India-US Strategic News and Discussion

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 27 Apr 2011 09:25

this might be OT, but i think the whole academia being "scared" of "South" mentality is blown out of proportions and in the present day might actually be non-existent. but present day is still a continuation of 20th century frame of mind. when that changes, i suspect US mainstream political thinking will also change. beyond that the circus drama will continue of course.

anyway, that's OT and end of discussion.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 28 Apr 2011 19:54

The other side of the argument.
How to lose friends and alienate people

04.28.2011 · Posted in Foreign Affairs, Security

India’s decision to reject US fighter planes is strategic stupidity

New Delhi, it is reported, has shortlisted two European vendors for its long-drawn procurement of fighter aircraft for the Indian Air Force. Now, military analysts can have endless debates and even objective opinions on which among the American, European and Russian aircraft is technically superior and better suits the stated requirements of the IAF. Financial analysts can have similar debates and objective opinions on which is the cheapest or the best value for money. These opinions may or may not converge. But when you are buying 126 planes worth more than $11 billion dollars, you are essentially making a geostrategic decision, not a narrow technical/financial one.

The UPA government’s decision to reject both American proposals, of the F-16 and F/A-18, demonstrates either a poor appreciation of the geostrategic aspect or worse, indicative of a lingering anti-American mindset. While the US ambassador has resigned, whether or not it will prove to be a setback for India-US relations remains to be seen. Damaging the careers of pro-India American officials is a silly thing to do.

This move will most certainly reduce India’s geopolitical leverage with the US military-industrial complex, at a time when India needs it most. From the unfolding dynamics in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, to the changing balance of power in East Asia, to UN Security Council reform, to a number of geoeconomic issues, the United States can take positions that can have long-lasting consequences for India’s interests. Is the United States more likely to be sympathetic to India’s interests after a $11 billion contract—which means much needed jobs for the US economy —is awarded to someone else? Long used to complaining that the United States doesn’t care for India’s interests, will awarding the contract to some European firms help change the situation?

The argument that the European bids were ‘technically’ superior are not entirely credible either, for two reasons. First, at sufficiently high levels of technology, the difference between the planes on offer is marginal. To suggest that the European models are vastly superior defies logic, because some of the world’s most powerful air forces are flying F-16s, leave along F/A-18s. Second, the notion that combat requirements can be perfectly defined at the time of procurement is false. It is the combination of man and machine that wins battles. The focus on machines ignores the reality that much swings on the man flying it. Moreover, given the nuclear deterrence relationships obtaining in the subcontinent and across the Himalayas, those planes might never see an aircraft-to-aircraft dogfight in their lifetimes. For other tasks like air support for ground operations, the specifications are even lower.

What about those alphabet soup agreements and fine-print contracts that the US insists that India sign, that might prevent the planes from being used when needed? Those who make these arguments do not understand what war means. War means all bets are off, and India will do whatever necessary to protect its interests. While the existence of those agreements was a usual bargaining chip for India, to get a discount, to believe that such arguments will hamstring India’s military options is naivete. The government might not need to spell this out in public, but it should know it.

It has been this blog’s argument that in the contemporary geopolitical environment, India’s interests are best served by being a swing power, holding the balance between the United States and China. It must enjoy better relations with each of them than they have with each other. It must also have the credible capacity to give pleasure and inflict pain. In this context, buying fighter planes from the United States would have been an excellent move.

And who has New Delhi shortlisted instead? European companies. The European Union is a bit player in the international system, zealously safeguarding its own legacy position at the United Nations Security Council, the G-20, the World Bank, IMF and other places, against India. Italy is engaged in process of blocking India’s UNSC candidature. An order placed with Eurofighter or Rafael isn’t going to change its plans. EU busybodies can be found everywhere from inviting Kashmiri separatists to speak, to attending court hearings of Binayak Sen. Some small EU states almost wrecked the India-specific waiver that the United States was obtaining at the Nuclear Supplier’s Group. When it’s crunch time in Afghanistan, does anyone in New Delhi think that the EU will or can make any move that’ll safeguard India’s interests? Why is India being gratuitously generous to Europe when there is much to gain from giving the contract to the United States?

