India-US Strategic News and Discussion

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 04 Jun 2012 10:32

Request for Book:

Hi Guys,

I am looking for a book - The Crisis Game, by Sidney Giffin.

If somebody has it in digital format, please mail to bushlovesosama at ze rate gee mail dot com.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jun 2012 23:10

Me Too!

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 04 Jun 2012 23:30

Advait wrote: Also, most American sites are avoiding mentioning the fact that all three winners are Indians. Most of them just have the winner's name and a few mention the second place winner.

I disagree. The initial Associated Press story mentioned that and also the trend since Nupur Lala. Most US papers/sites ran that story.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 04 Jun 2012 23:43

Links please. News reports have links.

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 05 Jun 2012 00:05

Here you go, Acharya:
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c1 ... 4e17006c39

Or you can google for Snigdha Nandipati and Nupur Lala together.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 05 Jun 2012 18:55

For those who might be concerned about a CT regarding Indo-Americans not being given their due on the spelling bee:
www.google.com/search?q=indian+american+spelling+bee

I still wish we could get one Heisman, Cy Young or NBA first round draft pick.

Jayram · Post by **Jayram** » 05 Jun 2012 19:50

Cosmo_R wrote:For those who might be concerned about a CT regarding Indo-Americans not being given their due on the spelling bee:
http://www.google.com/search?q=indian+a ... elling+bee

I still wish we could get one Heisman, Cy Young or NBA first round draft pick.

Unlikely to happen with majority of Indian parents who still view education as the only way to a "sucessfull" life here. The other pathways are not imprinted into our psyche yet..

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 05 Jun 2012 20:32

^^
OT Alert...

I think Indian parents are being smart about raising their kids. The probability of success and leading a simple and stable life is far greater with a good education, compared to any other sports. My daughter is in the competitive swim team now and she is reasonably good at it. However, we have decided to pull her out of the team next academic year, as it is beginning to interfere with her education. There are a lot of Indian kids in the competitive team when they are young. However, most tend to drop out around high school age when they start getting serious about their education. The Chinese kids and the White American kids continue on. I am sure it is not different in other sports as well.

Also, It has got nothing to do with Vegetarianism or being an SDRE as some folks tend to think. For eg. My vegetarian SDRE daughter can beat most of the meat eating white American and Chinese kids by atleast a body length in the competitions.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Jun 2012 21:06

Cosmo_R wrote:For those who might be concerned about a CT regarding Indo-Americans not being given their due on the spelling bee:
http://www.google.com/search?q=indian+a ... elling+bee

I still wish we could get one Heisman, Cy Young or NBA first round draft pick.

Major network TV have not given this report. Only we see that 4-5 news channel have shown this report.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 05 Jun 2012 22:09

I think we're really getting OT on this me included. The thread is called: " India-US Strategic News and Discussion". Spelling Bees don't fall into the strategic domain AFAIK. Where is all the stuff about Panetta's visit and the 'strategic dialog'?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Jun 2012 22:18

Because its a dailog between the deaf(US) and the dumb(India).

US doesn't want to hear Indian interests and India doesn't want to offend the US by stating them.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Jun 2012 22:24

I don't understand what more military-to-military contact the US wants in India. Every service chief since the late 80s has been a graduate of some US military college or the other per their biographies on BR. And the IAS is practically Harvard trained to reach the JS level at the center.
The reverse hasn't happened yet!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Jun 2012 22:42

X-post.....
"Austin"

US role to fade with China calling shots as creditor – economist

China has accumulated enough financial resources to induce borrowers US and EU to share power, argues Arvind Subramanian, senior fellow jointly at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and the Center for Global Development.

In an exclusive interview to RT the author of Eclipse: Living in the Shadow of China’s Economic Dominance explained how disputable currency policies from creditor China and borrower America dictate the political weather around the globe.

RT: Is China really dominating? Because the US is still the richest country in the world?

Arvind Subramanian: At the moment China’s GDP is smaller than that of the US, that’s true. But if you measure it in terms of purchasing power – it is as big as the United States’. Secondly, China is already the world’s largest trader. Thirdly – China is a big net creditor to the world. It finances the US and the US is a debtor. This combination confers China a lot of power.

