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.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby ramana » 18 Nov 2009 00:08

Acharya wrote:
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.



Archives:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB70/

Read part III for start.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby ramana » 18 Nov 2009 01:05

X-posted....
Meanwhile KS says:

Partnering the US -Yes-We-Can

So this is what Shyam Saran's ten month long quest ended up - getting closer to US for fear of PRC!
The caterpillar will get eaten up and never mind the metamorphisis.

For those who dont get it read Shyam Saran's speech on linear thinking and all that in the US-PRC relationship and India thread.

...It is not my contention that November 24, 2009 will be a repeat of July 18, 2005. The world has, of course, changed. At that time the US was unquestionably the sole super power. China was a rising power whom the US wanted to be “tethered in Asia”, in the words of the then Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. The US of George Bush promised to help India in its efforts to become a world-class power, presumably in an attempt to create a balance of power in Asia....


...Today, the US is perceived as a declining power in the wake of the financial crisis and China is seen as the second-ranking power striving hard to narrow the gap between itself and the US. Many Chinese and some Americans talk of a G-2 system of the US and China managing the international monetary system. China holds more than 800 billions of US dollar assets. The US expects China to continue to buy its treasury bonds. Predictions are that at current rates of growth, China will overtake the US as the world’s number one economy in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) in the next two-three decades. This situation is different from the one in July 2005, and the Indo-US summit has to address this reality...


Obviously, Obama would like the US to continue to be a pre-eminent economic, technological and military power even if it has to lose its place as the number one economy in terms of GDP.

Both Manmohan Singh and Obama believe that in the 21st century, knowledge will be the currency of power. China has four times the population of the US and is investing heavily in higher education and upgrading the skills of its population. Obama has warned fellow Americans that if they do not upgrade their education, they will have to face competition from Beijing and Bangalore.

If the US is to sustain its pre-eminence, it needs partners. This is highlighted by the fact that in this year’s Nobel prize list, a majority are Americans, and a majority among them are immigrant Americans! President Obama has already recognised the value of this aspect of Indo-US partnership.


What is in India’s national interest? Surely an international system in which the pre-eminent power is a pluralist democracy and not a totalitarian one-party state. India too needs a partnership for its accelerated economic growth. China was able to grow at such a rapid pace after 1980 because Chinese “princelings” (sons of top military officers and apparatchiks) linked up with US multinationals and exploited the US as a market, using the ties with those multinationals.

For the US, India is an English-speaking, pluralistic and democratic country, home of immigrants who have already made a notable contribution to US scientific and organisational innovativeness in a short period of three decades. US companies have developed a significant number of R&D centres in India and their experience of offsourcing has been positive with reciprocal Indian job creation in the US.

While China is likely to face the problem of an ageing population, India will have a youth bulge in the next two-three decades with a potential to convert it into a very productive workforce.

The US is about to embark upon a major healthcare reform which, it is feared, will increase its budgetary deficit and public debt. A major tie-up between US drug firms and the Indian pharma industry can result in significant cost reductions. It is expected that environment industries dealing in clean energy generation and energy efficient products will come up in coming years. The two countries can work together in this field.

Economic recovery after the financial crisis will be marked by the emergence of new, innovative technologies. Indo-US collaboration and cooperation in these areas may lead to cost reductions and creation of new markets. In other words, India is in a position to help sustain US pre-eminence in technological and economic spheres.

Unlike in 2005, this time India is in a position to offer the US a partnership of mutual benefit, which will serve both Indian and US national interests and also serve the cause of democracy. Just as the Sino-US economic partnership of the past three decades benefited both countries, till the recent economic crisis set in, and aided China’s growth, an Indo-US economic and social partnership can also be of mutual benefit to both democracies. {This ignores the fundamentals of why the US and PRC collaborated-It was the fear of SU which isnt there and the PRC can never be the existential threat the SU was. And was the US-PRC collaboration based on democracy or shared values? NO- it was based on real politick of common threat from SU.}




Looks like carrying knife to a gun fight. When the issues is challenging PRC hegemony, KS wants to submit Indian intellectual capital to the US for their recovery under rubric of partnership. The US can get that with PRC money anyway.

To me it looks like Shyam Saran's way has lost the fight. Its back to submission as a strategy.

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

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby csharma » 18 Nov 2009 01:59

ramana, can ypu point to Shyam Saran's thinking on Indo US relations. Thanks.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby ramana » 18 Nov 2009 02:01

csharma wrote:ramana, can ypu point to Shyam Saran's thinking on Indo US relations. Thanks.


How about reading the first page of this thread?

Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 932
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Venkarl » 18 Nov 2009 02:16

Acharya wrote:
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


Acharyaji...thank you for the link and your statement on US policy in Asia since Nixsinger times. Please correct me if I've said anything wrong here, during Nixsinger to BakerBush Sr. India was close to Soviets which resulted in US policy get drafted like that for that millennium. But, things have changed now, I fail to understand why US policy wasn't changed after so many developments between US and India post 2000 and 9/11. What Mr. Obama did and said on his so called Asia tour was a gross negligence of Indo-US relations from his end. Well, I leave their policy to them. What bothers me is how India as a nation should take this US-China fake affair at the cost of India's image? How will our leadership and their team of diplomats and secretaries will/should take this? I wonder how Indian diplomats posted in China are digesting those cunning, wicked grin faces after Obama okayed China overlooking Indo-Pak ties.