Yes, France, Britain and Germany are countries that India must engage. There are ways to allow them to benefit from India’s growth process—from power projects to manufacturing to services. The fighter aircraft contract need not be awarded to European firms, because it has higher strategic opportunity costs.

The downshot is that the UPA government has squandered a unique opportunity to gain leverage in Washington at a crucial time when closer ties are in India’s interests. It first took way too long to decide, dragging the procurement process even China built its own new fighter plane. It now decided to pick two vendors who might well sell a technically superior and cheaper product, but do no more than that. To put it mildly, this is strategic stupidity.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 28 Apr 2011 20:46

India has to buy planes as per IAF's requirement and defense need. Why should pleasing Unkill be a consideration in this?

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 28 Apr 2011 20:50

So let's talk about strategic "stupidity"!

So some questions:

most certainly reduce India’s geopolitical leverage with the US military-industrial complex, at a time when India needs it most. From the unfolding dynamics in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, to the changing balance of power in East Asia, to UN Security Council reform, to a number of geoeconomic issues

In the unfolding dynamics of Af-Pak, considerations of India's interest have no bearing on United States. First it was not for America to decide with which countries Afghanistan has diplomatic relations and who can help and who can't! Moreover it tolerated Indian presence because it thought it could move Pakistan to cooperate more.

In the changing balance of power in East Asia, it is the US that is losing power and PRC gaining power! India is not really in a position to project power in East Asia, so India does not really have to lose anything!

As far as UN Security Council Reform is concerned all of the P5 are dragging their feet, and even though USA may have stated it publicly it would support a permanent seat for India in the UNSC, there is no saying when this would happen and whether USA would really support or even if it can clinch the issue!

As far as geoeconomic matters matter, India is the country posting a healthy GDP growth rate, while USA is in the doldrums!

Long used to complaining that the United States doesn’t care for India’s interests, will awarding the contract to some European firms help change the situation?

Would awarding the contract to United States change the situation? Is there some guarantee? Why hasn't that cooperation been forthcoming?

A few more questions to ponder:

Has USA helped India in strategic matters lately?
Has USA acted against Indian strategic interests?
Does USA listen to India's concerns?
Would USA promote India's strategic interests in the near future, if it gets the procurement order?
Would USA hurt India's strategic interests in the near future, if it doesn't get the procurement order

USA has been getting kicked in the butt by almost every country - from Pakistan, to China, to Iran, and even Saudi Arabia buying defense equipment from Chinese!

When USA is getting kicked in the butt, strategy says, we need to kick it too! Why?

Because despite all the kicks, it still has not realized that its power has receded, and it needs allies! USA can't really sell those planes anywhere except to Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan!

These are bit players when compared to India and India's reach and ambitions!

In Asia, India remains USA's most natural choice for partner because Asia is turning both Sinic and Islamic, and none really sits well with USA strategically speaking! But USA does not yet accept this truth and is willing to trade off its long term strategic need for India for short term tactical gains e.g. in Af-Pak.

There is only so much weaponry USA can give Pakistan, but that much, it has decided it would give anyway! So if India says no to USA planes, it does not mean USA can start giving Pakistan much more weaponry! But in order to get into India's good books, America could have stopped giving Pakistan any conventional weapons and delivering F-16s and drone technology, etc, which it did not! So why should America expect Indian indulgence when America gives scant regard to India's strategic concerns!

Now USA has been put on notice that USA has something to lose if USA does not listen to India's concerns. This message was sent by India without any fear that USA would throw its weight in favor of Pakistan! USA has enough problems with Pakistan at the moment!

Until USA learns it has to apply a lot more Omega-3 Fats butter onto us and listen to our concerns, it should not expect Indian indulgence! USA should have been a lot more forthcoming!

Actually India should have invested that amount of money for furthering the domestic aircraft industry, but Europeans are a good choice!

