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.
Philip wrote:Amit,I was watching the live telecast,where the Mess-iah patronisingly put his hand on his disciple's back.His look is that of a "master" looking on approvingly of his disciple!
Philip, I respect you a lot but sorry to say I don't buy this "master" and "disciple" nonsense. It should be pretty apparent by now that MMS' style is very retrained and looks almost diffident. But it's been proved many times (for example during the scrape over the Nuclear Bill) that such appearances are deceptive.
Besides none of the announcements, the joint press conference or the address to Parliament sounded like a "master" and "disciple" interaction.
Again sorry and nothing personal but I think all this "analysis" of a photo taken from a particular angle is pure claptrap. In most cultures a hand on the shoulders or on the lower back is a sign of friendship among equals.
My last post on this.
Last edited by amit on 09 Nov 2010 12:58, edited 3 times in total.
Singha wrote:india is hardly in bed with myanmar the way US has been sleeping with Pak for decades. we have some understanding with the rangoon junta to hand over terrorists from both sides, a bit of border trade etc . we do not supply arms to myanmar to terrorize and threaten laos or thailand. myanmar is not a center of intl terrorists.
Well, I could not understand the part in his speech about democracy and the security council seat. USSR was never a democracy. And the Peoples Republic of China isn't either. UK is a monarchy. And France is, well France is unique. The fact is Ombaba is very weak now and the Republicans are smelling blood. They have clearly said that they want him to be a one term president. Also,they are saying that they have come this far by not working with him, and this non-cooperation will continue further, weakening his presidency. So, what he says and what he can do is two different things.
Gautam
Last edited by g.sarkar on 09 Nov 2010 12:56, edited 1 time in total.
..
...
Having waited for the thunder to subside on his smartly open-ended nod to India’s P-5 ambitions — “In the years ahead, I look forward to a reformed UN Security Council that includes India as a permanent member” — Obama immediately turned to remind his gleeful hosts there will be a price to pay.
“Now let me suggest,” he said to an audience already quite lured to Obama’s easy hypnotism of words, “that with increased power comes increased responsibility. The United Nations exists to fulfil its founding ideals of preserving peace and security and advancing human rights.” Bluntly put: The permanent seat is some way off, meantime start proving to us you fit the bill.
Before anyone had had a chance to divine what he was leading up to, he had clipped on the caveats — the nuclear brinkmanship of Iran and the suffocation of democracy in Myanmar.
On both counts, Obama appeared to suggest, India had been remiss.
...
..
“When peaceful democratic movements are suppressed — as in Burma —then the democracies of the world cannot remain silent. For it is unacceptable to gun down peaceful protesters and incarcerate political prisoners decade after decade. It is the responsibility of the international community — especially leaders like the United States and India — to condemn it.
“If I can be frank, in international fora, India has often avoided these issues.”
To many, the US President’s exhort on supporting democracy — probably made with an eye on his domestic constituency that has vocal views on Myanmar — rang a bit hollow.
Successive American governments having underwritten dictatorships across the world in the name of US national interest: a slew of Latin American states, Saudi Arabia and sundry repressive princedoms in West Asia, and nearer home, military regimes in Pakistan and, of course, the Hamid Karzai regime in Afghanistan which is widely alleged to have “stolen” the recent election.
So many female politicians / NGO-walis sport an oversize bindi. I do not understand this fetish for flaunting it. Are they unconciously saying that 'mine is bigger than yours', is it a form of pen!s envy?
Regards,
Abu Shaikh al-konfusedly onlee
---------------
amit wrote:
Maybe instead of $10 billion in contracts and 72,000 jobs, Ombaba should have asked the Constable for several hundred EVMs to use in the US?
Oohlalaaa...
