India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

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

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby svinayak » 13 Jun 2015 05:38

What To Do About U.S.-India Relations

Alyssa Ayres, CFR's senior fellow for India, Pakistan, and South Asia, CFR's Robert D. Blackwill, Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy, and Stephen P. Cohen, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, join John D. Negroponte, vice chairman at McLarty Associates, to discuss U.S.-India relations. Following President Obama’s recent visit to India and signing of a new joint statement, the panel assesses the U.S.-India bilateral relationship and the possibilities that lie ahead in trade and defense, as well as challenges.

This meeting is part of the "What to Do About" series, which highlights specific issues and features experts who put forward competing analyses and policy prescriptions in a mock high-level U.S. government meeting.


A Deshmukh
BRFite
Posts: 295
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 14:24

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby A Deshmukh » 13 Jun 2015 18:17

Sagar G wrote:
A Deshmukh wrote:Development is slow and limited, as most of the items are restricted.

What do you mean by limited development ??? The Rustom is almost ready to be flown so whatever restricted items there was have either been developed or solutions have been worked around.

I guess you are pointing to the actuator case with Rustom for which I squarely blame DRDO for being a dumbass and trying to cut development time by slacking on the job which ultimately lead to the delay they were trying to cut down. I hope MoD makes it crystal clear to DRDO that no such adventurism takes place in the future. They have developed the necessary actuator, so that isn't going to be an issue in the future.

A Deshmukh wrote:My point being, we usually associate MTCR with missiles.

What catchup ??? The only top dog in UAV is Murica and we ain't facing Murica in any war in the near future nor are they selling their top of the line UAV's to any of our neighbours, you are merely trying to bankroll on unfounded fears to sell MTCR. We must focus on indigenous programmes and in due time we will "catch up" just like in the case of missiles.


I am not referring to Actuator case but something else.
Our UAVs are nowhere close to US or Israeli drones.
We need better UAVs - to be effective in war or peace situations. need not compare with what US has or what US has supplied to neighbors.
Rustom is flying. but the capability of UAVs is determined by its payload (weight capability, endurance and quality of sensors).
Its my understanding that any sensor - ex FLIR camera -will be allowed to be imported on LCA/other planes, but not for UAVs like Rustom.
We are significantly behind on payloads on the platforms that are flying. And IMO the need to enter MTCR is to remove one of the roadblocks.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby RoyG » 13 Jun 2015 18:22

svinayak wrote:What To Do About U.S.-India Relations

Alyssa Ayres, CFR's senior fellow for India, Pakistan, and South Asia, CFR's Robert D. Blackwill, Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy, and Stephen P. Cohen, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, join John D. Negroponte, vice chairman at McLarty Associates, to discuss U.S.-India relations. Following President Obama’s recent visit to India and signing of a new joint statement, the panel assesses the U.S.-India bilateral relationship and the possibilities that lie ahead in trade and defense, as well as challenges.

This meeting is part of the "What to Do About" series, which highlights specific issues and features experts who put forward competing analyses and policy prescriptions in a mock high-level U.S. government meeting.



We've seen this type of WASP talk over and over again. India isn't doing enough to open economy. India lags behind China. US is committed to helping India join XYZ. India is a complex place. We need to do more!

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

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby svinayak » 14 Jun 2015 19:34

RoyG wrote:
We've seen this type of WASP talk over and over again. India isn't doing enough to open economy. India lags behind China. US is committed to helping India join XYZ. India is a complex place. We need to do more!

There is something more now.
Alyssa Ayres reads from Indian news papers and uses it for discussion and analysis.
They talk about the India and its relations with other countries (russia, EU etc) as if Uncle has veto power on it or control over it.
They talk about India complaining to US about arms transfer to Pak. But then they want to discuss the India Pak relationship as if there is no connection between the arms and India Pak relations
The theme is India is a regional power and India will be left in the region.

Unless Indian elite understand these things and widen its influence out side the Anglo world Indian influence will be under developed.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16548
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby NRao » 14 Jun 2015 19:50

The theme is India is a regional power and India will be left in the region


India has had a huge presence but has never used it. Even during the nuclear deal a scientist had to step in to save the strategic angles, politicians did very little.

But, Modi seems to understand such things and for the very first time (as far as I cna tell) has started to bark (at least). IF the Mynmar incident can be considered to be of value, then there is perhaps the first overt bite too.

He is also building the economy.

But as someone stated that the present generation has to slide out to see major changes. I suspect they are right, that the younger gen has a diff set of experiences, etc.

But, with the size of India, I always felt it was up to India.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6771
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby CRamS » 14 Jun 2015 20:26

svinayak wrote:They talk about India complaining to US about arms transfer to Pak. But then they want to discuss the India Pak relationship as if there is no connection between the arms and India Pak relations
The theme is India is a regional power and India will be left in the region.



I have interacted with Alyssa Ayres during my days at that despicacle SAJA filth. She knows Hindi very well. Her claim to fame is being part of some HR group that was active in Kashmir. And so you know what her views are on Kashmir, no need to say anything more. She is nothing more that a more nuanced version of India TSP equal equal anal-yst.

But on the above, maybe I missed it in the video, but where do they actually discuss Indian reaction to US arms sales to TSP? Matter of fact, my lament has always been that for some reason, no Indian politician, no Indian commentator except Brahma Chellaney, have publicly averred that unless US stops its military dalliance with TSP, there is no substance to India US relations besides cheap talk. Have ModiJI & Co made any statements about US military aid to TSP? During US def secretary, Carter's recent visit to India, I recall some muted statement (can't find the link now) from Parriker expressing concerns on arms sale to TSP. So I am curious as where this issue was discussed.

