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.
arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4049
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby arshyam » 14 Apr 2016 18:48

Chetak saar, no agreements have been signed yet, but the publicity and the apparent lack of willingness by our establishment to look at them critically is concerning. Apart from BK and PB Mehta, I haven't seen anyone else even mildly opposing it on its merits (I still think there is no need for this agreement and we can meet our interests without these).

krishna_krishna
BRFite
Posts: 911
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 04:14

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

Postby krishna_krishna » 14 Apr 2016 18:58

@Viv S GLoNass was fully operational by 95

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

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

Postby UlanBatori » 14 Apr 2016 19:01

I think 'Agreements' are overrated for their binding power, and underrated for their BS potential. This is the #1 Lesson of the Strategic Engagement Between US and India.
1. Agreement to Separate the Civilian and Military Components of the Indian Space Program. O-K!!! DRDO and ISRO ppl do not speak to each other any more, don't go to the same weddings, chai-biscoots, university chai-biskoots. When they see each other they cross the road.
Allows US-India collaboration on Chandrayaan, Mangalyaan, innumerable boondoggle Phoren Trips to India and US by respective Space Agints.
2. Agreement to Separate the Civilian and Military Nuclear Programs of India. O-K! Likewise, no fuel swapped. Not at all! US just knows **NOTHING*** about any military use of nyookulear by India. Allows endless chai-biscoot about non-viable power plants, reactors etc, but removed bar on selling overpriced yoor anium to India.

So this military base thingy is likewise. Removes a lot of travel restrictions, allows chai-biskoot, and access for landing and overnight stays, a few repairs and fat-burgers or vada-pav and Kingfisher beer. Just gotta get over the hype and learn to keep secrets. GOI has always been uber-paranoid on the wrong things - NO PHOTOGRAPHY signs outside All India Radio stations to keep ppl from taking photos of Babus goofing off..NO PHOTOGRAPHY FROM AIRPLANES OVER INDIAN TERRITORY.. Come on! Need to get over it. While the BigWigs sell all those and much much more from deep inside, for a bottle of Johny Walker.
Last edited by UlanBatori on 14 Apr 2016 19:05, edited 1 time in total.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24767
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 14 Apr 2016 19:03

arshyam wrote:Chetak saar, no agreements have been signed yet, but the publicity and the apparent lack of willingness by our establishment to look at them critically is concerning. Apart from BK and PB Mehta, I haven't seen anyone else even mildly opposing it on its merits (I still think there is no need for this agreement and we can meet our interests without these).


I knew that arshyam, saar :oops: . and yet I foolishly overlooked it

The full agreement has not yet been unfolded in the public domain or maybe not even presented to India for scrutiny. It is bound to have some restrictive clauses about which we will get hit later. Luckily Doval saab is in chair and parrikar will seek help in understanding the nuances. The termite queen govt would have kept the MOD out of the loop and insisting on handling it thru the MEA only. Matters are improving.

with the obama sun fast setting, the Indians should focus on the next set of crooks to infest the office of the POTUS. Things can change dramatically, if bill clinton becomes the first lady. :)

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24767
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 14 Apr 2016 19:06

Viv S wrote:
chetak wrote:then, why did they shut off the GPS over cashmere during the kargil war?? It impeded the IAF bombing runs.

Why were the IAF pilots flying with 'hand-held' GPS-devices jury rigged into the cockpit, if the region had no GPS coverage?


I was there, were you??

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

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

Postby Viv S » 14 Apr 2016 19:13

krishna_krishna wrote:@Viv S GLoNass was fully operational by 95

And utterly degraded by 99, most constituent satellites had a lifespan of 2-3 years (launched between 1985-1990). The next generation of satellites (Glonass-M) was launched starting 2003.

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

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

Postby Viv S » 14 Apr 2016 19:16

chetak wrote:I was there, were you??

You were where? Do elaborate please.

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_20292 » 14 Apr 2016 19:17

chetak wrote:
then, why did they shut off the GPS over cashmere during the kargil war?? It impeded the IAF bombing runs. This perfidy from them, even after we helped them so much during the gulf war??

and how easily and casually they stabbed us during kargil.

yet, we foolishly signed the LSA with these guys??



1. because we werent as powerful in 1999 as we are now.
2. because China wasnt as powerful in 1999 as they are now.
3. The US is individualistic - the primary credo is selfism. They could say to us - hey - we gave the Injuns the nuclear deal and they didnt buy our MMRCA/ nuclear reactors.

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

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

Postby habal » 14 Apr 2016 19:20

Viv S wrote:
chetak wrote:I was there, were you??

You were where? Do elaborate please.


he is a pilot.