Regarding my location...most of my times on BR are in lurk mode...It slipped off my mind to update my profile location when I've returned to India for greater good few months ago. I am sorry about that while I want to understand how important is my location with few highlighted quotes. No hard feelings Sir, just wanted to know as I am poor with understanding subtle messages.

Ramanagaru....thank you for that link...After what Acharya has said, I see the need to brush up on Nixsinger stuff once again.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2260
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 18 Nov 2009 02:29

Arrey :-? Itna emotion kyon
Theyve been insulting us for aeons - Slumdog, Caste, wrong maps of India etc. This is just a direct insult. Easier to read this and react to it.
The real issue is not the rebuff, it's the consequences of the same. The kissinger nixon policy is in full force, that's it.
Who cares if the leader of a stepchild nation (of chors at that) that has been committing genocide till 1960's visits us or not? IF the buma gives us what we want behind the scenes, thats good enough.
Itna emo mat ho

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

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby svinayak » 18 Nov 2009 02:31

Venkarl wrote:
Regarding my location...most of my times on BR are in lurk mode...It slipped off my mind to update my profile location when I've returned to India for greater good few months ago. I am sorry about that while I want to understand how important is my location with few highlighted quotes. No hard feelings Sir, just wanted to know as I am poor with understanding subtle messages.

People I talk to in India about this subject do not show the seriousness of the situation. Sleepless nights in India worrying about this is good since it shows the gravity of the situation.

D Roy
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby D Roy » 18 Nov 2009 02:44

Well ,

The Soviet Union having passed into history has left a void that we are still struggling to fill.

naturally the two "victors" of the cold war i.e the US and PRC are doing their little dainty dance as and when it suits them.

The writing for India on the proverbial wall is very clear- rise to fill up the void left by the soviet union yourself.

deputyhood is not for India. Independent path. Independent policy.

whatever gains could have accrued from India's outward policy are now exhausted. the IUCNA is in place, NSG done yada yada.

Its now time to look inward and start building up comprehensive national strength.

There are over 1000 million people in this country . there's no real need for x or y or z.

give them 20 years of real economic freedom and then watch what happens.

Already Indian companies are moving out of "niche' mode and are creating innovative products that can sell in the countryside.

more such can follow. just build the infrastructure.
Last edited by D Roy on 18 Nov 2009 02:59, edited 1 time in total.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2260
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 18 Nov 2009 02:46

ramana wrote:
Archives:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB70/

Read part III for start.


Anything other than part III? Planning to save it all so wanted to know where the juice was.
Have read part III
Yeh Nancy Kaun hai :)

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4432
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby putnanja » 18 Nov 2009 02:51

China, US agree on India, Pak

After a gap of nearly a decade, a joint statement issued by the US and China has named India and Pakistan.

US President Barack Obama repeated this during a press briefing later, saying the two countries had agreed to work together to bring about “peaceful relations in all of South Asia.”

This will go down poorly in India. Not only has it long argued its relations with Pakistan are a bilateral issue, the joint statement has given the impression the US sees China as the dominant power broker in Asia.On Tuesday, Obama and Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao announced plans to work together on a range of international issues. But the statement had an unexpected line: that the two sides “support the improvement and growth of relations between India and Pakistan.”
...
...
This will go down poorly in India. Not only has it long argued its relations with Pakistan are a bilateral issue, the joint statement has given the impression the US sees China as the dominant power broker in Asia. The most favourable interpretation is that Washington’s real interest is to persuade Beijing to exert its considerable influence with Pakistan.
...

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby RamaY » 18 Nov 2009 02:53

IMO, it has something to do with the image of PRC that is built into our world-view.

PRC is seen as a communist regime (people think it is similar to WB and Kerala) that achieved greater economic prosperity due to its centralized policy making (to give legitimacy for a strong centre in India). What people are not aware of is the rampant corruption and stage-managed development in PRC. And the fact that PRC did not have any direct conflict with India since 1962 (47 years) means that ~80% of Indian population doesn’t know PRC’s aggression. PRC learned quite well from Unkil and CCCP, the art of managing allies and rentier states. The link posted by Ramanaji shows how the major powers handled UN resolutions. You make one of your subordinate states to put forward a harshest-possible resolution and then negotiate with the opposition on that basis. PRC has been doing that with India for the past 40 years.

In comparison Pakistan is viewed as enemy/problem number-one due to continual terror attacks, and frequent wars.

Indian leadership itself is yet to learn the art of international-relations.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4432
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby putnanja » 18 Nov 2009 02:59

Posting this in full as I feel it has important points to consider ...

