Annexation Of Goa
India’s annexation of Portuguese Goa in December 1961 does not get the same accolades as that of the Princely States like Hyderabad or Junagarh. This is grossly disproportionate since the Princely States did not even have professional armies because of Subsidiary Agreements with the British. In addition, the annexation of these Princely States by India had legal grounds in the Government of India Act of 1935 and the Indian Independence Act of 1947. Portugal was not just a formidable colonial armed force but a founding member of NATO.
The fanfare around the annexation of Princely States is owed to the excitement surrounding Sardar Patel. Unfortunately, Sardar Patel passed away in 1950 while Goa was not annexed for another eleven years. Had Sardar Patel even been alive in 1961, the invasion of Goa would now be portrayed as the greatest conquest since the fall of Constantinople to Sultan Mehmed Fatih. Patel of course, would be the conqueror!
If the discussion on the annexation of Goa ever takes place, it is only to demean the then Defense Minister VK Krishna Menon and Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. While westerners accused Nehru and Menon of aggression, BJP leaders like Manohar Parrikar and Pramod Sawant have accused Nehru of incompetence for delaying the invasion. The Monday-morning-quarterbacking is, of course, poor taste given the bravery BJP themselves have shown protecting our Hydroxychloroquine supplies. It would be far more productive if BJP proved Nehru’s supposed incompetence by liberating PoK and Aksai Chin.
It, however, would be unfair to blame BJP alone when Congress’ own leaders portray the annexation of Goa, either as inconsequential or even unwarranted. Congress MP Jairam Ramesh blamed Krishna Menon for angering the United States and the West by invading Goa. Ramesh chuckles quoting then US President John F. Kennedy’s portrayal of Nehru as “pastor caught coming out of a bordello”. Kennedy’s pastor-reference, of course, pertains to Nehru preaching peace to the world and the comment was apparently made privately to an aide.
Let us be serious and compare this mere secretive name-calling by a US President, to the US military response to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of their ally Kuwait in 1990. We have also seen the consequences of Indonesia invading East Timor (another former Portuguese colony) in 1975 and Argentina for invading Falklands in 1982.
Krishna Menon Betrayed
Far from military intervention, JFK had to contend with a private sarcastic remark about Nehru. It is unfortunate that nobody in India is willing to acknowledge Menon’s diplomatic and military contributions to their country. Indians cheer Kennedy’s subsequent insistence to remove Menon from Defense Portfolio as a condition for military aid in November 1962. The reaction of the United States is hardly surprising. What is surprising is the lack of gratitude on part of Indians, and Congress’ eagerness to undermine both Menon and their own Nehru.
While historian Ramchandra Guha argued that Goa annexation was timed by Nehru to secure Menon’s re-election from North Bombay Parliamentary Constituency a few weeks later in February 1962, Ramesh credits campaign by Bollywood Stars for Menon’s reelection. Either way, we are told that the addition of territory and liberation of a million people is trivial.
Indians need to understand that annexation of Goa was no small accomplishment. If Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser had not closed the Suez Canal in time, India would have had to fight much larger contingent of Portuguese military. Since Portugal already referred the matter to the United Nations Security Council, if the war continued any longer, UN and NATO intervention would have been inevitable.
Menon’s diplomacy whether in defence of India’s position on Kashmir or his involvement in the Korean, Hungarian or Suez Crises is either viewed with amusement or contempt. Unfortunately, Indian historians cannot think beyond disjoint individual events. Nasser closed the Suez Canal and facilitated India’s annexation of Goa in December 1961, risking international anger on his own nation. Why did Nasser go to such great lengths to help India? Because Krishna Menon had solved the Suez Crisis in favor of Egypt in 1956. It has been said that many young boys in Egypt were named after Krishna Menon!
“Anarchist”
Among many desperate attempts to prove that Menon was not suited to be the Defence Minister, Jairam Ramesh and former diplomat Chandrashekhar Dasgupta have floated the false theory that Menon was an “anarchist”. They argue that Menon could not deal with the military’s rigid hierarchy and the chain of command. This is amusing for several reasons. By this definition, no civilian could ever be made a Defence Minister. But more importantly, Ramesh’s own (A Chequered Brilliance) portrayal of military in the 1950s and 60s shows a force that itself was in anarchy which had no respect for (Khadi clad) civil hierarchy, superiority nor chain of command.
Ramesh himself claims that General Timmayya had frequently ignored and bypassed the Defence Minister, and appointed his own successor disregarding even the Prime Minister (Page 529). Ramesh also wrote of Timmayya giving damaging misinformation (Page 504-505) to the British High Commissioner, and Lt. General SPP Thorat exhorting the military (Page 531) to be loyal to their Chief instead of the civil government or the constitution. Ramesh further wrote of General JN Chaudhuri moonlighting for a foreign newspaper (Page 502) and supplying them with all the military secrets.