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9242
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Hari Seldon » 14 Jun 2015 20:30

^^PRC both runs with the hares (trade, tech, turf etc) and hunts with the hounds (Taiwan, Tibet, Tiananmen) when it comes to USA.

No reason why GoI (and Modi sarkar in particular) cannot inject fresh dynamic into the tape-recordy Indo-US one and not try doing the same as well - use the US where required and arms-length stiff-upper-lip other places. No?

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

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby svinayak » 14 Jun 2015 23:08

CRamS wrote:But on the above, maybe I missed it in the video, but where do they actually discuss Indian reaction to US arms sales to TSP? Have ModiJI & Co made any statements about US military aid to TSP? During US def secretary, Carter's recent visit to India, I recall some muted statement (can't find the link now) from Parriker expressing concerns on arms sale to TSP. So I am curious as where this issue was discussed.

Check the part where Amb Robert Blackwill talks about it.

Also see the questions asked by the audience. The one question where India is blamed for TSP proliferation is interesting. Lot of P sympathizers in the country.
Another question was about the strategic partnership. The point is there is ban on military sales of certain kind. There is no economic and trade partnership between India and US as Amb Blackwill point out. US establishment does not really recognize Indian political leadership with all the visa antics.
But how this can be called as strategic partnership :-?

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7038
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby JE Menon » 14 Jun 2015 23:56

Alyssa Ayres is not your usual American TSP analyst. She has her independent point of view, and she is very committed to as much objectivity as possible. She is not going to sing our song, but she definitely won't sing the song of the Paks - and that is enough because by default that becomes pro-India. While we can nit-pick for this or that comment, etc., do note that she has also been very positive about India on many occasions. She also happens to be the wife of Sadanand Dhume.

Manny
BRFite
Posts: 846
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Manny » 17 Jun 2015 08:45

Rachel Dolezal's claim to be black is like Mani Shankar Ayer or Rahul Gandhi or the Italian white woman Sonia claiming to speak for Dalits of India!

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

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby arun » 17 Jun 2015 10:22

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

US Secretary of State talks to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s Prime Minister regarding relations with India.

Trust that if the US Secretary of State does take it upon himself to provide any unsolicited advice to India on relations with US’s Major Non-NATO Ally, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the US will be sent packing with a flea in the year by India.

Excerpt dealing with transpired between US Secretary of State and Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan:

I talked today with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan regarding a recent increase in the tensions publicly between India and Pakistan. It’s of enormous concern to all of us for all the obvious reasons. These are two very, very important countries playing a critical role with respect to regional interests, and it’s very, very important that there be no misinterpretation or miscalculation with respect to any of the back-and-forth and the empowerment some entities might feel as a result of that. The prime minister was extremely forthcoming. He could not have been more direct. He had actually just finished a conversation himself with the prime minister of India. And we welcomed some thinking together about how we can work, all of us, to try to reduce those tensions over the course of the next days and weeks.


From State Department website here:

Secretary Kerry's Press Availability


CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6771
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby CRamS » 17 Jun 2015 18:22

JE Menon wrote:Alyssa Ayres is not your usual American TSP analyst. She has her independent point of view, and she is very committed to as much objectivity as possible. She is not going to sing our song, but she definitely won't sing the song of the Paks - and that is enough because by default that becomes pro-India. While we can nit-pick for this or that comment, etc., do note that she has also been very positive about India on many occasions. She also happens to be the wife of Sadanand Dhume.


Agreed. But I have interacted with her at length. Her views on Kashmir will infuriate you. Nothing pro India about that. On other issues such as economic etc, you are right.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Singha » 17 Jun 2015 19:47

Washington: A bipartisan amendment to Intelligence Authorization Act 2016 seeking expansion of trilateral national security cooperation among the US, Israel and India has been passed by the US House of Representatives.
The amendment, moved by a group of top American lawmakers, requires a report from the Director of National Intelligence on the possibilities for growing national security cooperation among the three countries.
"While the US already has robust national security partnerships with both India and Israel, there are many areas where opportunities exist to develop and further grow these critical relationships," said Congressman Joe Crowley, one of the key architect of the amendment that was passed yesterday.
"This amendment demonstrates the commitment of Congress to ensuring that our national security strategies include expanding our cooperation with India and Israel, two of our most important friends in their respective regions," he said.
Among other sponsors of the amendment were Congressmen Eliot Engel, Ranking Member of House Foreign Affairs Committee; Ami Bera, Co-Chair of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian-Americans; Steve Chabot, a senior member of House Foreign Affairs Committee; George Holding, Co-Chair of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans; David Schweikert and Jerrold Nadler.
In the debate on the House floor, Crowley defended the amendment and praised India as a rising power.
Describing Prime Minister Narendra Modi's proposed visit to Israel as very positive being the first trip by any Indian Prime Minister to the country, Crowley said the amendment seeks to enhance cooperation between the world's oldest, world's largest democracy and the democracy in Middle East.
He highlighted the commonalities of values and interest between the nations and said that there are many avenues for cooperation between India and Israel (scientific, research, national security, defence).
"The US, along with two of our most important allies, India and Israel, have all faced the threat of international terrorism," said Bera.
"With the current instability in the Middle East and parts of South Asia, we should work together to enhance our security cooperation to continue to combat the global threat of terrorism. This amendment expresses Congress' dedication to making sure that happens," he said.
PTI

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7038
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby JE Menon » 17 Jun 2015 20:09

>>Her views on Kashmir will infuriate you.

