The Iraq war has clearly validated that you can conquer the country in a matter of hours, but it will take a heavy toll if you wish to establish a rule there.
A thousand Americans lost their life in Iraq not while fighting but while acting as a sentry, guarding the outposts and regular patrol duty. The people strongly condemn the foreign rule and they violently express their opinions.
Well, bringing this to the context of India- China relation opens up a new dimension in the secret wars and foreign policy disaster which I was talking about.
Tibet was a buffer state between the 2 Asian Giants. The presence of a buffer territory is a time tested method of reducing the tension and border incidents between the two super-powers. Chinese acquisition of Tibet did not go very well with India.
1) We condemned the Dragon of being an aggressor.
2) Gave shelter to the spiritual leader Dalai Lama.
3) Questioned the validity of the puppet govt. and the new Dalai Lama which Chinese govt. installed.
Chinese saw it in this way:
1) In order to rule Tibet, the Dalai Lama’s presence has to be quenched.
2) In future, if India gets powerful and it can use absconding leader as a pretense to expand its territories.
3) Over years the British had slowly and steadily expanded their territories into the weak Tibet, the Mac-Mohan line was forced on Tibet kingdom.
The war preparation at that moment was next to nothing. In fact India lost so much ground without even a single fight that Pakistan’s thought of capturing the buffer state of Kashmir could be put into action.
If China would have been an aggressor, it could have simply flag marched into New Delhi and we would be standing and accusing it of back-stabbing. Chanakya esp. said that there is friendship among equals. Humble states may call their alliance friendship, but it is actually submitting and seeking protection. It is a misfortune that the work of such a wonderful manager of diplomatic relations gathers dust.