India-US Strategic News and Discussion

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 27 Jul 2012 08:16

^^^ OT: I can see the algebraic topologists getting nightmares thinking about that

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 27 Jul 2012 08:17

shiv wrote:The US must be played, not sucked up to. The US has to fukkin well stop military aid to Pakistan and declare that Pakistan is not an ally. Nothing less.

Support to pakistan is what makes unkil relevant and raisin dieter in the region. Without that, unkil will be nobody in this part of the world. That's like asking unkil to self-castrate, and pack up bags and go home. Unkil needs pakis more than pakis need unkil. This is well gamed by pakis, and they are playing very well. They had OBL all along and inspite of that unkil is desperate to help (prop up pakis), until someone else in the region steps up to become paki like to provide relevance to unkil.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Jul 2012 08:34

JwalaMukhi wrote: This is well gamed by pakis, and they are playing very well.

Well said. We hate Pakis too much on here to appreciate that, but Paki have played the US better than the US has played them. The argument that says "look at Pakistan's condition now" is irrelevant because that is exactly the condition that the Pakistani elite need to stay in power and that is the condition that the US accepts as a necessary evil to generate the angry hordes used for fighting the Soviets. Neither the US nor the Paki elite are interested in improving the condition of Abdul Packee. And they are doing exactly what is required to create a mass of uncontrolled polio and Islam infected Abduls, who will be played any which way. Only, Pakis are playing them better.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 27 Jul 2012 09:31

Irrespective of Pakistan, US, China, EU..who we scheme to support, India must re-develop the maturity in supporting and encouraging the value systems that we cherish. It takes time to understand why doctrine/ value systems is/ are always fundamental. Strategic leanings let alone partnerships are not about temporal satisfaction that emerges from a snub. A more longer lasting strategic pairing is only achieved by having a commonality of vision and value systems. From that faith alone emerge the backbone of a stronger defense initiative, without which the vision of the core we want to defend gets lost. That has been historically a very common problem in Nations that succumb to a more concerted onslaught. We are many times unsure of our strengths which we undermine by not standing by the very principles and values we seek to protect, while we overplay our weak areas. One must look through a maze of propaganda and rhetoric while we try and balance our core 'interests' with a strategic relationship of sorts with the US.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 27 Jul 2012 11:03

Only solution I can think of is if Baluchistan is seperate and link up with AFgansistan, it will much more useful to unkil to play games and will also have less impact on us.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 27 Jul 2012 11:26

shiv wrote:
Pranav wrote:
OK, but the white masters need to be as much your brothers as the Paks.
There are an excess of Indians who are willing to be brothers of the US even when the US has a finger up our backsides. For me it makes eminent sense to be Pakistan's brother when Pakis have a finger up US backside

Ah, but there is more than one finger in the said unmentionable part of your anatomy.

Besides, it is an axiom that one should be perceived as friendly by all sides (unless one is in a position to impose peace by intimidation).

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 27 Jul 2012 19:25

harbans wrote:Irrespective of Pakistan, US, China, EU..who we scheme to support, India must re-develop the maturity in supporting and encouraging the value systems that we cherish. It takes time to understand why doctrine/ value systems is/ are always fundamental. Strategic leanings let alone partnerships are not about temporal satisfaction that emerges from a snub. A more longer lasting strategic pairing is only achieved by having a commonality of vision and value systems. From that faith alone emerge the backbone of a stronger defense initiative, without which the vision of the core we want to defend gets lost. That has been historically a very common problem in Nations that succumb to a more concerted onslaught. We are many times unsure of our strengths which we undermine by not standing by the very principles and values we seek to protect, while we overplay our weak areas. One must look through a maze of propaganda and rhetoric while we try and balance our core 'interests' with a strategic relationship of sorts with the US.

The only value worth promoting in the international arena is 'trust' - one sticks to agreements, one sticks to one's friends! Either that or you don't sign any agreements and you don't declare someone to be your ally!

Other than that all good values are reserved for internal use only! Externally any values would only bog us down! In order to pursue 'values' one needs a dance partner. Nobody out there is in the game for 'values'. It is only for advancing national interests!

We have had enough of values when one or the other Indian PM wrapped up all our HUMINT resources in Pakistan!

pentaiah · Post by **pentaiah** » 27 Jul 2012 19:31

A good role model for conducting external affairs is a used car salesman

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 27 Jul 2012 20:41

Rajesh Ji i don't know what you understand by 'Values'. But in real life credibility and as you say 'Trust' is damaged completely once one realizes one does not stand up for anything really but something akin to the short term glee as i mentioned that arises from spiting and humiliating another. Pakistan gained short term materially in it's alliance with the US. At one time they gloated about the Toyota's and Fords while we had only an Ambassador or Fiat to show. Yet every step the Paki's destroyed their own credibility and today everyone knows not to trust a Paki whose lips move or keyboard clicks. Values are not 'Interests'. Values are core. Unchanging. Something you will fight to the death to protect. You don't make compromises with the neighborhood thug however powerful about your family or say Wife or Children. You will fight him to the death and kill or be killed to protect those who are yours. If the Thug gets too powerful, you don't make a compromise and say hey you can take my wife once a month, but lets get along. So there is a clear Red line here. There is no real Politik, Chanakyaness involved in that and behaving like a used car salesman won't help. Similarly you have to define your red lines vis a vis the Values you seek to protect for your nation. Your alliances must be along with nations that seek the same for their own nation.

