US and PRC relationship & India

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.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23993
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby SSridhar » 04 Nov 2009 08:06


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54516
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby ramana » 05 Nov 2009 05:08

From Pioneer, 5 Nov 2009

US fly in China’s India ointment

Brahma Chellaney

The India-China relationship has entered choppy waters because of a perceptible hardening in the Chinese stance. Anti-India rhetoric in the state-run Chinese media has intensified, even as China has stepped up military pressure along the disputed Himalayan frontier through frequent cross-border incursions. Beijing also has resurrected its long-dormant claim to Arunachal Pradesh, nearly three times as large as Taiwan.

The more-muscular Chinese stance clearly is tied to the new US-India strategic partnership, symbolised by the nuclear deal and deepening military cooperation. As President George W Bush declared in his valedictory speech, “We opened a new historic and strategic partnership with India.”

The Obama Administration, although committed to promoting that strategic partnership, has been reluctant to take New Delhi’s side in any of its disputes with Beijing. This has emboldened China to up the ante against India, with the Chinese Foreign Ministry employing language like “we demand” in a recent statement that labelled the Indian Prime Minister’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh a “disturbance.” The Communist Party’s official newspaper, the People’s Daily, after asking India to consider the costs of “a potential confrontation with China”, ran another denunciatory editorial recently on New Delhi’s “recklessness and arrogance”.

New Delhi has hit back by permitting the Dalai Lama to tour Arunachal Pradesh and announcing an end to the practice of Chinese companies bringing thousands of workers from China to work on projects in India. And in a public riposte to Beijing’s raising of objections to multilateral funding of any project in Arunachal Pradesh, India has asked China to cease its infrastructure and military projects in another disputed region — Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

The present pattern of border provocations, new force deployments and mutual recriminations is redolent of the situation that prevailed 47 years ago, when China — taking advantage of the advent of the Cuban missile crisis, which brought the world to the brink of a nuclear Armageddon — routed the unprepared Indian military in a surprise two-front aggression. Today, amid rising tensions, the danger of border skirmishes, if not a limited war, looks real.

Such tensions have been rising since 2006. Until 2005, China was eschewing anti-India rhetoric and pursuing a policy of active engagement with India even as it continued to expand its strategic space in southern Asia, to New Delhi’s detriment. In fact, when Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited India in April 2005, the two countries unveiled six broad principles to help settle their festering border dispute. But after the India-US defence-framework accord and nuclear deal were unveiled in quick succession in subsequent months, the mood in Beijing changed perceptibly. That gave rise to a pattern that now has become commonplace: Chinese newspapers, individual bloggers, security think tanks and even officially blessed websites ratcheted up an “India threat” scenario.

A US-India military alliance has always been a strategic nightmare for the Chinese, and the ballyhooed Indo-US global strategic partnership triggered alarm bells in Beijing. The partnership, though, falls short of a formal military alliance. Still, the high-pitched Indian and American rhetoric that the new partnership represented a tectonic shift in geopolitical alignments apparently made Chinese policy-makers believe India was being groomed as a new Japan or Australia to America — a perception reinforced by subsequent arrangements and Indian orders for US arms worth $ 3.5 billion in just the past year.

Clearly, New Delhi failed to foresee that its rush to forge close strategic bonds with Washington could provoke greater Chinese pressure and that in such a situation, the United States actually would offer little comfort. Consequently, India finds itself in a spot.

For one thing, Beijing calculatedly has sought to pressure India on multiple fronts — military, diplomatic and multilateral. For another, the United States —far from coming to India’s support — has shied away from even cautioning Beijing against any attempt to forcibly change the territorial status quo. Indeed, on a host of issues — from the Dalai Lama to the Arunachal Pradesh dispute — Washington has chosen not to antagonise Beijing. That, in effect, has left India on its own.

The spectacle of the President of the most powerful country in the world seeking to curry favour with a rights-abusing China by shunning the Dalai Lama during the Tibetan leader’s Washington visit cannot but embolden the Chinese leadership to step up pressure on India, the seat of the Tibetan Government-in-exile. Mr Obama also has signalled that America’s strategic relationship with India will not be at the expense of the fast-growing US ties with China.

The Obama team, after reviewing the Bush-era arrangements, intends to abjure elements in its ties with New Delhi that could rile Beijing, including any joint military drill in Arunachal Pradesh or a 2007-style naval exercise involving the United States, India, Australia, Japan and Singapore. Even trilateral US naval manoeuvres with India and Japan are being abandoned so as not to raise China’s hackles. As his Secretary of State did in February, Mr Obama is undertaking an Asia tour that begins in Japan and ends in China — the high spot — while skipping India. In fact, Washington is quietly charting a course of tacit neutrality on the Arunachal dispute.