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_20292 » 14 Apr 2016 19:21

arshyam wrote:Strategic analyst C. Uday Bhaskar concurred and said the LEMOA would benefit India in the long term. "It is an India-specific agreement. I do think it will be in India's interest in the long term in terms of being able to obtain fuel and logistics at short notice," Bhaskar, who is the director of think tank Society for Policy Studies, told IANS.
What is wrong our analysts?


How tough is it to understand that when we patrol the South China Sea, we can get fuel from some base there, maintained by the US?

Can we embrace the buggers rather than be scared of them? Use them properly and be transactional with them. (like they are , with everyone else)

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

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

Postby Viv S » 14 Apr 2016 19:36

habal wrote:he is a pilot.

During Kargil? Should be some great stories there. Hopefully he'll share some of that on the BR blog.


I've been going by what the IAF brass stated -


Much of the IAF’s improved combat effectiveness during the campaign over time was a direct result of Western Air Command’s eventual replacement of classic manual dive bombing by MiG-23s and MiG-27s with the more accurate method of GPS-aided level bombing from safer altitudes above the effective reach of the enemy’s man-portable infrared surface-to-air missiles. As the command’s AOC-in-C at the time later recalled, “when the conflict started, there was only one squadron fitted with GPS. We [accordingly] acquired hand-held GPS instruments from the market and fitted them in the aircraft,” which allowed for “a somewhat ad hoc system… . With the target coordinates available, on approach to the target, pilots dropped their bombs at the determined distance from the target. We knew that if the coordinates were accurate, the results would be reasonable.” Air Marshal Patney added: “We also knew that the accuracy would be much better at lower heights. "at is why we resorted to night operations in those forbidding hills and at low levels of around 500 feet, something never done before anywhere in the world and that also with aircraft that had no modern aids and in an area where no radars could operate.”103 Air Chief Marshal Tipnis later applauded this novel initiative as the air war’s “biggest contribution to ingeniousness.” - Airpower at 18,000'

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17076
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

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

Postby NRao » 14 Apr 2016 20:28

Do you expect the amrekis to train brown Indians (including owasi's pals) on current bleeding edge top secret weapons + systems + Avionics + EW systems and what not??


As a data point:

They have been doing that for some time and continue to do so even today , IAF, IN and SF.


However, I suspect you mean an expectation you (or perhaps someone else) had/have at a very granular level. Nope. You just cannot have that expectation from anyone outside your own nation. Which is why I had stated a few pages ago India needs to act like Pakistan/Turkey/China (some took that as an insult, comparing India to them, but) - take what you need and act in your own interest. Even Israel does that.

Why did the US cut GPS? Well, the more pertinent question is why was India not prepared? For EVERY critical/strategic eventuality India needs to have a ready made response (nuclear, ICBMs, GPS, spares, etc). It s really silly that in 2016 people are recycling arguments made in mid 90s. You just HAVE to expect the worst.
Last edited by NRao on 14 Apr 2016 20:39, edited 1 time in total.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby JE Menon » 14 Apr 2016 20:30

Guys, there are US naval bases in Djibouti (Camp Lemonnier), Kenya (Manda Bay), Kuwait Naval Base, Fujairah Naval Base, Jebel Ali - and I'll bet there are in Saudi as well. If you are saying that such access is useless, then that's a different story altogether.

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

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

Postby sanjaykumar » 14 Apr 2016 20:55

They want access to the Andamans, nothing else.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5248
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 14 Apr 2016 21:01

JE Menon: Looks like Djibouti is a free for all, US, French, Chinese (their first overseas base). As for India being able to use US assets. I am sure it will be enabled for humanitarian missions. It will also be enabled for military missions - that meet their approval. In this region, it is India that should have the necessary bases and relationships for access to the littoral states. It is we that can and should act independently to secure bases in the Agalega Islands, Seychelles, Mozambique, Farkhor, Nha Trang and Chabahar. An independent power cannot rely on a foreign power to protect her interests when and where needed based on infrastructure controlled by another power. It is the definition of subjugation of the national interest.

Yes - one can argue, that these agreements do not "stop" India from yet pursuing these options. But in an environment of very tight budgets, the Navy that does not have the resources to even staff the A&N command with teeth, it balks at talk of foreign bases. This is also probably the reason Farkhor does not have ANY IAF assets. Chabahar has not been invested into. This is the result of keeping defense spending under 2% for a decade now and no political consequences for such mismanagement.

I am sure some will innovate creative reasons to loose our independence of maneuver. Including but not limited to the Chinese are coming!!!

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17076
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

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

Postby NRao » 14 Apr 2016 21:07

sanjaykumar wrote:They want access to the Andamans, nothing else.


Vizag.

They have been using Cochin.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1924
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

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

Postby sudeepj » 14 Apr 2016 21:40

chetak wrote:
then, why did they shut off the GPS over cashmere during the kargil war?? It impeded the IAF bombing runs. This perfidy from them, even after we helped them so much during the gulf war??

and how easily and casually they stabbed us during kargil.

yet, we foolishly signed the LSA with these guys??