OTOH if to protect your family you seek an alliance with thugs who do the same in other your or other localities with other women of other families, you end justifying the very act that you abhor. Here the core is the Principle/ value, that your wife is yours and not for some local thug to enjoy. A society where people try and gain protection from a gang that does not believe in that is a self defeating exercise with only very temporal benefits. A better and more viable solution to the Thug- Wife problem is stringing up *any* thug to the nearest lamp post type thing and allying with the majority that believe in that same value (of wife not being used by thuggie) and beating the crap out of them as a lesson to prevent them doing the same here or anywhere. You have to fight the people who don't hold the same value as yourself that it's wrong to take anyone's wife once a year or month or whatever.

It's the same with Nations. Gujral displayed the family trying to take protection of the thug (paying sort of Jizya), not the former option. Gujral defended that wrong value system. Think about it.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 27 Jul 2012 23:53

Suppiah wrote:^^^ that assumes that Unkil is completely mad and does not see benefit to himself and is just having some deep seated hatred against yeevil yindoos. Just like TSP has against us. Or Muslims against Joos. That is not true of a country 'that would gladly sell the rope by which it is about to be hanged, for a profit'

Nobody except you is saying that as far as I can see.

US has a certain mode of operating in international relations to keep its dominance. Shiv explained this very well above. It is not "personal" against India or Hindus or whatever, though obviously it only helps this mode of US functioning if India / Hindus have little sense of self.

Read the Panchatantra. There is a story about a cat who insinuates itself as a mediator between two monkeys arguing over the sharing of a piece of cheese; under the guise of equal-equal and balance, cat ends up devouring the entire cheese, nibble by nibble to balance the scales.

Neither monkey can change the game on its own by offering carrots to the cat to favor it since the cat doesn't eat carrots. In fact it is a mistake to even think the cat can be subverted in this way because the cat lives and prospers by controlling the cheese that doesn't belong to it.

But one monkey can push for joint rejection of the cat's good offices by instigating the other monkey by arousing its latent aileurophobia.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 28 Jul 2012 00:29

shiv wrote: The US is the opportunist dog here who smells an India bone as he smelt the Pakistan bone in 1955.

I am surrounded by US rakshaks at work. I mean the ex-military, ex-marine, lets go and kick some brown/black/yellow ass and US is the greatest types. They now a days smile at me and say "Hey, I hear you have a Pakistan problem". Meaning, lets fight Pakistan to the last Indian. I always tell them, No, India has won every war with Pakistan, it seems you have a Pakistan problem. Shuts them up fast. Whatever be the case, Puke perfidy is slowly sinking into the aam US jingo. Better late than never. They had a similar divorce in the past, in the case of Iran, Pak will be the next.
Gautam

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 28 Jul 2012 06:04

The successful prosecution of a nation's geopolitical interests takes a certain realism and practicality which I fear Indians may not possess as a culture.

Sigh. India is the bloke at an orgy who took the principled stance and didn't take the via gara-and now it shows.

It's okay I am getting reconciled to it.

pentaiah · Post by **pentaiah** » 28 Jul 2012 06:34

if one can't reconcile to Viragya then there is Via gara always as resort

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 28 Jul 2012 07:02

India is doing very little for either Iran or Syria, but -

Syria, Iran protected by selfish nations - http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/S ... 741625.php

Who cares if Syrian President Bashar Assad continues slaughtering his own people? It's not our problem if Iran builds a bomb.

They look out only for themselves. But even at that, they're doing an extremely poor job. India, Russia and China have mammoth domestic problems that they don't like to talk about.

A few weeks ago, for example, Jairam Ramesh, India's minister for sanitation, acknowledged that his country is the world's largest open-air toilet. UNICEF's most recent figures, from 2008, show that about one-third of India's 1.2 billion people have access to a toilet, leaving 800 million people with no choice but to defecate outside. The World Health Organization calls that "the riskiest sanitation practice of all."

At the same time, India's economy makes America's look healthy and robust. Standard and Poor's sovereign rating for India is BBB-minus, just above a junk rating. And in recent weeks, ratings agencies have been threatening to lower it even more.

Right now, one-third of the population lives on less than $1.25 a day. Nearly half the nation's children suffer from stunting, meaning they don't grow properly physically or mentally because of malnutrition during infancy. That's one of the world's highest rates. So is the "wasting" rate: children who are essentially starving to death. That's 20 percent.

Shouldn't India be attending to all of that rather than expending energy on being a balky, brutish BRIC?

Joel Brinkley, a professor of journalism at Stanford University, is a Pulitzer Prize-winning former foreign correspondent for the New York Times.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Jul 2012 07:29

g.sarkar wrote: Puke perfidy is slowly sinking into the aam US jingo. Better late than never. They had a similar divorce in the past, in the case of Iran, Pak will be the next.
Gautam

Let me make a prediction here. In an ideal world Pakistan will depend on the US for aid, and the US will get what it wants from Pakistan. The US only wants to ensure that an unstable Afghanistan and the bordering areas with Pakistan do not serve as a nidus of anti-US activity. If those people attack India, or Russia or Timbuktu, the US is not going to worry its pretty little head over that.