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 28 Apr 2011 23:00

Received about 8 emails this morning. Topic was 'snub' to US. FWIW, the consensus is gloom in India lobby and glee in China lobby.Take with grain of salt until public 'leak' but it appears the wrath of Khan is about to manifest itself. Things in the works:

1. Series of articles in media and articles from Think Tanks about futility of pursuing strategic partnership with India. One popped up right on time; http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 71440.html

2. GE-Wallahs saying 'litmus test' is order for 1,000 GE locomotives (I did not realize they were in the running).

3. NSG membership may now be a pipe dream as are some dual use tech stuff

4. As election season winds up, the 'outsourcing' issue will be brought back to the fore with a vengeance.

5. Can't vouch for accuracy but according to one email, BHO is 'personally PO'd' given his emphasis on trade with India.

6. Roemer may not be replaced until after 2012 election. The suddenness has little to do with BHO's campaign, apparently he bet the farm on Boeing/LM getting the deal and just quit in frustration when it did not materialize.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 28 Apr 2011 23:07

Very well said RajeshA!!

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Apr 2011 23:20

To be here is the opening

many in the Indian defense establishment are still wary of American intentions and United States military aid to Pakistan, India’s main adversary.

I have always wondered and brainstormed here with several of you, its fine and dandy for anyone including me to say that India won't put up with this or that from US, but at the end of the day, tough talk can only succeeed if there is some leverage. This is an opening. The defense guys et. al must sit together and have a serious conversation with their US counterparts. You want our moolah, then lets talk about this terrorist abomination called TSP first and the military aid you are supplying to them and your whitewashing their use of pigLeTs against us. Time to play hardball.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 29 Apr 2011 00:24

That is one MUTU article . Common sense demands that it is in seller's interest to not to loose the deal by attaching unnecessary and potentially fatal strings to the goods which are meant to be used for the protection of health, wealth and well being of the customer. When MRCA process started there was no PRC or Afghanistan issue and no talk of American providing billions for Poaks to poke Indian eyes. I think both understand that in this changed geopolitical enviorenment its not business as usual. Uncle cant tie the elephant India with the similar kind of leash used for doggy Poaks or poodle folks. The strategic limitations have now been exposed. The ball is in US court. Indian messege is that they wont undermine the basic principle,independent decision making regarding national security.It will be toostupid to pay $ as well expose T..te to Uncle's grip and sing the strategic songs while taking blow after blow of terrorist activities from Uncle's Ashna. US inability to assure the full utilization of their Warbirds by India againts Poaks killed their prospects. Unlike other buyers of Uncle's maal, the possibility of war beteween india and its enemies remain high. We live in ugly neighborhood and need real time use of weaponary and not for the exhibition purpose.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 29 Apr 2011 00:43

AKA has been public with his disenchantment over US arms freebies to pak, but the US has done precious little to address it, apart from harping on strategic ties which apparently means only US interests and concerns need to be accomodated

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 29 Apr 2011 01:07

Published on Apr 28, 2011
By John Elliott
India takes a NAM-style route on $11bn fighter contract: Riding the Elephant

This is a diplomatically brave decision that most observers never expected after India signed its nuclear power deal with the US in 2008. Numerous US officials from President Barack Obama downwards have lobbied hard for the $11bn multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) contract, indicating that it was expected as a nuclear thank-you. What seemed most likely therefore was that Lockheed or Boeing would be included – even though, as India knows, its supplies are unreliable – until the end of the process. Then the US would not give up until it had driven other bidders out of the contest.

The US offerings however did not match up to required standards during flight testing – nor did the MiGs. The F-18 failed tests in the cold and high Himalayas of Ladakh, and the F-16, flown by Pakistan, is long in the tooth. The Griffin fighter from Saab of Sweden has also been rejected.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 29 Apr 2011 01:37

@Prem ^^^: "US inability to assure the full utilization of their Warbirds by India againts Poaks killed their prospects. "

I thought this down select was made solely by the IAF based on specific parameters.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 29 Apr 2011 02:45

As previously mentioned^^^, the fallout is beginning:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 109993.cms

