had used US made F16 aircrafts for the raid. As a sign of displeasure, Ronald Reagan Administration suspended further supply F16 aircrafts to Israel.  Netanyahu may not take a calculated diplomatic conflict with US Administration at this point of time by repeating the past.

It took nearly two decades for the US to come up with a policy on nuclear proliferation that came to be known as Bush doctrine of 2002.

 National Security Strategy of 2002, also known as the Bush Doctrine, underlined a number of tools available for U.S. counter proliferation policy. Perhaps the most controversial is the preventive use of force against emerging nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs. By that time, Iraq had to struggle for long to revive the nuclear programme after the destruction of Osiraq facilities.  Menachem Begin Doctrine took shape with eight   F16 aircrafts did a pretty good job in little over 90 seconds without damages or losses to Israel. Bush doctrine took note of the strategy of Israel in developing the new doctrine of attacking the installations through minimum attack with limited time operation.

Menachem Begin, the then Prime Minister of Israel, was an excellent Military strategist of the time, was seemingly a continuation of Irgun for him.   The Israel Defense Force was shaped by Irgun.  He had been closely watching the Nuclear Programmer of Iraq which started the reactor, almost a gift of the Soviet Union in 1968.  The expansion programme came to limelight after the reports of negotiations with France for another reactor, probably of gas graphite that would enable production of minimum for nuclear warheads every year. The negotiations could not succeed, yet, in 1975 France was in agreement   for 70 MW reactor research purposes, but it was enough for Iraq to talk loud about the Arab Atom Bomb in the process.  Even after Iraq had raised the budget for the nuclear programme and employed thousands of Scientist and took cues from the Soviets to evade surveillance, they could not make a bomb even by 1991.  The easiness in the Iraq operation was the success that   US could benefit from razing down of Osiraq,

In 2006, Israel found that Syria had made major headway in nuclear installations in the remote region of Dier ez Zor.  The then Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Olmert was keeping a watch on what was taking shape under the cover of Syrian – North Korean Diplomatic relations.  Yet there were reports of disagreements within Israel’s government on the technological expertise of Syria for such a venture. Finally, during the first quarter of 2007, when the Syrian Atomic Energy chief was in Vienna, Olmert gave orders to hack their computers. The result was quite convincing on the programme for a Syrian nuclear facility to the nature of  North Korean design. Olmert was determined to destroy Dier ez Zor plant at any cost. But, Israel was yet to recover from the 2006 war with Lebanon and was concerned about the adverse situation of possible escalation into war with Syria. It was feared that  in such a situation, Hezbollah would join Syria and will receive support from Iran. Olmert had to get clearance from George W Bush, who was facing backlash over the failures to find any weapons of mass destruction or manufacturing facilities in the 2003 war with Iraq.  Bush kept on delaying the matter, in the same manner as Joe Biden in the 2024 situation with Iran and Israel. On 07 September 2007, eight F16 aircrafts destroyed Dier ez Zor nuclear facility almost completely. Syria, a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty had to hide the reality and issued a statement that its forces repelled an air space violation by the Israel Air Force.  In 2018, Israel had admitted that it had destroyed the Nuclear Facility of Syria.

At the same time, Iran slipped into an agreement on the proliferation of nuclear energy, realizing the potential threat from the US and Israel.

 

“Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran was established by Shah in April 1974 during the world energy crisis to develop nuclear power in Iran on a top Priority basis.” A declassified document of  the US State Administration  dating to 15^th April 1976   is narrative of the interests of Shah Government ,  The document reads “ The Government of Iran cultivates the impression that its ambitious programme to produce 23,000 MWe of nuclear power by 1994 is purely intended as an eventual alternative to thermal and  hydeo-elecric power and is no way intended to serve as base upon which to develop nuclear weapons capability.. Iran has signed and ratified the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has accepted controls of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) over the nuclear installations and materials within its sovereignty.”