I am currently unable to see either Pakistan or the US being able to suppress and control both Afghanistan and the bordering Pashtun regions of Pakistan. A very bad idea and a very very temporary respite would be for the US to fulfil the dreams of the Pakistan army and unite with Pakistan to attack India. I am unable to see this happening either.

That means that there is likely to be a steady deterioration, or at least a lack of improvement in US-Pakistan relations.

I believe that a lot of people on BRF possibly believe that the combination of poor US-Pakistan relations and the existing India-Pakistan animosity will somehow amount to a de facto India+US alliance that will take Pakistan down. I predict that this wil not happen. Pakistan will move towards India in the long term. How long that "long term" will be will depend on how many more terrorist attacks occur on India.

The US is in a situation where it cannot cheer and egg on terrorism against India (as it did during the Reagan and Clinton days). But if terrorism somehow "happens" and if India attacks Pakistan, the US will use the opportunity to squeeze Pakistan and refuse aid to Pak against India unless Pakistan cooperates. If Pakistan cracks down in the west (say against Haqqani) , the US will help "hold" India in the east (this is not difficult, but off topic here). But if India fails to react to terrorism, this plan fails too.

Pakistan's only option will be to get closer to India. I predict that China will be unable to fill the US gap. China's clout is overestimated, as is its "friendship" which is greed in disguise.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Jul 2012 10:33

Leaving aside that holier than though, self righteous moron Joel Brinkley's pontification on India's allegiance to BRIC thereby complicating US's efforts a tad to make Bibi's God ordained a land of Eden even more than it is now, what he says about India's domestic scene, particularly Jairam Ramesh's observation is sad but true (Although he makes a specious connection between India's securing its interests abroad with ills domestic ills, maybe he forgets US's domestic ills as it wages wars abroad under the guise of human rights).

I come to mera Bharat almost every year since I migrated to US quarter century ago, but when it comes to hygiene that Jairam Ramesh talks about and Brinkley mocks, its the same story. Sad but true. To the extent that India depends on US and its western lackeys for support in addressing many of its problems including TSP, India's domestic landscape makes us look horrible and thwarts those Indo-philes in US who want US to treat India as a better Munna than TSP.

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 28 Jul 2012 11:13

comment in yutube on yudhabyas

If USA and India help each other in developing and securing each of our countries, than an Indian in every corner of the globe will help USA remain the world power. The combination of USA/Indian can't be matched by any other nations.
20 years of aggresive development in India--cultural, economical, infrastructure, reducing corruption, improving womens rights, improving utilization of food industry--and then USA doesn't need anyone else's help.
marcmody 1 week ago

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 28 Jul 2012 13:56

“Escape to Nowhere”: A Mix of Facts & Fiction
A look back at the Indo-US spy case through the lens of RAW's teen number

“Escape To Nowhere”, a gripping spy thriller written by Amar Bhushan, who retired as Special Secretary (No.3 ) in the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) in 2005, has been described by the publishers as a spy fiction “loosely inspired by a true incident that took place in 2004 when a senior intelligence officer suspected of being a spy for decades vanished.”

2. The true incident alluded to is the clandestine escape of Major (retd) Rabinder Singh, a Joint Secretary of the R&AW, and his wife to the US via Kathmandu with the help of the station chief of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in the US Embassy in Kathmandu in May,2004. Rabinder Singh escaped while he was under surveillance by the Counter-Intelligence & Security Division (CI&S) of the R&AW because of suspicion that he was working for a foreign intelligence agency.

3.While the R&AW suspected that he must be working for the CIA, the first concrete evidence that he was a mole of the CIA came after he had escaped to the US evading the surveillance mounted on him. Enquiries made in Kathmandu after he gave a slip to the surveillance teams and vanished from Delhi brought out that the CIA station chief in Kathmandu had made arrangements for his clandestine flight to the US in a British Airways flight with US passports issued to him and his wife. They were escorted to the US from Kathmandu by a woman officer of the CIA named Angelien.

4.The Manmohan Singh Government, which assumed office on May 22,2004, had Rabinder dismissed from service under Article 311 (2) ( c ) of the Constitution of India on June 5,2004.This Article enables the dismissal of a public servant on grounds of national security without holding a formal departmental enquiry. The dismissal order was issued after he had taken sanctuary in the US and did not serve much purpose.

5.At the time this embarrassing incident took place, Shri C.D.Sahay was Secretary ( R ), as the head of the R&AW is known. In his capacity as Special Secretary and No 3 to Shri Sahay, Amar wore many hats. One of them was as the head of Counter-Intelligence and Security (CI&S). In that capacity, he was the Chief Spy Catcher of the R&AW and the Czar of its counter-intelligence.

6.The initial suspicion regarding Rabinder Singh was aroused by the observations of a young directly-recruited officer of the Research & Analysis Service (R&AS), who had noticed that Rabinder exhibited undue curiosity about classified matters of various divisions of the R&AW with which he was not connected and was in the habit of cultivating other officers through expensive entertainment in order to collect details of the happenings in the divisions under their charge.

7. This young officer, as he was expected to do, immediately reported his observations to Amar, who ordered the CI&S Division to mount a surveillance on Rabinder. The surveillance lasted 91 days. It covered his office, car, his residence and a gym visited by him.

