India-US Relations : News and Discussion

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.
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9969
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Yagnasri » 07 Nov 2014 08:19

What is the Aunty name who is considered a close friend of pakis and a Democrat? I could not remember it. She was around for a long long time.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby pankajs » 07 Nov 2014 08:23

Robin R. It's in the article.
Last edited by pankajs on 07 Nov 2014 08:26, edited 1 time in total.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9969
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Yagnasri » 07 Nov 2014 08:25

Sorry previous page has her name. This lady is a Paki spy for a long time. Her pro paki ideas are open to all to see. Yet CIA missed it for decade. I wonder how many are in Chipanda pay even now.

May be all this due to AD staying back in US for few days and giving information on this lady and other leads to US. :mrgreen:

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24734
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby chetak » 07 Nov 2014 08:43

Yagnasri wrote:Sorry previous page has her name. This lady is a Paki spy for a long time. Her pro paki ideas are open to all to see. Yet CIA missed it for decade. I wonder how many are in Chipanda pay even now.

May be all this due to AD staying back in US for few days and giving information on this lady and other leads to US. :mrgreen:


The CIA misses nothing.

They may have kept quiet at the time and kept monitoring her all the same or perhaps even more plausibly, actively directed the operations.

saip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4013
Joined: 17 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby saip » 07 Nov 2014 08:48

chetak wrote:
Yagnasri wrote:Sorry previous page has her name. This lady is a Paki spy for a long time. Her pro paki ideas are open to all to see. Yet CIA missed it for decade. I wonder how many are in Chipanda pay even now.

May be all this due to AD staying back in US for few days and giving information on this lady and other leads to US. :mrgreen:


The CIA misses nothing.

They may have kept quiet at the time and kept monitoring her all the same or perhaps even more plausibly, actively directed the operations.


Except things like 9/11.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3671
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Kashi » 07 Nov 2014 08:48

SajeevJino wrote:
Kashi wrote:
Hardly think so. When it comes to India, both Dems and Repubs are united in what they want from us- to be a poodle.


But Doctrine with China ..!!


You mean the pivoting poodle?!!

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby CRamS » 07 Nov 2014 08:51

A_Gupta wrote:Republican Senate might be good for India - an American view:
http://blogs.cfr.org/asia/2014/11/05/wh ... for-india/


Except for theatrics it will pretty much be the same. In fact, reps, a tad more so than dems, would like India to be a loyal poodle doing its bidding. Having said that, a transactional relationship is not bad at all IMO. Both sides pick and chose as they see fit on what to cooperate on.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby shiv » 07 Nov 2014 08:56

CRamS wrote:Having said that, a transactional relationship is not bad at all IMO. Both sides pick and chose as they see fit on what to cooperate on.

That is exactly the relationship that Pakistan and the US have. You are the first person to point out that the power differential between Pakistan and the US is so large that eventually the US gets what it wants.

You also take pains to point out the huge power differential between India and the US. But you still want a transactional relationship? Either you have not thought this through or you are stating a US wish list for India. The US has the money to sell its values and purchase them again. Not India. Once we are sold, we are bought out.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24734
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby chetak » 07 Nov 2014 09:01

saip wrote:
chetak wrote:{quote="Yagnasri"}Sorry previous page has her name. This lady is a Paki spy for a long time. Her pro paki ideas are open to all to see. Yet CIA missed it for decade. I wonder how many are in Chipanda pay even now.

May be all this due to AD staying back in US for few days and giving information on this lady and other leads to US. :mrgreen:{/quote}

The CIA misses nothing.

They may have kept quiet at the time and kept monitoring her all the same or perhaps even more plausibly, actively directed the operations.


Except things like 9/11.


Who says that they missed it?? but that's a topic for a slow and rainy day :wink:

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby arun » 07 Nov 2014 11:36

Long excerpt from “India ‘s Foreign Policy in a Changing World” by Vidya Prakash Dutt dealing principally with Robin Raphel and her India bashing ways. To be fair, as a close personal friend of then US President Bill Clinton, she was more the attack dog whose leash rested in someone else’s hand, in this case, Bill Clintons:

That the Clinton administration had embarked upon a considerably different track than the Bush administration did in the last two or three years of its tenure became evident from the successive statements that came from the officials of the new administration. The first shot was fired by John Malott, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs, who stated the American position at an address at the India International Centre (New Delhi) that the U.S. considered all of Kashmir to be disputed territory, that this was an issue to be settled peacefully by India and Pakistan, taking the views of the Kashmiris, both Muslim and non-Muslim, into account and that the U.S. was prepared to be helpful in this process, if that was desired by both sides. Each of the three principles that he outlined carried a new implication. Even though it might have been the position of the U.S. all along that Kashmir was a disputed territory, Washington had not cared to assert the position at least for the past two decades and to put it centre-stage in its policy towards South Asia. Washington laid a new stress on taking the views of the Kashmiris into account. Even though Malott mentioned both Muslim and non-Muslim, this distinction was soon forgotten and the U.S. emphasis came to be on ascertaining the wishes of the people in the Valley only. The ill-conceived suggestion about a U.S. mediatory role had not been asserted for over twenty years now?’ Malott followed up with a warning that India’s “human rights problem had the potential to affect the overall Indo-U.S. relations” and told the Voice of America that he had come to India to deliver a message. Obviously the message was about resolving the Kashmir problem, nuclear non-proliferation in South Asia and human rights.