Another unclassified Documents of US defence highlights Shah Md Rez Phlavi  justifying the rights of small countries to arm themselves with powerful nuclear warheads.  Shah later denied any such talks on Iran longing for nuclear weapons, but was said to have been disappointed in the failure to acquire eight nuclear reactors.  Shah was consistent in his efforts for a successful nuclear programme and had negotiations with some European countries as well. India had timed the Nuclear test in such a way that would deter US from supporting the nuclear programmes of the Middle East countries and Pakistan.  However, Shah was ambitious to make Iran a SuperPower in the open and he changed his statements on Nuclear weapons quite frequently. The US became skeptical about the intentions of the Shah leading to the Iranian monarch inking the Proliferation Treaty. 

Intelligence Estimates US in August 1974, now declassified, had assumed that Israel had already produced Nuclear weapons by then.  After Shah was removed from power in 1979, the new theocentric Government pursued the nuclear programme. Until the change of power, Iran and Israel had military cooperation.  David Ben Gurion , the Prime Minister of Israel as early as the 1950s , embarked on closer ties with non- Arab Countries . The Gurion doctrine of   “Periphery Doctrine” perhaps seemed to convince Iran to recognize Israel. There years before, Iran had vehemently opposed the UN Security Council motion to divide Palestine into Arab and Jewish Countries.   The decision of Iran was more or less a new alignment against Soviet design of Pan Arab Nationalism mooted by Abdul Nasser.  The Countries that were opposed to the formation of Israel as a sovereign state had to come together. Peripheral Doctrine worked well for Israel to wriggle out of the Isolation, joining hands with Turkey, Ethiopia and Iran.  The military Coup of Iraq in 1968 and rise of the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party brought matters to a more conflicting political situation equally for 1srael and Iran. Israel was already in the political scenario of Iraq in the fight of Kurds against the Iraqi Regime.  Israel-Iran and Turkey had formed a combined intelligence force to aid Kurds by 1958. The common Trilateral Intelligence Agency, the Trident paved way for military cooperation and exchanges between Israel and Iran.

Iraq had become a potential threat for Iran. Shah negotiated with US for the procurement of arms and Fighter Aircrafts. It is not certain whether Israel had looked into a probable setback as Iran would become self-reliant in its defence preparedness. Such a possibility under consideration of Israel would have   created a check on Iran in venturing into Iran through its deep penetration infrastructure. The design of Project Flower in 1977 would have been different if it was so.  Project Flower was the Joint programme of Israel and Iran to develop and produce an advanced missile system, under the agreement of Oil for Arms, almost little over a billion USD.  The Missile Technology development programme of Israel was in a way funded by Iran!  The extent of military cooperation grew to a larger extent between Iran and Israel even under the Khomeini regime. The potential threat from Saddam Hussain tightened their Bonds. Saddam Hussain left no stone unturned to boast about his ambitious nuclear programmes. His old enemy, a nuclear scientist (was released from Prison and was given a massive task of rebuilding the Nuclear Power plant.

 Prime Minister of Israel Menachem Begin reciprocated well on the shortfalls in the maintenance of US made Aircrafts that Shah had procured.  Disregarding US interests, the Israeli Prime Minister supplied to Iran much needed components.  The relationships between two countries became sour after Israel crossed Lebanon borders in 1982. Hezbollah gained considerably with this Israeli attack and in no time military cooperation between Iran and Israel ended, with age old hostilities and resurfacing the big “No to the Jewish State”, that too, after the death of Ayatollah Khomeini. By the turn of the millennium Israel became more convinced about the potential threat from Iran. Cooperation with Russian military and nuclear programmes, Iranian tactical support for Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthi changed the security perceptions of South West Asia. New frontiers opened with the Russian –Chinese North Korean axis, prompting Israel to act on Lebanon and Syria with all its superior intelligence machinery. 

The Nuclear Programme of Iran is centered around four of its facilities with the Atomic Research Station in the capital Teheran, Nuclear Energy Facilities in Bushher, the Uranium  plant of Isfahan and Fordow along with the Heavy water facilities at Arak. There have been reports that after a series of mishaps in the nuclear facilities they have tailor made the centrifugal facilities to such modules that can be dismantled and relocated in the event of a probable threat.