8.The surveillance teams collected considerable details confirming the observations of the young R&AS officer. They also found out that Rabinder was in the habit of extensively Xeroxing classified documents passing through his hands and carrying the Xerox copies to his house. While there was thus strong evidence that he was probably working as an agent of a foreign intelligence agency, suspected to be the CIA, there was no provable evidence connecting him to the CIA.

9. Normally such evidence regarding the agency for which Rabinder was working could have come only from clandestinely recorded meetings of Rabinder with his handling officer. During the entire period of surveillance, the surveillance teams did not come across any instance of Rabinder clandestinely meeting his controlling officer in the agency for which he was suspected to be working.

10.In the absence of such concrete evidence regarding the agency for which Rabinder might be working, differences arose between Sahay and Amar as to what should be done. Sahay urged Amar not to allow any more leakage of classified information and documents through Rabinder to the agency controlling him. He advised Amar to act against Rabinder on the basis of whatever incomplete evidence that he had been able to collect, have him arrested and interrogated and dismissed under Article 311 ( 2 ) ( C ).

11. Amar took a legalistic approach. He advised Sahay against any premature action. He wanted to move against Rabinder only after irrefutable evidence that would facilitate his successful prosecution had been collected and the agency for which he was working had been clearly identified.

12. Such evidence and such identification were not forthcoming from the R&AW surveillance teams. Sahay thereupon urged Amar to officially inform the IB and hand over the responsibility for further surveillance to the IB, which is the principal CI agency of India and has the responsibility for counter-intelligence in all departments of the Government of India, including the R&AW. Amar, who seems to have had a strong distrust of and ingrained prejudice against the IB, was not in favour of this.

13. At this stage, Sahay started getting worried that even Brajesh Mishra, the then Principal Secretary to the PM and the National Security Adviser (NSA), had not been kept informed of the suspicions regarding Rabinder and the surveillance mounted on him. On the 74th day of surveillance, Sahay insisted that the case should be brought to the notice of Brajesh Mishra. Amar opposed this. Sahay put his foot down and asked for a note so that he could brief Brajesh Mishra.

14.After Rabinder Singh escaped from Delhi, the CI&S staff found in his house two laptops. Amar gave them to the young R&AS officer, who was a computer expert, for examination. After examination, the R&AS officer reported that Rabinder had been transmitting the information and documents to his controlling officer through his laptops which had imprints of 23,100 files, some of which were probably Rabinder Singh's correspondence with his children in the US.

15. Enquiries made after Rabinder’s escape to the US brought out that he was being controlled by the CIA from the US Embassy in Kathmandu and not that in Delhi, that he used to transmit his reports and documents through the Internet and that he was making clandestine visits to Kathmandu to meet his controlling officer for instructions.

...

18.Sahay comes out very creditably out of this narrative. His was a pragmatic, feet-on-the-ground approach. He had no compulsive distrust of the IB or of Brajesh Mishra. Sahay rightly believed that it was the job of the IB to conduct the surveillance and that Brajesh Mishra had a right to be kept informed. The only reproach I will make against Sahay is that he did not put his feet down and direct Amar to carry out his orders. The fact that Sahay and Amar belonged to the same 1967 batch of the IPS and were close personal friends seemed to have come in the way of his taking a strong line.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 28 Jul 2012 19:15

KLNMurthy wrote: Nobody except you is saying that as far as I can see.

You heard it first here...

US has a certain mode of operating in international relations to keep its dominance.

Everyone does...just in the Ummah there are a dozen countries that all want to be caliph. Erdogan, Mullah Omar, Kayani, Mahatir, KSA King and a lot more...Russia, PRC, Unkil all want to be superpowers running the whole planet earth. Us kufr SDREs too, if others permit. There is nothing wrong with that.

Point is why is Unkil so anti-India, if he is, as per the argument here...either because he thinks we are against him for whatever reason, or we don't matter, or because he hates the very faces and existence of Kufr SDRE...or because we are intractable and unchangeably an obstacle in his ambitions. If the first two reasons hold true, as I suspect, there are chances of turning that around as is already happening. Without GUBO'ing, just to make it abundantly clear..This is independent of TSPA becoming more anti-Unkil, though that no doubt expedites things..

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 28 Jul 2012 19:26

shiv wrote:I predict that this wil not happen. Pakistan will move towards India in the long term. How long that "long term" will be will depend on how many more terrorist attacks occur on India.

Hakeemullah sahib, your statement can only be logical if terrorism is some kind of 'accident' or a weed that TSP is willing but unable to eradicate. On the contrary it is a crop it has been planting successfully for decades now, and with tender love and care. The weeds are the likes of Salman Taseer and Ambassador Haqqani, who are being eradicated with excellent cooperation from all TSP institutions such as judiciary. Isn't that the fact?

Pakistan's only option will be to get closer to India. I predict that China will be unable to fill the US gap. China's clout is overestimated, as is its "friendship" which is greed in disguise.

Here or in some other thread, pray elaborate on why you think 'the only option' is for TSP to move towards India...why Unkil why stop funding its terror apparatus aka TSPA. If so it would have done many things right already..unless you are talking REAL long term such as 100 years. Incidentally if Unkil does pull the plug on TSP, your essential pre-condition for improved Indo-US partnership is fulfilled already, so why do we even bother with TSP?