Now why did Obama not hink of this - outsourcing voting in US elections to India
i think the real pressure point was iran, burma was used as a fig-leaf for kashmir. that was probably done to appease the pak-e-fauj-al-gubo. the US has little strategic interest in burma. realistically, i think the US has been told to 'shut the front door' by GOI on the cashmere issue - rant all you want but we aint movin'. so the US only brings it up to keep paquis happy, and we say a few == nonsense to keep the ball rolling. the real change that has happened or is happening is that pakistan's role as guarantor of the 'wells of power' has now gone past its sell-by date.
the pak-e-fauj wants to keep the US enmeshed in afghanistan, as does China - but for different reasons. the Chinese want it to snare the eagle and bleed it, so that it economically continues to need china. The paquis want it as insurance against attack from india
the other signal i infer from the economic discussions is that the US wants to shift more focus from china to india
Dear Amit.My reasons for my statements are scientific,not subjective.Study "body language".It is taken v.seriously by many "agencies" to give them insights into behaviour and thoughts of leaders.Each individual has a "personal space".Generally,the length of an elbow is the measure of an individual's personal space-cocktail parties,with a drink in one's hand.Intrusion into this personal space can be friendly or unfriendly.It is why "lovers" are seen very close together,hold hands,kiss,etc.If you get close up with a girl,and she does not move away giving herself more room,in general,she finds you attractive,but you have to also watch for other positive signs like the position of legs,etc.
Now in the video clip where Obama and MMS were standing next to each other,Obama reached out and put his hand on MMS's back.This was a demonstration that Obama could take liberties with MMS,reaching out into his "personal space",very similar to how a teacher pats a student on the back for doing something correctly.This is also a sign of feeling "superior" to the person to whom you are patting on the back.Between close friends,the gesture is generally reciprocated,with each hugging the other,or putting arms round each other,signs of "equality" or cameradrie.In MMS's case,he did not put his hand on Obama's back,signifying a lack of confidence in doing so or a lack of "togetherness" with him.Contrast this with MMS's behaviour with George Bush and you will see a marked difference!
There are several other methods of catching a person who is lying,etc. from "body language".Psychographology is another most intersting science as well as phrenology.While not revealing the tricks of my trade,I will tell you one fact though,that MMS is a very "lucky" man from certain signs.Who was it who said,"I would rather have a lucky general than a smart general.... They win battles, and they make me lucky." Eisenhower! Napoleon also was reported to have made similar statements.
Pecking nose is a sign (construded) as lying.
Bush geting behind Angela Merkel was seen as a sign of positive Kinship by BUsh , but Laura's theme was different and caused uncertain ease in both ANgela and Mrs Bush...
Sanku wrote:
Congratulations everyone for this round.
Even G Parthasarthi (on TV with Arnab) looked just a little less cynical for once and muttered, "this is fine".
Funny this. While we seem to be "satisfied", the feeling elsewhere is different. .
Oiii, please note this is coming from a poster, about a channel and diplomat who have been regularly hopping mad about MMS and Indian behavior in geo-politics including SeS et al.
No one is "satisfied" only relaxed for a moment that the evening passed without any S-e-S and in fact strong statements by all and sundry on Indian side (who seemed to speak in one voice for once)
Philip wrote:Dear Amit.My reasons for my statements are scientific,not subjective.Study "body language".It is taken v.seriously by many "agencies" to give them insights into behaviour and thoughts of leaders.Each individual has a "personal space".Generally,the length of an elbow is the measure of an individual's personal space-cocktail parties,with a drink in one's hand.Intrusion into this personal space can be friendly or unfriendly.It is why "lovers" are seen very close together,hold hands,kiss,etc.If you get close up with a girl,and she does not move away giving herself more room,in general,she finds you attractive,but you have to also watch for other positive signs like the position of legs,etc.
Now in the video clip where Obama and MMS were standing next to each other,Obama reached out and put his hand on MMS's back.This was a demonstration that Obama could take liberties with MMS,reaching out into his "personal space",very similar to how a teacher pats a student on the back for doing something correctly.This is also a sign of feeling "superior" to the person to whom you are patting on the back.Between close friends,the gesture is generally reciprocated,with each hugging the other,or putting arms round each other,signs of "equality" or cameradrie.In MMS's case,he did not put his hand on Obama's back,signifying a lack of confidence in doing so or a lack of "togetherness" with him.Contrast this with MMS's behaviour with George Bush and you will see a marked difference!