Israel seemingly was not fully trusting Iran on their Joint comprehensive Plan of Action –JCPOA of 2015, wherein, Iran conceded to reduce the size of its nuclear programme. However, this agreement was of some relief to Saudi Arabia, if not to Israel till 2018.  Donald Trump citing failures in overseeing the Agreement, the US withdrew from JCPOA. Few incidents led Tehran to reconsider the spirit of the agreement and   to enhance their Uranium enrichment capabilities. 

After the black out of the Natanz atomic energy Plant in July 2001, it became open to the world that the Iranian Uranium enrichment plant was built as an underground facility. However, the country did not reveal anything about the incident, other than terming it as an act of “nuclear terrorism”.  By then, Iran had lost patience as barely a year ago the Ishfan plant suffered a big explosion. The plant had locally made centrifuges, Such explosions had occurred in 2013 and 2014 in the other two nuclear installations as well. After the 2020 explosion, the Natanz plant was shifted to more inaccessible hilly terrains as Iran became suspicious about the US- Israel collaborative “Operation Olympic Games”. This Operation was cited to have been behind the Stucknex virus that damaged the computers and network system of Natanz nuclear facilities. Operation Olympic Games was the brainchild of George W Bush in 2006 to unleash a cyber war against the hostile countries feeding proxy war against US and its allies.

Tactical issues confront Israel to destroy the nuclear facilities of Iran. A tough country on the move would have underground micro modules in populated areas. Iran would go silent even if Israel strikes through other means. Three earthquakes in a row cannot be ruled out as a probable hit on the underground facilities or storages. 

 

Pakistan had earlier on the previous day had threatened to Strike Israel with their nukes, however, by the evening, they changed their stand .

 

787 - A burden to Air India?

 Heavyweight-  787-Losses after Losses? 

Theory on the mistakes of the pilot is projected by some of the Western experts. Without understanding the bearing of such a campaign to the country, some of the media also has followed their suit.

Tata's Did not buy Dreamliner Aero planes. Whichever Government gave orders for AI should give explanation on the  Safety Standards. 

Air India faced delays in the delivery of 27 Dreamliner Aircrafts and in 2010, there were reports of charging compensation for the same reasons. Orders were placed in 2006 and deliveries were to commence from 2008. 

Air India Limited had placed the orders even before the prototype of 787 series  was rolled out and test flights were conducted. . After delays in the production , they were given Type certification by the mid of 2011. 

Then also, and now also the question remains. 

Air India, while facing financial crisis, how could they place orders for a non existent aircraft?  Was Air India Ltd.in a position to follow All Nippon Airways in taking such a calculated risk that would add to the financial liabilities?  

In 2009, AI had stated that Boeing had agreed to pay around 145 million USD for the delays, and a year later, another bill was raised  for 840million USD .  Some of the reports around the time had carried figures near to 320 million USD was paid by Boeing to Air India.  In 2009,  the deliveries were rescheduled to commence from 2011. 

The Ministry of Civil Aviation will have to review the technical evaluation  of  AI and the ministry prior to issuing the order for Boeing and Airbus. 

AI had sold some of its Long range B 777  aircrafts in the next three years after the 787 deliveries were in the process. The Etihad Airways  were given 5 Aircrafts of the category. Air India,  was then said,  to have incurred a loss of over 600 crores. 

Boeing 787 brought in a new comfort. In the eastern sector, within a fortnight or so, a major technical problem led to the cancellation of the flight . Passengers had to go through a bad time . Similar defect was detected in other aircrafts, leading to the Grounding of all  of them. Issues pertaining Lithium battery was said to be reason. But for such a huge damages and operational losses who were responsible? The purchase agreements were blank on any such clauses. 

It is the right time for the Ministry of Civil Aviation to get Boeing into the right track.  The  787 aircrafts supplied to India has a considerable weight difference, that had a bearing on the fuel efficiency and operational costs. It was then heard that Boeing would adjust the damages in the  pricing of other fleets , but seems they did not comply. 

AI 171 & Boeing 787 Series: Technology vs Emotions?

 

AI 171: No missing and misgiving:

 Media Briefing of K Ram Mohan Naidu, Minister of Civil Aviation provided an insight into the nature investigation into AI 171 Boeing 787 -8 crash at Ahmedabad. The minister asserted that the Indian Aviation sector employs the highest degree of security protocols to ensure the safety of the passengers. He sought the help of the media in the investigations.