I do agree PRC cannot waste money on TSP beyond certain point as it already finds its own 'cost' of lost opportunities with India rising as I mentioned earlier..

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 28 Jul 2012 20:19

Perpetual motion machine of second kind- terrorism is impossible. Terrorism machine needs to be sustained by hate for Hindus and Indians and also needs lot of dollars. When they run out TSP will look for ways to recocile differences perhaps.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Jul 2012 23:28

paramu wrote:comment in yutube on yudhabyas

If USA and India help each other in developing and securing each of our countries, than an Indian in every corner of the globe will help USA remain the world power. The combination of USA/Indian can't be matched by any other nations.
20 years of aggresive development in India--cultural, economical, infrastructure, reducing corruption, improving womens rights, improving utilization of food industry--and then USA doesn't need anyone else's help.
marcmody 1 week ago

Problem with this formulation is that there is not that much India can offer US, India has zero leverage over US, and above all the obvious civilizational/racial disparities makes it impossible for a symbiotic relationship. IMO, this BS about India being a counter weight to China is a tad exaggerated. Besides, I have heard many-a-TSP RAPE also say the same thing, namely, USA build up TSP's economy, give them military goodies, force India to give them Kashmir, yada yada, and TSP will be USA's best friend in the region unlike the backstabbing banias who aligned with the Russians.

member_23629 · Post by **member_23629** » 28 Jul 2012 23:38

Point is why is Unkil so anti-India, if he is, as per the argument here...either because he thinks we are against him for whatever reason, or we don't matter, or because he hates the very faces and existence of Kufr SDRE

The bolded part is the correct reason for Unkil's hostility to India -- its policy makers and elites cannot tolerate the existence of the world's oldest and largest pagan civilisation. They will always side with fellow monotheists (Islamists) against the Hindus. Indians should never forget this -- bank rolling missionaries in India, siding with Muslims against the Hindus, visa denial to Modi, are all manifestations of this bigotry against the pagans.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Jul 2012 06:39

Suppiah wrote:
Here or in some other thread, pray elaborate on why you think 'the only option' is for TSP to move towards India...why Unkil why stop funding its terror apparatus aka TSPA. If so it would have done many things right already..unless you are talking REAL long term such as 100 years. Incidentally if Unkil does pull the plug on TSP, your essential pre-condition for improved Indo-US partnership is fulfilled already, so why do we even bother with TSP?

Suppiahji. Re read my post. I said I will make a prediction. I write what I think. I think what I think because of various inputs I get from what I see and read.

If you don't think Pakistan will move towards India in the long term and if you have your own favorite definition for long term, that is your prerogative. You can all me out if you do not see my prediction coming true within your time frame. If the US forces Pakistan's hand beyond a point, the latter will move into India's orbit because they have nowhere else to go.

There is an element of India-US competition wrt to Pakistan that few seem to see or admit. But I insist that it exists and is well known among babus, armed forces officers and diplomats.

I had a sudden thought about India's demand that Pakistan be declared a terrorist state by the US. The obvious sense is that India is begging the US for help, and that is indeed the sense in which we read it. But as time passes and it becomes more and more and more clear to the world that Pakistan really is a terrorist state, it will also become clear that the US depends on the terrorist state and will not declare it one. In any case it makes no difference to India other than making a point that the US keeps an obvious terrorist state as an "ally". That tells us more about the USA than about Pakistan. Pakistan has,over the years, absorbed some of the most egregious techniques of US foreign policy management, so the US, while being a democracy has more Pakistaniyat than people are willing to admit, especially if one owes the US a personal debt of gratitude.

I make a further prediction, the US's weak and uninfluential hand with regard to Pakitan will really show up if the US, at some future date, actually does declare Pakistan to be a terrorist state. By that time such a declaration will be totally useless and will not make a difference to Pakis. It will only show up the US's growing inability to use perfidy and deceit in foreign relations. The US inherited that form the colonial countries and that game will be beaten back. The US too needs to be shown its place, and it will be done.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Jul 2012 06:50

CRamS wrote: Problem with this formulation is that there is not that much India can offer US, India has zero leverage over US, and above all the obvious civilizational/racial disparities makes it impossible for a symbiotic relationship.

For a change I agree with you here. But India offers the US one thing and that is competition for influence over Pakistan. The US has much to offer India and along with the US package of goodies for India comes the rabid Paki snake. The US will not control the snake, and the snake has proved too much for the US to control. India will have to charm that snake. But that will leave the US with one less ally and crutch to exert its foreign policy. A rising India that achieves a degree of peace with Pakistan can only come with Indian influence over Pakistan and loss of US power and influence.

No one wants to say it, but let me repeat, India and the US are in a state of competition over Pakistan. Not cooperation.

There are people who will die laughing if they hear that India is competing with the US. But so is Pakistan for that matter. It is getting dead serious for the US. It has been dead serious for India for 65 years.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 29 Jul 2012 07:11

DocJi,

I am sure we agree on lots of other things

.

Given the geographical distance between TSP & US, and given the massive military arsenal at US disposal, and the willingness to use it if necessary, I think US can annihilate TSP in a heartbeat. This is where I disagree a tad with you. I don't believe US really feels any threat per se from TSP, all these noise about TSP's nukes falling in the hands of anti-west jihadis notwithstanding.