There are several other methods of catching a person who is lying,etc. from "body language".Psychographology is another most intersting science as well as phrenology.While not revealing the tricks of my trade,I will tell you one fact though,that MMS is a very "lucky" man from certain signs.Who was it who said,"I would rather have a lucky general than a smart general.... They win battles, and they make me lucky." Eisenhower! Napoleon also was reported to have made similar statements.
Me thinks MMS endorsement of Fed's loosening $600b is a deliberate and well thought out measure...Chanakianism at work....after all Unkil pissing on his own currency directly affects those holding $$$ the most - guess who? Taller mountain...Furthermore, all the hollering we see from taller mountain (even HK newspaper SCMP had a front page article on how Unkil is causing bubble in Asia) is because they have been doing precisely that for a year or more now, and now are sitting on a huge bomb which they are waking up to and Fed is roaming around with a match stick....MMS surely knows this..
US is pushing for chinese currency appreciation - which suits India just fine
China is countering by buying up distressed debt all over southern europe, with the expectation that all future infra projects will come their way - most vulnerable are Greece and Portugal right now, but Spain and Ireland even might be next
they have already raped Africa and large parts of polynesia, only the victims are slowly coming out of the effects of rohypnol and realising what has happenend
I would like to negate some of the negative comments from members on Obama's trip:
1. What were the negatives on this trip?
Any hints that India should sign the NPT or CTBT or forced to act on Myanmar or Iran etc? Any hints that India must go back to cold storage as it was before if it does not comply? None.
The big change over the last 3 presidential visits to India is the language of arm twisting is missing. It has become one of cooperating with India than arm twisting. One can see it both ways, India's sticking to it's principled stance is finding more takers in the US administration or India's economic clout is calling shots or the truth is sort of midway. One can clearly see the basic language with which the US deals with India has changed in scope, content and direction. This is not just symbolic, it shows a willingness to look at India's POV. It makes it easier for India to put it's points forward on Iran, Myanmar or even Kashmir and Afghanistan. Clearly O makes out that US has started to listen respectfully and not lecture disdainfully as was a decade or more ago.
2. What are the Positives?
US understanding say of India's role in Afghanistan as revealed by GWB in his new book is taking Paki propaganda away. Voices of reason are emanating though not as much as you and i would like, but the direction is certainly right. India must help in stabilizing Afghanistan. This offsets the PA bent on keeping Afghanistan backward and earns us much goodwill amongst the Afghan population.
Removal of DRDO and ISRO from the entities list. I agree that they should'nt have been there in the first place, but then if an estranged brother comes back, it's always considered positive and not negative. Righting a wrong is a positive and deserves appreciation.
No interference in K. Nothing spectacular on that. All status quo only so far. As India would have liked. Looks people in the US administration have started looking at the Kings College report. Though admin officials will have to realize sometime that satiating Pakistan on Kashmir fairly is an impossible task for India. India cannot and will not have another emergent ROP Islamic State. Every newbee Prez comes sparkling eyed into the campaign thinking Kashmir is easy as hell to arm twist India into submission going by democratic values etc..but ends up realizing that is precisely why India can't give up on it as intended. No problems encountered thus on that account.
Business deals with India obviously will increase. IBM today employs more people in India than in the US. Indian innovators are not looking just cutting 5% of costs but 80%, that's speaking of really another level of innovation. This is being recognized in the US media possibly much more than in DDM.
At the Strategic level slowly US is realizing that they backed the wrong horse over 3 decades through MFN status: China. O said it clearly India's growth is unlike other countries (read China) that have grown just through exports and totalitarianism. Endorsement of UN candidature means that ALL P5 nations with the exception of China have endorsed India's bid. All said and done it's a positive endorsement. Though personally i think India should walk away from the UN if it's not given a seat with equal rights within say 5 years. And was'nt India a victor nation in WW2? Could UK have won withouit India? DId'nt India fight in 3 continents. How could one forget that some of the toughest battles fought in Aftrica, Monte Casimmo, Malaya, Burma, Europe were with Indian troops. Indians even bulldozed Japanese lines in Burma to get supplies in to China's beleaguered Army inside China. 3 Dogra with just 450 men fought an entire Japanese elite division in Malaya. THey took over 3000 Japs in exchange of each and every one of the 450. They were found without bullets, broken bayonets. Fought to the last man fighting fascists. India not a victor? Thats one argument that should be smashed too.
