India-US Strategic News and Discussion

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 08 Jun 2012 02:19

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.

No comparison. And India should not drive ANY bargain in this. Most of those who practise realpolitik are the biggest failures. Pakistan is a practitioner of Realpolitik. It's also the laughing stock of the world. HK was one, he stands discredited even before his generation has come to an end. The WKK Brigade are into realpolitik by appeasing China and Pakistan, thinking they are doing something Chanakyan. They are the biggest failures. Stand by what is Righteous/ Dharmic..and you'll win over. Realpolitik is nothing but Intellectual stupidity pretending to be some strategic brilliance. Think about it..and you will realize how true this is.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Jun 2012 03:34

Pioneer, Editorial

In Indian interests

In Indian interests

It must build ties with both US and China

US Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta’s two-day visit to New Delhi must be viewed against the backdrop of the recent ‘pivot to Asia’ in America’s strategic foreign policy. Earlier this year, US President Barack Obama released a security document that delineated Washington, DC’s strategy to confront a newly emerging world order that is no longer governed by a clutch of Great Powers. Instead, the world order today hinges on the phenomenal, and mostly worrisome, rise of China’s economic power that is buttressed by its growing military strength, vis-à-vis America’s loss of status as the world’s only hegemon. In effect, the new strategy, which includes transferring some 60 per cent of the US’s fleet to the Pacific by 2020, focuses on America’s attention towards the Asia-Pacific in a bid to keep an eye on China. It marks the most significant shift in American foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. Mr Panetta was in the region — he visited Singapore and Vietnam before coming to New Delhi — to essentially tighten the nuts and bolts of the new defence framework. For all practical purposes, Mr Panetta’s eight-day swing through Asia was meant to reassert waning American influence in the region. It is towards this end that Mr Panetta sought to engage India’s support. At this time, India is the only country in this region that has both the economic and the military clout to be a credible global power and stand up to China, and the US knows that. Hence, it is no surprise that increased security ties with India lie at the crux of the Obama Administration’s China policy. Mr Panetta’s emphasis on more joint military exercises between India and the US as well as his promise to make available to New Delhi the latest in military technology, must then be viewed against this backdrop.

So, a deepening of security cooperation between India and the US is a step in the right direction. After all, it is only natural that the world’s largest democracy and the world’s most powerful democracy with their common commitment to the universal values of freedom, justice, equality and liberty, should share a close bilateral relation. Furthermore, given that some analysts believe that US-India ties have somewhat plateaued in recent years — there has been nothing spectacular to report since the groundbreaking 2005 nuclear deal between the two countries — this push to take relations to the next level perhaps comes at a good time.

Having said that, however, the restraint that New Delhi has shown in dealing with the American offer reflects a sense of mature policy-making. While India should no doubt cooperate closely with the US, it must be cautious not to become an American satellite state representing Washington’s interests in Asia. This will work neither for India nor for America. Particularly in the case of China, India must be careful not to needlessly antagonise the Asian dragon. New Delhi already has a sensitive relationship with Beijing that is characterised by long-standing border disputes on the one hand and close trade relations on the other. It must be cautious enough not to jeopardise the normalisation of ties. America too must realise that an ‘autonomous’ India will be most effective as its ‘security anchor’ in Asia. India has to eventually do a fine balancing act as it navigates the rivalry between China and the US.

Also note they already have 50% of their fleet in Asia. A mere 10% more wont make much of a difference to PRC. In other words its an attempt to make India jump the fence and become a patsy.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 08 Jun 2012 03:59

At this time, India is the only country in this region that has both the economic and the military clout to be a credible global power and stand up to China, and the US knows that.

Some of these assessments are little overdone and may not be reality.
India will be the target of assault by many rogue countries if the elite dont watch out.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Jun 2012 04:05

You mean rogues!

Already the rupee has lost its glamor. The econ growth is already lower.

Advait · Post by **Advait** » 08 Jun 2012 05:54

harbans wrote:
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.
No comparison. And India should not drive ANY bargain in this. Most of those who practise realpolitik are the biggest failures. Pakistan is a practitioner of Realpolitik. It's also the laughing stock of the world. HK was one, he stands discredited even before his generation has come to an end. The WKK Brigade are into realpolitik by appeasing China and Pakistan, thinking they are doing something Chanakyan. They are the biggest failures. Stand by what is Righteous/ Dharmic..and you'll win over. Realpolitik is nothing but Intellectual stupidity pretending to be some strategic brilliance. Think about it..and you will realize how true this is.