Obama okay with Beijing monitoring Indo-Pak ties

A week before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is expected as state guest in Washington, US president Barack Obama has given a monitoring role to China in South Asia, particularly between India and Pakistan, a fact that has stuck in New Delhi's throat.

The US and China have agreed to work together to bring about stable and peaceful relations in all of South Asia, Obama said during his joint briefing with Chinese president Hu Jintao in Beijing. Hu, who spoke first in the briefing, did not mention Pakistan or South Asia.

They (US and China) "support the efforts of Afghanistan and Pakistan to fight terrorism, maintain domestic stability and achieve sustainable economic and social development, and support the improvement and growth of relations between India and Pakistan," the joint statement said.

This is a rare occasion when a US president has acknowledged that Beijing has a role to play in the India-Pakistan relationship. The move, if serious, runs counter to predictions of US foreign policy experts that the US would not acquiesce in a future Chinese hegemony in the region.

While New Delhi maintained a studied silence on the joint statement, it has infuriated officials in the foreign office because it brings back nasty memories of another US-China joint statement by Bill Clinton and Jiang Zemin on June 29, 1998.
Then too, it was Clinton and Jiang, in what India considered "offensive" language, scolding India and Pakistan for their nuclear tests. India had reacted sharply then, buffetted by general international condemnation after the tests.

But Tuesday's statement cuts at the heart of an Indian effort to build a relationship with the US without China complicating the issue. Former diplomat KC Singh said, "The statement was uncalled for and gratuitous, and serves to poison the chalice before the PM goes to Washington."

The reality is perhaps that the joint statement was drafted by Obama's China officials who don't carry sensitivities of India with them. But that it was allowed to go through signals to many Indian strategists that Obama may be more than pliant to China, giving it a role in a region where it's bound to come into conflict with a country Obama says is a US strategic partner, India.

The question is whether the US was pressured into giving China a bigger role in the region in return for other favours in areas like the North Korean and Iranian nuclear issues. The Indian government, which has always opposed third party intervention in the India-Pakistan dialogue, is likely to be worried about the new development.

The joint statement also shows that Washington is agreeable to the idea of China playing a bigger role in Afghanistan and Pakistan, which is another issue that can rattle New Delhi.

"The two sides are ready to strengthen communication, dialogue and cooperation on issues related to South Asia and work together to promote peace, stability and development in that region," the joint statement further said explaining the parameters of US-China cooperation in the region.

A Chinese foreign ministry official later said the two leaders did not discuss specifics of the situation in South Asia because there was not much time available for that. There were a lot of other issues for them to discuss, he said.

But the joint statement is the product of weeks of discussions between two sides and the US administration officials did approve the phrases concerning China's role in South Asia.


I for one am glad it happened before the Ombaba-MMS meeting next week, as it brings them back to reality. I don't know how obama's or MMS' apologists will try to spin this, but this is as bad as it gets between India and US. This officially acknowledges China's role in South Asia. If India cannot play a dominant role in its own region, we will have no control over how event unfolds over the next few years! A rude wake up call if ever there was one.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2260
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 18 Nov 2009 03:08

WTF.... thanks MMS/Antonia.
This is when we should blow every US investment out of india and Africa. Teach them a lesson

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

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Atri » 18 Nov 2009 03:22

*Perhaps, Obama out of his stupidity, will disrupt this established equilibrium. This is not India of 1971 anymore. The more Obama moves in the panda-lap, more India distrusts and the more shameful will be the US retreat from Afghanistan.

*I have stated on Future strategic dhaaga earlier that US will choose China as its successor in the region. India's chances for rise will begin with withdrawal of US influence from Afghanitan. Indian generation now is used to be molly-coddled by US in Bush times.

*The amount of Western investments and phoren capital which flowed in India during this election to reinstate INC government flawlessly is phenomenal. With all this hype of India-rising, I wonder how much India's newer generation will be cool with sudden distancing by Unkil and interference in South asia.

*This is not a sustainable option for USA. This was the moment for which China was chosen. USA was avoiding this moment of choice for as long it can, but now that the choice is made, the events will start unfolding rather fast. MMS or crown-prince might be forced to give up on Kashmir (Holding a Plebiscite at its least) OR direct invasion and "liberation" at its worst. The political ramifications of this will be tremendous. Jihadi conquest and consolidation of Pakjab will be complete under new regional master with promise that they won't spillover their pious influence in Xinjiang.

*Somewhere, something was needed to off-set this well-set equilibrium since 1971. I think this might the Munich agreement of modern history.

* India should consolidate Nepal now. It is high-time. Make a continuous border with Tibet and strengthen the defences uniformly all across the border. Otherwise Ganga-belt will face direct brunt.
Last edited by Atri on 18 Nov 2009 03:29, edited 2 times in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby ramana » 18 Nov 2009 03:24

Lets see if PRC gets over confident and tries to settle the disputes in its own manner.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4432
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby putnanja » 18 Nov 2009 03:36

When China cannot improve relations with India on its own, how does co-opting it to improve relations between Pakistan and India work? Is the US stupid not to have realized that TSP is china's proxy too in the region and the china is propping TSP to contain India? If the US is aware of it, the takeaway is that US is working with China to contain India's role regionally and globally. Having winked at chinese proliferation to pakistan earlier, it is now officially saying that china and pak can do what they want. If it means harming Indian interests, so be it, as long as US interests are not affected.