"The larger question though is whether the MRCA set-back to Washington will affect the broader US-India relations, which have been frequently bedeviled by trade spats and strategic misperceptions. Already, Washington is fuming about New Delhi not keeping its end of the nuclear deal bargain. The annual strategic dialogue between the two sides scheduled for April had to be deferred ostensibly because of regional elections in India, but some analysts have suggested that it was because of the nuke deal screw-up and the impending MRCA rebuff. The sudden resignation of US ambassador to India Timothy Roemer, coming within hours of the MRCA decision being made public, is also seen as a setback although Tellis believes it is not linked to the MRCA call. "

Managing this is going to be strategically expensive.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 29 Apr 2011 03:04

^^^ Puzzling why khan never considers the strategic fall-out of
-F-16s to Pakistan
-Headley flip-flop
- Kashmir flip-flop & closed door meetings with Hurriyat
- Incorrect maps of India while overstating Chinese territory (illegally occupied Tibet and Xingjiang)
- Blind eye to real Human Rights abuses in Pakistan and China while a laser focus on anything in India
- Support to dubious so called missionary organizations i.e., Worldvision and others in North East (that are actively working to destabilize)
- Others -- please free to add to the list

on the relationship with India

Right now they are pouting like the powerful parents of the girl who lost the beauty contest despite the parents connections. Kabhi kabhi merit se log aagee bad jaate hain.

Add to it they keep letting their psycho brat hitting the judge and due to their distorted worldview see nothing wrong with it. Afterall their psycho brat is entitled to this since they are the parents.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 29 Apr 2011 03:04

Part of the game. They will understand, just as we understand that they have to supply weapons to Pakistan which Pakistan will use to kill Indians with, and I'm not talking about fancy F-16s and other big-ticket items. Further, as someone listed on another thread, we are in fact buying billions worth of aircraft and other equipment from them, and we will buy more - but not the F-18s or F-16s. No one needs to get their knickers in a twist on this issue.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 29 Apr 2011 03:47

^^^
US just did not understand India's psyche and they always tried a Ayub, Zia, Saddam on India. Inspite of pouring in zillions in research, it just will never get India's civilizational DNA. It really needs to build a trustworthy relationship and not try to make India is some puppet.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 29 Apr 2011 03:54

@JEM ^^^"They will understand, just as we understand that they have to supply weapons to Pakistan "
'They' are not the 'understanding' types. This has become a bit like the 'Khandan (no pun intended) ki izzat barbad hui' stock scene from the Hindi movies of the 1960s.

BHO (apparently) feels 'dissed'. Streetwise, there is the 'payback' phase to come just to show it's a two-way street. Neither the nuke deals nor the C-17 deals have fructified.

IOW, Naresh Chandra et al can say "The India-US relationship is bigger than this one arms sale" etc. But, the pushback will come with the same disclaimer.

BTW, FWIW, I don't see this as a India-Pak thing. It has moved on and the balancing will come WRT to PRC now that that Tibetans have appointed/elected a political head.

JMT 99% chance of being wrong.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 29 Apr 2011 05:34

"Questioning whether these aircraft represented the best value for the IAF and the best investments for India overall, Mr. Tellis said to The Hindu that those in the U.S. who felt that India had settled for an aircraft over a strategic relationship would also conclude that “there is no reason why the administration should bend backwards to accommodate India.”

Mr. Tellis, formerly a senior advisor to the Ambassador at the U.S. embassy in New Delhi, a staff member of the National Security Council and Special Assistant to the President, also had critical words for the manner in which the decision was made and announced.

He said that it only made things worse given that “the GOI knew full well the importance the administration attached to this sale... [and] a quiet intimation of the coming decision would have helped.”

http://www.thehindu.com/news/internatio ... 819298.ece

We can of course, dismiss Dr. Tellis as a 'tool' etc. but the truth is IMHO, he's right. The pro-India lobby has been weakened.

Everything I'm hearing is really worrying. This has the potential to undercut those who have expended time, money and effort to promote the strategic relationship. The anger is palpable.