I don't think so, and it shouldn't bother you either. American views on J&K, whether unfavourable to us or positive towards us, are relevant only to the extent that they can give weapons to Pakistan to sponsor terror there (indirectly), or sponsor terror there directly. There's nothing else they can do there. Tell me if there is something they can do now that they haven't tried and failed at. No need to worry about US views on J&K. I would say that over the past decade and a half or thereabouts, they have been moving inch by inch towards us. But they will never stop supporting J&K separatism to some extent because they need Pakistan as a stick to beat us with if, in their opinion, we seem to be getting stronger than they can stomach. Retaining options. That's also fine. We understand that sort of thing well. They also can't go beyond a point. They know that.

What matters are more serious issues, trade, defence, and other forms of people to people interaction. On those things, she's on point. This is where money, technology and strategic benefits are exchanged. That is where the substance lies.

Tuvaluan
BRFite
Posts: 1816
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Tuvaluan » 17 Jun 2015 22:31

well, well. posted without comment. Brookings has always smelt pretty noxious…and the smell will stick onto Mr. SSM given enough time.

From rediff.com short items:
Shivshankar Menon joins Brookings Institute: Former foreign secretary and national security advisor Shivshankar Menon has joined the prestigious American think-tank Brookings Institute. Menon will serve within the Foreign Policy programme at Brookings, a statement said today.

"We are honoured that Ambassador Menon will join Brookings as a Distinguished Fellow," Brookings president Strobe Talbott said.

"He has served his nation in many ways, earning the respect and admiration of those who have had the pleasure of working with him on many of the major international issues of our era," he said.

Menon currently serves as chairman of the Advisory Board of the Institute of Chinese Studies in New Delhi. He has been a Richard Wilhelm Fellow at MIT and Fisher Family Fellow at Harvard University.

He served as national security advisor to the Prime Minister of India from January 2010 to May 2014, and previously as foreign secretary of India from October 2006 to August 2009.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22277
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby chetak » 17 Jun 2015 22:41

Tuvaluan wrote:well, well. posted without comment. Brookings has always smelt pretty noxious…and the smell will stick onto Mr. SSM given enough time.

From rediff.com short items:
Shivshankar Menon joins Brookings Institute: Former foreign secretary and national security advisor Shivshankar Menon has joined the prestigious American think-tank Brookings Institute. Menon will serve within the Foreign Policy programme at Brookings, a statement said today.

"We are honoured that Ambassador Menon will join Brookings as a Distinguished Fellow," Brookings president Strobe Talbott said.

"He has served his nation in many ways, earning the respect and admiration of those who have had the pleasure of working with him on many of the major international issues of our era," he said.

Menon currently serves as chairman of the Advisory Board of the Institute of Chinese Studies in New Delhi. He has been a Richard Wilhelm Fellow at MIT and Fisher Family Fellow at Harvard University.

He served as national security advisor to the Prime Minister of India from January 2010 to May 2014, and previously as foreign secretary of India from October 2006 to August 2009.


if this was in the pipeline, the chap was already compromised and was not working full out for his country. baboo(n)s setting up lucrative post retirement assignments using the contacts that they made whilst in service is always an odious business.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Viv S » 18 Jun 2015 02:58

JE Menon wrote:I don't think so, and it shouldn't bother you either. American views on J&K, whether unfavourable to us or positive towards us, are relevant only to the extent that they can give weapons to Pakistan to sponsor terror there (indirectly), or sponsor terror there directly. There's nothing else they can do there. Tell me if there is something they can do now that they haven't tried and failed at. No need to worry about US views on J&K. I would say that over the past decade and a half or thereabouts, they have been moving inch by inch towards us. But they will never stop supporting J&K separatism to some extent because they need Pakistan as a stick to beat us with if, in their opinion, we seem to be getting stronger than they can stomach. Retaining options. That's also fine. We understand that sort of thing well. They also can't go beyond a point. They know that.

Frankly that's a pessimistic view. I'd go much further.

Back in the 90s, the Americans were on a major high - they'd prevailed in the Cold War and fought successful campaigns in the Gulf & Balkans. The whole standing-up for-the-oppressed and taking high moral ground was central to their self appointed role as global cop.

That was then. After half a decade of bleeding in Iraq only to see the rise of ISIS, and a full decade's bleeding in Afghanistan only to see the govt prepare a peace-conference with a resurgent Taliban (mediated by the Chinese no less), the US has finally returned to Mother Earth. An exhausted, badly bloodied, wiser and more cautious nation. With a record (torture, drone wars, rendition etc) that pre-empts its instinctive tendency to engage in moral preaching. And given the current state of (Islamic) world from Libya stretching to Pakistan, they're probably glad that Kashmir is India's problem and nothing to do with them.

Also, the Indian 'threat', such as it is, remains an extremely low priority given that the US itself it set to be economically eclipsed by China within a decade, and militarily eclipsed in perhaps as little as two decades. It would be akin to India facing a Pak-China combine choosing to focus on 'containing' Bangladesh.

What matters are more serious issues, trade, defence, and other forms of people to people interaction. On those things, she's on point. This is where money, technology and strategic benefits are exchanged. That is where the substance lies.

Precisely. The days where we looked to curry favour or approval ended a long time ago. The US is just another nation looking out for its own interests. We need work with it where it suits us, and ignore it where it doesn't it. Getting ideological or sentimental about it, is both myopic and foolish.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Cosmo_R » 18 Jun 2015 03:14

Viv S wrote:Precisely. The days where we looked to curry favour or approval ended a long time ago. The US is just another nation looking out for its own interests. We need work with it where it suits us, and ignore it where it doesn't it. Getting ideological or sentimental about it, is both myopic and foolish.


+1. Well said. Only niggle: US is not just another nation. With a military budget equal to rest of world plus tech and a very adaptable economy that can shift quicker than anyone, the US will remain a 'hyper power' albeit a wizened and wiser country for all the stupid pratfalls in Iraq and rest of the ME and AFG.