Yet Beijing remains suspicious of the likely trajectory of US-India strategic ties, including pre-1962-style CIA meddling in Tibet. This distrust found expression in the People’s Daily editorial that accused New Delhi of pursuing a foreign policy of “befriending the far and attacking the near”. :roll:

Left to fend for itself, New Delhi has decided to steer clear of any confrontation with Beijing. As the Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government-in-exile, Samdhong Rinpoche, has put it: “For the past few months, China has adopted an aggressive attitude and is indulging in many provocative activities, which are being tolerated by Indian Government in a very passive manner.”

Still, even as it seeks to tamp down tensions with Beijing, New Delhi cannot rule out the use of force by China at a time when hard-liners there seem to believe that a swift, 1962-style military victory can help fashion a Beijing-oriented Asia.

Having declared that America’s “most important bilateral relationship in the world” is with Beijing, the Obama team must caution China against crossing well-defined red lines or going against its self-touted gospel of China’s “peaceful rise”.

-- The writer is professor of strategic studies at Centre for Policy Research.



Two points: US is in no position to do anything and might even look aside as PRC tries for Aisan dominance.
It is upto India to stall the confrontation and if it cant be avoided to give bloody nose. In other words its in India hands how to handle the situation in a manner of its choosing.

I believe MMS has stalled the situation by market opening to PRC. If this fails then the second option is left. US can stop whining as India takes mesures to protect herself.

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Kailash » 05 Nov 2009 12:41

ramana wrote:Two points: US is in no position to do anything and might even look aside as PRC tries for Aisan dominance.
It is upto India to stall the confrontation and if it cant be avoided to give bloody nose. In other words its in India hands how to handle the situation in a manner of its choosing.

I believe MMS has stalled the situation by market opening to PRC. If this fails then the second option is left. US can stop whining as India takes mesures to protect herself.


The alliance with US is just temporary cushion. Till our modernization drive and infrastructure catches up with the Chinese. Though we have a common enemy, our threats and theaters are completely different. When it comes to China, we were always on our own, always will be.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54516
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby ramana » 09 Nov 2009 23:15

X-posted...

csharma wrote:KS on the upcoming Indo US summit. Seems to be all about China.

http://www.maritimeindia.org/pdfs/ks08nov.pdf

Washington Summit

Already there is a widely
prevalent perception that Japan, South Korea and Australia are attempting to distance themselves from
the US in order to please China. The Chinese are further confident on the dependence of the US on
them and the yuan for keeping the dollar relatively stable and their continuing to buy US treasury
bonds. They talk of the G-2 managing the global financial system, even discuss getting the oil priced in
terms of a basket of currencies excluding the dollar and suggest sharing the Pacific Ocean with US as
two spheres of influence.


It is generally agreed that at the present rate of growth, China is likely to
overtake the US in terms of GDP in the next two to three decades. The present financial crisis has led to
a decline of US status as a power though it continues to be the pre-eminent power of the world. China is
the nearest challenger to the US. Though US may need the cooperation of China in sustaining the dollar
in the short term, it cannot afford to neglect the challenge of China as the non-democratic rising power.
This is another area of mutuality of interest between India and the US. In turn that calls for greater
cooperation between India and US in terms of defence, economic and R&D cooperation in several
fields. The US will need a strategic partner to sustain its position as the pre-eminent military ,economic
and technological power. Among various other powers, viz: European Union, Russia, Japan and India,
the last is a nation with comparable population to China, democratic and English-speaking and with a
young age profile. For the next two to three decades to come, while China, Russia and Japan will be
ageing India will have the advantage of a youth bulge. Therefore as the Clinton and Bush
administrations discovered - India is a natural partner for US.


From the Indian point of view, a world order in which the democratic,
pluralistic, English-speaking US with no conflict of interests with India, which welcomes Indian
immigrants remaining preeminent , is preferable - than one in which a non-democratic, Han-centric
China dominates. Nor can India afford to forget that China armed Pakistan with nuclear weapons and
missiles behind which WMD shield Islamabad has unleashed the campaign of terror both against India
and the US. While the 2005 summit was dominated by the nuclear issue, the forthcoming summit will
be dominated by the emerging world order in the wake of the financial crisis. There should be an
exploration of ways and means in which India can help the US. Among other areas, India can play a
role in manufacturing and supplying the US generic drugs at cheaper costs to bring down the costs of
Obama’s ambitious healthcare programme

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54516
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby ramana » 12 Nov 2009 02:39

X-posted....

Rudradev wrote:
Johann wrote:Unless there is a dramatic shift in the PRC's power structure, it is the Politburo, not the PLA that must be deterred. Given that damage inflicted in *any* nuclear exchange will utterly dwarf that of a major conventional war, what has been sufficient to deter the CPC Politburo from engaging in major conventional war in 30 years?