I guess more arms will flow to pak now from china unhindered, as also nuclear and missile technology. While the US cannot grant pakistan the same agreement that it made with India, it can wink and nod if china does the same to pakistan. so pakistan get what it wants, china gets to torment india, and US gets to mollify pakistan. Only India gets screwed!
Last edited by putnanja on 18 Nov 2009 03:40, edited 1 time in total.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2260
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 18 Nov 2009 03:37

ramana wrote:Lets see if PRC gets over confident and tries to settle the disputes in its own manner.



They will. Look at past precedent they will. We had 37 years to prep for this. What did our leaders do?

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

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Atri » 18 Nov 2009 03:39

This also means that India's Soft-Power alone can no longer save the a$$ of Afghanistan. The talks between India and Iran which happened this week need to be seen in this context now.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1664
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby ldev » 18 Nov 2009 03:58

This is the actual text of the statement and the paragraph relating to India.

The two sides welcomed all efforts conducive to peace, stability and development in South Asia. They support the efforts of Afghanistan and Pakistan to fight terrorism, maintain domestic stability and achieve sustainable economic and social development, and support the improvement and growth of relations between India and Pakistan. The two sides are ready to strengthen communication, dialogue and cooperation on issues related to South Asia and work together to promote peace, stability and development in that region.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21089
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Prem » 18 Nov 2009 04:17

Indian should be thankful for this. Obama forgot that India will arrive by2020 or so with no nation holding any leverage to manage her behaviour. She will be free to pursue national interests the cost of many antagonistic entities. I think this is an oppertunity but let hope Indian BBB at the helm (babbus,buddhas and Bs)can exploit it with confidence. We have work to cut our for next 10-12 years.

KrishnaMu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 81
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: UK

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby KrishnaMu » 18 Nov 2009 04:40

Folks,

time to partnering China. Biggest capitalist economist went embrassed china. Time to move on follow the American path.

1) China is sitting on 2TN dollers
2) 300 mn middle class (consumers)
3) Biggest rare earth metal exporter

At the heart of the hybrid is a rechargeable battery, and at the heart battery is a metal - one of 17 so-called Rare Earths which are at the heart of so many of the world's new technologies that they have the potential to bring about a shift in global power.

On the other hand we are failed to shown leadership with small country such as Srilanka/Bangladesh. We are trying to compare our self to china, it is not possible and unimmiginable. China can control Burmese, North Korean and 10 other small african war torn coutries. It has its tenticals from Amazon to Africa riches. We are unable to manage a medium sized Iron ore in Andhra Pradesh. We have aspiration that can nailed to ground British Raj ports, failing infrastructure.

West never cared about democracy and human rights. They have few quangoes where they will few million euro/dollers they build nice web sites, some cocaine addicted rock star endoreses, sings a song and talks in BBC Radio 4.

Its time wake up and smell the coffee. No point bashing china about human rights and democracy. China means business and India means IPL/Bollywood or is it (???!)

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2260
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 18 Nov 2009 04:41

Thanks Krishnamu. Can you tell us a little bit about Guilin? Thanks again

BTW good morning

KrishnaMu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 81
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: UK

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby KrishnaMu » 18 Nov 2009 05:10

Jarita wrote:Thanks Krishnamu. Can you tell us a little bit about Guilin? Thanks again

BTW good morning


i am not expert in the Chinese Geography, on the other big brother might help you.
http://www.google.ie/search?q=Guilin

shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby shaardula » 18 Nov 2009 06:51

ramana wrote:
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
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.



Archives:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB70/

Read part III for start.


did anybody notice how HK was bending over backwards for the chinese ambassador, who was mainly uttering inanities bordering non sequiturs. i dont understand what the chinese had done that deserved so much bucket holding. honestly, it was like school boy talk, i will only tell this to you, but i will not tell arun type of dialogues.

i dont know what part this played in the turn of events, but if the world is ruled based on this level of shallowness(people making up scenarios and fears) and child-like behavior, then we are doomed. I cant imagine this is the same HK, who is paraded as THE geo-political strategist of our times in media. mebbe this is all part of his chankian. if it is, then they must withdraw the oscar for gene hackman(1971 french connection) and give it to HK.

if this is an example of what actually goes on, then analysis here on brf seems like an overfit.

Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 932
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Venkarl » 18 Nov 2009 09:33

Acharya wrote:
Venkarl wrote:
Regarding my location....... with understanding subtle messages.

People I talk to in India about this subject do not show the seriousness of the situation. Sleepless nights in India worrying about this is good since it shows the gravity of the situation.