The US has come to realize that it does not want Kashmir to turn into another AFG or pakistan. It has enough of those on its hands.

There is a unique convergence of interests between India and the US for the near term future. We should exploit the opportunities therein to unsentimentally further our own interests.

The US is an 800 pound Gorilla whose business end we should help point in the direction of the PRC. Pakistan can be dealt with in symmetric ways :)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54275
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby ramana » 18 Jun 2015 03:16

OTH they want to point us in direction of China!!!!

VivS, very nice summary of the coming to-three decades.
And then add the demographic issues in China by then.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Cosmo_R » 18 Jun 2015 03:57

ramana wrote:OTH they want to point us in direction of China!!!!

VivS, very nice summary of the coming to-three decades.
And then add the demographic issues in China by then.


We are right behind you. Moral and political support. Go get the Yellow Peril (again). :)

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

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby RamaY » 18 Jun 2015 04:40

Can a former NSA join a foreign think tank? Just asking.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54275
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby ramana » 18 Jun 2015 04:51

In India a babu can do anything for his juniors also aspire for his munificence.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21144
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Prem » 18 Jun 2015 05:56

http://carnegieendowment.org/2015/06/12 ... istan/ialu
The shift to Pakistan for me is not that recent. I did a book on Pakistan in 1999, at that time, I wanted to see why these two countries with the same historical roots diverged after partition. We can control the historical variable, but chart a different trajectory. Then I realised that they do not, in fact, have the same history. The Punjab, the North West Frontier Province, did not experience the kind of democratisation that the rest of India had during the Raj, I include Bengal in the rest of India, by the way. On the other hand, there are converging dynamics. For instance, in many ways the politics at the local levels was almost the same, at least till the rise of Islamism in the 1980s in Pakistan and the rise of the OBCs in India in the 1990s. Biradaris politics was very similar to the clientelism brand of the « Congress system ».
There are other affinities. For instance there are resilient democrats in Pakistan.
The new government in India has engaged with almost all SAARC countries, visiting most of them in his first year, but has scrupulously avoided Pakistan. Almost as if he wants to "right size" Pakistan vis a vis other countries. What is your take?

The idea that you not only de­hyphenate yourself from Pakistan but also somewhat ignore it, is not new. But if that is dangerous. You cannot ignore a neighbour of that size, with that kind of military capability, with a history of conflict and this connection to China. To do so would also be dangerous because if you ignore Pakistan, it will make sure you pay attention to it. So there is no reason why India could not pursue the kind of engagement that previous Prime Ministers, including A. B. Vajpayee, have tried and trade and business can be used as one of the entry points. Now on the Pakistani side, the army would be not only suspicious but also happy to derail a process of rapprochement. But India needs to try again and again if only to make sure that Pakistanis felt considered. A dismissive attitude would be counter productive.

Jaffrelot’s core research focuses on theories of nationalism and democracy, mobilization of the lower castes and Dalits (ex-untouchables) in India, the Hindu nationalist movement, and ethnic conflicts in P

Tuvaluan
BRFite
Posts: 1816
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Tuvaluan » 18 Jun 2015 05:57

I find it incredible that a former NSA can work for a US State Dept. think tank like Brookings, serious what-the-effery. maybe this closeness is not post retirement, seeing as to how SSM toed the US SD line when he was NSA, including admitting to Indian involvement in Balochistan at sharm-al-sheikh.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6860
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby habal » 18 Jun 2015 10:17

this is basically what happens when you promote someone bypassing 12 others more senior and qualified. Intentions behind such ad-hoc dispensations of generosity always have tales of betrayel waiting to unfold.

regarding USA's role in subcontinent, over last few years almost $3 trillion have been pulled out of BRICS capital markets in preparation of post- IMF AIIB era. We are going to witness a change in paradigm of how business is done and $ power is going to narrow sharply in bits and shovels. India is not going to get any major FDI until this gets clear, on how things will shape up and quantum of hit on US $ is measured. If China doesn't oblige USA power projection capabilities will be at nadir. Thusly TSPA chief and Saudi prince Salman et al are extending overtures to Moscow.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22277
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby chetak » 18 Jun 2015 10:54

Tuvaluan wrote:I find it incredible that a former NSA can work for a US State Dept. think tank like Brookings, serious what-the-effery. maybe this closeness is not post retirement, seeing as to how SSM toed the US SD line when he was NSA, including admitting to Indian involvement in Balochistan at sharm-al-sheikh.


The previous NSA and the previous PM were way off base at sharm-al-sheikh. Both were unimaginative standard issue baboo(n)s who well knew the disaster that they were wantonly creating and the torrid aftermath that would consequently and surely ensue. The innate reluctance of the baboo(n) to commit anything in writing was also mysteriously and rather uncharacteristically overcome.

There was surely an "outside" hand guiding the proceedings and the fix was in even before the meeting started. They callously let the country step on a landmine that was visible in plain sight.

The opening at brookings being filled in such a blatant manner should attract the ire of the Modi govt.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Sagar G » 18 Jun 2015 17:27

Viv S wrote:There are missile & UAV components (particularly engines) that would become available, not just from the US but also UK & France.


These are "advantages" ??? In missile segment DRDO has already set a target of 2022 to free India from any technical black hole and the only remaining one in this segment is seeker manufacturing for which the GoI has already given a go ahead for setting up a fab. GTRE has developed engine for our cruise missile and various other engines are also under development for our UAV programs.

I cannot think of any reason other than to kill the indigenous development of these technologies that anybody sane enough would bring out their katora to beg from gora nations when we are at the cusp of developing them.

Viv S wrote:Our domestic UAVs & missile systems will get export access to foreign markets with the opportunity of carving out their own cost competitive niche.