Over the next 10-15 years all these numbers are going to go in China’s favor.

China has 3.3 trillion dollars in cash. If Europe gets into trouble, which country in the world has the ability to bail out Europe? Not the US – China. When it has that ability – it can always exercise power.

RT: What could be the political ramifications of Chinese power?

AS: The US wants China to be on its side. If China were on the side of the US things would be so much easier.

Economic power can always be leverage for political and foreign policy objectives. Still it is mutually dependent relations.

The fact that China has so much economic and financial power can always be used for political needs.

RT: Isn’t it good for restoring balance? When there is not just one kid on the block ruling everything?

AS: Some would say if you have one big good guy – maybe it’s better than having multiple guys who kind of cannot agree on anything.

RT: That is a very unilateral world. One guy can actually turn into a bad one at some point.

AS: That is exactly the risk. But having multiple sources of power, you can also get paralysis in decision-making. So whether cooperation is easier with one hegemon or multiple sources of power is an open question. You can argue it both ways.

RT: Has money-printing become America's main business?

AS: I think yes and no. On one hand, they have printed a lot of money in the last 3-4 years. But they would argue with some fairness that it is what you needed to get the economy back from recession.

RT: Don’t you see a hint of hypocrisy when the US is bashing China over its currency policy while playing with its own currency?

AS: There is a parallel, but it is overdone. Even though the US has been printing a lot of money in the 2-3 years after the crisis, the dollar has not weakened but has become stronger. You print a lot of money if you want to make your currency cheaper… But because the rest of the world still has so much confidence in the dollar, because of the crisis they all came to the dollar and it has become strong.

The effect of all that printing money has not been to make currency cheaper, whereas Chinese policies have made the Chinese currency cheaper.

RT: Dollar dominance allows the US to live beyond its means. How long can it last?

AS: It cannot last indefinitely because of these drives of China… Gradually over time the Chinese currency will start to displace the dollar because people will have more confidence in the Chinese currency than in the American currency. That will be a gradual process. But at some point it will start to happen rapidly. And at that point the US no longer has to live beyond its means. That is going to happen within the next 10-15 years.

RT: The IMF is traditionally dominated by Europe and the US. Do you think this current crisis could shift the centers of power in the IMF?

AS: To some extent it is happening already, though the formal voting is still very much biased in favor of Europe and the US. But the more Europe gets into trouble – the more it will need money from the outside.

Only China, Russia and Brazil have money to provide it – they will ask to change the system.

Borrowers don’t have power, creditors call the shots.

So all this US-India bhai-bhai is humbug. And Indian elite is falling for this. Last time JLN fell for this type of nonsense(forward policy, spy stations/Khampa rebels in Tibet etc) and led to 1962.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Jun 2012 22:45

Thanks to Abhishek Sharma:

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... ma_paradox

.....When I set out on the reporting of Confront and Conceal, what struck me the most was how surprising the Obama approach to foreign policy has been compared to what we expected coming out of the 2008 campaign. So this is a book about the surprises. And it's a book that tries to take seriously the thought that there may be an Obama doctrine -- even if the president has deliberately avoided that phrase. And I wanted to examine whether it works, where it works, and where it doesn't work.

If I had to summarize the doctrine, it's got two parts. When there is a direct threat to the United States, Obama has shown himself to be very willing to use unilateral force, even if it violates a country's sovereignty, and even if it angers the allies. Think of the [Osama] bin Laden raid. Think of the drone strikes over Pakistan. Think of Olympic Games [the code name for the cyber attacks on the Iranian nuclear program], which is one of the largest covert programs the United States has run in recent years and is a clear violation of the sovereignty of Iran.

When there are cases where the United States does not have direct interests at stake, when there was just sort of a global good out there, which may well include something like the responsibility to protect populations from brutal dictators -- think Libya, Syria, so forth -- President Obama has been very willing to say we're not going to take the lead here; we're going to force others to both pay for it and to man up to it according to their own interests. And this has left many allies pretty disturbed, because they have wondered whether or not the traditional United States leadership role is being abandoned. It's also created some political vulnerability for the president. At moments, it has worked, as in Libya. At other moments, it has not. The paralysis over Syria happened because when the United States hasn't taken the lead, and no one else has either. So the Obama doctrine gives us sort of a new lens on how the U.S. exercises power, and this book is an examination of what's worked and what hasn't. Not surprisingly, it's a mixed record....