On what grounds do you assert that the Politburo were *deterred* (i.e. prevented under duress by threat of external punishment) from prosecuting any major conventional war in 30 years?

It seems to me the Politburo under Deng made a conscious decision to seek an economic path to empire-building, 30 years ago. Engaging in conventional wars would have been detrimental to this programme until its goals: economic prosperity, large-scale industrialization, a favourable trade balance with the West, extensive buildup of infrastructure and a global trade presence were fulfilled. China wanted to be seen as a guarantor of trade and economic security, winning the confidence of east and south-east Asian trading partners; not a bully which started wars and disrupted international commerce.

In spite of this there were instances where the PLA's true colors showed through the new benign mask of economic expansion: Sumdorong Chu 1987, the grab for Johnson Reef in 1988, Kargil 1999 (when the PLA engaged in aggressive posturing in the Ladakh sector). So clearly, when the Chinese perceived a core interest as being threatened (as with the resource-rich Spratlys, or the chance of India overwhelming Pakistan with a cross-IB assault) they were quite ready to take military action... and hence, were not "deterred" in any commonly understood sense of the term.

If India's policymakers honestly believe that the Chinese have been "deterred" for 30 years by our arsenal of 25-kt weapons, they may be in for a rude shock, because it seems that calculations in Beijing are changing. The Chinese have come a long way... a lot further than us... in establishing themselves as a global economic power. Their clout in this arena has grown so much that even the US is now appeasing and placating them in return for assistance with managing the world economic crisis. The Russians, meanwhile, are wooing the Chinese to set up a counter-bloc against the West, currently known as the SCO.

So the Chinese can rest assured that now of all times they are unlikely to face US or Russian interference (conventional or nuclear), with any military adventures they might be plotting against India. Possibly less likely than at any time over the last 30 years.

However, the Chinese also see that with the rise of India, their window of opportunity to resolve the border issue in their favor (and reiterate their predominance as THE uncontested supreme power of Asia) might be limited. The Indo-US strategic partnership, the nuclear deal, the advent of Arihant and Agni and even Chandrayaan all point to this inevitable reality.

I think there is a substantial chance that China will, over the next four years, escalate hostilities with India to the level of a conventional war in order to resolve its border issues and demonstrate its regional military supremacy.

Unless we substantially improve our conventional warfighting capability (including logistics and infrastructure), or upgrade our nuclear arsenal to the point where we can inflict damage on them that is comparable to their capacity for damaging us... the Chinese may decide that the potential costs of such escalation are well worth it.



G-2 is creating this situation. US and PRC dance of snake and scorpion is giving the scorpion ideas.

However in my view the PRC will use the TSP as a cats-paw and not directly get involved. The reason is the divided Indian polity. TSP divides India into WKK (RNPs WMI, DIE etc) and others, the IM into TSP supporters and Indians. While PRC will unite all these groups.

So most likely it will be TSP doing the initial mayhem, while Indian Neros fiddle, and the PRC providing UN veto/Western interference muscle and plunging in only if TSP is about to be over run.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2363
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 12 Nov 2009 04:45

China does not have that great a grip on the US as is toted by folks.
They have to buy US debt if they want the US to keep buying their cheap (controlled currency) goods. Do you think the US gives two hoots about the debt that China holds?
A small policy shift can move manfacturing back to Mexico (they've lost a lot because of the CHina move). The American public is also in favor of that. This will paralyze PRC economy.
If PRC loosens grip on RMB, it will paralyze PRC economy

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2363
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 12 Nov 2009 04:57

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opi ... le1358331/

Moreover, Mr. Obama has been unwilling to oppose China even on so basic an issue as the U.S. dollar's remaining the world's reserve currency. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, flying to Beijing, famously announced that China's human-rights record would not impede broader dialogue. Her remark may or may not have been wise, but one can at least ask whether Washington shouldn't have got something back for throwing human rights under the bus.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2363
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 14 Nov 2009 06:59

Would it possible to summarize the points of covergence btwn PRC and US? I'am sure we can infer all of them by going through the threads but I think it is key to summarize the points of convergance
I can think of the following
- China as a counter to India and Russia
- Current and Future growth of evangelical xtianity
- Market for US goods and services - homogeniety driven by the cultural revolution aids this. Heterogeneity would hurt it
- Manufacturing hub for cheap goods and services

Please add additional points. A long term strategy has to look at these equations

Masaru
BRFite
Posts: 242
Joined: 18 Aug 2009 05:46

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Masaru » 14 Nov 2009 12:17

Cross posting from US PRC relationship & India thread


Apologies if already posted and discussed, seems like some more details have emerged from the old story.
A nuclear power's act of proliferation

In 1982, a Pakistani military C-130 left the western Chinese city of Urumqi with a highly unusual cargo: enough weapons-grade uranium for two atomic bombs.The uranium transfer in five stainless-steel boxes was part of a broad-ranging, secret nuclear deal approved years earlier by Mao Zedong and Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto that culminated in an exceptional, deliberate act of proliferation by a nuclear power, according to the accounts by Khan, who is under house arrest in Pakistan.