Which we can do without being a part of MTCR as well. I haven't come across anything which mentions that we have to be a part of MTCR to export our tech to foreign markets. So prove that it is the case otherwise drop it.

Viv S wrote:Getting sentimental about it as you are doing, will only pre-empt a sensible decision.Fortunately, the GoI especially under the current leadership doesn't suffer from that handicap.


You haven't been able to put anything advantageous about joining the club but yet call it a "sensible decision" !!! Bringing out the katora to beg might be a sensible decision for you but it isn't for me.

I agree with the latter part of your post about sensibility of GoI, after all the allah ke naam pe dey de baba "advantages" put forth to justify our joining of MTCR the actual reason is listed in wiki article about MTCR which is

Future Memberships

During a state visit to India in November 2010 as well as January 2015,[12] US president Barack Obama announced US support for India's bid for permanent membership to UN Security Council[13] as well as India's entry to Nuclear Suppliers Group, Wassenaar Arrangement, Australia Group and Missile Technology Control Regime.[14][15]


So basically Murica and it's poodles will support our UNSC candidacy if we join gora clubs.

Post UNSC entry we can still eff the club rules without having to worry about UN, I can agree to this arrangement.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Sagar G » 18 Jun 2015 17:31

A Deshmukh wrote:I am not referring to Actuator case but something else.
Our UAVs are nowhere close to US or Israeli drones.
We need better UAVs - to be effective in war or peace situations. need not compare with what US has or what US has supplied to neighbors.


The bolded parts are contradictory, make up your mind whether you want to compare with US or not. If not then there is no point telling that they have this and we don't have that.

A Deshmukh wrote:Rustom is flying. but the capability of UAVs is determined by its payload (weight capability, endurance and quality of sensors). Its my understanding that any sensor - ex FLIR camera -will be allowed to be imported on LCA/other planes, but not for UAVs like Rustom.


The present sensor packages on inducted UAV's are doing well enough, what's the hurry ??? Besides our own sensor packages are under development and will see induction before the end of this decade.

A Deshmukh wrote:We are significantly behind on payloads on the platforms that are flying. And IMO the need to enter MTCR is to remove one of the roadblocks.


The actual reason why India might join these groups is UNSC seat support from US instead of pet technology wish lists that have been put forth. Refer my reply above to Viv S.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Viv S » 18 Jun 2015 17:42

Sagar G wrote:These are "advantages" ??? In missile segment DRDO has already set a target of 2022 to free India from any technical black hole and the only remaining one in this segment is seeker manufacturing for which the GoI has already given a go ahead for setting up a fab. GTRE has developed engine for our cruise missile and various other engines are also under development for our UAV programs.

I cannot think of any reason other than to kill the indigenous development of these technologies that anybody sane enough would bring out their katora to beg from gora nations when we are at the cusp of developing them.

We're not on the cusp on developing a high thrust turbofan engine. Not even close. If we want something in the Global Hawk class, we need to import it. And as and when we get around to developing one domestically, we'll still need something similar to the F137. Same applies to a variety of sub-systems and sensor payloads where we're basically in the same shoes as we are with the Tejas.

Post UNSC entry we can still eff the club rules without having to worry about UN, I can agree to this arrangement.

Well... as intransigent as you are about the MTCR (despite the fact that we aren't begging anyone for anything) why should we bother to pursue membership in the UNSC either? We've done without it so far, we can continue to do without it in the future.

member_29058
BRFite
Posts: 735
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby member_29058 » 18 Jun 2015 17:42

Tuvaluan wrote:well, well. posted without comment. Brookings has always smelt pretty noxious…and the smell will stick onto Mr. SSM given enough time.

From rediff.com short items:
Shivshankar Menon joins Brookings Institute: Former foreign secretary and national security advisor Shivshankar Menon has joined the prestigious American think-tank Brookings Institute. Menon will serve within the Foreign Policy programme at Brookings, a statement said today.

"We are honoured that Ambassador Menon will join Brookings as a Distinguished Fellow," Brookings president Strobe Talbott said.

"He has served his nation in many ways, earning the respect and admiration of those who have had the pleasure of working with him on many of the major international issues of our era," he said.

Menon currently serves as chairman of the Advisory Board of the Institute of Chinese Studies in New Delhi. He has been a Richard Wilhelm Fellow at MIT and Fisher Family Fellow at Harvard University.

He served as national security advisor to the Prime Minister of India from January 2010 to May 2014, and previously as foreign secretary of India from October 2006 to August 2009.


WOW! Former NSA is uncle's servant. How sad Indian situation under $onia was? Imagine how every security establishment was/is infiltrated and compromised. Imagine how many of his moles are still embedded in these institutions.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Sagar G » 18 Jun 2015 18:16

Viv S wrote:We're not on the cusp on developing a high thrust turbofan engine. Not even close. If we want something in the Global Hawk class, we need to import it. And as and when we get around to developing one domestically, we'll still need something similar to the F137.


Remind me again what we are going to do with Kabini ???

Viv S wrote:Same applies to a variety of sub-systems and sensor payloads where we're basically in the same shoes as we are with the Tejas.


The sensor suites in Tejas can be indigenized as and when GoI decides to do the same and for that firstly you have to develop the infrastructure to manufacture the sensors and that's being done as of now. Israeli sensors are doing fine and will keep doing fine till we replace them by our own which will happen in due time, no need to break bangles over that.

Viv S wrote:Well... as intransigent as you are about the MTCR (despite the fact that we aren't begging anyone for anything) why should we bother to pursue membership in the UNSC either? We've done without it so far, we can continue to do without it in the future.


Really, you want to do an == between UNSC seat and MTCR membership !!! You want to go down that road ???

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Viv S » 18 Jun 2015 19:01

Sagar G wrote:Remind me again what we are going to do with Kabini ???