Acharya, I think a common Indian is not aware of GoI's view of resolving Indo-Pak border dispute(bilateral,no third party), leave alone their opinion on world leader removing India like kadi patta from his Asian meal(no, I am not in a mood for pun).

Let this be a NICE LESSON to our folks that a Gora(or yankee kalla) is always a Gora. No point rubbing our shoulders with theirs..I feel that the best thing for our PM to do in his upcoming visit is to say in front of media to Mr.Obama that Indo-Pak border disputes WILL BE resolved bilaterally....last night around 2:30 am it got on my nerves after I saw this "Okaying" news when I am already "emo" as Jarita aptly put. Starting from Nuke deal to yesterday's YudhAbhyas-09 we have been moving up steadily in this snake and ladder game. We did extremely awesome not only when we allowed His Holiness,Dalai Lama, travel to Tawang but also when there were no political reactions when Lamaji spoke(Was actually prohibited from commenting politically) about China during his visit to A.P. We were slowly shaping and carving our image to a Strong nation with Self-Respect in the face of China. This man who could not keep his tongue in check regarding kanye west in front of media folks, comes here and vandalizes our Position in OUR region. So far, Indian establishment has not commented on this and I hope they are not scratching their heads thinking “What to do Now?”. I have full faith in our civil services cadre to tackle this situation. I am only waiting to see what they'll make our leadership comment about this.

Jarita brother, let us come to think about it..film directors, stupid journalists/columnists, analysts can say and do whatever they want as it is not a State's opinion. But a US President, the most powerful man on this planet, saying something like this is not affordable at this point of geo-political transition considering the amount of time, energy, efforts and money we have put in to create the current image of India. Two permanent members of UN Security Council talk about India like this while this world is watching, and we want to be a permanent UN SC member..lol..seriously lol..nothing is gained by me becoming jazbaati and you comforting me on an open forum as we don't have power or authority..it is "them" who has to be with some channelized emotion, focus and have some Swabhiman.

Jai Hind

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2260
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Jarita » 18 Nov 2009 09:38

I am more pissed off about the sneaky discussions the GOI is having with Kashmir (land of Uma BTW) terrorists (pls don't call them seps). Dont have appetite to lose any more precious territory. I keep toggling on BR and news sites. Dont give two hoots about what izzat or anything.
God forbid something happens, I'll do something real bad to some people

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby ramana » 18 Nov 2009 10:34

Its only caterpillar status for now. Things aren't good thanks to the mess about ten years ago. The US financial meltdown has reduced the maneuver space.

Thats why PRC was re-deputized to look after the neighborhood.

MMS needs all the support he can get.

"Kora kagaz, kora he rah gaya!" There goes the tryst.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23757
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby SSridhar » 18 Nov 2009 11:35

It is like a game of chess. Not only should we attack in order to checkmate eventually and win, but also defend our own positions simultaneously. There should always be multiple options for both defence and offence. India has never believed going on the offence but somehow still continues to dream of checkmating. In the end, only it is getting checkmated all the time and all the efforts and energies are spent on recovering from that and from that alone. What the US is doing is that it befriends India to sort of control China and befriends China to control India among other things. We must remember that the US asked China to draft the G-7 condemnation statement after the Shakti series. The US obviously gives China hegemonic position in this region.

Even now, India must issue a strong statement that third party interference in the affairs of the Indian subcontinent will not be tolerated. We must state that such attempts will be construed as unfriendly. The Indian leaders are worried to their bone marrow about what the US or China will think if there is a strong statement from MEA. We always mumble something incoherent and our body language conveys diffidence all the time. We don't need to be arrogant for that is not in our nature but we must have self respect and that must be conveyed openly, not behind the doors, so that the billion plus Indians are aware of how India reacts.

santoshriyer
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 26 Oct 2009 16:06

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby santoshriyer » 18 Nov 2009 11:47

MMS wont do anything. I still remember his speech which he conveyed to the country during the on going 26/11 attacks, that india would pursue the attackers into their territory. AIts not the statement that he made that bothers me, its the total absence of emotion when he said this. He was like who cares? The same A-hole RR Patil has become the home minister of Maharashtra.

India will be the second fiddle to china always in the asian region. Our politicos simply lack the spine to do something. To say we are the most corrupt democracy ranked at 84/180.

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3000
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby vera_k » 18 Nov 2009 12:17

Why do people think something has changed with this statement? It seems the status quo put in place in 1962 is intact. Won't that be broken only by besting China in a war?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23757
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby SSridhar » 18 Nov 2009 12:44

vera_k wrote:Why do people think something has changed with this statement? It seems the status quo put in place in 1962 is intact. Won't that be broken only by besting China in a war?

For at least two reasons, vera_k. One is that nothing should go unchallenged because it would then become a fait accompli. Secondly, war is not the only way to assert one's position. It is the last option and India may never resort to that option to establish its sphere of influence while a China may also decide not to start a war. In that case, the impression that is created by repeated assertions like the this reference to the situation in the Indian subcontinent will become the accepted norm.