It was in line with the change of tack by Washington that the Clinton administration decided not to declare Pakistan a terrorist state. But in order to keep Islamabad on the hook, Washington warned that the decision could be reversed at any time if Pakistan was found backing terrorist activities (as if Washington did not know that such backing was continuing unabated in Kashmir)? President Clinton himself added chagrin to the growing uneasiness in India about the change in U.S. policy by referring, even though in passing, to Kashmir in his address to the U.N. General Assembly. “Thus, as we marvel at this era’s promise of new peace, we must also recognize the serious threats that remain. Bloody ethnic, religious and civil wars rage from Angola to the Caucasus to Kashmir”, he said at Lake Success on I September? In order to mollify Indian susceptibilities that were badly hurt by this gratuitous reference to Kashmir, some half-hearted effort was made by the State Department to explain it away as a rhetoric flourish.

If there was any doubt about the “new thinking” and if Malott had put things in a more sophisticated manner, the lacuna was filled by Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Robin Raphel in a background briefing to South Asian journalists stationed in Washington on 28 October. While reiterating that USA regarded the whole of Kashmir as disputed territory, the status of which needed to be resolved, she asserted that “we do not recognize—and that means that we do not recognize—that instrument of accession as meaning that Kashmir is forever an integral part of India”. As an official aide-memoire pointed out, Raphel had asserted that the US. government did not recognize the instrument of accession. “We do not recall any such articulation on Kashmir at the senior levels of the U.S. administration”, the aide-memoire pointed out in protest and added that Raphel’s statement constituted a qualitative shift in the U.S. position.

Raphel in fact appeared to be questioning the validity of the Indian Independence Act and her statement bristled with far-reaching legal and political implications. She was also dismissive of the Simla Agreement, stating that it was “20-plus years old* and there have been few discussions, if any, under that accord in terms of resolving Kashmir issue ... Therefore, by definition it is de facto, it hasn’t been very effective.”

Raphel also was virtually dismissive of Pakistan’s role in fanning militancy in Kashmir. She could not have put it more bluntly: “I think it is very important to point out that whatever outside support there might have been or might be for the insurgency in Kashmir, in our view there are very strong indigenous elements to that insurgency. And one can even argue that at this point it is really self-sustaining.”
This was a very different tune from that of even Malott, whose testimony at the congressional Asia-Pacific subcommittee hearing earlier had acknowledged that the U.S. government was “particularly concerned about continuing reports of official Pakistani support for militants who commit acts of terrorism in India. We are keeping the situation under active continuing review and have raised this issue continuously with the Pakistani Government at the highest level.”

Raphel’s statement came at a time when there was a serious crisis over the seizure of the Hazratbal shrine by the militants in Kashmir and India was engaged in a critical effort to ensure a peaceful resolution of the problem. The Home Minister S.B. Chavan noted that the statement had been unhelpful and perhaps only served to prolong the crisis at the mosque.4° Indian opinion had already been slighted before Raphel added fuel to the fire, and Chavan accused the U.S. of helping Pakistan in aiding anti-social elements in India. “We have no evidence”, he told media persons on 24 October, “but there is no doubt that the United States is helping Pakistan in aiding and abetting terrorist and anti-social activities in India.”4’ Indian sentiments were further ruffled when, responding to a letter from some Congressmen, whom many in India regarded as India-baiters, President Clinton referred to his concern about the protection of “Sikh rights”. Indian sentiments were particularly hurt at this rather insensitive reference, because Congressman Condict and others had urged the U.S. President to “assume an active diplomatic role in resolving the crisis in Khalistan”. The President’s letter of 27 December, in reply to the Congressmen’s letter of 17 November, did not refer to Khalistan, but the mention of “Sikh rights” was somewhat anomalous when the situation in the Punjab had returned to peaceful normalcy. It was subsequently clarified by anonymous State Department officials that the President had to reply to a letter by members of the US. Congress but that he was in no way endorsing the concept of Khalistan. These clarifications, however, sounded hollow because in less than two months, the President told the Pakistani Ambassador, “We share Pakistan’s concerns about human rights abuses in Kashmir.” The Pakistani Ambassador, Maleeha Lodhi, while presenting her credentials, read out a long panegyric about the persecution and oppression of the Kashmiri people “who are terrorized by half a million brutal occupation troops making their life miserable”.43 Clinton gave the impression of taking Pakistan’s side in the Kashmir dispute.

However, India’s ire was particularly aroused by Robin Raphel and she became the focal point of Indian anger, chiefly because of the apparent hauteur with which she seemed to address the problem and the insensitivity she was exhibiting in expressing herself on very sensitive issues. There was widespread criticism in Parliament, in the media and by virtually all the analysts for her provocative utterances. The External Affairs Minister said in response to a query:

“We do not accept anyone’s right to question the status of Kashmir as an integral part of India. We are surprised that even the validity of the Instrument of Accession is being questioned”.”

Prime Minister Narasimha Rao told visiting US. Senators Thad Cochran, Larry Pressler and Hank Brown that statements by officials like Robin Raphel did not help the promotion of Indo-U.S. relations.