According to Khan, the uranium cargo came with a blueprint for a simple weapon that China had already tested, supplying a virtual do-it-yourself kit that significantly speeded Pakistan's bomb effort.
"Upon my personal request, the Chinese Minister . . . had gifted us 50 kg [kilograms] of weapon-grade enriched uranium, enough for two weapons," Khan wrote in a previously undisclosed 11-page narrative of the Pakistani bomb program that he prepared after his January 2004 detention for unauthorized nuclear commerce."The Chinese gave us drawings of the nuclear weapon, gave us kg50 enriched uranium," he said in a separate account sent to his wife several months earlier.

"The speed of our work and our achievements surprised our worst enemies and adversaries and the West stood helplessly by to see a Third World nation, unable even to produce bicycle chains or sewing needles, mastering the most advanced nuclear technology in the shortest possible span of time," Khan boasts in the 11-page narrative he wrote for Pakistani intelligence officials about his dealings with foreigners while head of a key nuclear research laboratory.{Porki boast about backwardness, skulduggery and plain stealing is amazing}

Over several days, Khan said, he briefed three top Chinese nuclear weapons officials -- Liu Wei, Li Jue and Jiang Shengjie -- on how the European-designed centrifuges could swiftly aid China's lagging uranium-enrichment program. China's Foreign Ministry did not respond to questions about the officials' roles."Chinese experts started coming regularly to learn the whole technology" from Pakistan, Khan states, staying in a guest house built for them at his centrifuge research center. Pakistani experts were dispatched to Hanzhong in central China, where they helped "put up a centrifuge plant," Khan said in an account he gave to his wife after coming under government pressure. "We sent 135 C-130 plane loads of machines, inverters, valves, flow meters, pressure gauges," he wrote. "Our teams stayed there for weeks to help and their teams stayed here for weeks at a time."


In return, China sent Pakistan 15 tons of uranium hexafluoride (UF6), a feedstock for Pakistan's centrifuges that Khan's colleagues were having difficulty producing on their own. Khan said the gas enabled the laboratory to begin producing bomb-grade uranium in 1982. Chinese scientists helped the Pakistanis solve other nuclear weapons challenges, but as their competence rose, so did the fear of top Pakistani officials that Israel or India might preemptively strike key nuclear sites.
{Why did this not happen? This could have saved a lot of trouble for the future, possibly all of Punjab, J&K, Kargil, Mumbai bleeding. As usual babus and netas twiddling thumbs?}

Mohammed Zia ul-Haq, the nation's military ruler, "was worried," Khan said, and so he and a Pakistani general who helped oversee the nation's nuclear laboratories were dispatched to Beijing with a request in mid-1982 to borrow enough bomb-grade uranium for a few weapons. After winning Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping's approval, Khan, the general and two others flew aboard a Pakistani C-130 to Urumqi. Khan says they enjoyed barbecued lamb while waiting for the Chinese military to pack the small uranium bricks into lead-lined boxes, 10 single-kilogram ingots to a box, for the flight to Islamabad, Pakistan's capital. According to Khan's account, however, Pakistan's nuclear scientists kept the Chinese material in storage until 1985, by which time the Pakistanis had made a few bombs with their own uranium. Khan said he got Zia's approval to ask the Chinese whether they wanted their high-enriched uranium back. After a few days, they responded "that the HEU loaned earlier was now to be considered as a gift . . . in gratitude" for Pakistani help.



And the usual denials and hand wringing that follows after the horse has been let out of the barn! Instead of sanctions and embargoes all this gets conveniently pushed under the carpet for the sake of diplomatic nicety and maintaining the cold war balance? On the other hand NSG, NPT etc. etc. came out of the Smiling Buddha?

Meanwhile, Chinese Premier Zhao Ziyang promised at a White House dinner in January 1984: "We do not engage in nuclear proliferation ourselves, nor do we help other countries develop nuclear weapons." A nearly identical statement was made by China in a major summary of its nonproliferation policies in 2003 and on many occasions in between.

Hans M. Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, said that except for the instance described by Khan, "we are not aware of cases where a nuclear weapon state has transferred HEU to a non-nuclear country for military use." McGoldrick also said he is aware of "nothing like it" in the history of nuclear weapons proliferation. But he said nothing has ever been said publicly because "this is diplomacy; you don't do that sort of thing . . . if you want them to change their behavior."


Regardless one has to give due credit to the porkis for their skill in begging and blackmail which they employ effectively to play US and PRC against each other. Where are the GoI strategic(!) planners in all this. Porkis are continuing this game till today and will become even worrisome as PRC transforms into a stronger power.