 In the meanwhile the media has cast a host of theories on the crash; some of the views questioned the credibility of the Boeing and the safety standards.  One has to take note that the relationship between Boeing and India is not limited to the procurement of Commercial Aircrafts. Boeing has made significant contributions in rendering new dimensions to the Indian Aviation Sector. They have research projects in India both in the   academic and commercial arenas including a Joint venture for the manufacture of fuselages for the Apache Helicopters.  Vertical fins for 737 category aircrafts are few of them. With more than 250 partners in India Boeing has a transaction to the tune of 1 billion USD employing more than 10000 persons directly and indirectly.

 At this instance, it is pertinent to review the Communication-Navigation-Surveillance and Air Traffic Management Plan developed by Boeing and Directorate General of Civil Aviation. The Agreement for developing the comprehensive plan was signed in 2019. The decadal plan under US-India Aviation Cooperation Program was completed in 2022

 Some of the Experts in some TV Channels in India and overseas had talked about the pneumatic controls of the aircraft. Some of the passengers even highlighted the malfunctioning of the electrical and Air conditioning systems.

 As one of the first among the passengers of the Dreamliner in the inaugural flight between Kolkata and New Delhi, more than the rose flower gifted, the new aircraft was a transformation in the passenger comfort level.  A week or so later the same schedule had to be cancelled for certain technical flaws.  Then " E category aircrafts were new in India.  The Captain who was from The Boeing gave a detailed account of the technical flaw of the aircraft. Curiosity on the mechanisms and development of the Dreamliner led to a better understanding of the manufacturing and collaborators     

 As some TV Channels had wrongly put across, 787 do not have pneumatic systems and are almost fully electrically operated. . The 787 series, as far as it was known in the initial days, were using the already existing ground units in most of the airports. Unlike some other aircrafts, the lights were not turned off for starting the engines as this series uses ground power units. Gearbox mounted engine starters. Architecture of the 787 series became a matter of curiosity.

 Following the Ahmedabad accident, there was no mention of Pratt & Whitney in the whole discussions and reports. The 787 Series uses   the Auxiliary Power unit supplied by Pratt& Whitney, No doubt, they can claim to be the pioneers in Auxiliary Power Unit Development for commercial air crafts of the category.  The steady power supply is said to be of 450 KVA gas turbine APU, and is claimed to be worth for operations above 43000 feet. However, the highest Altitude heard from the captains is up to 42000 feet Altitude

 Like APS 5000 for 787 series. Pratt & Whitney manufactures APS 3200 for Airbus A320 series; they supply the APU for Boeing 747 Series as well. So far their credibility remains unchallenged. It would be ideal to have their expertise made available in the Risk elimination model for future safety standards.  In the aircraft, the 235V AC current is produced by four generators; APU systems form a secondary line of supplementary Power generation along with Battery support. The batteries are rechargeable and give power to the aircraft before the engines are started. If there was a power failure in the cabin before the engines started then the question of the Battery function would come into question. How did the AI 171 start during the ill-fated schedule will have to be answered by the Ground staff?.

 Battery support and Ram Air Turbine automatically operate whenever a total Power failure occurs. Ram Air Turbine manufactured by Eaton Corporation, seemingly has to be tailor made for the all electric 787 series, to be activated automatically when a dire emergency  situation arises. The conditions for such an automatic deployment occur when both the engines fail and as an when complete failures of electric and hydraulic systems become dysfunctional.  RAT provides emergency power supply to open the doors.  Role of Eaton in the production lines of 787 is not limited to Supply of RAT. Other products of Eaton used in the 787 include electric motors, Pumps, flow control mechanisms,  fuel management systems, displays, Cockpit controls as well as load management systems.   Eaton will certainly have system maintenance, and management protocols. Since the question gears have come under question, Eaton will have to look into as they provide hydraulic motors of the gears for the takeoff and landing, landing along with a Host of other components.