Why? Is it anywhere close to being viable for a F137 class engine (as opposed to a long term research project)?

For the record, given our current core competencies, developing a Global Hawk-type HALE UAV is a far less ambitious project than developing an analogue to the turbofan that powers it.

The sensor suites in Tejas can be indigenized as and when GoI decides to do the same and for that firstly you have to develop the infrastructure to manufacture the sensors and that's being done as of now. Israeli sensors are doing fine and will keep doing fine till we replace them by our own which will happen in due time, no need to break bangles over that.

There's still plenty of major and minor equipment that we source from Europe & US. Radome/refueling probes from Cobham for example. Aside from that fact the Israelis too source components from US & EU companies, for obvious reasons its a bad idea (from a business perspective) to give Israeli companies an (avoidable) monopoly on Indian contracts. And while domestic efforts in the area are essential, a project's time-lines should not hinge upon its success (evidenced by the Tejas experience).

Really, you want to do an == between UNSC seat and MTCR membership !!! You want to go down that road ???

Oh no, there's a major difference between the two increasingly irrelevant Cold War-era clubs. One club we may never get access to, with China wielding an absolute unquestionable veto, while the other we can walk into in as little as six months with minimal diplomatic or legislative effort, notwithstanding our ego issues.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Sagar G » 18 Jun 2015 19:38

Viv S wrote:Why? Is it anywhere close to being viable for a F137 class engine (as opposed to a long term research project)?

For the record, given our current core competencies, developing a Global Hawk-type HALE UAV is a far less ambitious project than developing an analogue to the turbofan that powers it.


Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 Jun 17 New Delhi, Delhi

Development of the Kaveri core for UCAV applications is progressing well.


Yeah "long term research project" it is :roll:

HALE effort isn't going to be taken up before the MALE one is taken to production so we still have at least end of this decade when we will take up the said project and there is no problem with the Kabini core. Accepting the same will puncture a hole in your theory hence I can see why you are creating FUD.

Viv S wrote:There's still plenty of major and minor equipment that we source from Europe & US. Radome/refueling probes from Cobham for example. Aside from that fact the Israelis too source components from US & EU companies, for obvious reasons its a bad idea (from a business perspective) to give Israeli companies an (avoidable) monopoly on Indian contracts. And while domestic efforts in the area are essential, a project's time-lines should not hinge upon its success (evidenced by the Tejas experience).


The major or minor equipment that we source from gora nations doesn't fall in the restricted category hence they are supplied to us, funny that an MTCR supporter can't differentiate between commercial and restricted items !!!

The Tejas experience also taught us that instead of bending over backwards we should bash on regardless to achieve our targets. Project time lines are effed up all over the world not only in India. The excuses you give are the same one's given by dalaal lobby to kill indigenous projects.

Viv S wrote:Oh no, there's a major difference between the two increasingly irrelevant Cold War-era clubs. One club we may never get access to, with China wielding an absolute unquestionable veto, while the other we can walk into in as little as six months with minimal diplomatic or legislative effort, notwithstanding our ego issues.


Oh yeah create straw man arguments when the basic fallacy in your argument has been shown. Let's see whether China has the balls to veto us when everybody else will vote for our inclusion. If China does that then it would be clear as daylight to Indian public about the inimical nature of China towards India, let China make that choice of image why are you breaking sweat over that ??? The view that because China might veto us from joining UNSC you want India to go ahead and join MTCR with no apparent advantages is as pathetic as it can get. Not to forget the lame == between the two that you are continuing.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Viv S » 18 Jun 2015 20:55

Sagar G wrote:Yeah "long term research project" it is :roll:

HALE effort isn't going to be taken up before the MALE one is taken to production so we still have at least end of this decade when we will take up the said project and there is no problem with the Kabini core. Accepting the same will puncture a hole in your theory hence I can see why you are creating FUD.

Yes that's very nice. Meanwhile far away as the HALE is, development of a suitable turbofan remains much further. The Chinese experience with the solid CFM56 being an apt example.

The major or minor equipment that we source from gora nations doesn't fall in the restricted category hence they are supplied to us, funny that an MTCR supporter can't differentiate between commercial and restricted items !!!

All equipment intended for integration on a medium-long range UAV, is covered under the MTCR. Including dual-use items.

The Tejas experience also taught us that instead of bending over backwards we should bash on regardless to achieve our targets. Project time lines are effed up all over the world not only in India. The excuses you give are the same one's given by dalaal lobby to kill indigenous projects.

Meeting project timelines (or minimizing the delays) is far more crucial to a project's success than maximizing the percentage of locally sourced components. The Tejas Mk1 would have been defunct today had the Kaveri not been delinked from the program. And there's a good reason why they're not waiting on the Uttam for the Tejas Mk1.5

Oh yeah create straw man arguments when the basic fallacy in your argument has been shown. Let's see whether China has the balls to veto us when everybody else will vote for our inclusion. If China does that then it would be clear as daylight to Indian public about the inimical nature of China towards India, let China make that choice of image why are you breaking sweat over that ??? The view that because China might veto us from joining UNSC you want India to go ahead and join MTCR with no apparent advantages is as pathetic as it can get. Not to forget the lame == between the two that you are continuing.

Oh I'm not against UNSC membership at all. Merely pointing out the dichotomy of rejecting membership in the MTCR available without any strings, because of an ego issue over its exclusivist history, while expending a far greater degree of effort in the pursuit of permanent membership of the UNSC, a club that's much much more 'exclusive'.

I'm referring to the principle of course, the govt wouldn't do something that inane in reality.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Sagar G » 18 Jun 2015 22:07

Viv S wrote:Yes that's very nice. Meanwhile far away as the HALE is, development of a suitable turbofan remains much further. The Chinese experience with the solid CFM56 being an apt example.