A declining US will do whatever it can to keep porkis in their orbit and a rising PRC will use increasingly larger bait (J-10 etc) to lure them to its camp to use as a spoilsport w.r.t. India and get access to CAR. The loser in this game is pretty obvious.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Sanjay M » 15 Nov 2009 00:42

NYT:

Obama Goes to China with Begging Bowl

When President Obama visits China for the first time on Sunday, he will, in many ways, be assuming the role of profligate spender coming to pay his respects to his banker.

That stark fact — China is the largest foreign lender to the United States — has changed the core of the relationship between the United States and the only country with a reasonable chance of challenging its status as the world’s sole superpower.

The result: unlike his immediate predecessors, who publicly pushed and prodded China to follow the Western model and become more open politically and economically, Mr. Obama will be spending less time exhorting Beijing and more time reassuring it.

In a July meeting, Chinese officials asked their American counterparts detailed questions about the health care legislation making its way through Congress. The president’s budget director, Peter R. Orszag, answered most of their questions. But the Chinese were not particularly interested in the public option or universal care for all Americans.

They wanted to know, in painstaking detail, how the health care plan would affect the deficit,” one participant in the conversation recalled. Chinese officials expect that they will help finance whatever Congress and the White House settle on, mostly through buying Treasury debt, and like any banker, they wanted evidence that the United States had a plan to pay them back.

...


Read the whole article, it's quite interesting.

Well, well, the Dragon's gold-plated diamond-studded teeth are sparkling brightly these days. I guess the Chinese haven't reached the point where they're interrogating US officials on their military spending, which is a significant contributor to the US deficit.

I'm wondering if the day will come when Whitehouse officials have to meet with Indian babus to explain their military-financial aid to Pakistan, which we will be indirectly financing.

Anant
BRFite
Posts: 270
Joined: 02 May 1999 11:31
Location: Iowa City, Iowa
Contact:

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Anant » 15 Nov 2009 06:54

I saw and heard Obama's speech yesterday from Tokyo. He gushed about China ad naseaum and emphasized China's role in Asia and that the US had nothing to fear from a "rising China." India wasn't mentioned once. I voted for this guy and I am now regretting this decision. Has Obama planned any visit to India? I have a bad feeling this guy is a Chinese shill and this might come at the expense of India.

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Atri » 15 Nov 2009 07:17

Anant wrote:I saw and heard Obama's speech yesterday from Tokyo. He gushed about China ad naseaum and emphasized China's role in Asia and that the US had nothing to fear from a "rising China." India wasn't mentioned once. I voted for this guy and I am now regretting this decision. Has Obama planned any visit to India? I have a bad feeling this guy is a Chinese shill and this might come at the expense of India.


I don't think macain would have been different.. just a bit less nauseating than the nobel birader .. the policies of nations don't change much even if the political leadership changes...ombaba or repubs, sucking the phallus of china is necessity of unkil..

csharma
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby csharma » 15 Nov 2009 07:19

As Ashley Tellis has mentioned the thing to watch out for would be the MMS summit later this month. What would be interesting to watch would be Obama's position on support to India wrt to China. As AT has mentioned, GB had given such an assurance to India in 2001 or 2002 and relations had blossomed since then.

There have been reports by people like B Raman that US under Obama is taking a neutral position with regards to India China issues. If Obama takes a position of neutrality India US relations will go into a lukewarm phase.

Anant
BRFite
Posts: 270
Joined: 02 May 1999 11:31
Location: Iowa City, Iowa
Contact:

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Anant » 15 Nov 2009 10:00

Sharma Sir and others,

Assume the US response to India is lukewarm and pro-Chinese, what should India's response be? What cards does India have in turn to respond? The words coming out of Obama's mouth may as well be in mandarin. Policies don't change but the man is making me ill in terms of his foreign policies.

csharma
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby csharma » 15 Nov 2009 13:53

Anant, K Subrahmanyam (KS) and others have written that India should be assured regarding US support. Other countries such as Russia, UK, France also have an interest in balancing the weight of China which undoubtedly is looming large.

As far as India's own actions are concerned it has to grow its economy and increase trade linkages with key states. India seems to be doing that with free trade agreements with ASEAN and SK in place and negotiations ongoing with other key states.

Militarily, India has to match Chinese quantities with better technology. KS and others argue that the way to do this is by buying the best which usually comes from the US. China has a drawback here in that US and Europe do not sell military wares to them.

Lastly, I believe that China deserves a lot of attention because it is now the second largest economy and one of the top trading nations in the world and huge foreign exchange reserves.

