I personally prefer to read the controversial book written byNeville Maxwell , an Australian journalist and historian. The book was titled " India's China War " and banned in India.
Here is a snippet of the book: ..... By this time it was plain that the Indian Government's determinationnot to negotiate for a settlement had only been confirmed by the defeaton the borders. Chou En-lai wrote Nehru in April 1963, accusing him oftaking a dishonest approach and of having no intention whatever of holdingnegotiations. He said that India exploited ambiguities in the Colombo proposalsto interpret those as conforming with the Indian demand for restorationof the September 8th positions, and was now trying to convertthem into an adjudication and force them on China. As for the referenceto the International Court, that was "plainly an attempt to cover up thefact that the Indian Government refuse to negotiate." Chou reiterated China'sreadiness to open negotiations immediately on the basis of the Colomboproposals, which both sides had accepted in principle. But, he went on,"if the Indian Government, owing to its internal and external politicalrequirements, is not prepared to hold negotiations for the time being,(China) is willing to wait with patience." A year later Nehru said in Parliamentthat he would be willing to consider opening talks if the Chinese completelyevacuated the twenty-kilometer strip in the western sector. Chou En-laihad proposed exactly that compromise, and when two emissaries of BertrandRussell put it to the Chinese Government, the Chinese did not rule it out.New Delhi instantly denied that the Nehru entrusted the Russell emissariesand said that only if the Chinese evacuated the western strip "the newsituation might merit considerations." But by this time the Chinese Governmenthad decided that it was useless to open discussions on the borders withIndia unless there was evidence of a radical change in Indian approach.New Delhi continued to publish the diplomatic exchanges for years, andthe Indians continued to present themselves as the aggrieved party, andthe Chinese as aggressive and recalcitrant. On the ground the positionwas reversed. There the boundaries had already been settled by China'scrushing victory. ....