Conflict in the Mountains.

[Sarthak]

Recent writings of a RAW chief showed that India planned an invasion of Terai of Nepal in 1971 after Nepal formalized trade relations and military connections with the PRC. However due to Indira Gandhi's jingoistic attitude and the fairly small yet modern Nepali Army at the time, The Indian Generals said 'no' and the whole idea did not even reach the Parliament.
However this wasn't implausible. A blockade had been initiated in 1971 against because of it and the Nepali Army was kept on full alert. Nepal didn't have an airforce however at that time did have a decent amount of anti-air guns centered around the capital and Pokhara.
What if the Indian Parliament and Military said 'ok' and invaded Nepal in late 1971?
Note that King Mahendra was a very respected monarch internationally and according to the Treaty of 1923 Britain guaranteed the territorial and diplomatic sovereignty of Nepal and is still active today.
Now i Know in a pitched battle, Nepal has no chance of winning militarily, but what would be the effects, diplomatically, militarily and internationally?

 

[Aghasverov]

Recent writings of a RAW chief showed that India planned an invasion of Terai of Nepal in 1971 after Nepal formalized trade relations and military connections with the PRC. However due to Indira Gandhi's jingoistic attitude and the fairly small yet modern Nepali Army at the time, The Indian Generals said 'no' and the whole idea did not even reach the Parliament.
However this wasn't implausible. A blockade had been initiated in 1971 against because of it and the Nepali Army was kept on full alert. Nepal didn't have an airforce however at that time did have a decent amount of anti-air guns centered around the capital and Pokhara.
What if the Indian Parliament and Military said 'ok' and invaded Nepal in late 1971?
Note that King Mahendra was a very respected monarch internationally and according to the Treaty of 1923 Britain guaranteed the territorial and diplomatic sovereignty of Nepal and is still active today.
Now i Know in a pitched battle, Nepal has no chance of winning militarily, but what would be the effects, diplomatically, militarily and internationally?

I'm not familiar with the 1971 agreements between Nepal and China, but just how close were the military connections that were established?
It's unlikely, but it's possible that China could use the invasion as a pretext to settle some old scores with India over the NE Frontier Province and Aksai Chin disputes, and attempt to resolve any remaining boundary disputes in China's favor by force...
Another factor could be the US. Nixon despised Indira Gandhi, and I could see some pretty heavy diplomatic and economic pressure being put on India by the Nixon admin.

 

[Sarthak]

I'm not familiar with the 1971 agreements between Nepal and China, but just how close were the military connections that were established?
It's unlikely, but it's possible that China could use the invasion as a pretext to settle some old scores with India over the NE Frontier Province and Aksai Chin disputes, and attempt to resolve any remaining boundary disputes in China's favor by force...
Another factor could be the US. Nixon despised Indira Gandhi, and I could see some pretty heavy diplomatic and economic pressure being put on India by the Nixon admin.

Nepal bought Chinese weapons and had an agreement for military exercises in the mountains of upper Tibet every 3 years. It still goes on today. Today it's been expanded to once a year.

 

[Sarthak]

Another factor could be the US. Nixon despised Indira Gandhi, and I could see some pretty heavy diplomatic and economic pressure being put on India by the Nixon admin.

Considering America was already mad at the Indian invasion of Bangladesh, another invasion this time another country could mean extreme American economic sanctions.
I wonder how Britain would keep their part of the treaty. They do have around 100 military personnel on Nepali soil at all times, mainly for training the Nepali army and the Gurkha recruitment. But they are well equipped just as any other British military group. Of any Brit dies, hell will come.

 

[Sarthak]

Bump..................no one else?

 

[Bougnas]

Bump..................no one else?

If the Indians attack and sanctions do not end the war, and the Nepalese hold long enough (more than a week or two?), then I could see the US and UK making a show of force in the Indian Ocean. Having China and Western countries on the "same" side should be lots of fun.

 

[Sarthak]

If the Indians attack and sanctions do not end the war, and the Nepalese hold long enough (more than a week or two?), then I could see the US and UK making a show of force in the Indian Ocean. Having China and Western countries on the "same" side should be lots of fun.

Oh Nepal at that time could last a week or two, considering like the Indians, Nepal had a lot of veteran troops from the Tibetan and Khampa insurgency. Terai would be lost to India, as Nepalese anti-tank weaponry while strong, is pitifully small in numbers. However that means the narrow passages into the hills would make India's advantage in numbers and the air evaporate meaning in the foothills, the Nepalese can hold the line, especially since the Chinese will no doubt start supplying the Nepalese army.

 

[yulzari]

The Indian army will have enough problems with it's own Gurkhas never mind all the British trained ones in Nepal. It would begin with a quick rush and end in a slow attrition.

 

[Sarthak]

The Indian army will have enough problems with it's own Gurkhas never mind all the British trained ones in Nepal. It would begin with a quick rush and end in a slow attrition.

Oh yeah I did forget about that. Having around 40,000 soldiers rise up in mutiny won't be good. What about Uttarakhand and Assam? They do have majority Nepali ethnic people. (More 50/50 in Uttarakhand, but majority in Assam). Domestic unrest would skyrocket in India i think.

 

[Brahman]

India would win the Terai Plains as they are the geographic extensions of north indian plains, but the mountains would essentially be no mans land, they could be bribed to join though

 

[David Flin]

Considering America was already mad at the Indian invasion of Bangladesh, another invasion this time another country could mean extreme American economic sanctions.
I wonder how Britain would keep their part of the treaty. They do have around 100 military personnel on Nepali soil at all times, mainly for training the Nepali army and the Gurkha recruitment. But they are well equipped just as any other British military group. Of any Brit dies, hell will come.