In the case of AI 171, the assessment of the battery function during the preflight assessment would become crucial. As per Boeing, they have demonstrated that 787 series can fly for 5hours and 30 minutes and land safely with a single engine and one generator in operation. Complete failure of all systems and accident is a big question before the users and manufacturers of the Components for the Dreamliner. The Federal Aviation Administration that certified the electrical systems will become answerable if the investigation points a finger on the design and complete failure of the electrical systems. The expert opinions of nature before the completion of the investigations will be a matter of serious concern for both the US Government and the Government of India.

 Also, as the Complaints against the Air Conditioning systems surfaced, it would be ideal for the investigating agencies to invite a technical explanation from Hamilton Sundstrand along with Maxon Group.

The technical review may also include a hearing of Airbus industries on why they removed Pratt & Whitney from the APU supply, while Boeing continued to rely on them/ Airbus now relies on Hamilton Sundstrand.

 The questions on the gears also need to be looked into on the design parameters of the taxiway and runway at all airports in India.  Higher temperatures of the wheels may be taken into account. There is a deliberate effort from some scorners to point a finger at the First Officer; Pilot error should be considered only when all parameters and operational conditions were found to be in perfect order.

 Questions will remain till the investigations are completed pertaining tp the maintenance crew, ground Staff,  Operational Clearance, any outsider withing the premises and so on.  The question will remain on the security and intelligence network of the airports

It is for the Civil Aviation Ministry, especially DGCA  and Ministry of Home Affairs to gather all inputs and to narrow down the Reasons of the crash to any ground. 

 Packets of data on Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System - ACARS is more crucial along with Automated Engine Trend Data in the evaluation. What is the nature of Aircraft Condition Monitoring employed by Boeing in collaboration with the operator of the airlines Air India is not generally a matter of public concern. All these matters become a matter of Concern, when such a catastrophic incident of massive proportions occurs. 

 Eliminating Human errors in the crash is a herculean task. There is no room for Human errors or pilot error in a commercial aircraft. Human error in such a case can be treated as Sabotage or a terror plot unless the screening of the entire staff of two airports in this case removes even a microscopic threat to such a thought. 

 The onus of the catastrophe cannot be thrust on the Pilots as they rely on the display systems. After reaching the initial velocity V1, there is no other option than to lift off. Here, it has to be seen whether the operational failure happened during the acceleration to V2 as well.  Lives were lost both on ground and of those in the aircraft. The Investigation report has to be a public document.

 

India Then and Now Part 1

Political Philosophy of India was on complete disarmament and world free from Nuclear  weapons.  Gandhian philosophy of nonviolence, mutual cooperation and truthfulness could not sustain immediately after the Great Theocentric divide and partition. The Violence and bloodshed that started with a new revived phase on 16 August 1946 continued with October attack on Kashmir by the newly born Pakistan. Soon the Chinese incursions set a new security concern. The Government led by Jawaharlal Nehru relied on friendship and deposed trust in the Chinese leadership under Chou en Lai that territorial violations would not escalate. India refused accept that china waged a war with India, instead treated the whole situation as an aggression.  However, much against the political notions, from the initial set backs, Indian Army mounted an assault on the invading Chinese contingents , forcing them to flee.  Eye witness narratives point towards  and the real data huge difference in the official data of casualties on Chinese side.  It was an unprecedented shock for the Chinese Communist Party, deciding to withdraw their positions which was evident from the response from the Chinese Government. " Beginning from December 1, the Chinese frontier guards will withdraw 20 kilo meters from the line of actual control as on November 7, 1959.". That was a new beginning and a matter of great psychological win fro the Indian Armed Forces. 

Today,  the ear on India has to be based on skepticism generated from  undisclosed Defense technological secrets that will  point to a   disaster of indefinite proportions  for any country.  The Country has just displayed the effectiveness  of integrating  indigenously developed systems  with imported ones to create an architecture that had proved its outstanding capabilities in Operation Sindoor. At the same time time immediately before the 1962 invasion of China, the Prime Minister of India showed his reliance to low quality Indian weaponry  than importing  the weapons from other countries that were useless for them. 

The change is visible. as one goes through the political outlook of India in 1962.  the  debates in the Parliament on Chinese incursions will provide a clear and concise picture, 

On  06 December   1961,  Braja Kishore Sinha called the attention of the Rajya Sabha on the Chinese incursions into the Indian Territory.