For a while Robin Raphel was unruffled by the storm she had created in New Delhi as she believed it was “easy to create a storm” there. She continued to focus on Kashmir and human rights while some of the other high-level functionaries concentrated on the nuclear issue so that India was sought to be caught in a pincer movement between one issue and the other. Even three months after her contentious “background briefing”, and the consequent uproar in India, Raphel muddied the waters further by comparing Kashmir with Afghanistan. She told a luncheon meeting of the Asia Society in Washington on 10 February that the “seemingly intractable and tragic South Asian conflicts—the civil war in Afghanistan and the insurgency in Kashmir—would remain high on her agenda for U.S. South Asia policy. Even though she acknowledged that the two conflicts were very different in their genesis, she clubbed them together because, she said, both were exacting a terrible toll on civilians, both had potential to mutate into wider regional conflicts, in both the participants were not ready to make the compromises needed for a durable peace and “both conflicts challenge our conscience and our imagination to develop incentives to bring the warring parties to the peace taIk”.

The strongest response to Raphel’s and other US. statements came from the Home Minister, S.B. Chavan who charged the U.S. in the Lok Sabha on 2 March with developing “vested interests” in Jammu and Kashmir. “It seems clear to me”, he told a cheering house, “that they are ... neither interested in helping Pakistan nor India. They will like to help themselves.”

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby arun » 07 Nov 2014 11:42

More excerpts from V.P.Dutt's work.

Good Cop, Bad Cop routine aka “orchestrated dichotomy” played by Robin Raphel and Strobe Talbot:

Raphel came to India in March-end to mend some fences. Before coming, while she stuck to the core of her statements and to the new line on South Asia, she softened the abrasive edges to limit the damage done to the psychological feeling of friendliness between the two countries. Nevertheless she told the Congressional Asia and Pacific sub-committee that as a consequence of American pressure “that tap”—Pakistan’s assistance to militants in Kashmir—had been virtually turned off. That statement flew in the face of evidence that was available to both Americans and Indians and the report that the administration itself would be sending to Congress shortly enough.

Despite the External Affairs Ministry’s intention to give only a “correct welcome” to Raphel, the Congress Party rolled out the red carpet to her in the belief that she was close to the US. President and, therefore, should be influenced for India’s viewpoint. She made few concessions on her earlier statements but was more careful and sophisticated in the articulation of the new American stance on South Asia. There was only one area in which she resiled and in which there was a noticeable shift from her earlier comment. She was now a votary of the Simla Agreement and called for progress in resolving the Kashmir dispute in accordance with the Simla Agreement, and, of course, taking into account the wishes of the people of Kashmir.

The orchestrated dichotomy was evident from Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott’s visit a month later. Talbott was suave and gentle. He did not hit hard on the Indian standpoints.


US clarifies with one hand while muddies with with the other:

As in all democracies, including India, in the US. too the left hand did not necessarily know what the right hand was doing. While Robin Raphel was proclaiming that the conduit for arms from Pakistan to India had dried up and that there was no hard evidence that Pakistan was giving material aid to the Kashmiri militants, the State Department’s report on “Patterns of global terrorism 1993”, released on 9 May 1994, stated that “there are credible reports of official Pakistani support to Kashmiri militants who undertook attacks of terrorism in Indian-controlled Kashmir.” There were also reports of support to Sikh militants engaged in terrorism in northern India, it said. Some support came from private organizations such as the Jamat-i-Islami but the report refuted the suggestion that support for Kashmiri militants had stopped or that it came only from private agencies. In any case, the report noted, some of the private agencies were run by former officers of the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16003
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby RajeshA » 07 Nov 2014 13:34

Both left-liberal Democratic ideologues and far-right Christist Republican ideologues hate India.

As long as India has good business going on with USA, India can neutralize these ideologues, kyonki sab se barda Rupaiya!

Shanmukh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2988
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Shanmukh » 07 Nov 2014 19:01

The only question about Robin auntie is - why now? What changed? It's not like what she has been doing has been unknown to SeeEyeYay. So-why go after her now?

Ambar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2053
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 09:56
Location: Weak meek unkil Sam!

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Ambar » 07 Nov 2014 19:51

It is probably something like kickbacks for the nonmilitary aid she was administering. If it was serious like passing secrets, she would have been taken into immediate custody like Robert Hannsen or Aldrich Ames. In any case, good riddance to the "Godmother of Hurriyat Conference".

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby CRamS » 07 Nov 2014 20:04

shiv wrote:You also take pains to point out the huge power differential between India and the US. But you still want a transactional relationship? Either you have not thought this through or you are stating a US wish list for India. The US has the money to sell its values and purchase them again. Not India. Once we are sold, we are bought out.


The power differential between India & US is equivalent to that well-known height of competition joke: a man pissing in front of Niagra falls.

My point was that, and bears no repetition: the racial, cultural, religious, power, you name it, differences between India and US are so huge, that all this bogus talk of "strategic partnership" starting from the time of Vajpayee and "my friend Strobe", to pliant MMS remote controlled by Sonia, does too much damage to India. It is used-car salesman talk from US side to get what it wants from India.