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 05 Jun 2012 23:20

ramana wrote:I don't understand what more military-to-military contact the US wants in India. Every service chief since the late 80s has been a graduate of some US military college or the other per their biographies on BR. And the IAS is practically Harvard trained to reach the JS level at the center.
The reverse hasn't happened yet!

US wants to get more layers of Indian strata under its influence, incase top layer is compromised,they have start over from scratch.
A major complaint from US is the protocol prevents lower levels from communicating with their peers in mil-mil contacts.May be a Major or Lt.
If they build US influence from these levels,those who raise in 7-10 years through natural promotions and progressions will be more "likable" to US.
We are being completely penetrated from all directions and all layers of society including military by US.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Jun 2012 04:00

no wonder US officals go batty about India!
While Panetta is in Delhi talking about India's (no)role in Asia, SM Krishna knocks on SCO doors for admission!

India pitches for SCO membership

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 06 Jun 2012 17:23

Panetta pledges steps to allow India access to dual use tech

The US on Wednesday promised to initiate measures to provide access to dual use technology to India which has been contending that American norms were leading to denial of export of such sophisticated items.

This assurance was given by US defence secretary Leon Panetta to defence minister AK Antony during hour-long discussions in which they reviewed the security situation in South Asia and the AfPak region.

Panetta gave an assurance to Antony that the US would initiate measures to provide access to technology, defence ministry officials said.

The denial of dual-use items by the US to various laboratories under the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) was a key issue for discussion between the two sides.

DRDO chief VK Saraswat had recently said that US President Barack Obama's assurance on removal of DRDO from the entities list and easing exports of dual use items had remained on paper.

Pranay · Post by **Pranay** » 06 Jun 2012 18:27

http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/ ... ?ref=world

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta came to India this week like a teenage boy asking to be kissed, but — continuing a long tradition — India is unlikely to fully reciprocate.

In a speech Wednesday at the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, Mr. Panetta said that the military relationship between the United States and India must deepen.

‘‘Today, we have growing economic, social and diplomatic ties that benefit both of our nations, but for this relationship to truly provide security for this region and for the world, we will need to deepen our defense and security cooperation,’’ Mr. Panetta said. ‘‘This is why I have come to India.’’

Mr. Panetta is near the end of a swing through Asia in which he has promised to enhance the U.S. military presence in the region despite budget constraints at home. This will be accomplished in part by increasing the share of Navy ships in the Pacific Ocean while lowering them in the Atlantic, he said.

The change is widely seen as an attempt to check China’s growing clout and posturing in the region, and the United States sees India as a crucial partner in that effort. But India has long resisted U.S. entreaties for closer military cooperation in part out of fear of angering the Chinese. Ties are indeed deepening between the two nations, but not nearly as fast as the Americans would like. And the word ‘‘alliance’’ to describe the relationship is out of the question.

‘‘As the United States and India deepen our defense partnership with each other, both of us will also seek to strengthen our relations with China,’’ Mr. Panetta said in his speech.

One small step in the intricate dance between the United States, India and China was an agreement announced on Tuesday to allow the United States to resume efforts to recover the remains of some 400 airmen lost in 90 aircraft crashes in northeastern India near the Chinese border during World War II. Bad weather led to the cancellation of the searches in 2009. India has been considering whether to allow them to restart since then.

‘‘The ability to return heroes to their loved ones is something that America deeply, deeply appreciates,’’ Mr. Panetta said.

On Tuesday, Mr. Panetta held what the Americans described as ‘‘productive meetings’’ with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Shivshankar Menon, the national security adviser. In his speech Wednesday, Mr. Panetta said that when he worked for President Bill Clinton in the 1990s, the relationship between the two countries was strained. But he noted that President Barack Obama has called the U.S. relationship with India one of the defining partnerships of the 21st century.

