It must be remembered Nehru died a broken man, His dream as a world leader shattered as he neglected military power. We lost 30000 sq miles in Aksai Chin to China and now China claims the entire Arunachal pradesh. 

We lost to China in war of sixties because order from top to army not to fight with China as probably then PM was eyeing on Nobel prize for peace, during that time if India would have confronted with China they we never known what would have happened then. My grand father used to tell me that Manasarobar was in India,and hew as there twice, but now it is in China. What a pity. 

Nehru lived in a dream world or as justice Katju says he was an stooge of English. I don't know, but he reduced India to a second rate power vs China.

Pt Nehru played a sigificant role in organizing non alignment movement and Afro Asian unity.  The world was divided between Soviet Union led Warsaw Pact countries and the western Block led by U.S.A. Nato CENTO  Treaty nations.  Pt Nehru, Marshal Tito and Col. Nasser were three top leaders in non aligned movement. Pt Nehru formulated an independent  foreign policy which is wrongly described as neutrality. Non alignment is not neutrality. You can't be neutral between evil and virtue. 

Unfortunately, we had some trouble with China on border issue. India recognized China's sovereignty in Tibet as part of china but also allowed Dalai lama to play separtist and anti China role from Indian soil. This naturally was a wrong decision. Most probably this is what led to war between two countries. It is true that India was less prepared for war.  But there is never foolproof guarantee that other cannot be stronger.  

Nehru never aspired to be world leader. He was genuine good meaning statesman. One cannot be successful always. Inspite of  poor show in Indo Chinese war, Nehru's role in independent foreign policy, laying foundation of India'as Economic development canot be forgotten.   

Military might is the guardian at the gate. Military power is not only the service but it protects citizens. Military might represents the country's strength. 

mohan manohar wrote:

Military might is the guardian at the gate. Military power is not only the service but it protects citizens. Military might represents the country's strength. 

This is the best statement made and clearly sums up. Nehru did try to be a great third world leader, but came a cropper as he was out of his depth in the concept of military power as an instrument of domination. India is still paying a heavy price for the folly of Nehru.

Nehru always wanted to play the role of a great third world leader. He thought Mao will be beholden to him for agreeing to give up British priveleges in Tibet. In fact he acted the elder statesman to Chou en lai at the 1955 Bandung conference. But he failed to realize that only by a strong military you are respected. By his neglect he reduced India to second rate power and lost 30000 sq miles to China.

There is no doubt he died a broken man. Even Indians now realise that all problems from Kashmir to linguistic states and controlled economy is Nehru Gift to india.

I am thinking of legacy that I can be proud of, should I think that we lost China because of trending of peace, and we lost part of Kashmir because of faulty decision making. It should be proper distribution of power, these are arena of armed forces and they should continue to deal with now, government is exactly doing this. Hindsight, we could have dominated world now as China but political leaders did not know then. 

We lost kashmir and  land to China because of a defensive outlook and  being led by a leader ( Nehru) who had no concept of power and its relation to the standing of a nation. this is sad as there does not appear to be much of a change down the years.

Each incident of past military action we proceed in the same way with plenty of interest and determination to get behind the image.