Pakistan actually has done pretty well by the aims that it had. With just 15% of India's population, it has fought India to a draw.We may laugh at its aims, but were/ are ours any wiser.
Trying to be leader of 3rd world when we ourselves are 3rd world and bad mouthing countries that could have actually helped us.
China has also done well by getting a cheap fighting partner in Pak.
The WKKs are the very opposite of realpolitiks; they are the biggest sentifools around (at least the true believers among them.)
Btw, who's HK?
I know you won't agree with most of what I say, but since you believe that dharma wins, answer this: what about all the millions of Hindus killed, raped, forcibly converted, temples destroyed, worked as slaves, their lives destroyed over the centuries. Where they all un-dharmic? Did they deserve it?

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 08 Jun 2012 09:31

Important speech by Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta at Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses.. "The U.S. and India: Partners in the 21st Century"

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 08 Jun 2012 09:33

Does India Want to Be a Part of America’s Plan for Asia? | TIME

The article suggests some heartburn in DC over Chinese vice premier Li Keqiang telling foreign minister SM Krishna that Sino-Indian ties would be the most important bilateral relationship in the 21st Century.

If the US-China tension escalates (the probability is very low though), India's policy of non-alignment will fall on its face. The last time both superpowers were far off. This times we've a contested border with one party that aspires to challenge the US dominance.

Complicated days ahead!

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 08 Jun 2012 10:26

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... 1972.story
India not sold on closer military ties with U.S.
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta meets with Indian officials, seeking enhanced defense cooperation. But India seems more interested in buying U.S. arms.
By David S. Cloud and Mark Magnier, Los Angeles Times
June 6, 2012, 6:27 p.m.
NEW DELHI — 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 up Afghanistan'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."
The Pentagon has stationed tens of thousands of troops, plus aircraft and warships, at bases in Japan and South Korea since the end of World War II. But the U.S. withdrew from most of Southeast Asia after the Vietnam War ended in 1975, and major bases in the Philippines closed in the early 1990s.
The U.S. maintains a large Navy ship and submarine support facility and air base on Diego Garcia, a British-controlled atoll in the Indian Ocean. It has no bases in India.
The new strategy aims to restore aU.S. militarypresence across the Asia-Pacific region, but not by building permanent bases or deploying large forces.
Instead, Panetta emphasized, the United States seeks to build up the militaries of friendly governments with arms sales and joint training with U.S. forces deployed on short rotations. The message was meant to reassure Indian officials, who are eager to modernize their armed forces but not to appear too cozy with Washington.
"Our vision is a peaceful Indian Ocean region supported by growing Indian capabilities," Panetta said in a speech at the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, a think tank associated with the Indian military. "America will do its part … but the fundamental challenge is to develop India's capabilities so it can respond to challenges."
U.S. officials have said publicly that the new strategy is not aimed at confronting China, but Panetta's trip took him to India and Vietnam, two of China's historic rivals. Both nations have border and territorial disputes with Beijing and concerns about its expanding military might.
Senior officials traveling with Panetta said they hoped India would take a greater role in training Afghan army and police forces as the U.S. and its allies withdraw combat troops from Afghanistan over the next 2 1/2 years.
India brings a small number of Afghan officers to its military academies for instruction. It has balked at sending Indian troops to Afghanistan, even as trainers........."
Gautam

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 08 Jun 2012 10:55

How is following Dharma different from practicing realpolitik ? Are they two inversely proportional to each other?
Can one be dharmic and yet follow realpolitik in the strategic sphere ?

Mostly Have we been really Dharmic in our interaction with this world or have we put on the cloak of cowardice and call it Dharma.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 08 Jun 2012 13:09

what about all the millions of Hindus killed, raped, forcibly converted, temples destroyed, worked as slaves, their lives destroyed over the centuries. Where they all un-dharmic? Did they deserve it?