In contrast, republicans to begin with have utmost contempt for any non-white, non-Christian civilization. Relationship with them is purely business and transaction. Under Modi, I am hoping that India will be wise to deal with US on matters that impact it: business investment for example, hopefully security (which I am iffy, military support to TSP as a counterweight to India is bi-partisan in US) etc, and India not fall for lofty rhetoric. Under reps, there is a greater chance of that IMO.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby vishvak » 07 Nov 2014 20:37

a man pissing in front of Niagra falls.

Indeed, if you search for the navy of Cuba, all you see is pictures of US Navy ships, including the bigger amphibious assault ships. Then on Wikipedia, there is a category of " Ships transferred from the United States Navy to the Cuban Navy‎" on the page Category:Ships of the Cuban Navy. We should do well to upgrade a whole lot of ship building capabilities and get it to a new level altogether. Instead we are thinking of buying ships and naval air force jets from, none other than, <drumrolls...> USA.

anmol
BRFite
Posts: 1877
Joined: 05 May 2009 17:39

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby anmol » 07 Nov 2014 20:57

U.S. diplomat and longtime Pakistan expert is under federal investigation


It’s about time! Let’s hope they finally get her. These prosecutions have a way of being bobbled. Robin has two sources of support that can and will be effective. The ISI will do anything to cover for her. Pakistan has benefited from Robin’s efforts greatly, and we always wondered if she was recruited. Also, there is an extensive cadre of diplomats who we think are also part of the gravy train. We are deeply suspicious of the very career paths for South Asian diplomats in general as they are often well funded by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Many of them have a severe case of what we call “Pakimouth”. That is they say and indicate things that are well outside of where America’s interests should be, advocating belligerent aspects of Pakistan’s agendas, most notably backing Pakistan’s ambitions in Kashmir and Afghanistan. But they are very careful about covering their tracks. Proving that Madame Raphel actually materially gave information to the ISI will likely be most difficult, and we wish investigators luck.

We expect that they will be looking at money that is given to Pakistan as bribe money. Raphel and her cadres have long been all but admitting that they are bribes which they fully expect to be pilfered. “That’s the price of doing business”, is the oft heard remark about billions of dollars wasted on the Islamic kleptocracy. This thing will likely have legs as it is very old and almost certainly will involve Secretary Kerry as money trails will lead back to Congressman Charlie Wilson and a slew of defense contractors. David Mangan should be contacted on this as he actually has admitted to delivering money to the DNC HQ that was intended for Kerry.

We notice that one of the first actions taken by Raphel is to hire a PR firm. Andrew Rice has also been hired by Dubai for a dubious deal in which they purchased the management of several US container ports. We are still curious about what she knew and what she knows about the assassination of Zia which also killed her ex-husband, Arnie Raphel, then the Ambassador to Pakistan. We have always been curious why she chose, while still in college at the University of Washington to study Urdu, the language of Pakistan, and no other regional languages. Her career at State has had a curious path, seeming to plateau and avoid promotion, choosing instead to work as a lobbyist for Pakistan and related business enterprises. We are also aware of someone editing out of her Wikipedia page aspects of her career that are questionable. In particular, it has proven difficult to nail down her career in the late 1980s. However, we have no idea of what specific actions the investigators are looking into, and no one has contacted us.

We wish the investigation all the best as they are going up against a well-prepared target who has had a very long time to prepare. Robin Raphel is no amateur. She is adept at masking her motives and communication, as well as rewriting history when possible. She has lied to the Congress for many years, and there are scores of people who are well aware of this. The key area we think is of historic importance, however, is that she has consistently lied and back spun Pakistan’s many treacheries in its dealings with the United States, from the support of the Taliban to claiming support for charitable institutions which were hyped as “gains” in South Asia. Her latest schemes seem to have been encouraging “investment” into shadowy deals in Pakistan and may well have culminated in a new dam deal which the World Bank has backed away from citing the earthquake-prone nature of the intended site. It’s the kind of deal that only Raphel could love, as it is aimed squarely on failure. But there will be lobbying contracts and new town houses built from the money that will come down like monsoon floods for this lemon.

It seems to be another scheme like the UNOCAL pipeline, a proposed energy pipeline that was to lay vulnerable pipeline through war-torn Afghanistan with the Taliban as its security force. No one familiar with the region would have advocated that seriously and Jezail was simply aghast at the the suggestion at the time. But the Clintons were in the White House at the time and Benazir Bhutto was the leader of Pakistan at the time and they both seemed happy with the plan. Another person who has clearly leaned on Raphel is Mrs. Clinton herself. This means that it will be a difficult investigation to prosecute. We expect investigators to turn up extensive trails leading all over Washington and we wish the investigators Godspeed. We can only hope this breaks the back of Washington’s sick relationship with the very worst elements of Pakistan. It should be quite a ride.

We are jezail.org and can be contacted through our web pages, Facebook, and @jezail_org on Twitter.

—David Dienstag

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Manny » 07 Nov 2014 21:11

Skanda wrote:U.S. diplomat and longtime Pakistan expert is under federal investigation

A veteran State Department diplomat and longtime Pakistan expert is under federal investigation as part of a counterintelligence probe and has had her security clearances withdrawn, according to U.S. officials.

The FBI searched the Northwest Washington home of Robin L. Raphel last month, and her State Department office was also examined and sealed, officials said. Raphel, a fixture in Washington’s diplomatic and think-tank circles, was placed on administrative leave last month, and her contract with the State Department was allowed to expire this week.

