Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Indian Foreign Policy

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46922
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby ramana » 01 Jul 2017 03:18

Philip, I think the US got deep intelligence on Indian military and political weakness during the short liaison mission in aftermath of 1962 Chinise war. This went as input to Pal planning for 1965.

Schmidt
BRFite
Posts: 169
Joined: 19 Aug 2016 08:02

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby Schmidt » 01 Jul 2017 10:07

Nice article on Indo Iranian ties

https://swarajyamag.com/world/reality-c ... ional-ties

Advocates India adopting a pragmatic and hard nosed approach rather than through any rose tinted glasses invoking some nonsensical shared heritage

If at all we did have some commonalities that was millennia ago

Now they are as rabid an Islamic country as another , who have never really stood for us either

They are also untrustworthy as a business partner

When they suffer from sanctions they give us oil field exploration rights and talk up Chabahar Port , but when the sanction ease off they go back on their agreements

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3519
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby Satya_anveshi » 04 Aug 2017 09:42

Xposting from Politics thread:

Satya_anveshi wrote:MUST WATCH!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93dswlYnTvk


VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2082
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby VinodTK » 04 Aug 2017 18:32

^^^^ Very good show by SS

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1273
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby chola » 04 Aug 2017 18:51

Schmidt wrote:Nice article on Indo Iranian ties

https://swarajyamag.com/world/reality-c ... ional-ties

Advocates India adopting a pragmatic and hard nosed approach rather than through any rose tinted glasses invoking some nonsensical shared heritage

If at all we did have some commonalities that was millennia ago

Now they are as rabid an Islamic country as another , who have never really stood for us either

They are also untrustworthy as a business partner

When they suffer from sanctions they give us oil field exploration rights and talk up Chabahar Port , but when the sanction ease off they go back on their agreements


They are what they are. Mooslem fanatics. About time we wash ourselves of these idiotic "ties" that are nothing but some romantic notions of shared culture. Whatever that was good was subsumed a 1000 years ago under the tide of Islam.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4954
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby RoyG » 04 Aug 2017 18:58

chola wrote:
Schmidt wrote:Nice article on Indo Iranian ties

https://swarajyamag.com/world/reality-c ... ional-ties

Advocates India adopting a pragmatic and hard nosed approach rather than through any rose tinted glasses invoking some nonsensical shared heritage

If at all we did have some commonalities that was millennia ago

Now they are as rabid an Islamic country as another , who have never really stood for us either

They are also untrustworthy as a business partner

When they suffer from sanctions they give us oil field exploration rights and talk up Chabahar Port , but when the sanction ease off they go back on their agreements


They are what they are. Mooslem fanatics. About time we wash ourselves of these idiotic "ties" that are nothing but some romantic notions of shared culture. Whatever that was good was subsumed a 1000 years ago under the tide of Islam.


With large swaths of Iraq and Syria falling under their control, they will muscle into Afghanistan and Pakistan as well.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9000
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby arun » 13 Aug 2017 09:13

X Posted from the “India-US relations: News and Discussions IV” thread.

Excerpt from US State Department’s Daily Press Briefing of August 10:

Heather Nauert
Spokesperson
Department Press Briefing
Washington, DC
August 10, 2017 ……………………..

QUESTION: Afghanistan?

MS NAUERT: Okay, last question. Afghanistan. Hi.

QUESTION: What’s your stand on Senator McCain’s Afghan strategy which he unveiled this morning? Have you seen this?

MS NAUERT: Mm-hmm. So I’m certainly aware of Senator McCain’s proposal. By the way, it was great to see Senator McCain back here in Washington just a few weeks ago, a very strong and tough man. And as someone whose own father experienced the same illness that he had, I was really proud to see him walk back into Washington.

That personal note aside, let me just say the Afghan review policy, which I know a lot of people are very curious about, is still under way. There have been a lot of conversations and negotiations with the President’s national security team. Of course, that includes Secretary Tillerson as part of that. We are looking at this as not just a solution to Afghanistan, but also a broader concern that incorporates India and Pakistan as well as a regional solution. We just don’t have that plan. And by the way, the White House will roll out that plan, but we just don’t have that done just yet. It’s still under review, okay?


If this “broader concern that incorporates India” involves doing an Equal=Equal with the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic by way of allaying their paranoia and/or limiting our role Afghnaistan, the US should be told to FO. Anyway as this is still “under review”, wait and watch.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9000
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby arun » 16 Aug 2017 14:33

X Posted from the India-US relations: News and Discussions IV thread.

Prime Minister Modi thanked President Trump for his strong leadership uniting the world against the North Korean menace.


If true that this is indeed what our Prime Minister Narendra Modi said, I am truly disgusted at this abject grovelling our Prime Minister. I say that as North Korea is a minor direct security threat in comparison to the menance of the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Peoples Republic of China etc., as at worst North Korea represents a menace only from the limited standpoint of proliferating missile technology to the Islamic Republic. If on the other hand this is a bit of Self Aggandisement by Donald Trump then India must officially deny.