I have heard this story of how the US 'switched off GPS over Kashmir' during the Kargil crisis multiple times. But no first hand, authoritative source.. So if Chetak saab can provide one, itll be illuminating.

As far as I know,

1. The antenna design for satellites up to Block III is 'wide angle' such that it transmits to the entire Earth.
2. The GPS satellite, in orbit @26,000 kms, sees a vast part of the Earth.
3. You can't just switch off the signal when the Satellite is visible in, say Kashmir. The average number of satellites visible at particular latitudes may be as many as 12! Switching off the signal would mean turning off half of the total GPS satellites, and making the entire system completely inoperable!
4. Block III satellites will have a new antenna, called a 'spot beam antenna' installed, that is a high gain directional antenna, that can be used to either boost the M signal in specific theaters, or jam the signal in specific theaters*. The first block III will be launched in 2017.

Of course, the Khan can do many things. But based on available information, to me it sounds unlikely that the US even had to capability to 'switch off' GPS over a specific region.

*This jamming of the signal is not an advertised capability, its just a logical inference.
Last edited by sudeepj on 14 Apr 2016 21:44, edited 1 time in total.

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 » 14 Apr 2016 21:43

I think they can error the signal by 100s of meters by area. Allegedly done in georgian war

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4049
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby arshyam » 14 Apr 2016 21:54

mahadevbhu wrote:How tough is it to understand that when we patrol the South China Sea, we can get fuel from some base there, maintained by the US?

Pretty darn tough, actually. Especially when our ships and planes routinely patrol in that area, and don't use any djinn tech to keep the tanks full. Can you tell me what they do today, and why that won't work going forward? I suppose you have heard of Vietnam, and her offers for us to use her facilities (Da Nang, Cam Ranh Bay, Haiphong, etc.)? Maybe, just maybe, they have some fuel to sell us? Their food is pretty good too, btw.

mahadevbhu wrote:Can we embrace the buggers rather than be scared of them? Use them properly and be transactional with them. (like they are , with everyone else)

To be transactional (which we currently are anyway), there is no need for an embrace. A firm handshake is sufficient. Fear, OTOH, will be to hide under a rock and not answer a phone call :lol:

It's easy to dismiss a question by using the 'fear' argument, but harder to actually try to answer the question. I will wait for your answer.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1924
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

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

Postby sudeepj » 14 Apr 2016 21:58

Singha wrote:I think they can error the signal by 100s of meters by area. Allegedly done in georgian war


Again, each satellite is visible over a very large portion of the Earth. Almost 1/3 of entire Earth is visible from that high up! You can't mess up the signal transmitted by the satellite, and expect it to stay bad in an area a few hundred kms across.. The satellite that is high up in Georgian sky is likely visible all over Europe. What happens to receivers that are relying on that signal in the rest of Europe? Receivers dont do any 'error checking' on the signal transmitted by the satellite.. The assumption is that the signal transmitted by the satellite is valid and correct, and if incorrect, the satellite will transmit an 'unhealthy' status. So to deny GPS in Georgia, the US would play with receivers all over Europe? There is a lot of telecom equipment that uses GPS receivers to keep time. All of those will go for a toss as well.. Then there is the sheer number of satellites that will have to transmit the bad signal.. This particular strategy, just will not work. What will work is a specific jamming signal transmitted by the satellite itself, which is focused over a very small area. This capability is present in Block III satellites, but as far as I know, not in the earlier satellites.

But who knows Khan ki maya? There may be other ways to achieve the same result.. Which is why I am curious as to the source of this statement that GPS stopped working in Kashmir during Kargil. Def ministry reports indicate otherwise, and that the airforce used even handheld GPS receivers to drop bombs!

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4049
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby arshyam » 14 Apr 2016 22:34

JE Menon wrote:Guys, there are US naval bases in Djibouti (Camp Lemonnier), Kenya (Manda Bay), Kuwait Naval Base, Fujairah Naval Base, Jebel Ali - and I'll bet there are in Saudi as well. If you are saying that such access is useless, then that's a different story altogether.

Thanks for enumerating some of these bases, JEM saar. This is what I have been trying to understand for a while. What are the US bases we will get access to, and which of ours will they get access to. A full list will be illuminating, I am sure - my hypothesis is, we will at best get access to bases in our own neighbourhood (many of which we could get ourselves if we put efforts into it) and they will get access to our mainland bases. We will on-paper get access to their mainland bases, but since we have no legitimate business there, it won't amount to anything. I can't help but see a disparity there, and if folks say that's all right, that's a different story altogether, to put it in your own words :).