As someone who was caught up in the events, I'm not entirely sure one can label the Indian intervention in Bangladesh as an invasion in the strictest sense of the word. They came in response to the activities of the Pakistan Army while East Pakistan was busy changing its name to Bangladesh, and it involved the Pakistan Army undertaking some of the worst atrocities against the civilian population I've had the misfortune to witness (and I've also been through a short period in Beirut during the Lebanese Civil War and a period in Kosovo when the Serb unpleasantness was ongoing).

The Indian Army came, defeated the Pakistan Army (not that this was a difficult task, given that all control in the Pakistan Army had long since been lost, and that what remained was a mob merely intent on committing atrocities), things settled down, the Indian Army went home, and Bangladesh was no longer East Pakistan.

Intervention? Absolutely. Invasion? That's a bit of a stretch.

Interestingly, I happened to be one of those British military personnel in Nepal (albeit a bit later - 1974-76, to be precise). We'll hand wave issues regarding Gurkhas in the Indian Army, and we'll hand wave issues regarding the British military and Gurkhas. Indeed, we'll hand wave all external international involvement.

I've seen the terrain. I've seen the Indian Army capabilities of the period. Good luck with the Indians getting beyond the Terai.

 

[Sarthak]

As someone who was caught up in the events, I'm not entirely sure one can label the Indian intervention in Bangladesh as an invasion in the strictest sense of the word. They came in response to the activities of the Pakistan Army while East Pakistan was busy changing its name to Bangladesh, and it involved the Pakistan Army undertaking some of the worst atrocities against the civilian population I've had the misfortune to witness (and I've also been through a short period in Beirut during the Lebanese Civil War and a period in Kosovo when the Serb unpleasantness was ongoing).

The Indian Army came, defeated the Pakistan Army (not that this was a difficult task, given that all control in the Pakistan Army had long since been lost, and that what remained was a mob merely intent on committing atrocities), things settled down, the Indian Army went home, and Bangladesh was no longer East Pakistan.

Intervention? Absolutely. Invasion? That's a bit of a stretch.

Interestingly, I happened to be one of those British military personnel in Nepal (albeit a bit later - 1974-76, to be precise). We'll hand wave issues regarding Gurkhas in the Indian Army, and we'll hand wave issues regarding the British military and Gurkhas. Indeed, we'll hand wave all external international involvement.

I've seen the terrain. I've seen the Indian Army capabilities of the period. Good luck with the Indians getting beyond the Terai.

That's is pretty awesome that u were based in Nepal. However, yes Bangladesh and East Pakistan was more of a necessary intervention than an invasion, however because of it America had been undermined by India through their proxy Pakistan. Don't think they will take another military action on part of India sitting down.
What would be China's reaction? Also at the time Soviet CPSU engineers were pretty active in Nepal. That could complicate things

 

[Sarthak]

Also thing to note. Whilst the Lowland Madhesis who have links to India may side with India, the Tharus, Rai, Limbus and Hilly Madhesis are very nationalistic about Nepal as well, which probably means at least a medium scale insurgency and guerilla war in Terai.

 

[David Flin]

That's is pretty awesome that u were based in Nepal. However, yes Bangladesh and East Pakistan was more of a necessary intervention than an invasion, however because of it America had been undermined by India through their proxy Pakistan. Don't think they will take another military action on part of India sitting down.
What would be China's reaction? Also at the time Soviet CPSU engineers were pretty active in Nepal. That could complicate things

I quite enjoyed being deployed to Nepal; one of the nicer deployments I had.

It was the terminology of describing the Indian intervention as an invasion that I had a problem with; an intervention that pissed off America which had supported Pakistan despite the evidence of what was going on in East Pakistan/Bangladesh.

My understanding was that because India had signed a Treaty of Friendship with the Soviet Union earlier in 1971, China was basically backing Pakistan and condemned the Indian intervention loudly, without actually doing anything.

How this would translate to a Chinese response to Indian action in Nepal? Difficult to tell how far it would go in support, but it's got interest in supporting Nepal and interest in opposing India. Nepal's requests to India to withdraw its BOPs established in Nepal during the 1962 India-China had met with what can only be described as foot-dragging, with one of the BOPs still there. At the time, Nepal was importing Chinese weapons. In brief, while it's hard to say how much support it would give, China would back Nepal, and would at the very least supply it.

My rough summary: Were I on the Indian General Staff with instructions to plan an attack on Nepal, I would be looking for diplomatic ways of saying: "Are you mad?"

 

[Sarthak]

My rough summary: Were I on the Indian General Staff with instructions to plan an attack on Nepal, I would be looking for diplomatic ways of saying: "Are you mad?"

Actually it's nothing new. From the book, the question came up again in 1977 and only went away due to the emergency in India at the time and the subsequent failure of Indira Gandhi to win the election.

 

[Sarthak]

Another Bump.....

 

[52cardsshortofadeck]

Oh yeah I did forget about that. Having around 40,000 soldiers rise up in mutiny won't be good. What about Uttarakhand and Assam? They do have majority Nepali ethnic people. (More 50/50 in Uttarakhand, but majority in Assam). Domestic unrest would skyrocket in India i think.

And doesn't Assam have a fair amount of domestic unrest at the time anyway, AFAIK?

 

[Sarthak]

And doesn't Assam have a fair amount of domestic unrest at the time anyway, AFAIK?

Don't know. But the Bengali internal immigration was happening, so it may have caused some troubles.

 

[Aghasverov]

Yeah, the more I think about this one, the more I see it becoming nothing but a shit-storm for India... both diplomatically and militarily.

 

[Sarthak]

Yeah, the more I think about this one, the more I see it becoming nothing but a shit-storm for India... both diplomatically and militarily.

Yeah, however how do you think this would affect Britain (close ally of Nepal), The USSR (close ally of India) and Pakistan and China (close enemies of India).