While India has done well, it is behind China in several aspects. However, one hopes that India will be able to catch up with China eventually as a great power. India looks positioned for some good growth going forward. So, let's wait and see.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby svinayak » 15 Nov 2009 21:43

Anant wrote:I saw and heard Obama's speech yesterday from Tokyo. He gushed about China ad naseaum and emphasized China's role in Asia and that the US had nothing to fear from a "rising China."

See the rise of Russia and Russia asserting itself in East Asia.

Vinod Ji
BRFite
Posts: 118
Joined: 26 Oct 1999 11:31
Location: Dubai U.A.E.

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Vinod Ji » 15 Nov 2009 23:26

China used Pakistan to fight with India & checked India's growth(compared to its own)--> Pakistan went to dogs..
USA uses India to fight China ??? :?: that a possibility :?:


OR
China was propped up to see Soviet's demise by USA . No more Soviet but china on world stage No.2.
India is propped up ------>> :?: That a possibility :?:

none of the above :?: That a possibility :?:

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 671
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby V_Raman » 15 Nov 2009 23:31

csharma wrote:As Ashley Tellis has mentioned the thing to watch out for would be the MMS summit later this month. What would be interesting to watch would be Obama's position on support to India wrt to China. As AT has mentioned, GB had given such an assurance to India in 2001 or 2002 and relations had blossomed since then.

There have been reports by people like B Raman that US under Obama is taking a neutral position with regards to India China issues. If Obama takes a position of neutrality India US relations will go into a lukewarm phase.


what is the meaning of neutrality? if india operationlizes f15, C17 etc. and if there is a conflict, US will not supply us with spares and ammunition?

csharma
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby csharma » 16 Nov 2009 00:55

The following two docs should give one an idea about what is going on India US China triangle.


The following blog post talks about Obama's neutrality on India China issues.

http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot. ... ty-on.html

The following doc by AT talks about US support to India on China issues.

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/us_india_3.0.pdf

Though New Delhi
arguably can contain the challenges posed by
Islamabad more or less independently, the
same is not true of Beijing. Thus India must
continue depending on the United States to
preserve order in Asia until it feels it can protect
its own interests independently.
The Bush administration and Indian policy
makers saw eye to eye on this issue, and
this congruence formed the foundation for
the rapid improvement in bilateral ties starting
in 2001. Preserving an Asian balance of
power that safeguards the region’s states drove
Bush’s decision to strengthen India’s rise as a
global force capable of protecting its interests
in friendly, even if only tacit, collaboration
with Washington. The government of India
hopes that the Obama administration will
continue this policy—if for no other reason
than to protect U.S. interests. But gnawing
uncertainties persist.

csharma
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby csharma » 16 Nov 2009 00:57

There was discussion in Fareed Zakaria's GPS among China scholars that Obama is perceived as a "weak" leader in China.

There was mention of US giving concessions to China without quid pro quo. The two concessions were: naming China as a strategic partner and not meeting Dalai Lama when he was in Washington.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby svinayak » 16 Nov 2009 01:43

Vinod Ji wrote:China used Pakistan to fight with India & checked India's growth(compared to its own)--> Pakistan went to dogs..
USA uses India to fight China ??? :?: that a possibility :?:


OR
China was propped up to see Soviet's demise by USA . No more Soviet but china on world stage No.2.
India is propped up ------>> :?: That a possibility :?:

none of the above :?: That a possibility :?:

Uncle can take care of China and pakistan since they dont have legitimacy

But Uncle has a deeper problem with India and that is the problem

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Atri » 16 Nov 2009 01:47

Acharya wrote:Uncle can take care of China and pakistan since they dont have legitimacy

But Uncle has a deeper problem with India and that is the problem


Dharmo Rakshati Rakshitah..... Dharma protects the protector(of Dharma)

But How long, Acharya ji?

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 671
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby V_Raman » 16 Nov 2009 04:06

Uncle can take care of China and pakistan since they dont have legitimacy

But Uncle has a deeper problem with India and that is the problem



can you please explain more Acharyaji. i want to understand more. Are there any threads i can read to understand this better?

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Sanjay M » 16 Nov 2009 09:22

America's Piggy Bank




Obama's China Trip


Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9252
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Hari Seldon » 16 Nov 2009 16:59

x-posted only.
Hari Seldon wrote:Apna favorite alarmist Sri Ambrose Evans Pritchard rides back to the rescue painting D&G scenarios with a straight face only.
China’s policies are global economic menace number one

By holding the yuan to 6.83 to the dollar to boost exports, Beijing is dumping its unemployment abroad – “stealing American jobs”, says Nobel laureate Paul Krugman. As long as China does it, other tigers must do it too.

Western capitalists are complicit, of course. They rent cheap workers and cheap plant in Guangdong, then lobby Capitol Hill to prevent Congress doing anything about it. This is labour arbitrage.