Outsourcing was not dealt with in the messy one way thing that O has been going on since his campaign. IF barriers and suspicions do come down fair 2 way trade should and must benefit both parties.
I also like the way he said while other countries had starving populations India and the US cooperated to usher in the Green revolution. Factual correct and well noted.
For the critics of this trip, i would like to ask what did we really expect more at this stage? I feel this crystallized the present relationship between the US and India as best as one could possibly hope.
Last edited by harbans on 09 Nov 2010 18:33, edited 1 time in total.
Lalmohan wrote:US is pushing for chinese currency appreciation - which suits India just fine
China is countering by buying up distressed debt all over southern europe, with the expectation that all future infra projects will come their way - most vulnerable are Greece and Portugal right now, but Spain and Ireland even might be next
they have already raped Africa and large parts of polynesia, only the victims are slowly coming out of the effects of rohypnol and realising what has happenend
Pumping more money into the system means a weaker dollar which hits the trillion dollar that Panda holds.
I think by supporting that during the press conf India was sending a clear message to Panda. You push us and we gang up against you with the US and Japan.
The TV footage will have to be analysed over several days to decipher the body language. Was it the Indian kiss more Messiah like or was the US the more dominant kisser? All this is ripe for comments from experts...
Philip wrote:Amit,I was watching the live telecast,where the Mess-iah patronisingly put his hand on his disciple's back.His look is that of a "master" looking on approvingly of his disciple!
You know, if you have a presumptuous frame of mind, any and every action that you will see will appear to affirm your thinking. Unfortunately, posts like these, in my humble opinion, bring the forum's standard down. But hey, freedom of speech and all...
Philip is a known physiognomist aka face reader, You guys had no problem when he used to face read Mushy!
Philip What I felt was MMS was quite uncomfortable. Was there some disappointment? I liked his we don't steal jobs. I think Nandan and his gang should think of how to move away from the US jobs market and let them face the increased cost of doing business. In future it will be economic warfare and one nees all the weapons in the quiver. So if US wants to forgo the advanage of least cost software and BPO then they should be given the privilege.
amit wrote:I'm not too sure why there's such a hullabaloo about permanent membership of the UNSC. And I'm not talking about only in BRF but in the general chatterati. If we can get another decade or so of uninterrupted 10 per cent (or near that) growth and can keep an independent India-first foreign policy, the UNSC members (sans China) will need us more than we would need them.
Wait patiently and grow the economy and these buggers will come on their own with the keys to the UNSC club.
Obama's endorsement was good and all that but no need to start jumping through hoops in joy.
JMT
For the same reason that the nouveau riche in places like Kolkatta or Mumbai want to become members of the Wellington Club the Saturday Club or the CCI. Asinine IMO.
On another note, I thought that the Soviet Politburu was dead, buried and forgotten. But maybe, just maybe - a few survivors are posting incognito here on.
SwamyG wrote: My question is w.r.t INC. Is there anger among common people towards INC? Recently at a get together, it was mentioned that Rahul traveled in a train, like Gandhi, to know first hand what people of India feel, think ityadi. Indian politics does mirror American politics. Obama will change tunes and stances, is INC doing the same? Obama is careful to spread the "bringing new jobs to America from India" narrative that can be used later. Is INC utilizing this visit for its benefit? Indians and Americans elections issues are not the same either.
Why are you comparing politics. No two politics are the same.
Ambar wrote:Apart from all that has been discussed here already, is 10 billion $ worth of "i'll be a goody" deals to US less than expected? There were plenty of rumors earlier this year that Obama will leave India with atleast 25 billion $ worth of orders, so this must be a disappointment for the yanks.