Two U.S. officials described the investigation as a counterintelligence matter, which typically involves allegations of spying on behalf of foreign governments. The exact nature of the investigation involving Raphel remains unclear. She has not been charged.


http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot. ... bin+raphel

MONDAY, AUGUST 3, 2009
ROBIN RAPHEL: OLD ANTI-INDIA HAND TO JOIN HOLBROOKE'S TEAM ?
B.RAMAN

The “News”, the Pakistani daily, has reported on August 3,2009, that the Barack Obama Administration has decided to appoint Robin Raphel, who was a Counselor for Political Affairs in the US Embassy in New Delhi from 1991 to 1993 and subsequently became the Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs in the Bill Clinton Administration, as a member of the team of Richard Holbrooke, the Special Representative to the Af-Pak region.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10852
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Vayutuvan » 07 Nov 2014 22:35

University of Washington is in Seattle. IIRC, there was a proposal by UAE to buy Seattle port trust which was shot down by US Congress.

Here is a wikipedia link - there were 6 ports under the management takeover proposal.

Dubai_Ports_World_controversy

Seattle is not in the list. I distinctly remember Seattle was one of them - may be the offer was made some other time.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby A_Gupta » 07 Nov 2014 23:56

NYTimes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/08/us/ro ... .html?_r=0
WASHINGTON — Federal agents searched the home and office of a veteran State Department diplomat last month as part of a counterintelligence investigation, government officials said Friday.

The diplomat, Robin L. Raphel, is a retired ambassador and an expert on Pakistan who was working under contract as an adviser to the State Department’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. After the F.B.I. searches, Ms. Raphel was put on leave and her contract was allowed to expire.


The way the NYTimes phrases it, it might seem that the FBI search found some evidence.

Karan Dixit
BRFite
Posts: 1102
Joined: 23 Mar 2007 02:43
Location: Calcutta

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Karan Dixit » 08 Nov 2014 00:28

May be she was secretly given Nishaan-e-Pakistan by handsome Pakjabi men and the US government did not like it.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24734
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby chetak » 08 Nov 2014 00:29

Karan Dixit wrote:May be she was secretly given Nishaan-e-Pakistan by handsome Pakjabi men and the US government did not like it.


at age 67 ??

Abhijit
BRFite
Posts: 529
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Bay Area - US

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Abhijit » 08 Nov 2014 01:06

My theory is that this was a RAW operation. It was put under wraps by the UPA jokers but the new dispensation dusted it off and handed the dossier to the US spooks. Everybody knew that this woman was on the take. It would have been quite within the reach for RAW to get the goods on her.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby pankajs » 08 Nov 2014 01:17

Speculative but possible.

Doval did stay back for an additional 2 days discussing anti-terror cooperation during Modi jis US visit. My be she actively participated in diverting some of the funds under her to Taliban fronts and the RAW had dope on her. After all she had a soft spot for the bunnies.


arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby arun » 08 Nov 2014 06:18

More background for study and reflection of matter of US investigation of India hater Robin Raphel for spying for an unnamed country.

Excerpt from US State Department Press Briefing of April 11, 1995 in which the then US President Bill Clinton unleashed his personal friend Robin Raphel to support the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and trash India’s legitimate claim to all of Jammu & Kashmir.

It will do well to remember that this assault on India was no independent off reservation foray by Robin Raphel. It was calculated US policy. With prospect that it is likely that another Clinton could likely sit in the White House, undoubted malign role of Robin Raphel’s personal friend, the then US President Clinton, should not be forgotten.

India must now ascertain with zero pussy footing around and blunt sans diplomatese questioning if the US continues to view an integral part of Indian territory as “disputed territory”

Our relationship with the US can then be appropriately tweaked to reflect the outcome of the US’s answer:

Press Briefing by Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Affairs Robin Raphel, and Director of Near East and South Asian Affairs for NSC Ellen Laipson

April 11, 1995 ………………………….

Q: Prime Minister Bhutto said that she was glad that the Clinton administration accepts that Kashmir is a disputed territory. We've been hearing different positions on the Kashmir issue and on whether this administration believes it is a disputed territory or whether it's an internal problem of India and needs to be resolved bilaterally. What is the latest position of the Clinton administration on Kashmir, Ms. Raphael?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY RAPHEL: Actually, our position has remained constant; the U.S. position even before the Clinton administration has remained constant. We view the entire formal princely state of Jammu and Kashmir as disputed territory. In our view, India and Pakistan need to get together and have serious negotiations on how to resolve this dispute and other problems between them.

We have said that it is important, of course, and a practical necessity that the wishes


Full text of Press briefing is available at below link. Press briefing also touches upon Pressler Amendment and supply of F-16’s to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan:

Clicky
Last edited by arun on 08 Nov 2014 06:23, edited 2 times in total.

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9288
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Hari Seldon » 08 Nov 2014 06:21

A_Gupta wrote:The way the NYTimes phrases it, it might seem that the FBI search found some evidence.


Luckily for Ms Rapahel, the FBI is not the NYPD. Else some cawitty searches would've been in order too... Not that such would be unfamiliar (or unwelcome) to a Pak-frequenter...

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby UlanBatori » 08 Nov 2014 07:29

I could not believe this! RR was as rabid a hateful racist **** as they come. Remember her pompousness during the MTCR and NPT and maybe CTBT scam times?