I still feel that the primary interest US has in TSP is because of India. The India TSP equal equal formulation where TSP has effectively check mated India has served US interests very very well. US does not want to deal with a geo-political realignment where this formulation is no longer valid, and US has to deal with India in the entire region. That is US's primary interest in propping up TSP IMO.

Just think about it, if US had not managed to get TSP to have nukes, can you imagine the nightmarish scenario in having to deal with an sole regional nuke power in India, with all its democratic credentials, anti-colonial stand, non-alignment, moral posturing etc in the world stage?

Contrast that with current scenario where TSP pigLets attack India, threaten nuke war, and US declares nuke flash point. From a diplomatic standpoint, which scenario suit US better, both TSP and India having nukes and the rabid TSP dogs provoking India often, or a relative peaceful scenario where only India has nukes and can talk with US as an equal. (Even 2-bit bimbos like Robin Raphel or Hilary Clinton becaome "foreign policy" experts in talking down to India in the current India TSP equal equal scenario). In fact, I would wager to bet that without TSP, US will find even dealing with Iran on nukes, because India would point to US double standards in allowing Israel to have nukes etc etc. In short, US will find it very difficult to deal with a confident India than a defensive one right now.

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 29 Jul 2012 07:21

Just think about it, if US had not managed to get TSP to have nukes, can you imagine the nightmarish scenario in having to deal with an sole regional nuke power in India, with all its democratic credentials, anti-colonial stand, non-alignment, moral posturing etc in the world stage?

They have been playing this only after 1971. With PRC tey have a bigger game going on in South Asia.

It's been nearly seven months since the Permian Basin has had a significant amount of rain, and local churches across West Texas are joining together to ask for the much-needed moisture.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 29 Jul 2012 07:44

Shiv,

Pakistan is not going to move towards India to avoid American pressure. If anything the GOI under all Indian political parties has been too willing to serve as an anvil on the occasions the USG has squeezed Pakistan.

What will drive the detente with India is resources and population. The size of Pakistan's population, and the size of Pakitan's problems will expand beyond the point at which any combination of traditional partners can afford to handle without India.

From 1947 onwards the Pakistani ruling classes conceived of survival first and foremost in terms of dealing with the external Indian threat. In 1971, Pakistan's internal threats could only break out of the box with external help. Things are going to be different in the future.

The real choice the GOI will face is how to use that opportunity. In the end I am guessing they will pick the most cost-effective option to contain the spillover. What that is, who can say at this time. I don't think its possible to really predict whether it can or will be a zero sum competition with the Americans.

CRS,

Have you wondered why an all-Powerful America hasn't eliminated a North Korea that is a fraction of Pakistan's size? What about a non-nuclear Iran with less than half the population of Iran? Or even a non-nuclear Cuba?

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 29 Jul 2012 07:55

CRamS wrote:
I still feel that the primary interest US has in TSP is because of India. The India TSP equal equal formulation where TSP has effectively check mated India has served US interests very very well. US does not want to deal with a geo-political realignment where this formulation is no longer valid, and US has to deal with India in the entire region. That is US's primary interest in propping up TSP IMO.

Just think about it, if US had not managed to get TSP to have nukes, can you imagine the nightmarish scenario in having to deal with an sole regional nuke power in India, with all its democratic credentials, anti-colonial stand, non-alignment, moral posturing etc in the world stage?

It already is nightmarish scenario for unkil. Let me explain.
Terrorism is the weapon of the "weak". Pakis whether in uniform or in kurtas excel in terrorism, where their speciality is in attacking unarmed wimmen and children. It is amply seen be it in 1971 or more recently in Mumbai.

The very fact unkil is reduced to pursue this route through pakis where to contain India, it has to rely on the blood of unarmed wimmen, children and men should be nightmarish scenario.

(But, it looks slightly different because it is euphemistically referred to as "new clear flash point". Just as it sounds more palatable to refer to "beef" than to call it "dead cow meat". ) Eventually, one will be forced to see through the perfidy.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Jul 2012 08:46

Johann wrote:Shiv,

Pakistan is not going to move towards India to avoid American pressure. If anything the GOI under all Indian political parties has been too willing to serve as an anvil on the occasions the USG has squeezed Pakistan.

In fact I know of a woman who was accused of being too willing to get raped. India has been a willing anvil only as long as it took for the Indian polity to see that it was being used. Pakistan will not move towards India to avoid US pressure. Pakistan will move towards India because of unavoidable compulsion when US pressure stops working and the US stops giving sops to Pakistan.

Pakistanis do not like India. Many don't like the US either, but at least some Pakistanis benefit from US money and arms. Once that comes down to a trickle Pakistanis will have to choose between India and the US. They have nowhere else to look. The US will hold Pakistan as long as possible though. The fact that the US needs Pakistan so badly is an advantage that can be used by various entities in India and Pakistan.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Jul 2012 09:13

CRamS wrote:
Contrast that with current scenario where TSP pigLets attack India, threaten nuke war, and US declares nuke flash point. From a diplomatic standpoint, which scenario suit US better, both TSP and India having nukes and the rabid TSP dogs provoking India often, or a relative peaceful scenario where only India has nukes and can talk with US as an equal. (Even 2-bit bimbos like Robin Raphel or Hilary Clinton becaome "foreign policy" experts in talking down to India in the current India TSP equal equal scenario). In fact, I would wager to bet that without TSP, US will find even dealing with Iran on nukes, because India would point to US double standards in allowing Israel to have nukes etc etc. In short, US will find it very difficult to deal with a confident India than a defensive one right now.