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

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby csharma » 18 Nov 2009 12:53

China 'peace maker' role has India upset

http://www.timesnow.tv/China-peace-make ... 332349.cms

Sources in New Delhi say Obama’s statement has not gone down too well with the Indian government, which has always opposed third party intervention in the India-Pakistan dialogue.

Government sources have told TIMES NOW that this could be a move by Obama to gain leverage ahead of his meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.


This is leaving a bad taste ahead of the summit. Let's see what happens during the summit. Only KS seems to be sanguine about the outcome.

Maybe the US is trying to gain leverage to force India to make concession on Pakistan to sort out their Afghanistan predicament.

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3879
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby KLNMurthy » 18 Nov 2009 13:32

SSridhar wrote:
vera_k wrote:Why do people think something has changed with this statement? It seems the status quo put in place in 1962 is intact. Won't that be broken only by besting China in a war?

For at least two reasons, vera_k. One is that nothing should go unchallenged because it would then become a fait accompli. Secondly, war is not the only way to assert one's position. It is the last option and India may never resort to that option to establish its sphere of influence while a China may also decide not to start a war. In that case, the impression that is created by repeated assertions like the this reference to the situation in the Indian subcontinent will become the accepted norm.


In part, this statement works as a psychological leverage over India. Consider the mentality of the ruling class which is basically morally hollow but status-obsessed--they desperately want to be accepted as a junior partner of America, albeit with some level of respect & status--this is the meaning of the constant hankering after the "superpower" label, begging for Security Council seat, etc. Essentially it boils down to aspiring to become a vassal, but primus inter pares among vassals. The current statement only creates stress and angst at seeing this dream recede and replaced by a humiliating low status, forced to "drink the elbow water" of china while Pakistan looks on in glee and attacks at will. The feeling is like torture.

But it does nothing to lessen the thirst for that prize of prime-vassal status; in fact this denial only intensifies it more. So now, on a special occasion like the state dinner (which by the way is scheduled to mostly coincide with nov 26, so that there can be no question of where govt's priorities are--no question of MMS-led samvatsarikams for the victims), some extra courtesy can be shown, some words can be said, to relieve the tension the ruling classes (represented by MMS) would be feeling, and you have the govt where you want them--in a softened and pliant state, relieved (for the moment) from the unbearable torture-tension.

This is the classic dynamic of torture, known to every Indian policeman. Torture by itself useless, it has to be followed by a bout of kindness--the softened tone, sending out for idli-chai in the morning after a night of inflicting measured pain meant to break the will of the prisoner. This is basic power politics, played by an experienced master. India as a culture has no historical experience of dominating other cultures, therefore it finds itself in unfamiliar territory when it gets drawn into this game. India can win, but to do so requires a great deal of collective self-awareness and a recourse to the methods of inner calm and outward action that are also buried somewhere in our DNA.

Dhiman
BRFite
Posts: 527
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 13:56

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Dhiman » 18 Nov 2009 13:42

SSridhar wrote:
vera_k wrote:Why do people think something has changed with this statement? It seems the status quo put in place in 1962 is intact. Won't that be broken only by besting China in a war?

For at least two reasons, vera_k. One is that nothing should go unchallenged because it would then become a fait accompli. Secondly, war is not the only way to assert one's position. It is the last option and India may never resort to that option to establish its sphere of influence while a China may also decide not to start a war. In that case, the impression that is created by repeated assertions like the this reference to the situation in the Indian subcontinent will become the accepted norm.


While the problem solely lies in Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Obama administration has never been able to disassociate India from the "Af-Pak" situation. This statement shows Obama trying to get Chinese blessing on his "Af-Pak + India" thinking and Chinese using their leverage on US to score geo-political points over India. At the same time both US and China, while seeing themselves as part of the solution, are discounting their own decades long role in propping up Pakistani economy, military, and nuclear programs which created the Af-Pak problem in the first place and Pakistani animosity towards India ensured that "Af-Pak + India" factor whether we like it or not. Had it not been for US/China propping up TSP, the problem would have been solved a long time back. So if there is one thing that MMS should impress Obama with during their meeting it is that the problem is "Af-Pak + US + China", but not "Af-Pak + India". Fix the first problem and the second will automatically go away. Or at the very least it will keep India out of their geo-political games.

Statements aside, the ground situation does not change. Both these countries (US and China) have already armed and economically supported Pakistan - a failing anti-India country for decades. I am not sure if there is anything more that can be done to create more problems for India in South Asia by voluntary or involuntary actions that these two countries have already taken in South Asia. For god sakes, they have already armed a failing military-terrorist dictatorship with nukes, what else remains to be done?

They neither have the capability or the motivation to do anything further without India's support (in case of US) or the cost that India can levy (in case of China) and they haven't been able to prevent Pakistan's journey into failure despite all their support. At the same time it hasn't stopped India from developing. This is still our backyard and hence, aside from the fact that geo-political points are being scored here, it is India's reaction to this joke of a statement that would mean more and I sure hope that MMS does a good job of putting the focus on "Af-Pak + US + China" problem rather than "Af-Pak + India" problem. On the other hand if MMS says something that can be construed as endorsing this point, then all bets are off...
Last edited by Dhiman on 18 Nov 2009 14:16, edited 1 time in total.

Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Airavat » 18 Nov 2009 14:12

He came bearing a long shopping list, including Chinese support for tougher sanctions on Iran and more flexibility by Beijing on currency exchange rates, but Obama was met with polite, yet stony, silences. Not only is the U.S. president coming away without any definable concessions, but the Chinese appeared to be digging in their heels.

"We maintained a stable yuan during the financial crisis, which not only helped the global economy but also the stability of the world's financial markets," He Yafei, deputy foreign minister, said, adding that it was too soon since the worldwide financial crisis to talk about a change of strategy. The Chinese official also slapped down Obama's call for more Internet freedom, saying that "we need to ensure that online communications do not affect our national security."

During Obama's "town hall" meeting in Shanghai on Monday, the 50 students selected to question him were mostly officers of the Communist Youth League. Wary that Obama might say something provocative, the Chinese government refused White House requests that the event be broadcast live on nationwide television. Instead, it was broadcast only on Shanghai television.

Obama's limited results in part reflect the profound shift in Sino-U.S. relations and global politics, with China's rapid rise and America's weakened position, especially in the wake of the financial crisis. "It used to be the U.S. could go around and say 'Do this and do that' because they had so much leverage," said Dali Yang, director of the Center for East Asian Studies at the University of Chicago. "Today, the U.S. can't do that."

LA Times

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

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby csharma » 18 Nov 2009 14:24

The general impression that has been created in the US media is that this visit clearly shows how US power has diminished wrt China. America's weak hand is showing and China's prestige and position has gone up a notch. In public perception, China now seems closer to US in power since US is dependent on Chinese money and cannot get China to support its agenda.

US economy has to improve rapidly for it to regain some ground.

The trip has lessons for India as well. As a confident rising power it should stand up to American pressures and not fod up like they did in SeS.

satya
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby satya » 18 Nov 2009 14:26

In part, this statement works as a psychological leverage over India. Consider the mentality of the ruling class which is basically morally hollow but status-obsessed--they desperately want to be accepted as a junior partner of America, albeit with some level of respect & status--this is the meaning of the constant hankering after the "superpower" label, begging for Security Council seat, etc.


KVRaojee

Just cuz ToIet & co. says India is wana be super power & security council seat doesn't mean Indian leadership's thinking on same line or even its one of their goals ! Indian leaders never mean what they say and they never say what they mean .

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9225
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Hari Seldon » 18 Nov 2009 14:32

The gfacade is cracking.

Here's from a keyed in aam amerikhan aadmi verbalizing the US response to the cheenis when push comes to shove.....

Open Letter To The Chinese Premier

Must read, IMHO. Though the writer is a tad excitable.

Some choice excerpts:

Dear Wen Jaibao:

We in America have noted with concern your nations' expression of alarm at our Federal Reserve's blatant money-printing, debt monetization, and interference in the free markets, in particular the recent commentary of China's bank regulator.

However, yesterday afternoon Ben Bernanke gave you the finger, Donald Kohn, another Fed Governor, erected his middle finger in your direction as well with his comments last night and Yellen added her view this morning in which they also both said "we see no bubble." That's three.

How many more times do you need to be flipped off before you get it: The Fed isn't going to do what you want, and neither is Obama. Get over yourself.

On the objective measures the price/earnings multiple of the S&P 500 currently stands at over 130, more than double its previous record and vastly beyond anything achieved even in China's manipulated and overheated markets. In short, they're lying and they don't care.

Welcome to American Politics Mr. Wen.


Meaning - the Fed is not going to raise interest rates anytime soon. Period. And no one, not even the superpower-in-waiting, can make them. Period again.

Now that I have your attention by making sure you that you realize that our Central Bank has flipped you off, let me point out something you should be aware of:

The so-called "paper" you hold denominated in our dollars will not be paid in full.

Let me put forward a few realities you may not be aware of, since you are the Premier of a Communist Nation where there is no freedom of the press nor, for that matter, any of the other freedoms guaranteed in our Bill of Rights. That is, you head a nation where you believe the government has rights and the serfs, er, population has privileges you grant, where our founding documents express the precise opposite view - we believe that all people have rights that are endowed by our creator, that government can secure and protect rights but is incapable of bestowing them (since it didn't have them in the first place), and that government has mere privileges granted by the people - and that the people have the right to revoke those privileges.

Here's the problem you face, in a nutshell, just to make sure you read it correctly the first time:

We're not going to pay.


Uh-oh. Is he verbalizing what is already on many minds? That the US might wilfully have to default on its debts? Nothing new, has happened before with many many countries only.

But on what basis the default? Well, the obvious reason is that to maintain solvency. The ostensible reasons though will be couched in high rhetoric.