Millions were killed because we didn't have the gumption to fight Adharma. The moral route they took was what Arjuna was taking at the Battlefield when Krishna weaned him away to stand by Dharma. They appeased and made deals with Adharma and let it prevail in our lands in the name of realpolitik, temporary peace and ignorance. Even in the Mahabharatha the enemy soldiers were given time to collect bodies and provide a decent burial. There were no bargains in this. Even in recent times our appeasement of Pakistan and China has been referred to by mandarins in South block as one of realpolitik. We hosted the Mugabes, Gaddaffi, Sauds, Maos and every 2 bit 3rd world dictator even when they trained the guns on their own people and badly influences sections within our own country.

Vikas ji says it perfectly here:

Mostly Have we been really Dharmic in our interaction with this world or have we put on the cloak of cowardice and call it Dharma.

Advait · Post by **Advait** » 08 Jun 2012 13:17

VikasRaina wrote:How is following Dharma different from practicing realpolitik ? Are they two inversely proportional to each other?
Can one be dharmic and yet follow realpolitik in the strategic sphere ?

Mostly Have we been really Dharmic in our interaction with this world or have we put on the cloak of cowardice and call it Dharma.

You are right, dharmic and realpolitik do not have to mutually exclusive. We shouldn't call our timidity and softheardness "dharmic"

After all, the Pandavas won by adopting some "undharmic" type strategies. But they kept the bigger picture in mind.

We are doing the same thing (or at least we should). There, I created an equal equal onlee

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 08 Jun 2012 21:30

Turning Words into Action - Center for American Progress
The Evolution of the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 09 Jun 2012 01:51

You are right, dharmic and realpolitik do not have to mutually exclusive. We shouldn't call our timidity and softheardness "dharmic"

After all, the Pandavas won by adopting some "undharmic" type strategies. But they kept the bigger picture in mind.

We are doing the same thing (or at least we should). There, I created an equal equal onlee

Advait Ji, if you think that it is using Adharmic strategy, that Wins occur. You are not only wrong, but operating on the wrong side. Winning is reserved only for Truth/ Satya and Dharma/ Righteousness. Nothing else. Exceptions to the rule don't become the rule. To understand this requires evolution..or faith in Dharmic scripture.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 10 Jun 2012 07:33

The last time the Chinese faced encirclement (from the Soviets) they decided to kiss and make up with their other enemy, the Americans.

Given that Panetta in Cam Ranh Bay and New Delhi China will look for detente with at least one of its major strategic rivals. Will it be India? Or America? Or the states of the South China Sea? At the very least they're going to keep the relationship with Russia strong.

One thing is clear though, the Chinese really don't like the growth in the reach of Indian power whether its Agni V or the Look East policy.

The PRC's response to encirclement has always been to arm and support its enemies' enemies. The PRC may become more generous with Pakistan and North Korea with conventional weapons.

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 10 Jun 2012 08:22

Johann wrote:
The PRC's response to encirclement has always been to arm and support its enemies' enemies. The PRC may become more generous with Pakistan and North Korea with conventional weapons.

Like that has not happened earlier. The Chins have been doing that anyway... Since India has already paid that price, it may as well go ahead and do what it needs to do.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Jun 2012 11:27

PRC sinking its hooks deeper into TSP will make it more difficult politically for America to flood them with cheap high quality weapons pkgs. I welcome a TSP armed 90% with chinese weapons and 10% american over a TSP armed 50-50 from each.

they have already provided GLCM and nuclear weapons. other than chemical and bio weapons which the TSP can make for themselves in the first place there is no 'redline' left to cross.
the Shaheen2 already covers all places in india except A&N & NE states the pakis might want to strike at.