A sizeable area of our territories were lost from within a decade, starting with 12,000 square miles in 1956 that led to several changes in the international borders between 1959 and 1961. Attack on Assam Riles post in Lingju of Arunachal Bhutan Border.in 1950 was not taken up seriously.  Lingju was taken over by China and Assam riffles had to withdraw. For the First time, Guns sounded in the India China Border,

Nehru took the stand that the Lingju confrontation as a creation of those who stood for the liberation of Tibet. The Government of India had hidden the information from the people on the Chinese taking away 12000 square miles.

Barely an year before Chinese Communist forces launched a full scale attack deep inside NEFA, the  question raised by Pandit Hridyanathh Kurzu in November 1961 in on the area taken away by the Chinese, the Prime Minister holding the Ministry of External Affairs had stated that :

"The exact area is the area of the post. There is no other area. They sit on a post. Now the influence of that post round about is not occupation, but its influence. They do not occupy any other territory, actual occupation. It is just that post, whatever it may be, a few hundred yards or so, but actually a post has certain influence round about. How far round about depends upon many circumstances. It is not occupation; any other area is not occupied."

On the motion of  06 December961, a motion on the Chinese incursions Rajya Sabha the Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru replied:.

“… So the point we have been considering is what has appeared in the course of the last year—that is a narrow issue—and if you like in that connection, what our broad policies are. I stated that what has happened in the course of the last year on the Chinese side was, so far as we knew, that three check-posts or military posts had been established. We cannot give the exact date, it is not possible. We can only say that it was not there on one day and later it was there on some other day when our reconnaissance party went there. Or, in other words, we got to know about it then. We heard about it in September—in the 'beginning or middle of September. And so, we mentioned these three posts—one, rather in the north, not far from the Karakoram and not far from an important post that we have— a long name, I forget it at the moment—and their post is on the Chipchop River about fifteen miles to east of our post and two posts in the southern region of northern Ladakh which we mentioned and which we said were round about the international frontier.”.

“….Now, one word about building of roads. An hon. Member has asked why they have built thousands of miles of roads on their side and we have not done so still. The broad answer to that question is that the terrain they have to pass through is far easier to build roads on than the terrain we have on our side. That is to say, there are broad plateaus, ups and downs. Road-making in Tibet, apart from the high mountains that come in, is merely pulling out trees and levelling and nothing else, no application of anything, because the moment it is levelled it is a road. Owing to extreme winter the ground is so hard that nothing more is done. We have ourselves built one airfield at least in these high regions in Ladakh which cost us at that time, I do not know, exactly Rs. 400. Practically nothing. It meant really sweeping the place and removing little boulders and stones and pulling out shrubs and it became an airfield, not a first class one but good enough for use. So that road-making on the other side has been a very much simpler undertaking. Then on our side we have to cross high mountain peaks, passes, up and down precipices. Hon. Members who have cared to see the photographs of some places— even the Himachal Pradesh roads that are being built— will realize the extremely hazardous nature of this road-making. That is one reason. I think we have proceeded fairly well with road making in these mountains. The real difficulty has been that we have to take everything—I mean every machine, every screw has to be taken by air and that led, naturally, to our trying to acquire bigger transport planes, big ones to carry these things. We did that and matters have been progressing fairly well and I can assure Dr. Kunzru that it is not in an attempt to save a few crores of rupees that we have allowed, or we are going to allow, this to suffer.”

” But there is another fact. Apart from any temporary affair, in any major conflict anywhere with any country, our first and basic defence is the industrial position we hold behind it, what we are producing—I am not talking about other things, of war material and the rest but everything—whether it is aircraft, whether it is guns, whether it is other things. That is the basic thing. If one does not have it, one depends on external sources which are not very reliable and not forthcoming at the time. It is better, I have always held—and that has been the opinion of some of  the highest military advisers that we get from abroad to advise us—it is better to have second class weapons which you produce yourself and have them in abundance than an improved weapon which you do not produce and which may be denied to you at the time of need and which may get out of order and you cannot put it right and then you are helpless. However, that is a matter of opinion”.