Bollocks to any “Half Wit Saudi Princes”, “It's in our national interest to flatter them” type arguents that were trotted out in the Hindustan Times article posted by me on this same page of this thread (Clicky)


Readout of President Donald J. Trump’s Call with Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9000
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby arun » 18 Aug 2017 11:53

X posted from the India-US relations: News and Discussions IV thread.

Excerpts from August 17 joint press conference held by US and Japan Defense and Foreign Affairs officials dealing with India.

US Secretary of State, Rex W Tillerson:

We will also cooperate to advance trilateral and multilateral security and defense cooperation with other partners in the region, notably the Republic of Korea, Australia, India, and other southeast Asian countries.


Foreign Minister of Japan, Taro Kono:

ROK, Australia, India, and Southeast Asian countries – we will promote more than ever before cooperation and security and defense.


There was no India specific remark made by US Secretary of Defense Gen. James Mattis (Retd.) or for that matter by Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera who were also present.

Excerpts from the US State Department website at the below weblink:

Remarks With Secretary of Defense James Mattis, Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono, and Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera at a Press Availability

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16745
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby Philip » 18 Aug 2017 13:28

Former NSA MKN.Politely saying what we on BRF have been saying for aeons!

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 513055.ece
Redrawing the arc of influence
M.K. Narayanan AUGUST 18, 2017 00:00 IST

Indian diplomacy needs to display higher levels of sophistication for New Delhi to play a global role

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s schedule of foreign visits has been extremely impressive, and he has managed to inject a degree of dynamism into a system accustomed to a more leisurely pace. Estimating outcomes from these visits is, however, more difficult.

Taking the two most recent visits, for example, one can easily see the contrast in outcomes. The U.S. visit was a carefully calibrated one producing few surprises, despite the U.S. President having a reputation of being highly unpredictable. For his part, the Prime Minister charted a time-tested course, concentrating mainly on counter-terrorism and the defence security partnership, avoiding contentious trade-related issues. The naming of the Hizbul Mujahedeen chief as a “specially designated global terrorist” and a “new consultation mechanism on domestic and international terrorist designations listing proposals” were the high points of the counter-terrorism agenda. Reiteration of India’s position as a major defence partner and confirmation of the sale of the Guardian Unmanned Aerial System to India, reflected the deepening security and defence cooperation.

In concrete terms, not much else took place during the visit, despite an oblique reference in the joint statement to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and reiteration of support for “freedom of navigation” in the Indo-Pacific. What was most obvious was the U.S. tilt towards transactional rather than strategic aspects.

A clear de-hyphenation

In the case of Israel, this being the first ever visit by an Indian Prime Minister to that country, the euphoria of the standalone visit, de-hyphenating Israel from Palestine, was understandable. It also produced better dividends, including elevation of the India-Israel relationship to the level of a ‘strategic partnership’. Israel achieved a major propaganda scoop by getting the Indian Prime Minister to visit the memorial of Theodor Herzl, founding father of the Zionist movement.

The main focus of the visit was on defence cooperation, joint development of defence products and transfer of technology. Most of the agreements signed related to transfer of technology and innovative technology-related items and India expects to benefit substantially, considering that Israeli export rules are far more flexible than those of the U.S.

Both countries also expressed a strong commitment to combat terror. The reality, however, is that when the two countries speak of terrorism, they speak of very different things. Iran and Hezbollah are the main targets for Israel, which has little interest in the Afghan Taliban or Pakistan’s Lashkar-e-Taiba. For India, it is the latter that matters.

The euphoria of the visit cannot, however, conceal China’s importance for Israel. China is a far bigger investor and trading partner of Israel than India. On this occasion, India and Israel decided to set up a $40 million Innovation Fund to allow Indian and Israeli enterprises to develop innovative technologies and products for commercial applications, but it is clearly dwarfed by the Israel-China comprehensive innovation partnership which has an outlay of $300 million. India and Israel also have differences over China’s BRI: Israel is eager to participate in it, unlike India, and possibly views this as an opportunity to develop a project parallel to the Suez Canal.

It’s the neighbours

Two countries where India’s diplomacy, despite the impetus given to it, is currently facing heavy odds are China and Pakistan. China in Asia is already exercising some of the political and economic leverages that the U.S. previously possessed. China has a significant presence in East and Southeast Asia, is steadily enlarging its presence in South Asia, and is also beginning to expand into West Asia. For instance, China’s influence in Iran today appears to be at an all-time high, whereas India’s influence seems to be diminishing.

India has, however, refused to be inveigled by China’s blandishments, including the BRI. Nor has it flinched from standing up to Chinese ‘bullying’, as in the recent instance of the Doklam plateau in Bhutan. Few other countries in Asia are, however, willing or in a position to tangle with China. A divided ASEAN again has provided China with an opportunity to demonstrate its economic and military muscle. Most countries in the region also demonstrate a desire to join China-based initiatives. Even in South Asia, despite India’s commanding presence, China has been successful in winning quite a few friends among India’s neighbours such as Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives.

*(Here is where our apthetic MEA dropped the ball,not once or twice,but umpteen times.We have to regain what was lost usigng every means in the book,India's survival as asovereign [power depends upon control over our immediate neighbour's relations with our mortal enemies.)