‘‘We will expand our military partnerships and our presence in the arc extending from the Western Pacific and East Asia into the Indian Ocean region and South Asia,’’ Mr. Panetta said. ‘‘Defense cooperation with India is a linchpin in this strategy.’’

For decades, India resented the apparently close relationship between the United States and Pakistan, but the war in Afghanistan has badly damaged those ties. Mr. Panetta praised India for its recent efforts to improve its relationship with Pakistan.

‘‘Pakistan is a complicated relationship — complicated for both of our countries,’’ Mr. Panetta said. ‘‘But it’s one that we must work to improve.’’

Mr. Panetta pledged to streamline rules to make trade in military hardware between the United States and India ‘‘more simple, more responsive and more effective.’’ And he urged India to change its own regulations regarding ‘‘nuclear liability legislation,’’ a reference to a longtime U.S. call for India to change its laws to make it easier for American companies to develop civilian nuclear reactors in India.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 06 Jun 2012 18:47

One small step in the intricate dance between the United States, India and China was an agreement announced on Tuesday to allow the United States to resume efforts to recover the remains of some 400 airmen lost in 90 aircraft crashes in northeastern India near the Chinese border during World War II. Bad weather led to the cancellation of the searches in 2009. India has been considering whether to allow them to restart since then.

‘‘The ability to return heroes to their loved ones is something that America deeply, deeply appreciates,’’ Mr. Panetta said.

I am completely for India cooperating and helping the families find the remains of the fallen Airmen and Soldiers. There should not be any consideration in this regard. This should be an emphatic YES from India's side. I have no clue to what sort of thinking is concerned about Chinese 'sensitivity'. There was lots of news in the media yesterday about India's concern about hurting Chinese sensitivity etc..Disgusting.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Jun 2012 19:28

harbans hold your nose. That area is border between India and China. Under the guise of search for missing people, US might want to fly their planes and base them in India. They migh do extensive mapping to find the remains. At same time US does not have an innocent track record eg. arming the Tibetian exiles (Khampa rebels), stationing listening devices on mountain tops etc. So the Chinese will be wary and provoke an armed response or create new pressure points on India.

So there are multiple sides to all steps/moves.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 06 Jun 2012 20:16

Under the guise of search for missing people, US might want to fly their planes and base them in India. They migh do extensive mapping to find the remains

Ramana, India has the prerogative to obviously not allow a complete military base to the US. What the US brings into the house without compromising Indian sensitivity/ security is the primary concern here and basing planes in India is probably out of the question. From all the reports i read India's concerns stemmed not what bases the US were planning, but Chinese sensitivity. Chinese anyways don't seem to have much concern about Indian sensitivity when it comes to putting there own troops on the LOC in Kashmir or POK.

Meanwhile we keep Chinese senstitivity in concern by trying banning the World Buddhist conclave, by our leaders not visiting ArP, by not allowing DL in ArP..there is no end to the list that might provoke China. I am certain that our security establishment is intelligent enough to allow and disallow the needed equipment on part of the US for getting the remains of the missing Airmen back home to their families.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Jun 2012 20:50

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... epage=true Mr. Antony emphasised that the priority for India was to move beyond the buyer-seller transactions and to focus on transfer of technologies and partnerships to build indigenous capabilities.

.. and to which country USA has giving such capabilities or transferred technologies and at what cost/strategic dependence?

in a sense, I feel like a beggar now.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 06 Jun 2012 21:24

Well I watched Mr. Panetta and I thought it was a "paki like" speech. He should have at substitute the word "South Asia" for "Indian Subcontinent" .

South Asia was created by naPakis and is used by Lefties in India. The whole of "South Asia" is nothing but countries that were part of India in earlier times. (naPak, Bangladesh, Lanka, Maldives, Nepal, Afghanistan).

We should also start calling it back to its original name of Indian Subcontinent.

Advait · Post by **Advait** » 06 Jun 2012 22:20

harbans ji, why should we show so much concern for Americans w.r.t finding the remains of their airmen from almost 70 years ago.

Americans had no concern when Pakis where/are sponsoring terrorists in India. Sure they send in the FBI for some help, but no changes policy wise.