ManjaM · Post by **ManjaM** » 10 Jun 2012 19:16

http://news.yahoo.com/ex-indian-army-of ... 29260.html

SELMA, Calif. (AP) — A former Indian army officer wanted in the 1996 killing of a human rights lawyer shot and killed his own wife and two of their children in their California home before apparently committing suicide, authorities said.
A 17-year-old believed to be the man's son also was shot in the Saturday morning attack and was "barely alive," Fresno County Sheriff's Deputy Chris Curtice said.
The ex-officer, Avtar Singh, had been arrested in this central California city last year after his wife said he choked her, and the Indian government sought his extradition days after that in the 1996 death of Jalil Andrabi.
But he remained free, for reasons that were not immediately clear. Andrabi's brother and lawyer blamed New Delhi, saying Singh's family would still be alive if the government had tried harder to bring him to justice.
"These lives could have been saved if a trial of Maj. Avtar Singh was conducted on time," said Andrabi's brother, Arshad. "We have lost that chance now. He was a known murderer and we are appalled that he was even shielded in the United States. It's a failure of justice at all levels."
Singh, who owned a trucking company in Selma, called police around 6:15 a.m. Saturday and told them that he had just killed four people, Curtice said. He added that a sheriff's SWAT team was called in to assist because of Singh's military background and the India charges against him.
When the SWAT team entered the home they found the bodies of Singh, a woman believed to be his wife and two children, ages 3 and 15, Curtice said. All appeared to have died from gunshot wounds.
The 17-year-old suffered severe head trauma and underwent surgery at a hospital where he remained in intensive care Saturday evening, Curtice said.
Singh, 47, was arrested by Selma police in February 2011 when his wife reported that he had choked her, Selma Police Chief Myron Dyck said shortly after that arrest. Police then discovered that he was being sought in India, but Dyck said at the time that he could not keep Singh in custody on the murder charge without a warrant from international authorities.
Several days later, India requested that the United States arrest and extradite Singh. It wasn't clear on Saturday why Singh had remained free since the request. A request for comment from the Consulate General of India in San Francisco on Saturday was not immediately returned.
Dyck didn't immediately return a call seeking comment Saturday about the 2011 arrest, and Selma police referred questions about the apparent murder-suicide to Fresno County sheriff's officials.
Selma police last had contact with Singh about two months ago when he called to complain that reporters wouldn't leave him alone because of the murder warrant, Fresno County Sheriff Margaret Mims told the Fresno Bee (http://bit.ly/KpCPEq).
Jalil Andrabi was killed at the height of protests in Indian-controlled Kashmir, where nearly a dozen rebel groups have fought security forces for independence or merger with Pakistan since 1989. More than 68,000 people, mostly civilian, have been killed in the uprising and subsequent Indian crackdown.
Andrabi disappeared in March 1996 in Kashmir's main city, Srinagar. His body was recovered 19 days later in a local river. He had been shot in the head and his eyes were gouged out.
A police investigation said Andrabi had been picked up from his home by Indian troops and killed in their custody. The probe blamed Singh and his soldiers for that killing and also accused Singh of involvement in the killings of six other Kashmiri men.
Singh had been charged in Kashmir only with Andrabi's killing. Kashmir police had sought permission from the government of India for Singh's prosecution in the six other killings. Under India's armed forces special powers act, federal permission has to be obtained before police can prosecute any army or paramilitary soldier posted in Kashmir.
No soldier has been punished for Andrabi's killing, human rights lawyers say.
Singh fled India after he was accused of killing Andrabi. Hafizullah Mir, a human rights lawyer, said he was tracked to California in 2009 with the help of the Canadian Center for International Justice, a human rights advocacy group, but that New Delhi did not pursue extradition until after his 2011 arrest.
In Selma, Singh owned and operated Jay Truck Lines. Alli Adan, a driver for the company, said he had seen Singh the night before the killings, and that had appeared to be acting normally.
"He was a nice guy," Adan told the Fresno Bee. "I couldn't believe it because I didn't think he could do something like this."

CIA asset or someone who slipped through the cracks? This person was discovered to be living in California in 2009. The post 2001 US is not a place where one can get away with these things. Overall, very suspicious.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Jun 2012 23:21

yes very curious indeed. the US is generally very eager to deport anyone. and how can a illegal migrant become such a prominent figure like running a trucking co...surely lots of legal issues could crop up like lack of SSN.

methinks GOTUS support must have been there for some unknown reason.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 11 Jun 2012 01:03

Singha wrote:PRC sinking its hooks deeper into TSP will make it more difficult politically for America to flood them with cheap high quality weapons pkgs. I welcome a TSP armed 90% with chinese weapons and 10% american over a TSP armed 50-50 from each.

they have already provided GLCM and nuclear weapons. other than chemical and bio weapons which the TSP can make for themselves in the first place there is no 'redline' left to cross.
the Shaheen2 already covers all places in india except A&N & NE states the pakis might want to strike at.