At some point, American workers will rebel. US unemployment is already 17.5pc under the broad “U6″ gauge followed by Barack Obama. Realty Track said that 332,000 properties were foreclosed in October alone. More Americans have lost their homes this year than during the entire decade of the Great Depression. A backlog of 7m homes is awaiting likely seizure by lenders. If you are not paying attention to this political time-bomb, perhaps you should….

It is fashionable to talk of America as the supplicant. That misreads the strategic balance. Washington can bring China to its knees at any time by shutting markets. There is no symmetry here. Any move by Beijing to liquidate its holdings of US Treasuries could be neutralized – in extremis – by capital controls. Well-armed sovereign states can do whatever they want.

If provoked, the US has the economic depth to retreat into near autarky (with NAFTA) and retool its industries behind tariff walls – as Britain did in the 1930s under Imperial Preference. In such circumstances, China would collapse. Mao statues would be toppled by street riots.


Aha, re-read the bolded part. Smoot Hawley II can blindingly speedily regress to ekhanomic armageddon. Duniya is poised rather precariously at abyss-edge onlee. DollahoAkbar!

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Sanku » 16 Nov 2009 17:05

Thank you the far seeing one.

So are all the punters taking bets that China will not use Nukes on India under such circumstances if they stand to lose only a few of those (now useless) industrial towns?

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2363
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 16 Nov 2009 22:06

A comment from the article above

You go on about the US military and how this can be used. You should read up about how the US military was shown to be very vulnerable/defeatable in the recent military exercises off the Hormouz peninsular and the joint Indian exercise before making this claim. In adition China has said that it is willing to lose 200m people in a nuclear war: how many would the US be willing to lose-zero? If push comes to shove I do not believe that the US will ever use its so called 'great military machine' against a major well armed adversory. If your enemy is willing to use nuclear weapons, and I believe that China would, then it makes a large military machine at worst obsolute or at the least questionable.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2363
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 16 Nov 2009 22:43

The followup was pretty quick

Obama administration seeks 'assurance' on non-proliferation from India


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 235169.cms


VikramS
BRFite
Posts: 1835
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby VikramS » 17 Nov 2009 11:25

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comm ... onomy.html

Ambrose is right on. The Chinese are huffing and puffing thinking that they can dictate to the US. However if things go too far, the US has a lot of other places which it can use to import deflation. Latin America has a lot of manpower. It is going to be more expensive than China but shipping costs are going to be less. Further if this can curb illegal immigration into the US it will be worth in terms of the social costs of illegals who do not pay taxes.

Of course if India can get its manufacturing act together (i.e. infrastructure, political and environmental ), there is nothing which prevents India from becoming a major manufacturing hub for higher value products.

KaranR
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 22 Jan 2009 00:28

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby KaranR » 17 Nov 2009 14:55

He is[Barack Obama] eloquent in his speeches like J.F Kennedy but lacks the guts for not being forth right in foreign policy.

By nature he‘s like President Carter, all talk no action; but what can you expect from a declining super power. Duplicity, hypocrisy are the tools of the USA.

As for India and its lunger party leaders; they can be satisfied with ego inflating speeches. No substance treaty will come out of the visit from USA. The President already made the speeches in China which Indian should take note; USA cannot help India against China or the Pakistan. :!:

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Lalmohan » 17 Nov 2009 17:49

Jarita wrote: how many would the US be willing to lose-zero? If push comes to shove I do not believe that the US will ever use its so called 'great military machine' against a major well armed adversory.


the americans have a dogged determination when the chips are down. they are willing to retreat from overseas adventures, but if the homeland is threatened, they will go to any extreme to protect or avenge. to think otherwise is to misunderestimate them

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Atri » 17 Nov 2009 19:01

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 239771.cms

BEIJING: The United States appears to have accepted the idea that China could play an important role in the task of improving relationship between India and Pakistan. This is what emerges from a remark made by US President Barack Obama and the joint statement issued by the two governments in Beijing on Tuesday.

chandrabhan
BRFite
Posts: 196
Joined: 23 Jul 2008 10:59

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby chandrabhan » 17 Nov 2009 19:17

Chiron wrote:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Obama-wants-China-to-play-role-in-Indo-Pak-relationship/articleshow/5239771.cms

BEIJING: The United States appears to have accepted the idea that China could play an important role in the task of improving relationship between India and Pakistan. This is what emerges from a remark made by US President Barack Obama and the joint statement issued by the two governments in Beijing on Tuesday.


We should never never allow this idiocity to take route... i said in November 2008 that this Lout, Ineffectual Messiah is going to be dangerous for India. We should never allow these Chincoms any foothold in our issues. Obama wants to hand over Asia for Chinese hegemony...