This tells you that just because we see some pompous ass spouting off with seeming immunity and contempt for the Constitution, doesn't mean they are not being watched.

Can't be a political investigation - she's way past her prime, why harass someone at this age? So it's a long-building investigation, and probably there are other fish to be netted.

Pakin Harkin, maybe? (just being hopeful..) Dan Burton? Cynthia McKinney (nah! she will have immunity on the grounds that it takes intelligence to be a spy).

A whole lot of ppl there involved in supporting the Paki terrorists. Timing is curious: 2 days after election results came out. I wonder if it is significant.

Why now?

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Shreeman » 08 Nov 2014 08:54

^^^ I love the long memory and optimism in this forum. Just bubbly as a young man going into thge honeymoon all aflutter. There is less than meets the eye, not more.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6894
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby habal » 08 Nov 2014 10:57

there are 2 lobbies at work here, first there is US state dept anti-India lobby that shines at maximum during demorat periods. RR is an icon and daughter of this school.

but they tend to get too successful for their own good at times, and that is when they are overruled by the shadier and nastier, 'internationalist lobby'. They are the deep state and the one that arranges assasinations, 'history turning events', career ending injuries and plane crashes.

Roperia
BRFite
Posts: 778
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Roperia » 08 Nov 2014 13:30

The NYT story tells about the sense of panic in Pakistan

It is extremely rare for the F.B.I. to open a counterintelligence investigation into such a prominent Washington figure. Any decision by the Justice Department to open the inquiry would have had to take into account that an investigation — whatever its outcome — will have a lasting impact on Ms. Raphel’s ability in the future to operate within American diplomatic circles

<snip>

There was even speculation (in Pakistan) that Pakistan’s adversaries — whether Indian officials or powerful Indian-Americans living in the United States — had played a part in helping to open the investigation.


F.B.I. Is Investigating Retired U.S. Diplomat, a Pakistan Expert, Officials Say | NYT

I read somewhere that when former CIA Director Petraeus's email affair was discovered, it was brought to the notice of Attorney General to seek permission to proceed (which was granted).

I'd guess that somebody higher up in the chain signed off on raids at her house.

She was a senior diplomat, FBI Counter Intelligence team must have something concrete to have been granted this permission.

Is there an India link? Aren't I curious? :lol:
Last edited by Roperia on 08 Nov 2014 13:37, edited 1 time in total.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby pankajs » 08 Nov 2014 13:36

I think what you have quoted is the most significant outcome of this investigation. Even if she is not prosecuted her access and her ability as an advocate will be severely diminished.

US would not act on an Indian or American-Indian complain unless her actions some how impinged on US strategic goals. It must have been something pretty damning.

What is far more consequential is that the remaining baki advocates in US SD and elsewhere will now be more cautious as anyone pushing the baki line will be viewed with a little more suspicion. Also, anyone who has accepted baki favours in the past will suddenly start worrying about their own back trail.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24734
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby chetak » 08 Nov 2014 14:43

pankajs wrote:I think what you have quoted is the most significant outcome of this investigation. Even if she is not prosecuted her access and her ability as an advocate will be severely diminished.

US would not act on an Indian or American-Indian complain unless her actions some how impinged on US strategic goals. It must have been something pretty damning.

What is far more consequential is that the remaining baki advocates in US SD and elsewhere will now be more cautious as anyone pushing the baki line will be viewed with a little more suspicion. Also, anyone who has accepted baki favours in the past will suddenly start worrying about their own back trail.


No need to go overboard, saar. This is just a temporary negotiating position of the US. Exactly what they want of India is not out in the open or public domain yet . No doubt, it is something extraordinary for the US SD to go to such great lengths as "apparently defaming" one of their own. The pakis have hidden dawood and appear spooked. Something is blowing in the wind.

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1528
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby sooraj » 08 Nov 2014 14:47

Robin Raphel: “goddess of Indian terrorists, secessionists and other outlaws”
http://shashankjoshi.wordpress.com/2014/11/07/robin-raphel-goddess-of-indian-terrorists-secessionists-and-other-outlaws/

It’s been reported that the veteran US diplomat Robin Raphel, who had been working for the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan (SRAP), after spells as a lobbyist and a contractor in the US Embassy in Islamabad, is under federal investigation “as part of a counterintelligence probe”. She was also “placed on administrative leave last month, and her contract with the State Department was allowed to expire this week”.

As the Post noted, “espionage cases involving State Department officials are relatively rare”. But the case is also notable because Raphel was – to put it mildly, as the excerpts below demonstrate – India’s bête noire throughout the 1990s for her outspoken views. When Raphel returned to the State Department in 2009, the analyst and former intelligence officer B. Raman wrote, in an article titled ‘She’s Back’:


During her posting in the US Embassy in New Delhi [1991-1993], she was actively interacting with the various anti-India groups in Jammu & Kashmir and it was reportedly on her advice that the Hurriyat, as an umbrella organization of these groups, became very active.

It was during her tenure as the Assistant Secretary of State that the Clinton Administration declared Jammu & Kashmir as a “disputed territory” and started calling for the resolution of the dispute between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir issue in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people. This refrain has once again been taken up by the Obama Administration.