Here it comes again "Gleat China couldn't do it so we won't as well" claim. I just posted what will happen with our effort and you merely glossed over it. I understand man, to sustain bullshit one must look over the facts. One another fact being that the Chinese engine failed endurance testing in Russia while Kaveri passed. Deal with it 8)

Which HALE UAV uses engines meant for commercial passenger aircraft ???

Viv S wrote:All equipment intended for integration on a medium-long range UAV, is covered under the MTCR. Including dual-use items.


And that's why we are developing them on our own so that we wouldn't have to GUBO infront of goras unlike your wish.

Viv S wrote:Meeting project timelines (or minimizing the delays) is far more crucial to a project's success than the percentage of locally sourced components. The Tejas Mk1 would have been defunct today if had the Kaveri not been delinked from the program. And there's a good reason why they're not waiting on the Uttam for the Tejas Mk1.5


Huh what defunct ??? The Kaveri still is at works while Tejas moved onto a different engine, the timelines of Kaveri wasn't matching with that of Tejas hence moved aside for it to be developed while Tejas gets inducted. The international engines were always on offer even without Kaveri. Don't like it but we will get their eventually while Tejas keeps marching forward. Uttam was never meant for 1.5 hell their was no talk of 1.5 a few months back, it's an HAL offer which for the record hasn't been confirmed by IAF as accepted. Uttam is our first effort at fighter AESA and will take time to mature and was always meant for mk.2.

Why are you talking about commercially available items while defending MTCR membership ???

Viv S wrote:Oh I'm not against UNSC membership at all. Merely pointing the dichotomy of rejecting membership in the MTCR available without any strings because of an ego issue over its exclusivist history, expending a far greater degree of effort in the pursuit of permanent membership of the UNSC, a club that's much much more 'exclusive'.

I'm referring to the principle of course, the govt wouldn't do something that inane in reality.


That's a straight faced lie, you can go ahead and read the MTCR guidelines and if still you don't understand the strings that will come attached with it if we get any technology post membership of the club then I will happily point them out to you. From subversion of topic to peddling absolute lies, I think this very much tells about the flimsy grounds you are on w.r.t. MTCR.

UNSC club will give powers/international heft to us which MTCR will never provide so stop doing your ridiculous == between the two. Not to mention that we blew MTCR out of this world hence talking now about UNSC membership which otherwise would have never come.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Viv S » 18 Jun 2015 22:44

Sagar G wrote:Here it comes again "Gleat China couldn't do it so we won't as well" claim. I just posted what will happen with our effort and you merely glossed over it. I understand man, to sustain bullshit one must look over the facts. One another fact being that the Chinese engine failed endurance testing in Russia while Kaveri passed. Deal with it 8)

You posted a tweet. Inference being that while even the Russians are forced to tie up with their Westerners on propulsion projects, we're on the 'cusp' of leapfrogging decades of technological development.

Which HALE UAV uses engines meant for commercial passenger aircraft ???

Which indeed. How about the only one in production (apart from China) i.e. Global Hawk/Triton. Uses the same engine as the DRDO's new AEW&C aircraft. :lol:

Huh what defunct ??? The Kaveri still is at works while Tejas moved onto a different engine, the timelines of Kaveri wasn't matching with that of Tejas hence moved aside for it to be developed while Tejas gets inducted. The international engines were always on offer even without Kaveri. Don't like it but we will get their eventually while Tejas keeps marching forward. Uttam was never meant for 1.5 hell their was no talk of 1.5 a few months back, it's an HAL offer which for the record hasn't been confirmed by IAF as accepted. Uttam is our first effort at fighter AESA and will take time to mature and was always meant for mk.2.

'Timeline wasn't matching' huh? And here you were telling the forum that timelines don't matter since everyone is running late. And giving the Uttam 'time to mature'! Why not hold up the program until its ready, in the interests of total indigenization? Why treacherously resort to imports to streamline the development?

Why are you talking about commercially available items while defending MTCR membership ???

Dual use technology is also controlled under the MTCR regime.

That's a straight faced lie, you can go ahead and read the MTCR guidelines and if still you don't understand the strings that will come attached with it if we get any technology post membership of the club then I will happily point them out to you.

Go ahead and point them out.

From subversion of topic to peddling absolute lies, I think this very much tells about the flimsy grounds you are on w.r.t. MTCR.

Yup. Me and our current govt. Both shamelessly peddling lies. :lol:

UNSC club will give powers/international heft to us which MTCR will never provide so stop doing your ridiculous == between the two. Not to mention that we blew MTCR out of this world hence talking now about UNSC membership which otherwise would have never come.

'International heft'? That comes from the UN nowadays does it?

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Sagar G » 18 Jun 2015 23:07

Viv S wrote:You posted a tweet. Inference being that while even the Russians are forced to tie up with their Westerners on propulsion projects, we're on the 'cusp' of leapfrogging decades of technological development.


A tweet from a well respected defence journo. Russia also has a law which bars them from importing defence equipments how about that. I would like to know which Russian defence equipment uses barred tech from the west. Do point out that to me.

Viv S wrote:Which indeed. How about the only one in production (apart from China) i.e. Global Hawk/Triton. Uses the same engine as the DRDO's new AEW&C aircraft. :lol:


And that engine is the same as CFM 56 ??? Even HAL is building one for HALE.

Viv S wrote:'Timeline wasn't matching' huh? And here you were telling the forum that timelines don't matter since everyone is running late. And giving the Uttam 'time to mature'! Why not hold up the program until its ready, in the interests of total indigenization? Why treacherously resort to imports to streamline the development?