First, we (the citizens) didn't enter into these obligations. You pursued a mercantilist strategy that involved, among other things, near-literal enslavement of your citizens under working conditions equal to or worse than those we imposed on the Africans we forcibly imported into this nation (that is, kidnapped) in the 1600s and 1700s. ...
As a consequence we the people don't like you very much. In fact, some of us would be quite content to invite you to dinner - as the main course.


Wow. so the pitch begins or what? Is that the line the yanks will ultimately pull?

Next, it is clear that you have strong-armed our government into exchanging toxic securities you bought from private actors for "good credit" US Treasuries. You are among those who have played the "Financial Armageddon" card with a fair measure of success. Precisely what you said and to whom you said it has not been publicly disclosed, but that threats were part of the negotiation is essentially assured, since nobody in their right mind would exchange used toilet paper for good Treasury Debt otherwise. Yet our government wasn't the agent of the original fraud - those were private corporations and actors. Instead of doing what reasonable people do - that is, sue in a US Court and hold the guilty to account - you decided to play geopolitics. You have that right, but we have the right to tell you to stuff it - today or tomorrow. That day will come I can assure you.


Hmmm. I see.

Third, there is the matter of our citizens waking up to the scams - including your scams....
Trust me when I tell you we're just as pissed off about the frauds and scams as you are, but that doesn't give you the right to obligate we the people who were not the architects of these scams and frauds to pay for them, and we will not accept any such putative "obligation." Go take your gripe up with Mr. Paulson, Bernanke, Geithner, Obama, Bush and those who peddled all this crap worldwide. Your beef is with them, not us, and we hold that those who commit bad acts are where the liability for same begins and ends.
...
Finally, we have the matter of our children and those yet unborn. They did not consent to any of this - not even the rampant consumerism you fueled in this nation with your slave labor and pegged currency. They have no obligation whatsoever to you or to any debt contracted by anyone prior to their coming of age, and it is highly unlikely they will consent to be bound to it.


You proceed from the unfounded belief that our government will be able to extract this effort from us via either voluntary compliance with ever-rising taxation or the employment of naked force at arms. This is not a sound assumption.
...
Sooner or later, whether by peaceful election or less-than-peaceful means, a leader will arise in America who will contemplate erecting the middle finger back in your direction, just as many Americans have flipped off Washington DC. Ben Bernanke, Mr. Kohn and Ms. Yellen are just the first three you've seen in our officials who are willing to tell you where to stick your expectations - the day will come, I assure you, where a decision is made to simply tell you to stuff it at the highest levels of our government. Yes, such a declaration - that your alleged and dear "Treasuries" are in fact nothing more than toilet paper - would have severe geopolitical consequences. So what? By then our nation will be incapable of paying anyway - a default by any other name is still default. But our citizens, unlike yours, are and will be armed - go ask Admiral Yamamoto about the wisdom of considering an attempt to enforce your alleged debt by force. While you're at it count the blades of grass in our nation. I think you can figure the rest out for yourself.

Worse for you, while we would suffer were America to turn isolationist, we would survive. Your nation and its people would not.


There you have it. The bare naked iron claw. No more velvet gloves now. No?

Read it all.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23757
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby SSridhar » 18 Nov 2009 18:13

Indian reaction to the US-China Joint Statement
"The government of India is committed to resolving all outstanding issues with Pakistan through a peaceful bilateral dialogue in accordance with the Simla Agreement. A third country role cannot be envisaged nor is it necessary. We also believe that a meaningful dialogue with Pakistan can take place only in an environment free from terror or the threat of terror."


GoI also should have also said something like this "India has been the worst sufferer of cross border terrorism for which support extended by other countries to states that are unwilling to take action to rein in sponsors of such acts, is significantly responsible. We hope such support will cease so that meaningful dialogue can take place.".

US ambassador to India Timothy J Roemer, meanwhile, described as a 'positive statement' the mention of Indo-Pakistan relations in the US-China joint statement.

"I have not really taken a close look at the joint statement at this point. The two countries (US and China) have said they would work for a more stable and peaceful relationship between the countries in South Asia. I think that is a very positive statement to make," he said.

Roemer said this at a press conference here when his attention was drawn to the discomfort in India over the mention of its relationship with Pakistan in the US-China joint statement. The envoy went on to add that the US is 'trying to make sure there is a prosperous and peaceful rise of China' and 'at the same time have historic close relations between the United States and India.' {What 'historic close relationship' is he talking about ? The close relationship is very recent and is still fraught with suspicion from the Indian masses}

Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1110
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Re: US and PRC relationship & India

Postby Rishirishi » 18 Nov 2009 18:54

I think the Indian reaction has been a bit hard. The Sino-US statement was the same as saying, India and Pakistan will hopefully sort out their differences. There was nothing on kashmir, Indian nukes or specifics on the Indo-Pak conflict.

China is the one in the fix. They are depending on US for exports. They have over 2 trillion dollars lent out the US, and will be the greatest loosers if the dollar colapses. US could just come up with some lame excuse and refuse to repay the 2 trillion dollars to china. China does not sell anything critical to US, that they cant get anywhere else.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: UlanBatori and 54 guests