It is making me very angry. Where is the Lunger party and where is MMS and Aunty? They were hedging their bets on this Coward. We can not outsource our defence and first of all kiss good bye to F18/16 from MRCA. I am now convinced that Americans will not supply parts/weapons in case of war with Chinese. The game is unravelling

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Lalmohan » 17 Nov 2009 19:43

i think that ombaba is doing taqiya with the dragon. with his hands full in af-pak and still not free from iraq, an economy not yet out of the doldrums, other major issues on the horizon, he does not want a full on confrontation with china. the statement on s.asia could mean a number of different things, we just don't know. there is little doubt that strategically, the US is gearing up to deal with China, to not lose its prime slot to the dragon. appeasement is not going to be the long term goal.

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Atri » 17 Nov 2009 19:43

del
Last edited by Atri on 18 Nov 2009 03:29, edited 1 time in total.

Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Venkarl » 17 Nov 2009 22:05

Brothers...I firmly believe that the civil services cadre are the real rulers behind these lunger parties and they are actually on the steering wheel of this nation to the next level (up/down). Considering the current scenario, it gives me sleepless nights as a normal citizen of India. I am wondering about the steps and measures being taken by these civil servants. I am trying to understand the psyche of an Indian bureaucrat/diplomat/secretary at times like these. I am only praying that this kind of behavior by US Prez did not come as rude awakening to this privileged league of civil servants and have plan B/C/D...Z to these unpredicted/predicted situations based on long term interests of this nation instead of jumping off the gun just to show the public that that was the response. It is upto these privileged folks about how the world powers should view India as a nation. I personally take this act of US President as a humiliation on my face. He and His administration might have some secret agenda behind all this comfort China attitude but I personally see that as an intended behavior to downplay India's place on Asian (forget world) stage.

1) He skipped India in his Asia tour.
2) He never mentioned about India anywhere in his speeches about India playing role of Asian region development in the field of trade/security/climate change etc.
3) He dared to mention that China can play a third party role in Indo-Pak realtions(How dare he said that?)
4) He even downplayed and undermined the spiritual leader, His Holiness, Dalai Lama's vision of Tibet by saying Tibet is a part of China. Point is, will he say that Arunachal Pradesh is the integral part of India if not in D.C. but in his visit(if there is one) to India?

Many friends here might ask me whats up with this "he didn't say that didn't say this" feeling?, "why should we care of what US Prez says/not says?" I don't care of what he says in his Euro or Latin America tour, he was on an ASIAN tour for God's sake. It is said that "Strength respects Strength". It gives a different message to this world about India's prominence on Asian stage. Leave alone these fit for nothing political parties, Foreign missions/Diplomats/Secretaries/ Bureaucrats should actually work out on this. I am not able to digest this kind of insult. I believe that this eligible and privileged league of ladies and gentlemen can change how India and her citizens should be viewed. While I see India rising, I do not wish to face another insult like this....call me egoist..emotional or whatever...but I do not want another one of this type..no not any more...please accept my apologies if my post violated any forum rules and ethics...

Jai Hind

KaranR
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 22 Jan 2009 00:28

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby KaranR » 17 Nov 2009 23:47

.

1) He skipped India in his Asia tour.
2) He never mentioned about India anywhere in his speeches about India playing role of Asian region development in the field of trade/security/climate change etc.
3) He dared to mention that China can play a third party role in Indo-Pak realtions(How dare he said that?)
4) He even downplayed and undermined the spiritual leader, His Holiness, Dalai Lama's vision of Tibet by saying Tibet is a part of China. Point is, will he say that Arunachal Pradesh is the integral part of India if not in D.C. but in his visit(if there is one) to India?





Like the British after the war [who were bank corrupt] never argued with USA [their creditors]. So how could USA talk down to the Chinese [their creditors]?

Not to mention India by the President is correct since PM is visiting USA very shortly. Let’s see what this lunger& pizza party achieve in USA. Not much! :eek:

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby svinayak » 18 Nov 2009 00:00

Venkarl wrote: Considering the current scenario, it gives me sleepless nights as a normal citizen of India. I personally take this act of US President as a humiliation on my face.
I am not able to digest this kind of insult. While I see India rising, I do not wish to face another insult like this....call me egoist..emotional or whatever...but I do not want another one of this type..no not any more...please accept my apologies if my post violated any forum rules and ethics...

Are you in India. One needs to understand that US policy in Asia was set in 1972 by the Kissinger/Nixon group and has never changed since then.

view this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwVQphTDCeU
Last edited by svinayak on 18 Nov 2009 01:09, edited 1 time in total.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby svinayak » 18 Nov 2009 00:02

V_Raman wrote: Uncle can take care of China and pakistan since they dont have legitimacy
But Uncle has a deeper problem with India and that is the problem
can you please explain more Acharyaji. i want to understand more. Are there any threads i can read to understand this better?

Please read all the archives of Kissinger/Nixon visit to China and their conversation on India. You will get the clarity.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Karan M, Pingale, ricky_v, suryag and 50 guests