What I'm thinking about are the weapon systems the Chinese developed as part of their strategy of high-tech asymmetric warfare; ASAT weapons, anti-ship ballistic missiles, and offensive cyber warfare. Pakistan and North Korea more than any other states seem likely to be willing to use cyber attacks against purely civilian targets such as banking, chemical plants, aviation etc just to score points in games of brinkmanship. The level of deniability will be immensely attractive.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 11 Jun 2012 20:52

Published on Jun 10, 2012
Your Move, Delhi: WSJ
Let's see evidence that India is willing to be a U.S. partner.

kasthuri · Post by **kasthuri** » 11 Jun 2012 21:00

US already lost the boat and started cajoling us when it put a bounty on Hafiz Saeed. I am supposing these are only desperate moves that we shouldn't fall into.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Jun 2012 21:15

Nightwatch10 June 2012

India: Update. Last Friday, the Indian Navy's Russian-built and extensively refurbished aircraft carrier, INS Vikramaditya (trans. "brave as the sun"), commenced sea trials in the White Sea with a mixed crew of Indian and Russian sailors. Sea trials in Russian waters are to last for the next four months before the carrier formally is transferred to India.

Officials at the Sevmash shipyard said, "After initial trials in the White Sea, the carrier would move into the nearby Barents Sea for trials with naval fighters." Additional trials are likely in Indian waters after transfer.

Comment: The sea-trials and transfer are four years behind schedule. India and Russia signed the initial $947 million contract for the purchase and complete updating of the carrier, formerly the Admiral Gorshkov, in 2005. Delivery has been delayed twice because of cost overruns that increased the total price to $2.3 billion.

This is not a new ship. It was laid down in 1978 at the Nikolayev South shipyard in Ukraine, launched in 1982, and commissioned with the Soviet Navy in 1987. In 1994, the Admiral Gorshkov sat in dock for a year for repairs after a boiler room explosion. In 1995, it briefly returned to service, but finally was put up for sale in 1996.

The ship displaces 45,000 tons; has a maximum speed of 32 knots and an endurance of 13,500 nautical miles at a cruising speed of 18 knots. The Indians have insisted that Soviet-era cruise missiles and other deck weapons be removed in order to make the ship a true carrier, instead of a hybrid cruiser that can launch aircraft.

The Navy purchased a dozen MiG-29K naval fighters in 2010 and has an option for 14 more. Vikramaditya also will carry six helicopters. The MiG-29K was reportedly selected over the larger and more-capable Su-33 naval fighter because India also hopes to operate them from its smaller, indigenous "Project-71 Air Defense Ship" carriers, now being built in Indian shipyards.
When Vikramaditya arrives in India later this year, it is supposed to replace INS Viraat, but India is likely to operate two carriers for as long as Viraat lasts. Ultimately, it will have at least two carriers, one each for the West and East Fleets.

India has been sailing and fighting carriers since 1961 when it acquired its first carrier, INS Vikrant. India has five decades of experience with light carriers and carrier air groups. This is tonight's good news.

They are really desparate to seek proxy allies. Now if you are not against its good enough unlike in Foster Dulles times!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 11 Jun 2012 21:25

kasthuri wrote:US already lost the boat and started cajoling us when it put a bounty on Hafiz Saeed. I am supposing these are only desperate moves that we shouldn't fall into.

They are really desparate to seek proxy allies. Now if you are not against its good enough unlike in Foster Dulles times!

India has to avoid any kind of alliance with any P5 for the next 30 years.
No alliance but issue based cooperation can be explored.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 12 Jun 2012 01:15

US Clears India, 6 Others From Iran Oil Sanctions

The Obama administration on Monday exempted India and six other nations from U.S. economic sanctions after they significantly reduced their imports of Iranian oil.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton also granted waivers to Malaysia, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Taiwan, meaning that banks and other financial institutions based there won't be hit with penalties under U.S. law for a renewable 180-day period.

They join 11 countries — Belgium, Britain, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain and Japan — that Clinton in March determined had done enough to wean themselves of Iranian petroleum. Of major importers of Iranian oil, only China now remains without a waiver. It has until June 27 to reduce its consumption of Iranian oil or face the penalties unless it receives a national security waiver.

Clinton said in a statement that the exemptions are proof that sanctions aimed at pressuring Iran to come clean about its nuclear program are working.

"Today's announcement underscores the success of our sanctions implementation," she said in a statement. "By reducing Iran's oil sales, we are sending a decisive message to Iran's leaders: until they take concrete actions to satisfy the concerns of the international community, they will continue to face increasing isolation and pressure."