I think our babus/politicos might be driving a hard bargain with this. And if they are, kudos to them. Finally the pupil has become the teacher

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Jun 2012 23:43

SBajwa wrote:Well I watched Mr. Panetta and I thought it was a "paki like" speech. He should have at substitute the word "South Asia" for "Indian Subcontinent" .

South Asia was created by naPakis and is used by Lefties in India. The whole of "South Asia" is nothing but countries that were part of India in earlier times. (naPak, Bangladesh, Lanka, Maldives, Nepal, Afghanistan).

We should also start calling it back to its original name of Indian Subcontinent.

all depends on what "they" want to call.. do you think India as a major world player as arrived to dictate what everyone wants to call us? I was told we were named by firangs too in the history.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 07 Jun 2012 02:10

The Rise of India Could Spell Trouble for the U.S. 5/29/2012 6:25:48 AM
The authors of "Chinese and Indian Strategic Behavior" say the rise of both China and India is not a good thing for the U.S. The WSJ's Deborah Kan speaks to China Editor Andrew Browne.

http://online.wsj.com/video/225A7112-40 ... le_tboleft

arun · Post by **arun** » 07 Jun 2012 06:56

As a humanitarian step, India will also allow the resumption of the search for the "remains" of the 430 American personnel, in the upper reaches of Arunachal Pradesh and other states, who were killed in plane crashes while flying the Himalayan ``hump'' between India and China during World War-II.

"This is a humanitarian gesture by the Indian government, with whom we share so many values. The ability to return heroes to their loved ones is something that America deeply, deeply appreciates," said Panetta. While US personnel had earlier conducted some such search missions in the region, they were later halted by India probably because of the China factor in Arunachal.

Indian Express

I am not so sure that this is a wise move by our Government given the track record of the US in our region and beyond of abusing hospitality by using the cover of “humanitarian” operations to gather “intelligence” with the “vaccination” programme to smoke out Mohammadden Terrorist Osama Bin Laden immediately coming to mind.

I do hope that our Government takes all steps to ensure that no meaningfull intelligence can be gathered by the US by way of having US personnel escorted at all times and also ensuring that no survey data gathered by the US is taken out of India.

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 07 Jun 2012 08:51

how come this humanitarian step is necessary after 70 years?

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 07 Jun 2012 10:07

viv wrote:how come this humanitarian step is necessary after 70 years?

My doubts exactly. Learned folks please share your thoughts. What was the trigger point for this and why now?

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 07 Jun 2012 10:13

My CT is this - US asks something that is innocuous but India can only reluctantly agree or refuse given that this is a sensitive border area where we may not want the US to snoop. A refusal would help the US brand India as not ready to be a US poodle.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 07 Jun 2012 10:23

merlin wrote:My CT is this - US asks something that is innocuous but India can only reluctantly agree or refuse given that this is a sensitive border area where we may not want the US to snoop. A refusal would help the US brand India as not ready to be a US poodle.

My CT
A crashed sensitive UAV or satellite whose parts may have survived. Wait! It cannot be a Alien spacecraft?

Kanishka · Post by **Kanishka** » 07 Jun 2012 11:32

India not sold on closer military ties with U.S.

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta urged India on Wednesday to build a closer military relationship with the United States, but Indian leaders appeared more interested in buying U.S. weapons than in aligning strategically with Washington.

Senior Indian officials made it clear in two days of talks that they will continue to set their own course on U.S. national security priorities, including isolating Iran and building upAfghanistan'smilitary forces, sometimes in tandem with Washington and sometimes not.

Panetta is visiting Asia this week to bolster military ties as the Obama administration, wary ofChina's growing clout in the region, seeks to reassert America's presence in the Pacific after a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Pentagon chief described enhanced defense cooperation with India as "a linchpin" of the new strategy. But India has charted an independent foreign policy for decades, and its response was decidedly cool.

Panetta held meetings with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Defense Minister A.K. Antony, National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon and other government officials. But he did not hold a joint news conference with his Indian counterpart, as he usually does when he visits friendly countries.

"We'll never be an alliance partner with the U.S.," said Lalit Mansingh, an analyst and a former Indian ambassador to Washington. "The limit is a partnership."