What the US has done is to gamble on one bad choice hoping that things don't get so bad that the gamble fails. That bad gamble was made by cold warriors using the US philosophy of "In the long term we are all dead" so they gambled medium term, probably guessing rightly that it is only a matter of time before everyone gets nukes and the best that can be done is to create hurdles in an otherwise certain path of acquiring nukes.

This game only raises the stakes higher, but does not guarantee a victory for the US. The basic question is whether a nuclear war in some part of the world benefits the US or works against US interests. In the short term a nuclear war between India and Pakistan will benefit the US. In the longer term it will be a nail in the US's coffin because once the nuclear taboo, carefully built up by stories of how horrific Hiroshima and Nagasaki were is gone, it will be a nuclear free for all.

In fact you don't even need a nuclear "exchange" to tip the balance. Imagine a Pakistani nuke on India and India fails to retaliate deciding to absorb the cost rather than retaliating. The future of the "balance of power" in the world becomes very interesting after that. An analysis of how the US in particular behaves would be useful here. The signal that goes out top every country on earth would be interesting. Clearly after a nuclear attack on India, India will come under pressure not to retaliate. Technically India would have to retaliate, and soon. But a delay based on Indian political unwillingness can still be milked to bring Pakistan down and make the world more unsafe for the US. The topic is an interesting one for me, but probably OT for this thread. I am sure US think tanks have gamed this and I am sure they know how badly things can go wrong for the US. If things can go wrong for the US I am sure there are other countries including Indians who are planning on how to make things go wrong for the US when its "ally", Pakistan, uses a nuke.

The best "balance" is if Pakistan does not use its nukes. That is where we are now. And what is the US going to do if this system collapses?

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 29 Jul 2012 10:18

shiv wrote: In the short term a nuclear war between India and Pakistan will benefit the US.

Imagine a Pakistani nuke on India and India fails to retaliate deciding to absorb the cost rather than retaliating. The future of the "balance of power" in the world becomes very interesting after that

But a delay based on Indian political unwillingness can still be milked to bring Pakistan down and make the world more unsafe for the US.

If things can go wrong for the US I am sure there are other countries including Indians who are planning on how to make things go wrong for the US when its "ally", Pakistan, uses a nuke.

The best "balance" is if Pakistan does not use its nukes. That is where we are now. And what is the US going to do if this system collapses?

If US is burdened with a world more unsafe for the US, it may simply shut itself and close its doors.

But US may find itself in a position where it may not have much option left but still have a world unsafe for the US.
Pakistan is capable of creating such a situation for US

Right now US is paying money to Pakistan so that Pakistan does not use nukes anywhere. As others have pointed out Pakistan will reach a stage where it will too big even for US and then they will reach out to India. India has to be firm.

shiv wrote:

The US is the opportunist dog here who smells an India bone as he smelt the Pakistan bone in 1955. The US must be played, not sucked up to. The US has to fukkin well stop military aid to Pakistan and declare that Pakistan is not an ally. Nothing less. Until then there is no point taking the role of one more US chela which is what I see a lot of people, including yourself proposing. What we need with the US is not friendship. US does not consider friends its equals and builds up sympathy among "friendly nations" by giving sops. After having faced proxy butt kicks from the US the last thing we want is a slobbering love relationship with the US. We grab what we can and recognize that the US will only grab. The US's zehniyat is one of a grabbing bully. Paying off a minority in any nation (with money, visas, jobs) is cheaper for the US. The US buys off that minority and makes it look like it is a friend.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Jul 2012 10:31

paramu wrote: Pakistan is capable of creating such a situation for US

Right now US is paying money to Pakistan so that Pakistan does not use nukes anywhere. As others have pointed out Pakistan will reach a stage where it will too big even for US and then they will reach out to India. India has to be firm.

The US will never reach out to anyone for help as an equal. The US will always be willing to help someone who will be a vassal or a potential vassal. It is a mistake to imagine even for for a nanosecond that the US will ever ever look to India for any help where India is considered in any way equal. Any "equal" to the US is a competitor. In this world, to be counted you have to be a competitor to the US. Not a friend. Looking for friendship with the US on an equal basis is the same as living in la la land.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 29 Jul 2012 15:30

Wal-Mart seek US help on India plans

WashingtonAmid growing political opposition in India for easing of foreign investment norms in retail and other sectors, US-based companies like Wal-Mart and Prudential Financial are lobbying hard with their own lawmakers here to garner support for their Indian business expansion plans.

As per their latest lobbying disclosure reports filed with the House of Representatives and the Senate, the US-based companies and industry groups spent millions of dollars since the beginning of this year towards lobbying on issues including FDI in India, changes in Indian taxation framework and various other trade-related matters.

Wal-Mart Stores, which has been trying to set multi-brand shops in India for a long time, spent nearly USD 1.5 million on lobbying in the last quarter ended June 30, 2012 on various issues, including matters "related to FDI in India."

The world's largest retailer's lobbyists presented its case with the Senate, the House of Representatives, the US Trade Representative and the Department of State during the last quarter.