The U.S. sanctions target foreign financial institutions that do business with Iran's central bank by barring them from opening or maintaining correspondent operations in the United States. They would apply to foreign central banks only for transactions that involve the sale or purchase of petroleum or petroleum products.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 12 Jun 2012 09:35

Will India Ever Really Be America's Partner? Ten big things Washington is still waiting on from New Delhi.

Kanishka · Post by **Kanishka** » 12 Jun 2012 10:07

India's cold shoulder

Courting India as hoped-for 'strategic partner,' the U.S. has given the nation $8 billion in arms over the last 10 years. In return, U.S. goals have been mostly frustrated while nuclear nonproliferation efforts have been undermined.

In our zeal to improve relations with India, we've undermined our own nuclear nonproliferation efforts. Giving India nuclear technology without making it a party to the nonproliferation treaty created a double standard that encourages a dangerous, alternative path for aspiring nuclear powers. In April, for example, as U.S. officials were warning North Korea against its planned missile launch and criticizing Iran for its lack of transparency, India launched its own long-range, nuclear-capable missile.

As India's nuclear capabilities grow, so doesPakistan'sparanoia. In response to India's April test, Pakistan launched its own nuclear-capable missile six days later and has since conducted four more tests. Worried about falling behind India in nuclear arms, Pakistan is racing toward the completion of its fourth nuclear reactor and has doubled the size of its nuclear arsenal since 2006, according to estimates by the Federation of American Scientists and the Institute for Science and International Security.

India has also made a habit of abandoning the United States at the international altar. In 2011, the year after President Obama announced support for giving India a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council, India voted with the U.S. only about 33% of the time in the United Nations General Assembly. In its temporary seat on the U.N. Security Council, India often sides with Russia and China, who dismiss international efforts to protect human rights as meddling in other nations' domestic affairs.

To be sure, the United States and India have made progress on a number of strategic fronts, expanding joint military exercises and exchanges, for example. But overall, relations consistently fall short of the warm-and-fuzzy rhetoric that U.S. leaders of all political stripes have grown accustom to voicing.

Rather than continue their charm offensive, U.S. officials should push India to articulate its view of the U.S.-India partnership and India's larger role in the international community. The South Asian power has expressed its intent to become a leading global power, but it has shied from assuming responsibilities that come with the territory.

Getting a clearer picture of India's intentions will allow U.S. officials to recalibrate expectations about where the relationship stands and where it is heading. Like the overhyped "reset" in relations with Russia, unrealistic expectations about U.S. relations with India only make it harder to manage tensions when they arise. India is not Russia, of course, but neither is it a traditional ally like Britain, and when it comes to the Asia Pacific, it's also not Australia, Japan or South Korea.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 12 Jun 2012 10:59

Kanishka wrote:India's cold shoulder

Courting India as hoped-for 'strategic partner,' the U.S. has given the nation $8 billion in arms over the last 10 years. In return, U.S. goals have been mostly frustrated while nuclear nonproliferation efforts have been undermined.

The US 'gave' us $x bn worth of arms? Like we're Pakistan or something? We 'bought' 'em arms. Fair and square. Not as if unkil did any favors to us, only to himself.

The rest of it reads like a NPA caterwaul. Totally forgettable. Yawn.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 12 Jun 2012 11:45

Address by Leon E. Panetta, Defence Secretary, United States at IDSA on "Partners in the 21st Century". The complete text of address is available at IDSA website: http://idsa.in/keyspeeches/LeonEPanetta ... 1stcentury

member_19969 · Post by **member_19969** » 12 Jun 2012 14:31

x post from Bangladesh thread

US planning a Base in BD. IBNLive wants india not to be amused

http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... mused.html

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Jun 2012 23:46

abhishek_sharma wrote:Will India Ever Really Be America's Partner? Ten big things Washington is still waiting on from New Delhi.

Abhishek, You should really post the full text for it has so many demands that need to be answered for sake of completness!