“Anyhow, the basic thing for defence is the Plans. All these Five Year Plans are basic for the defence of India. People seem to think that the Five Year Plans are something isolated from the defence of India. Some people in the other place said, "Oh, scrap the Five Year Plans and go in our defence" which showed how little understanding there is as to what is required for defence. All this is required— may be some odd thing or may not be—but whether we want an iron and steel factory, it is essential for defence. All that defence -wants is steel. So, in building up defence, in building up  the strength of India for protecting the security of India, building up this industrial apparatus is highly important. We may give a twist to the industrial apparatus so as to build more of defence. That is another matter. But essentially the things are common whether It is defence, or whether it is any kind of civil advance. So, as I said, in considering the position as it is, arising during the last year this has happened to the best of our know ledge and we consider it as a serious matter, not merely as an intention or intent but as something that has been done-“

"We have meanwhile also put up a number of posts, che»k-posts, military posts. It is not quite proper for me to give the exact locations of them except the one I have mentioned which is right near the Karakoram and which prevents any flanking movement fro« that side. The position is that, when people ask how -much territory they have taken over, committed aggression on—the Chinese —and vaguely they say ten thousand miles, fifteen thousand miles or two thousand miles, it is difficult to say that because it is not occupied in the ordinary sense of the word, although it is true that a certain influence is exercised over a certain territory by these check-posts, and one may say that where there is a succession of check-posts they are, in a sense, in possession of the territory behind them. That is so. On the other hand, there are some check-posts which are like a zigzag. They are check-posts and it cannot be said that they have occupied that territory. I do not wish to make much of the facts. It really does not make very much difference. The point is how much strength they have to control that place because occupation there is not occupation of territory where people live. They are just mountains and other things and in that sense I had said that it was not correct that the building up of one check-post in the north— there is one in the north really, the other is on the frontier—had given them a larger area under occupation, but it has given them a stronger position in that area. That is correct”.

Nehru Chose to spin the matters to another angle. His usual manner of exhibiting his vision on the global  security and safety:

“The major problem before us now is whether in the course of two, three, four or five years there is going to be a nuclear war or not. That is the big problem of a war which will destroy everything, which will affect every country, including India, even though we may not be joining any war. And so we have to see this problem in this context, because when we see it in that context, it does make a difference, what China can do to us and what we can do to China. In spite of some people thinking that we are isolated in the world—we may be isolated from the point of view of non-alignment and not being a party to some military alliance—there are other ways of contact, close contacts and close friendships. And apart from any such ways, there are reactions. Is it imaginable that a war between India and China will remain confined to these two countries? It will be a world war and nothing but a world  war. I am not saying that it need necessarily be a war between India and China. Other steps can be taken and may have some effect. But we have to think of every aspect, of every possible development and prepare for it, and avoid developments which may be very harmful not only to us but to the world.”

“…I hope, Sir, that the House will agree with this assertion of our position, that this aggression has taken place on our territory and we must do everything in our power to get that aggression vacated. We must try to use every diplomatic and all peaceful devices to that end, whatever they may be, that is to say, avoid war to that purpose, because war between India and China would be one of the major disasters of the world, for us and for the world, for it will mean world war. It will mean war which will be indefinite. We would not be able to limit it in time, because it will not be possible for China to defeat us and it will be impossible for us to march up to Peking across Tibet. These things are not done. Things function differently and for us to jump into such things would be the reverse of wisdom. If it is to be done, if it is forced upon us, it is a different matter. Therefore, we should be prepared and prepare as fast as we can and in the best way we can, keeping in view always the larger situation in the world and how it is developing and how that is affecting our own problems in India”

It requires no interpretation or commentaries. 

The long term planning to develop whole infrastructure  required for the defense industry and then entering into production of weaponry was the approach.  Situations of border areas did not change in  even by the 21st century. Yet the present government came out of the age old notions and went on to develop the border areas. The defense sector was freed from the old psyche of confining everything within the fold of government establishments. Private sector took entry and more indigenous investments in capital and ideas making an unprecedented line of combat efficiency abd self dense. 

ReplyForward Add reaction