Even more important here is that erstwhile Congress President Annie Besant was Krishna Menon’s first mentor who also gave him his political identity. Ramesh, who claimed to have rediscovered Besant, should have known that she sought Home Rule for India through constitutional reforms. Besant was appalled by Mohandas Gandhi’s Non-Cooperation Movement, which was to break the law and defy the authority, although through peaceful means.
As Ramesh himself vouches for, Menon had brought our independence through lobbying and negotiations with the Labour Party, while obeying the law, hierarchy and authority. To call Menon an anarchist is mischief at best. The real anarchists were other Defence Ministers like KN Katju, YB Chavan and Jagjivan Ram who rebelled against the government of the day as well as the very military they would latter command.
A Note On Nehru
Jairam Ramesh had claimed that Nehru was on “political and biological decline” after 1958. However, the events of 1961 show no signs of such decline, despite Ramesh’s refusal to acknowledge. Ramesh’s argument is that Nehru could not control the rightwing hawks in his cabinet who supposedly set the agenda which led to the 1962 conflict with China. Ramesh fails to understand that these ministers were only echoing a widespread public sentiment which resembled Manifest Destiny. Nehru dealt with even stronger rightwing in his ranks like Sardar Patel, Rajendra Prasad, Rajaji and PD Tandon until early 1950s.
Ramesh should read Page 372 of his own book where he quotes a conversation between Krishna Menon and Nehru in June/July 1951. Menon exhorts Nehru to assert himself, to which Nehru responds that he was a not an “autocrat”. Nehru goes on to explain that everybody needs to be carried along in a democracy and that “mere rightness of opinion is not enough”. Now, does that mean Nehru’s “political and biological decline” began in 1951? I’m sure Ramesh himself would not believe so.
Even the previous year (1950) when he was marginalized by Patel and Tandon in the party and government, it did not take much for Nehru to take the control back. Nehru was not a pushover; be it China or his own ministers! Pressure existed on Nehru even in cases of Goa, Hyderabad, Puducherry, Junagarh as well as separate Andhra State in 1953! Claims of Nehru’s biological decline and ungraceful death can be described as cheap-shots when made by BJP leaders. Unfortunately, the current Congress Party has fallen so far that it cannot even comprehend Nehru.
Nehru’s resilience was legendary. If Nehru was really such a spent force in 1962, India could never have recovered NEFA. Let us remember that India did not add a single inch to its territory after Nehru, with exception of uninhabited and un-militarized Siachen in 1984. Indians need to rethink their compulsion to magnify insignificant setbacks of 1962 while choosing to brush aside the great victory in 1961.
India’s Manifest Destiny
Like many civilizations, Indians too believed in their inherent virtue, right and duty to occupy all the lands they believed to be their own. We still see the remnants of such “Akhand Bharat” dreams. Every single expert on 1962 conflict with China, from Neville Maxwell to Jairam Ramesh, grossly miss the steady buildup of a general will and prevailing Indian psyche at that time. Neither 1961 (Portugal/Goa) nor 1962 (China/Aksai Chin) were isolated issues but just intermediate goals on a continuum.
Leaving the tragedy of Partition aside, India had experienced a series of military and diplomatic successes and gained much territory since 1947. These were all Nehru’s own successes which even Congress leaders are now refusing to acknowledge! Princely States of Kashmir, Junagarh, Hyderabad, Manipur and Sikkim were added in addition to those that already joined before the Independence Day. India had successfully negotiated the exit of French from Puducherry in 1954 and evicted Portugal from Goa in 1961.
Gandhians attributed these successes to Gandhigiri. On each of these occasions, when India had asserted itself, the enemy gave-up or gave-in; be it the Nawab of Junagarh, the Razakars of Hyderabad, the French or the Portuguese.
Krishna Menon alone had understood that China was a different animal. During the Korean Crisis, Menon had seen China’s commitment to a principle and willingness to pay any price. He alone understood that China will not fold up and leave just because India displayed Gandhigiri.
In his book, Ramesh mocks (Page 551) that the victory over Portugal gave Menon a “swollen head and a false sense of India’s military prowess”. Yet Ramesh himself later (Page 570) admits that Menon alone had his head straight who tried to avoid conflict with China as late as July 1962. Having said that, the phenomenon of “swollen head” was real since everybody else in India had it. Having secured Goa, evicting China from Aksai Chin became a national obsession!
India Needs New Paradigm
Contrary to what our historians want us to believe, our Defence Minister (Menon) was most competent and exactly knew our strengths and weaknesses. It is time for the misinformation to stop and Krishna Menon gets his due. Indeed, the Chinese response in late 1962 had blown our “manifest destiny” out of water. But how appropriate is it for Indians to close their eyes and ears to the truth and continue to invent ways to blame Krishna Menon?