I never said that you should read my post again instead of putting words in my mouth. Fine go ahead and hold up an offer by HAL for Uttam to mature, I don't have any problem with that. 1.5 isn't official yet that you are banging your head about that. Importing is and always will be a short term solution unless it is for commercial segment.

Viv S wrote:Dual use technology is also controlled under the MTCR regime.


Dual use tech isn't available to India and hence we are developing the same. How hard it is for you to fathom ???

Viv S wrote:Go ahead and point them out.


Gladly

2. The Annex consists of two categories of items, which term includes equipment and technology. Category I items, all of which are in Annex items 1 and 2, are those items of greatest sensitivity. If a Category I item is included in a system, that system will also be considered as Category I, except when the incorporated item cannot be separated, removed or duplicated. Particular restraint will be exercised in the consideration of Category I transfers regardless of their purpose, and there will be a strong presumption to deny such transfers. Particular restraint will also be exercised in the consideration of transfers of any items in the Annex, or of any missiles (whether or not in the Annex), if the Government judges, on the basis of all available, persuasive information, evaluated according to factors including those in paragraph 3, that they are intended to be used for the delivery of weapons of mass destruction, and there will be a strong presumption to deny such transfers. Until further notice, the transfer of Category I production facilities will not be authorised. The transfer of other Category I items will be authorised only on rare occasions and where the Government (A) obtains binding government-to-government undertakings embodying the assurances from the recipient government called for in paragraph 5 of these Guidelines and (B) assumes responsibility for taking all steps necessary to ensure that the item is put only to its stated end-use. It is understood that the decision to transfer remains the sole and sovereign judgement of the Government.


5. Where the transfer could contribute to a delivery system for weapons of mass destruction, the Government will authorize transfers of items in the Annex only on receipt of appropriate assurances from the government of the recipient state that:

A. The items will be used only for the purpose stated and that such use will not be modified nor the items modified or replicated without the prior consent of the Government;

B. Neither the items nor replicas nor derivatives thereof will be re transferred without the consent of the Government.



Basically which means that India will be subservient to the country which supplies it with dual use tech. Viv S is batting for the same and agrees to this !!!

Viv S wrote:Yup. Me and our current govt. Both shamelessly peddling lies. :lol:


Don't get excited yet the offer to join is being looked at not final and neither the current GoI will bend backwards to please western nations, unlike you.

Viv S wrote:'International heft'? That comes from the UN nowadays does it?


No no it comes with MTCR and GUBOaasana.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby Viv S » 18 Jun 2015 23:45

Sagar G wrote:A tweet from a well respected defence journo.

A tweet nonetheless. It does get any more devoid of detail and context than that.

Russia also has a law which bars them from importing defence equipments how about that. I would like to know which Russian defence equipment uses barred tech from the west. Do point out that to me.

That's nonsense. How about the Damocles pod and Catherine imagers for a start. And cockpit glassware from Thales. Engines from France and Ukraine. Mission computers for the Su-30 from India. Two 20,000 ton Mistral class helicopter carriers from DCNS! All illegal under Russian law?

And that engine is the same as CFM 56 ??? Even HAL is building one for HALE.

Don't try to obfuscate the issue. You were confident that a HALE UAV could never use a 'commercial engine'. Having being corrected on the matter, don't pretend you were talking about the CFM56 all along.

I never said that you should read my post again instead of putting words in my mouth. Fine go ahead and hold up an offer by HAL for Uttam to mature, I don't have any problem with that. 1.5 isn't official yet that you are banging your head about that. Importing is and always will be a short term solution unless it is for commercial segment.

Importing is a 'long term solution' for the Tejas program (F404/F414). But point was even as a short term solution an import has valuable utility if pushes a domestic program along. Which is where access to global suppliers will welcomed by our UAV developers as well as the armed forces.

Dual use tech isn't available to India and hence we are developing the same. How hard it is for you to fathom ???

Membership in the MTCR will provide us access to dual use equipment and therefore reduce development cycles. How hard is that for you to fathom? Eventually the degree of indigenous content can be increased, as associated efforts bear fruit.

Gladly
5. Where the transfer could contribute to a delivery system for weapons of mass destruction, the Government will authorize transfers of items in the Annex only on receipt of appropriate assurances from the government of the recipient state that:

A. The items will be used only for the purpose stated and that such use will not be modified nor the items modified or replicated without the prior consent of the Government;

B. Neither the items nor replicas nor derivatives thereof will be re transferred without the consent of the Government.



Basically which means that India will be subservient to the country which supplies it with dual use tech. Viv S is batting for the same and agrees to this !!!

What are you talking about? Seriously? All the quoted text said that members will not modify imported equipment, re-export it, or use it for an unagreed purpose without approval (most standard EULAs specify the same conditions).

Where pray sir, is the 'subservience'? And by extension why won't the other members of the regime be equally 'subservient' to India?

Don't get excited yet the offer to join is being looked at not final and neither the current GoI will bend backwards to please western nations, unlike you.

India applies for Membership of MTCR regime - 11 June 2015

They're not 'looking' at anything. They're pretty much doing it. Maybe they haven't understood the insidious MTCR text as well as you have. :lol:

Viv S wrote:'International heft'? That comes from the UN nowadays does it?


No no it comes with MTCR and GUBOaasana.

Cute. Keep repeating that while the PM pursues India's membership in the regime. :mrgreen:

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

Re: India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

Postby svinayak » 19 Jun 2015 09:16

In honor of the inaugural International Yoga Day on June 21, Tulsi has introduced a Congressional Resolution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOWwYWJE2Bg

Paid for by Aloha Committee, a joint fundraising committee authorized by Tulsi for Hawai‘i and Time to United Lead and Serve with Integrity – TULSI PAC


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: saip and 26 guests