Well, the stunning Carla Bruni or vivacious/zaftig Angela Merkel better be prepared to deliver item numbers ...

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 29 Apr 2011 06:30

Cosmo_R wrote:We can of course, dismiss Dr. Tellis as a 'tool' etc. but the truth is IMHO, he's right. The pro-India lobby has been weakened.

Everything I'm hearing is really worrying. This has the potential to undercut those who have expended time, money and effort to promote the strategic relationship. The anger is palpable.

Well, the stunning Carla Bruni or vivacious/zaftig Angela Merkel better be prepared to deliver item numbers ...

The so called pro-Indian lobby is f-ed up lobby. There may good and genuine folks but along with them there are substantial number of others are there to only promote their business and I am sure about it. The anger can be due to loss of personal deals. If I am India, I will take this with a tonne of salt.

India does not need a lobbying in US. It is totally useless as USA is hellbent on being opposing to India strategically. As long as it keeps on singing that Pakistan is their need and it is just waste. US doesn't want to listen and what is that lobbying will do. All that lobbyists will do is go to India and tell it how better off India will be without JK and nukes.

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 29 Apr 2011 06:43

All the US has to do is stop putting the breaks on EU selling high tech weapons to China. EU would be selling everything on the planet to China.

In fact, all the US has to do is, indicate to India that it would not stop EU from selling high tech stuff to China.

Italy and Austria hates India. UK is all for Kashmir joining with Pakistan and wants to dance to the tune of POK Kashmiris in the UK. France has been itching to sell high tech planes and weapons to the Chinese. Germany has no love for India. The rest of the EU pretty much could care less about India.

This is the strategy of cutting ones nose to spite the face by lefties of India. This is the lefties punching beyond their puny weight.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 29 Apr 2011 07:28

^^^"t is totally useless as USA is hellbent on being opposing to India strategically. As long as it keeps on singing that Pakistan is their need and it is just waste. "

"Pakistani and American officials said that General Petraeus’s selection could further inflame relations between the two nations, which are already at one of their lowest points, with recriminations over myriad issues aired publicly like never before.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/29/world ... us.html?hp

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 29 Apr 2011 07:46

Manny wrote:All the US has to do is stop putting the breaks on EU selling high tech weapons to China. EU would be selling everything on the planet to China.

In fact, all the US has to do is, indicate to India that it would not stop EU from selling high tech stuff to China.

Its not as if the anti-PRC arms embargo is in place for India's benefit. No, sir. Its to benefit unkil in particular and the west in general only. Kindly have no illusions on that score.

So sure, let the great khan go and lift the embargo on PRC. By all means. Lift anytech sanctions and restrictions while at it too. All to spite India only. It would be a classic case of what you call:

This is the strategy of cutting ones nose to spite the face

As for a pro-India lobby etc, tks to the Obama admin coming to power, most of the good work by the GWB admin was a lost cause anyway. India-US relations will develop based on converging interests sans arms-twisting. That alone is sustainable, even if slow.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 29 Apr 2011 07:52

Cosmo_R wrote:^^^"t is totally useless as USA is hellbent on being opposing to India strategically. As long as it keeps on singing that Pakistan is their need and it is just waste. "

"Pakistani and American officials said that General Petraeus’s selection could further inflame relations between the two nations, which are already at one of their lowest points, with recriminations over myriad issues aired publicly like never before.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/29/world ... us.html?hp

The media is running a psyops to just show to the world that they are going to screw Pakis. In reality on the drawing board they will work on who could be sacrificiable and later how strategically they can corner India.

As long as they are in Af-Pak with Pak's help (real or made-up) there is no chance of Indo-strategic growth.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 29 Apr 2011 07:53

JE Menon wrote:Part of the game. They will understand, just as we understand that they have to supply weapons to Pakistan which Pakistan will use to kill Indians with, and I'm not talking about fancy F-16s and other big-ticket items.