In the case of Pakistan, the implosion of the state arising from its internal stresses and problems, together with the virtual standoff between India and Pakistan (involving a total cessation of talks or any kind of worthwhile contacts), has enabled the Pakistani Deep State to further entrench itself. India has been left with few options and this is leading to a diplomatic gridlock which does not augur well for India.

As Pakistan becomes still more deeply mired in problems, its dependence on China is growing. This is contributing to a strategic imbalance in the South Asian region. It is a moot point whether India and Indian diplomacy can do something to rectify matters in this context, but for the present it confronts Indian diplomacy with one more serious dilemma.

Notwithstanding India’s efforts, the diplomatic scene vis-à-vis Russia also could be better. Russia is undergoing a strategic resurgence of sorts, sustained in good measure by the close relations recently established with China. Buoyed by developments in the Ukraine and Crimea, and the uncertainties surrounding U.S. commitment to NATO, the new Russia-China ‘strategic congruence’ is certain to impact Asia. The problem for India and Indian diplomacy is that at this time India-Russia relations appear less robust than at any time in the past half century.

India’s ‘Act East and Look West’ policies have given a new dimension to Indian diplomacy in both East and West Asia. In both regions, however, but especially in West Asia, Indian diplomacy still lacks the nimbleness required to deal with fast-changing situations. In West Asia, despite its long time presence in the region, a 9-million strong diaspora, and the region being its principal source of oil, India is not a major player today. Both Russia and China have overtaken India in the affairs of the region. This is particularly true of Iran where the Russia-China-Iran relationship has greatly blossomed, almost marginalising India’s influence.

Fadeout in West Asia

India’s absence from, and its inability to play a role in, West Asia, even as the region confronts a split down the line between the Arab and the non-Arab world is unfortunate. More so, there is the possibility of a series of confrontations between an increasingly powerful Shiite Iran and a weakening Saudi Arabia. The most recent challenge is the one posed by Qatar to the existing order in the West Asian region. The fallout of all this will impact India adversely and Indian diplomacy’s inability to make its presence felt will matter. An additional concern for India would be that growing uncertainties in the region could further fuel radical Islamist terror in the region.

*(Relations with Iran being allowed to go downhill tx to US pressure.Why can't we stand up and say NO to the US ,just as it =refuses to ditch Pak?)

The ‘Act East’ policy has produced better results. Closer relations with countries in East and South East Asia, especially Japan and Vietnam, are a positive development. However, in the Asia-Pacific, India has to contend with an increasingly assertive China. There is little evidence to show that India’s diplomatic manoeuvres individually, or with allies like Japan, have succeeded in keeping the Chinese juggernaut at bay — or for that matter provide an alternative to China in the Asia-Pacific.

India’s diplomatic establishment is all too aware of the political history and economics of the Asian region. Under Prime Minister Modi, diplomatic styles have changed but it would seem that the substance has altered little. His recent visit to Israel was, no doubt, a resounding success, but Israel was already one of the very few countries which had shown a complete understanding of India’s defence and security needs, even ignoring the sanctions imposed on India by some countries. Israel’s supply of critical defence items during the Kargil conflict (of 1999) is an excellent example.

What Indian diplomacy currently needs to do is to find a way to steer amid an assertive China, a hostile Pakistan, an uncertain South Asian and West Asian neighbourhood, and an unstable world. The strategic and security implications of these, individually and severally, need to be carefully validated and pursued. Indian diplomacy may possibly need to display still higher levels of sophistication to overcome the odds.

M.K. Narayanan is a former National Security Adviser and a former Governor of West Bengal


PS:MKN's narrative completely ignores India's relations with Russia,which at one time was the lynchpin of our foreign policy.This allowed us to defeat Pak in '71,brush off the Chinese,etc. Sure,things changed after the USSR collapsed,but allowing Indo-Russian relations to stagnate,without injecting a new dynamism to the same,rushing to "love" Bush,etc., has cost us dearly. Russo-Sino relations as a result have vastly improved,but India still has an edge which must be leveraged more forcefully especially at this time of crisis with China.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4891
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Foreign Policy

Postby Viv S » 18 Aug 2017 15:46

Philip wrote:Sure,things changed after the USSR collapsed,but allowing Indo-Russian relations to stagnate,without injecting a new dynamism to the same,rushing to "love" Bush,etc., has cost us dearly. Russo-Sino relations as a result have vastly improved,but India still has an edge which must be leveraged more forcefully especially at this time of crisis with China.

Hmm.. so India is at fault for letting relations with Russia 'stagnate'?

1993 - China-Russia 5 year defence cooperation agreement

2001 - Sino-Russian Treaty of Friendship - (20 year strategic treaty)

^ Article 9 - When a situation arises in which one of the contracting parties deems that peace is being threatened and undermined or its security interests are involved or when it is confronted with the threat of aggression, the contracting parties shall immediately hold contacts and consultations in order to eliminate such threats.

2005 - India-US Defence Framework agreement


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chanakyaa, Ramesh and 49 guests