Towards the end of 1993, during a non-attributable discussion with some Indian journalists in Washington DC she reportedly defended this formulation and contended that the US considered the Kashmiri territory transferred by Pakistan to China in 1963 when Ayub Khan was the President also as disputed territory, whose future was yet to be decided. The Times of India prominently carried this story on the front page without identifying the official of the State Department who had talked to the Indian journalists on the Kashmir issue. Enquiries made by the government of India identified the official as Robin Raphel.

It was during her stewardship of the South Asian Affairs portfolio in the State Department that the Taliban under Mulla Mohammad Omar came into existence in 1994 with the joint support of the Pakistan and US Governments. The Taliban was prepared to support the construction of an oil and gas pipeline by UNOCAL, an American oil company, from Turkmenistan to Pakistan via Afghanistan and she had met Mulla Mohammad Omar in this connection. This period also saw Osama bin Laden shift from Khartoum to Jalalabad in 1996 without any objection from the US. The Taliban later shifted him to Kandahar.

Even after she left the State Department and joined the faculty of the National Defence University, she reportedly maintained active contacts with anti-India elements in J&K.

The News has correctly described her as “one known to be Pakistan’s friend”. She is.

(Raphel was also prominent in Raman’s Times of India obituary last year).

Contemporary reporting and writing also highlight just how toxic her interventions were in India. The former governor of Jammu and Kashmir devoted a section in his book to Raphel’s comments:

Screen Shot 2014-11-07 at 12.07.00

Screen Shot 2014-11-07 at 12.06.51

Following those comments, India Today wrote in 1993:


[T]he fact that the sudden renewal of international pressure on Kashmir is being led by the US, the sole remaining superpower, gives the Kashmir question unprecedented urgency, even legitimacy. Kashmir, as officials put it, has appeared on the “radar screen” and no amount of rhetoric about the Simla Agreement or aide memoires can wish that away.

US Assistant Secretary of State Robin Raphel may be the villain of the piece in New Delhi – and the flavour of the month in Islamabad – but she is certainly no loose cannon on the State Department deck. Nor is she to be dismissed as a ‘bleeding-heart’ junior functionary who overstepped her official brief. Raphel spent three years at the US embassy in New Delhi – she was married to ambassador Arnold Raphel who died in General Zia-ul-Haq’s plane crash. Her brief in India was Kashmir, more specifically what the Americans call Track-2 diplomacy which involves bringing together experts from India, Pakistan and Kashmir in ‘neutral’ situations …

Raphel, who is an articulate and aggressive speaker, suggested that the time was ripe to turn the screws on both India and Pakistan over resolving Kashmir. Her argument advocating a ‘a glove off line was, as even top level MEA officials admit, forceful and credible. The US and its western allies were “prepared to do anything” to avoid regional instability in the subcontinent …



On the surface, Raphel’s remark smacks of indirect support for militancy in the Valley. The Indian aide memoire in reaction to Raphel’s briefing, stated that “it only encourages Pakistan to persist with its interference,” and added; “We percieve… a studied tilt on the part of US towards Pakistan.”

Even in the US, Raphel’s remarks were seen as being tendentious and undiplomatic. “Raphel made a very grave mistake, completely inappropriate for an Assistant Secretary of State,” says Selig Harrison, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who has written extensively on the subcontinent … What the Raphel remark has exposed is Indian ineffectiveness in influencing US foreign policy.

India Today again, in 1994, on the “patch-up”:


It is silly, therefore, as some politicians are now doing, to sit on ceremony or to condemn the treatment and access accorded to Raphel as a manifestation of Indian obsequiousness in the face of a bully. For it was really nothing of the sort. Raphel, for all her unpalatable pronouncements, is the senior most Clinton Administration official dealing with this part of the world.

And having decided to play host to the representative of the unipolar world’s most powerful leader, it was only proper that the Government treat her with apt protocol while also using her as the lightning rod for criticism of Washington’s recent postures on Kashmir and related issues. The very fact that Raphel decided to descend on New Delhi right in the midst of a diplomatic hurricane of her own making was in itself proof that Washington wanted to make amends. And there were sound reasons for this. America’s commitment to its Manifest Destiny forces it into playing a high-profile world role at any given time. …

For starters, Raphel backtracked completely on her most controversial utterance on the validity of the Instrument of Accession. She recognised the provocation from Pakistan-trained terrorists and was at pains to stress that Washington was mounting ceaseless pressure on Pakistan. This was clearly damage control. And it apparently had the sanction of the highest authority in her land. For it was no coincidence that in the midst of Raphel’s visit, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao received an invitation from President Bill Clinton to visit the US.

The New York Times in 1994 on another flare-up:



India has reacted with anger to recent statements by the Clinton Administration over possible abuses of human rights in the Government’s efforts to put down a rebellion in Kashmir … Among the comments that have riled New Delhi was a statement last month by President Clinton while accepting the credentials of Maleeha Lodhi, Pakistan’s new Ambassador to the United States, that the United States shared Pakistan’s “concerns on the abuse of human rights in Kashmir.” The Indian reaction had been primed by remarks in Washington by Ms. Raphel, who was named last fall to the newly created post of Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs.