+1. Absolutely.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 29 Apr 2011 08:36

Nothing positive in Indo-US ties since nuclear deal

But on a larger canvas, the Indian decision shows the level of deterioration in India-US relations. From the nuclear liability law onwards, things have not been positive on the India-US front. India believes it bent over backwards to accommodate US concerns during the nuclear deal and in its aftermath, as in the end-user verification issue. The US believed it got short shrift on India's nuclear liability law which makes it difficult for US companies to get into the Indian nuclear power sector.
:
The US, on the other hand, believes India has not kept up its part of the bargain after the nuclear deal. They believe they made a huge concession to India by overcoming the dissent in their own system to support India for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. Sources in Washington said the US would probably walk back from that support.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 29 Apr 2011 09:03

^^^
who gives a sh** about UNSC? does anyone really believe that the structure of UN allows countries other than the initial power brokers to actually have some kind of an influence? what's the probability of UNSC seat enhancing India's security and interests? the downside is that entry into UNSC will become some kind of Holy Grail which will be used to arm twist India. i am personally of the opinion that UNSC seat doesn't matter to India. I am willing to change my view if presented by solid facts that UNSC seat can augment Indian interests. what do the BRF gurus think about this?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Apr 2011 09:15

+1 . its a useless trinket the giving of which will be used to armtwist concessions from us.

let GOTUS walk away from the issue with all speed - sooner the better. make it public, abuse GOI, threaten GOI ... even better.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 29 Apr 2011 09:24

Devesh Miyan,
IMHO, any international power sructure without us is wazibul Qatal. Destroy that instituion and watch the tamasha. Cant wait for the day when India will be able to use all left hand five fingers into UN Musharraf and tickle them to heart content.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Apr 2011 09:39

MRCA decision is revealing the MUTU types in media among others.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Apr 2011 09:47

remember the enron ceo rebecca mark threatening GOI that she would use the sovereign guarantee clause, complain to her buddies in GOTUS and seize Indian govt assets?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Apr 2011 10:07

she made millions before enron chap 11, and made use of every capital oppty there.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 29 Apr 2011 10:13

ramana wrote:MRCA decision is revealing the MUTU types in media among others.

I would never classify Nitin Pai as a MUTU type, which is why I find his views on this subject perplexing to say the least. As much as I appreciate contrarian views.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 29 Apr 2011 10:19

Prem wrote:Devesh Miyan,
IMHO, any international power sructure without us is wazibul Qatal. Destroy that instituion and watch the tamasha. Cant wait for the day when India will be able to use all left hand five fingers into UN Musharraf and tickle them to heart content.

Prem ji,
Sorry ji, but to the question Should India leave UN, if we don't get a veto seat in UNSC?, the BRFites have already answered with a NO!

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 29 Apr 2011 10:43

This US admin has been acting in a manner that is just not condusive to the improvement in bilateral relations. First the review of all on going defecne deals with India and then when BHO was in Yndia, the the emphasis on deals was obscene. I for one am glad that Indian money cannot be used to subsedise the weapons for TSP. At least in this respect.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 29 Apr 2011 10:48

I would say give some other sops to the US to encourage them to do the right thing in Af-Pak. Defense imports from any foreign source are problematic, not only due to issues of spares, but also due to the dangers of Trojans or kill-switches. But if one can get tech transfer along with the purchase, then it may be tolerable.

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 29 Apr 2011 13:21

Cosmo_R wrote:"Questioning whether these aircraft represented the best value for the IAF and the best investments for India overall, Mr. Tellis said to The Hindu that those in the U.S. who felt that India had settled for an aircraft over a strategic relationship would also conclude that “there is no reason why the administration should bend backwards to accommodate India.”

Mr. Tellis, formerly a senior advisor to the Ambassador at the U.S. embassy in New Delhi, a staff member of the National Security Council and Special Assistant to the President, also had critical words for the manner in which the decision was made and announced.

He said that it only made things worse given that “the GOI knew full well the importance the administration attached to this sale... [and] a quiet intimation of the coming decision would have helped.”

http://www.thehindu.com/news/internatio ... 819298.ece

We can of course, dismiss Dr. Tellis as a 'tool' etc. but the truth is IMHO, he's right. The pro-India lobby has been weakened.