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 13 Jun 2012 04:42

U.S., India Have Yet to 'Unleash' Partnership's Potential
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... ial?page=2

U.S. and Indian officials are all smiles and platitudes ahead of strategic talks this week in Washington, but building the closer relationship the Obama administration hoped for has been more difficult than expected. Some experts wonder behind the scenes whether it is already too late to maximize the mutual benefits of cooperation.Ahead of a third-annual strategic conference with a jammed agenda, slated for Wednesday in Washington, senior officials are focusing on "an incredible array of activity" and a "certain momentum" between Washington and New Delhi.Nancy Powell, U.S. ambassador to India, touts the level of annual trade in merchandise and services between the two economic giants. Bilateral merchandise trade is up by nearly $52 billion in 1990, according to government data. And overall trade between the two allies could top $100 billion for the time in 2012, Powell says.When senior U.S. private-sector executives visit her New Delhi office, they often tell her about new opportunities in India their firms are examining.For instance, there is "lots of debate" among U.S. corporate chieftains about new opportunities in the Indian insurance and pension markets, Powell says."People are making profits," says irupama Rao, New Delhi's ambassador to Washington.Rao is quick to note it is a two-way relationship, noting Friday during a forum in Washington that $26 billion flowed from India into the American economy over the last several years.Yet, behind the kind words and rosy talk, there are signs of a friendship that never quite took off as each side hoped just three years ago.In May, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said during a visit to India that "there is much more potential to unleash," before adding the two nations "should be working toward having one of the world's largest trading relationships."The relationship has not blossomed enough to allow for a full unleashing of the fury of U.S.-Indian economic teamwork, experts say."The world's oldest and largest democracies were to become major trading partners, with India opening its markets to U.S. investors," Rich Verma and Michael Werz of the Center for American Progress write in a new report. "Three years later some critics contend neither President Obama nor Prime Minister Singh have much to show for all their good intentions."On the U.S. side, gripes include unmet promises that New Delhi would make changes to its economy that would make it easier for American firms to do business there. U.S. companies were supposed to help India with a range of civilian nuclear programs, but they remain locked out; Boeing and Lockheed Martin hoped to sell F-18 or F-16 fighter jets to Washington's new best friend, but lost a competition to a French firm that underbid both U.S. weapon makers.
Among Indians' complaints with the U.S. are a clunky regime of controls over what firms can export to certain countries, and work visa restrictions that prevent Indian citizens from taking and keeping high-quality jobs in the United States.One need only glance at the latest data that paints a portrait of the U.S.-Indian trade and economic relationship to see there are reasons to wonder whether the two economic powers will grow any closer than they are today."Even as the volume of U.S.-India trade continues to grow," says Karl Inderfurth, a former top U.S. diplomat, "the share of Indian trade that involves the United States is dropping."India holds great promise as a potential economic partner for the United States," says Inderfurth. "However, this potential is far from realized. Despite being on track to become the world's third-largest economy, India is only our 13th-largest trade partner."One move the two nations could make this week is to sign--or enter into final negotiations about--something known as a "bilateral investment treaty," which Washington uses to fan the flames of economic work with other nations, says Inderfurth

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Jun 2012 04:47

but lost a competition to a French firm that underbid both U.S. weapon makers.

Not true. They lost the competition on technical factors. The final was between French and Eurofighter where the French asked for less money.
It never was a US race at all.
With such obvious spins how much of the above article is true?

Garooda · Post by **Garooda** » 13 Jun 2012 23:58

rgsrini wrote:^^Garooda,
My dog ate my homework!

Believe what you want. There was no need for me to discuss my mother was it? I am serious. He has been a responsibility and a liability for both me and my father.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 14 Jun 2012 00:15

Re: Bay of bengal Base

Bay of Bengal is already packed with foreign military presence and that means nothing but headache for defence. We have noted stepped up PRC naval deployments in BoB, again a high risk of accidental shots fired and escalation in this sector.

Panetta told desis he knows all about Paki perfidy from his last job as CIA director and laughed

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 14 Jun 2012 06:46

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivers remarks with Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna at the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State in Washington, D.C. on June 13, 2012. [Go to http://video.state.gov for more video and text transcript.]