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 07 Jun 2012 13:40

Too many people smoking what is not a CIGAR. So what is there in the border area that US can snoop and it is historical fact that US did lose airmen over the hump. I have softer corner for US as compared to China. So is China mindful of Indian sensitivities when it places missiles in Tibet pointing at India before we start worrying about China's sensitivity?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 07 Jun 2012 17:08

The global economic, trade, military and diplomatic scene is becoming chaotic and ill-defined. While speaking of 'peaceful rise' and 'multi-polar world', China in fact wants to usurp the Sole Superpower status from the US, taking advantage of this chaos and the decreasing clout of the US. It is however jumping the gun with its audacious behaviour against littoral countries in South China Sea and by its arrogant actions against India. Today, China is many times stronger than India both economically and militarily and like any normal nation-state faced with such adversity, India also needs to have friends and it needs to shore up its defences. China will definitely see the American request to comb the Northeast and the Indian green signal as a sinister move by the two countries ganging up against her, whatever excuse we may give. Why do we need to bother about that ? China has (and continues to transfer) transferred nuclear and missile technologies to Pakistan to use them solely against us and yet the two-way trade has touched USD 80 Billion. China continues to act very provocatively against us in various ways too without bothering about what will happen.

India gave up its non-alignment in 1962 when faced with a grave danger. At other times too, India has played a very nuanced diplomatic trapeze when situations so warranted. Since the 90s, India has been increasingly thrust into situations where it has to play realpolitik. India can no longer insulate herself from such dynamics nor shy away from playing its role. So long as narrow political and personal views do not cloud its statecraft, I believe that India can and should play its part well and derive benefits for herself at minimal risk. The India of c. 2012 is very different from that of the 60s and 70s. If the Russian Bear could not hug us tightly, I expect we can tackle the American Uncle too.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 07 Jun 2012 17:36

VikasRaina wrote:Too many people smoking what is not a CIGAR. So what is there in the border area that US can snoop and it is historical fact that US did lose airmen over the hump. I have softer corner for US as compared to China. So is China mindful of Indian sensitivities when it places missiles in Tibet pointing at India before we start worrying about China's sensitivity?

Who said anything about China's sensitivity? It IS a sensitive border area since we have a lot of defence infrastructure there and I presume we don't want snoopers.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 07 Jun 2012 17:47

Who said anything about China's sensitivity?

Advait, Merlin ji..the news channels were on only about India being cautious due to Chinese sensitivity. I mentioned that in my original post on this. This is completely a humanitarian issue. The locations of some wrecks have been coming up for some time now as more areas became accessible. It is now that a lot of data has been compiled on these wrecks. Returning the remains of any Soldier who died in the call of battle is honorable, humanitarian, Dharmic and must be done. How would families feel if wrecks of Indian soldiers killed say in some remote part of Africa remained there.

Advait · Post by **Advait** » 07 Jun 2012 19:32

Dharmic and non-dharmic has nothing to do with this. This is where we go wrong. Going all sentimental. Should Kasab's associates' remains also be returned with full honor. I know, I know there is a big difference. But we should drive a hard bargain wherever possible. I thought we were all realpolitik believers here.

kasthuri · Post by **kasthuri** » 07 Jun 2012 20:02

May be this is why this recent fondness with India...

New US leverage seen in negotiations with Pakistan over NATO supply route

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 07 Jun 2012 21:26

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/leon ... 99505.html
US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta identifies India as 'linchpin' in US game plan to counter China in Asia-Pacific North, News - India Today

Check some of the details.
US wants to give technology to friendly states so that they can maintain peace!
After they have given tech to rogue countries now it is the turn of the friendly countries.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 07 Jun 2012 22:23

Acharya wrote:http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/leon ... 99505.html
US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta identifies India as 'linchpin' in US game plan to counter China in Asia-Pacific North, News - India Today

Check some of the details.
US wants to give technology to friendly states so that they can maintain peace!
After they have given tech to rogue countries now it is the turn of the friendly countries.

The difference is that rogue countries have no restrictions on the usage while friendly countries cannot take a leak without permission.