Everything I'm hearing is really worrying. This has the potential to undercut those who have expended time, money and effort to promote the strategic relationship. The anger is palpable.

Well, the stunning Carla Bruni or vivacious/zaftig Angela Merkel better be prepared to deliver item numbers ...

Really, select a relationship over fighter. What has Mr. Tellis been smoking? Mr Tellis what will happen when America turns fickle or worse provides Pakistan with exactly the same weapons which have been provided to India, thus negating the 10-11 USD Billion spent. India's strategic autonomy is very important and too crucial to be made dependent on some American whims. Did Mr Tellis really think that India was going to give life support to assembly line which produced the delivery vehicle for Paki nuke?
It is America or shall i say certain Americans which put on this deal the weight on Indo-US relationship. It was not India. And if they are disappointed it is because of two reasons, 1) American unreasonable expectations and 2) Pitching Obsolete weapons.
Yes granted the only active AESA avaliable is with Americans and not with the europeans, but Mr Tellis you should know that America has not provided the code for AESA to an ally like UK. The chances of US to provide such a source code to India are remote to say the least. Further there is nothing preventing the French and the EFT consortium from developing a AESA radar for India.
Granted F/A-18SH has some amazing sensor facilities, but the whole package has to be taken into the account and not just sensor.

satya · Post by **satya** » 29 Apr 2011 13:41

Unkil ko mirchi lagi hei. This is a first i guess . Will be interesting to know wht they do next either continue the same old way more EJs more SDRE bashing + == thing or they take right steps . It was a message ball in unkil's court .Will be interesting to record unkil's & co. rxn both in desh & videshi media .

Venkarl · Post by **Venkarl** » 29 Apr 2011 14:02

This Deep Disappointment by Yankees is not only because of IAF disqualified US teens but this decision by 4th largest Air Force will hit future prospects of US teens in other countries' air force procurement

. I remember ACM saying IAF technical evaluation procedure is itself a template/handbook for other countries to decide on a fighter plane for procurement.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 29 Apr 2011 14:32

Muppalla wrote: The so called pro-Indian lobby is f-ed up lobby. There may good and genuine folks but along with them there are substantial number of others are there to only promote their business and I am sure about it. The anger can be due to loss of personal deals. If I am India, I will take this with a tonne of salt.

India does not need a lobbying in US. It is totally useless as USA is hellbent on being opposing to India strategically. As long as it keeps on singing that Pakistan is their need and it is just waste. US doesn't want to listen and what is that lobbying will do. All that lobbyists will do is go to India and tell it how better off India will be without JK and nukes.

Thats right. I think you Muppalla'h has it spot on. Someone who I spoke to who was close with the negotiations on the 120k troops inafghanistan issue was saying the same thing. Amriki has no interest to help us and they aren't serious. More than we have to prove our sincerety, US hasto show some sincerety first. How about relaxation of sanctions that are STILL on us and 26/11.

The expectation is sooner or later the US will realise they need us.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 29 Apr 2011 14:47

Perhaps one template that was used in the selection was how to prevent aircraft technology from getting into the hands of the Chinese!

The Chinese would not be getting any aircraft technology from the Americans, and Russians would not want to part with their top of the line technology either, so the soft spot, the weak link are the Europeans, and with their economic woes they might just be tempted into selling technology to the Chinese, overriding the objections of the Americans!

So perhaps it was just a means of preempting such an outcome! Actually it makes sense to partner with Europeans and to base the decision on technical grounds. There was little to expect from America on any big strategic issues!

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 29 Apr 2011 14:49

First we had the nuclear power plant liability issue. Then the murky ISRO-Devas deal, which had the likes of Madeline Albright lobbying for it, was canceled. But it's not that the US is getting completely locked out. This is from 2 days ago:

Decks cleared for $5.8-bn C-17 Globemaster deal

New Delhi: The deal to buy 10 C-17 Globemaster-III aircraft from Boeing of the US is a step closer to being clinched. The finance ministry, after initial objections, has sanctioned the money for the acquisition.

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/de ... l/781863/0