The Washington Post (20 March 1994, p. C1; no link) had a particularly colourful account:


Particular scorn has been reserved for the assistant secretary of state for South Asia, Robin Raphel, who until a year ago was a senior political officer in the U.S. Embassy here. Raphel, who is expected to visit Delhi on Tuesday, has become a lightning rod for complaint for her outspokenness on Kashmir.

For instance, in the middle of a tense stand-off between the Indian army and terrorists barricaded in a mosque in Kashmir last October, Raphel said at a Washington press briefing that the United States did not believe Kashmir “is forever more an integral part of India,” adding that Kashmiris should be consulted about the future of their region. The State Department churned out clarifications, and officials here conceded that the timing of Raphel’s statement was unfortunate.

Indians have focused on Raphel’s remarks, and comments by Clinton expressing concern over human rights abuses in Kashmir, as a sign that America is ignoring Pakistan’s role in fueling the insurgency and secretly favors an independent Kashmir. Nonetheless, the increased public pressure by the United States and others is paying some dividends as India has begun opening Kashmir to more international observers.

U.S. officials have complained that the Indian embassy in Washington and Indian officials in Delhi have orchestrated a flood of negative and often uninformed commentary about the United States and its policies, which are eagerly picked up and sensationalized by India’s free but strongly nationalistic press.

A front page story two weeks ago in the Hindustan Times, a popular, mainstream daily, called Raphel the “goddess of Indian terrorists, secessionists and other outlaws” and urged the government to roll out a “black carpet” for her when she arrives later this month. “Considering the animosity she arouses in every patriotic heart, politicians are expected to treat her as an untouchable,” the story said. “It is likely that she will use this country’s soil to reaffirm the Clinton administration’s commitment to destabilize India.”

Karan Dixit
BRFite
Posts: 1102
Joined: 23 Mar 2007 02:43
Location: Calcutta

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Karan Dixit » 08 Nov 2014 17:15

chetak wrote:
Karan Dixit wrote:May be she was secretly given Nishaan-e-Pakistan by handsome Pakjabi men and the US government did not like it.


at age 67 ??


I suppose there is no upper age limit for receiving Nishaan-e-Pakistan.

On a more serious note, it is well known fact that Pakistan is responsible for killing thousands of Americans both civilians and military personnel. Anyone who knows that and goes on to support Pakistan will draw some suspicion - especially these days. I have noticed lots of former Pakistan supporters are beginning to change their tune nowadays.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby vishvak » 08 Nov 2014 18:10

Raphel, for all her unpalatable pronouncements, is the senior most Clinton Administration official dealing with this part of the world.

Well, there you go. The Indian media seem to have ignored this part, where the top politicians of USA allowed the rise of the chief pastor of "terrorists, secessionists and other outlaws" in India. (Not "goddess", the press goes heathen/pagan/kufr/ when something unpalatable is to be said.)

=====
Edit: corrected incorrect auto correct.
Last edited by vishvak on 08 Nov 2014 18:44, edited 1 time in total.

member_24684
BRFite
Posts: 197
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby member_24684 » 08 Nov 2014 18:31

Kashi wrote:
SajeevJino wrote:
But Doctrine with China ..!!


You mean the pivoting poodle?!!



I always wondering When This will Comes . A Indo Jap US Naval Exercise in Bay of Bengal Twice a Year and in Indian Ocean Twice a Year to Keep out the Chinese SSN and SSBN from Indian Ocean.

Found a Interesting Story

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Eye-on-China-India-and-US-set-to-ramp-up-joint-naval-drills/articleshow/45075908.cms

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby CRamS » 08 Nov 2014 18:52

Shreeman wrote:^^^ I love the long memory and optimism in this forum. Just bubbly as a young man going into thge honeymoon all aflutter. There is less than meets the eye, not more.


ShreemanJi, you see to be a tad skeptical, what is your take?

Ambar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2053
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 09:56
Location: Weak meek unkil Sam!

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Ambar » 08 Nov 2014 21:01

Whatever it is she is damaged goods now. There was an interesting article in yawn yesterday by Almeida. He claims RR kinda forced herself between all US and Paki matters., and was near delusional with exaggerated self-importance in all matters Pakistan. Maybe in this grandiose belief she got deeper into some murkier deals and got bitten. Even if she comes out of this she is finished as an "expert diplomat". And she will be leaving the State Dept with with tainted past and no future. Maybe she can join Haqqani saheb in his speaking assignments..

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion

Postby Shreeman » 08 Nov 2014 21:13

CRamS wrote:
Shreeman wrote:^^^ I love the long memory and optimism in this forum. Just bubbly as a young man going into thge honeymoon all aflutter. There is less than meets the eye, not more.


ShreemanJi, you see to be a tad skeptical, what is your take?


A withdrawn clearance may mean a future limited to the talk circuits or think tanks. There is no "grand conspiracy" investigation. Things dont work that way.

RR had little influence left after afpak events beyond minor lobbying. Yesterday's goods. Nothing to do with tomorrow. So policies will be what they were in SD.

RR was a hater, and will stay that way. People who listened to her will still do. Why open old wounds. If something firm comes out, then there is scope for policy discussion. Otherwise this is PR for her.

my 2wcs.

ps -- WaPo is now a rag, worse than london tabloids.
edit -- it would appear the lady took some reading matter home (as noted elsewher on the forum), which would be a purely administrative matter, and has happened before.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ashbhee and 83 guests