As for the MMRCA , the suspense continues..
Rumors are that deals that were going on were merely inked during this visit. Not all the deals are new ones, according to Internet sources
I just heard Ombaba's speech where he said he looked forward to India's joining the UNSC security council. He was, IMO referring to the non permanent seat to which India has just got elected. Nothing more. Neat trick.
shiv - i thought that too at first. but since all newspapers are carrying P5++ stories and the GOTUS has not denied it or clarified it... i believe he does use "permanent" at some point in the speech, but he also hints at others, which will be germany, japan and brazil...
Its galling these pukes bringing in Kashmir and justifying so called "extremism". And its equally comical dim-wits like Chris Mathews so obsessed with so called "Al Queda". So anytime, someone links fighting "Al Queda" with some other pet cause as Mush did, it cuts a chord with these useless clowns on US media.
Last edited by CRamS on 09 Nov 2010 21:36, edited 1 time in total.
Marten wrote:Was there any talk by the Indian camp of the need to revoke the extraordinarily anti-business visa fees imposed by the US Govt? Why has no media firm talked about the stupidest trade barrier! I heard a few lines about outsourcing is good, but nothing about whether BHO advocated revoking the visa fees. Folks need to always keep in mind BHO was one of 17 Dems who strongly opposed the Nuke pact with India citing security concerns and lack of trust.
I think the GOI will tell the companies to pass on the cost to the contracts. IOW its the US companies that will foot the bill eventually after all iis they who outsourced.
Politics party reaction to the visit. He thinks there was mid-course correction during the visit. Note he is very pro spin meisters(ruling party, govt babucrats and police big wigs) so take it as another input.
He rants a lot but in between he slips in stuff. need to high bandwidth filter while reading his site. The bit about MMS is all his sychophancy to first family. The part to pay attention to is the potential for defacto alignment.
We need to play the drama game. in response to the nonsense of bringing Burma in his speech, we should have brought some victims of Bhopal into parliament and asked Mr Ombaba to live to the ideals of his country where large payouts are made for such crimes??
If the India-US partnership is to be truly strategic, both sides will have to deliver on each other’s concerns. This will not be easy despite the prevailing optimism
Before the visit, it was said that there are no deliverables and no surprises. US President Barack Obama has surprised and delivered on issues he had said were “complex” and “difficult” in a pre-visit interview to PTI.
The lifting on curbs for dual use technology and endorsement of India’s bid to a permanent seat in the UN Security Council are major indicators that Mr Obama intends to take strategic relations with India to a higher level. Further he said all the things Indians wanted to hear on Pakistan and facilitate India’s entry into multilateral export control regimes meant only for NPT signatories.
So why this change of course from tactical to strategic? Inviting India to the high table was prompted by the need to reducing the trust deficit that has plagued the inflationary strategic partnership. India-US divergences are reflected in the way India has voted with the US only 20 per cent of the time in the UN General Assembly. Differences even on intelligence and counter-terrorism cooperation were evident over the Headley affair.
The relationship has indeed transformed from one of virtual enemies to partners on selective issues but distasteful events, like the aircraft carrier Enterprise in the Bay of Bengal in 1971, linger. The only real strategic tie-up India has had was with the former Soviet Union and its legacy is carried through Russia though in a diluted form. India inevitably bears the burden of that relationship by being dependent on Russia for spares, technology and upgrade of military hardware and equipment, 70 per cent of which makes up the inventory of its armed forces.
Even as India-US relations were graduating from estrangement to engagement and were mainly defence driven in the early 1990s, the trust deficit remained despite the Gen Kicklighter initiative in 1991 for an institutionalised defence dialogue which was bereft of any political underpinning.
British-manufactured Westland helicopters with American parts had to be cannibalised to keep the aircraft operational as the US had barred supply of spares to India as part of its sanctions regime. The LCA project was similarly hit by terminating supply of GE404 engines which had been released under President Reagan’s India initiative. In 2004, when the Government belatedly signed the Hawk trainer aircraft deal, the contract contained an India-inserted clause that there would be no US-sourced spares in the Hawk.