Key points: -

1. US pleased with Westinghouse getting a share of Indian nuclear market with its preliminary contract with NPCIL to setup a plant in Gujrat.
2. A trilateral of India, US and A'stan will be setup for consultations.
3. Discussion on the situation in Asia-Pacific.
4. US applauds India for reducing its oil imports from Iran.
5. Follow up on Science and Technology, Health and Higher education progress.
6. India happy with depth and diversification of its relationship with the US.
7. Both sides stress the need to deepen the economic relations.
8. India wants tech transfer, co-production of defense technology.
9. Co-operation on CT, cyber security, intelligence.
10. India demands access to Headley and Rana.
11. The issue of elimination of safe havens in Pukistan.
12. Myanmar, West Asia and Iran's dialogue with P5+1 discussed.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 14 Jun 2012 20:44

Roperia wrote:
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivers remarks with Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna at the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue at the Department of State in Washington, D.C. on June 13, 2012. [Go to http://video.state.gov for more video and text transcript.]

Key points: -

1. US pleased with Westinghouse getting a share of Indian nuclear market with its preliminary contract with NPCIL to setup a plant in Gujrat.
2. A trilateral of India, US and A'stan will be setup for consultations.
3. Discussion on the situation in Asia-Pacific.
4. US applauds India for reducing its oil imports from Iran.
5. Follow up on Science and Technology, Health and Higher education progress.
6. India happy with depth and diversification of its relationship with the US.
7. Both sides stress the need to deepen the economic relations.
8. India wants tech transfer, co-production of defense technology.
9. Co-operation on CT, cyber security, intelligence.
10. India demands access to Headley and Rana.
11. The issue of elimination of safe havens in Pukistan.
12. Myanmar, West Asia and Iran's dialogue with P5+1 discussed.

Thanks for posting this. Looks like, overall, Indian policy towards US is being played reasonably correctly, subject to caveats about corruptibility of Indian official and political classes; even on that, there are still some checks & balances operating, as we have seen with nuke liability bill, MMRCA deal etc.

With respect to Pakistan, it is clear that the Obama administration's policy (more so than the Bush policy) remains one of using India to get Pakistan to do US bidding--first by trying to get India to "give" on Cashmere and staying out of Afghanistan, and now by "using" the India bogey to force compliance by pak. In both cases, they are being met by chai-biskoot which is good.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Jun 2012 20:55

c/f from the mijjle thread:

kit wrote:
SaiK wrote:
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=19014

alliance with the US, such that they make their airspace available for such operations or that the NGB will be so stealthy that it will penetrate Indian airspace at will before doing the same to the Chinese. Neither is, of course, a particularly settling prospect to India. Not to mention that a Seventh Fleet in the Bay of Bengal impinges on a core area of interest for India and can surveillance seed numerous Indian facilities in the vicinity, including missile test ranges.
OT but.,
This is probably one area where India and china can work together and not let Bangladesh too chummy with the yanks.Neither India nor china will be comfortable with a US military base even if it is not overtly so., in their back yard.

I would say no. bad idea. I would ask for Joint base with US in BD. We get a better handle on things. That way, we establish our leadership in the region.. and US brings out on the table, their share of things.

Further, mil-mil exchanges and protocol issues can be established as well. more knawlidge of things, means better INT for our launch preparedness.

Joint base is the way to go.. BD will be pissed though. For the khans, this means we have arrived as a new power. But.. are we ready for this game? can US respect our power? are our babooze vision matches these thoughts?..

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 14 Jun 2012 22:09

SaiK wrote:

I would say no. bad idea. I would ask for Joint base with US in BD. We get a better handle on things. That way, we establish our leadership in the region.. and US brings out on the table, their share of things.

Further, mil-mil exchanges and protocol issues can be established as well. more knawlidge of things, means better INT for our launch preparedness.

Joint base is the way to go.. BD will be pissed though. For the khans, this means we have arrived as a new power. But.. are we ready for this game? can US respect our power? are our babooze vision matches these thoughts?..

India has to demand a base in BD for allowing US into BD
India needs to station atleast 100000 troops inside BD and also access to border areas near Assam.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 14 Jun 2012 23:33

The guy who almost saved the biscuit nation's game:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18450893

A Texan banker, Stanford rose to prominence outside the US when he bankrolled international cricket competitions in the UK and Caribbean.

But after the collapse of his agreement to stage Twenty20 cricket in England, his financial empire began to crumble amid investigations by US regulators.

as well as other travails
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... trial.html

Wonder whom he pissed off in US? "Holding cell with 18 inmates" is not usually reserved for rich texans

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Jun 2012 00:45

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 133475.cms

Hillary having an external affairs with Krishna!!!

krishna krishna!! affair of the heart!