Wal-Mart has been lobbying among the US lawmakers since 2007 to garner support for its plans to enter India and its lobby issue earlier included "enhanced market access for investment" in India."

However, the company's lobbying issues during the first quarter of 2012 did not include India-related matters, presumably because chances had improved at that time for Indian government allowing FDI in multi-brand retail business.

While the government is pushing hard to evolve a political consensus for allowing FDI in multi-brand retail, the opposition has increased manifold in the past few months.

Besides retail sector, the US companies are also lobbying for market access in a host of other businesses. Among these, Dow Chemicals had "Trans Pacific Partnership Market Access - India" as one of its lobbying issues in the last quarter, when it spent more than USD 3.6 million on various lobby issues.

Financial services giant Prudential Financial Inc has spent nearly USD four million so far in 2012 on various lobbying matters, including those "relating to India financial services market access and equity ownership issues".

Other major entities having spent big bucks in the last quarter on issues related to trade with India include Dell Inc, Morgan Stanley, Xerox, Cargill Inc, Aerospace Industries Association of America and Chamber of Commerce of the US.

Besides, Honeywell International is lobbying on "issues related to engine upgrades for Indian military aircraft", and Medtronic lobbied on matters including those "relating to improving medical device regulation in India" during the last

After FDI, the issue of proposed tax amendments in India has emerged as another major lobbying issue for the US-based entities in the recent months. The US-based Financial Services Forum paid its lobbyist USD 440,000 during the last quarter alone for issues including its opposition to the proposed tax amendments in the India Finance Bill 2012.

"These proposed amendments will have a significant negative effect on our companies, customers and shareholders, and investors in India and may have a detrimental impact on the flow of direct investment into India," the Forum said in its lobbying disclosure report.

Some other entities, such as Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) and Financial Executives International, have also begun lobbying on matters related to the Indian Finance Bill, among other India-related matters.

Among others, Devas Multimedia has spent USD 120,000 in the first two quarters of 2012 on "foreign direct investment and government procurement issues relating to a satellite communications contract in India."

In the communications space, US-based Qualcomm is also lobbying on "issues related to spectrum licences in India".

Alliance of Automobile Manufactures paid its lobbyist nearly USD four million during the last quarter for various lobbying issues, including "to prohibit the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions in the US until China, India, and Russia implement similar reductions."

A host of other entities, including CenterPoint Energy are also lobbying on this issue of carbon emissions.
.........
However, the foreign investment ceilings in a host of sectors in India have come in the way of the US companies seeking to expand here, and they are seeking the help from their government to facilitate their expansion plans

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 29 Jul 2012 16:58

^^
The American lobby is clamoring for faster ROI from "UPA" but Congress is playing hardball for unknown reasons. Congress knows its numbers very well and know they are on the safe side as long as they keep NDA divided and not let some n00bs jump in. This is where NaMo alternative is factoring in from the "lobby". NaMo report sheet for Gujarat speaks for itself and more 'aye's from the 'Board members' of the lobby to put NaMo in the Indian PM hot seat. Congress still has the numbers but will jump to contingency plan when they have to. Either way Indian politics will get very murkier before 2014 and strange bed fellows will emerge. Dark times ahead!

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 29 Jul 2012 20:16

One of the friend who is in the media business says the reporters are being hired as lobbyist by the MNC

They are getting 85Laks rupees salary from Dow and similar companies.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 29 Jul 2012 20:26

paramu wrote:One of the friend who is in the media business says the reporters are being hired as lobbyist by the MNC. They are getting 85Laks rupees salary from Dow and similar companies.

The lobby group works in different levels from a fresh IAS/IFS(grooming by gori chamdi's, greenbacks) to the PM/HM in the government and in the media/pharma/defense sectors etc in India. The level of penetration is just awesome.

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 29 Jul 2012 21:08

These are the new informers for the western interest now. Hired informers

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 29 Jul 2012 21:54

shiv wrote: Pakistan will move towards India because of unavoidable compulsion when US pressure stops working and the US stops giving sops to Pakistan.

Pakistanis do not like India. Many don't like the US either, but at least some Pakistanis benefit from US money and arms. Once that comes down to a trickle Pakistanis will have to choose between India and the US. They have nowhere else to look. The US will hold Pakistan as long as possible though. The fact that the US needs Pakistan so badly is an advantage that can be used by various entities in India and Pakistan.

Shiv,

Pakistan will eventually move towards India independent of whether or not American aid stops, because its growing problems and needs will ever more dwarf what the Americans can offer.

The question is whether they will try to extract this help from India using North Korea's tactics on South Korea, or whether it will be more cooperative.

The Pakistani relationship with America is and will be far, far more rocky than the PRC and DPRK.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 29 Jul 2012 22:00

Pakistan is way smarter than DPRK. It won't isolate itself from anyone. It will continue to extract maximum benefits by playing bigger countries against each other. There is a good chance that it will try to lower the enimity levels towards India if US relations deteriorate. Pakistan was able to stand up to India only due to US support. Without it, Pakistan would lower its intensity against India.

America does not DPRK as it has SK and Japan. America does not have any substitute for Pakistan in the region. They will try to support Afghanistan. But for the time being, Pakistan is irreplaceable in the US geopolitical calculus.