In the last 20 years of the 20th century, India managed to acquire, just a dozen artillery fire-locating radars from the US. It was not until the 2004 Next Steps in Strategic Partnership Agreement that the following year, the new Framework for Defence Agreement was signed in Washington. Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee recalled how he detected some ‘deviation’ in the US version of the text of the agreement which had to be rectified. The US political and military establishment are extremely keen that the defence relationship becomes truly strategic in nature and India is elevated to the status of a non-Nato ally, a distinction that only Pakistan has enjoyed for some time now.
In 2001, the BJP-led NDA Government had provided unequivocal support to the US Ballistic Missile Defence and offered logistic support to US warships and aircraft engaged in post-9/11 war in Afghanistan. Indian Navy ships even escorted US Navy ships through the Malacca Straits. The Congress-led UPA is more circumspect in any tilt towards the US despite the so-called payback time for the India-US Civil Nuclear Agreement.
More defence equipment has been purchased from the US under the Foreign Military Sales Programme in the last five years than was acquired in the last 40 years and much more is in the pipeline but held up as India has been wary of signing a triad of foundational agreements — CISMOA, LSA and BECA — acronyms for interoperability, logistics support and terrain mapping. These agreements which the US says are mandatory for the sale of any high-tech equipment have been examined for intrusiveness and it seems they are. The EUMA (End User Memorandum Agreement) which bars modification of equipment and its transfer to a third country) was signed some time ago. The FMS is Government-to-Government transaction though separate agreements are required for spares with original manufacturers.
In September this year, during Mr AK Antony’s visit to Washington, he told Defence Secretary Robert Gates that India was unable to sign the three agreements in their present form. Some of the big ticket items already contracted have been supplied minus a few high-tech components as the enabling triad agreements have not been signed by New Delhi. The users have told the Government that the absence of high-tech items will not degrade operational capability and they can work around them. Or get the additional items once the texts of the agreements have been settled.
The enabling agreements are pivoted around interoperability, security of codes used on US communications equipment and access to logistics facilities anywhere in the world by swiping a card. The first two are interdependent and hinged on joint operations requiring interoperability. The argument goes that India is least likely to join US or Nato in expeditionary operations except under a UN flag where US participation is doubtful. Interoperability therefore, is restricted to joint exercises, an unprecedented 53 of which have been carried out in the last 10 years.
Two strategic issues — reliability and unpredictability of the US strategic focus — and India’s bad experience with the supply of spares will remain an irritant. The buyer-seller nature of the relationship cannot be self-sustaining unless it transforms into joint research, development and production like it is the case with Russia. The Russians are leasing for 10 years and a billion dollars a nuclear-powered submarine, helping in refiring the indigenous Kaveri engine for the LCA (Boeing is now providing 100 GE414 engines)and providing nuclear technology for India’s own nuclear-propelled Arihant submarine.
If the India-US partnership is to be truly strategic, both sides will have to deliver on each other’s concerns. This will not be easy. Pakistan, a strategic ally of the US is India’s nemesis. India cannot drop Burma and Iran — the countries Mr Obama mentioned in his speech to parliament — to vote with the US. More importantly, for building a strategic framework, India must follow the American formulation: Trust but verify.
So he too detects a change in the message mid-course.
Surya wrote:Drat almost forgot what i wanted to post
We need to play the drama game. in response to the nonsense of bringing Burma in his speech, we should have brought some victims of Bhopal into parliament and asked Mr Ombaba to live to the ideals of his country where large payouts are made for such crimes??
India has quit pontificating, others are beginning to... enough said!
Surya wrote:Drat almost forgot what i wanted to post
We need to play the drama game. in response to the nonsense of bringing Burma in his speech, we should have brought some victims of Bhopal into parliament and asked Mr Ombaba to live to the ideals of his country where large payouts are made for such crimes??
Per Hind Times, Sushma Swaraj did bring up the issue of Bhopal in her meeting with Obama.