[Rest of this post is addressed generally to all]
There are two aspects of this whole issue, as I see it. The tactical one is the signing of these agreements, enumerating the facilities that will be given access. That itself seems problematic to me, as I explained above. But we should not ignore the fact that there is a strategic dimension to it - nothing hidden, the Americans have been openly saying it. There is nothing wrong in that dimension per se, but we should carefully consider if we want to be a part of it.

For that, we need to first answer what it is we want.

I think the American side's answer to that question is quite straightforward - access to the sub-continent and regular presence coming and going. It's not food or fuel - they can get it from Sri Lanka anyway, not to mention Singapore, DG, and the bunch of facilities mentioned above. The reason for this access again is obvious, isn't it? Be fully involved in India's development as a purported friend (no issues there actually), but keep on eye on things so we don't do things contrary to US interests. Again no issues, that's how realpolitik is played - but we should recognise it for what it is - for sure another '71 will be difficult to execute. Are we comfortable with that? Also, have we recognized the limitations of the Sino-US rivalry, considering their economic ties are far stronger than with us, and its impact on us in the long term? Questions, questions.

What is India's answer to that question? If we really want to dominate the IOR and Indo-China sea as an independent power, then we should bite the bullet and actually act upon it. Increase our damn budget from the pittance 1.65%, increase the Navy's share in the budget, act upon the various offers to host our bases in the IOR rim (the natural outcome from the Navy-led IOR symposium) and elsewhere. That means Mauritius, Mozambique, Oman, Vietnam and maybe Singapore, for starters. We could increase the level of engagement with Phillipines, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia in the ICS region, and with Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa on the other side, and maybe get our own facilities in some of these countries. China somehow got into Djibouti - maybe we can do so too. Accelerate the forever on-going Chahbahar, and increase presence in Afghanistan beyond the few Mi-24s. Engage Russia and Tajikistan actively, and activate the Farkhor air base for proper ops. Lastly, beef up A&N properly, time for a 3rd fleet focussed on the strait and points south. Being sure of ourselves and engaging with these countries from a position of self-confidence and strength will evoke a better response from them, than these tentative efforts on someone else's shoulders.

Btw, none of these actions preclude talking to the USN. I am all for it. We should continue with Malabar, and play an active role in RIMPAC, etc. But do we need these agreements to do all that?

Instead of doing any of the above, we seem to be content to simply sign agreements and expect the Americans to do this work for us. We will simply waltz in with our ships and putter about. Really? If we have to punch at our weight, we need to show some muscle. Not more of the non-violence inspired meekness.

Riding on the US's shoulders won't cut it - unless we are content to be like Japan or Korea. I repeat this, I am not content to see India in that level. I think most of this board will agree with me on this point.

Lastly, for those who say questioning these agreements is being fearful, let me return the compliment. Why so much fear that we have to run the Americans to 'help' us get food and fuel? Too scared to ask on our own?

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

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

Postby vishvak » 14 Apr 2016 23:49

The whole Kargil war was about terror munna Pakis sneaking in to invade India and Indians burning midnights oil to kick out the barbarians. What do you even say to switch off GPS signals 'in Kashmir region'?

We better have a complimentary list available so that such alphabet soup treaties can be pushed to some join (Indo-Japan-US-Aussie) type treaties. Mig-35 would prolly be at the very top in such a list.

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

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

Postby TSJones » 14 Apr 2016 23:51

^^^^^ Arshyam +1

.....nothing rewarding or productive is easy to do......

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 950
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

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

Postby KrishnaK » 15 Apr 2016 00:13

Clearly, Modi seeks to transform India from being merely an influential entity into one whose weight and preferences are defining for international politics. While this desire is laudable, it appears that India’s climb to great power status will take time. Although contemporary projections of global growth out to 2050 suggest that India will become a true pole by then, they also conclude that it will remain the weakest of the principal entities—China, the United States, the European Union, and India—dominating the international system at that time.6 A detailed analysis from 2012 suggested that India, representing only 7 percent of the global product in 2050, will remain well behind China at 20 percent and the United States and the European Union at 17 percent each, though it will be somewhat ahead of Japan at 5 percent and comfortably lead Russia and Brazil at 3 and 2 percent, respectively. Assuming that current U.S. alliances survive until then, the Western democracies and Japan will still reign supreme with 39 percent of the global product, almost double that of China’s and similarly close to double China’s and Russia’s gross domestic products (GDPs) combined.7
It is in the greater Asia-Pacific region, however, that India can make a dramatic difference to the continental balance. If India allies with the United States and Japan, the resulting 29 percent of the global product will easily exceed China’s 20 percent in contrast to only the marginal advantage that the two democracies will enjoy if India sits out. Against China and Russia together (a total of 23 percent), India’s contribution will become even more valuable because it will erase the slight inferiority that will otherwise mark the collective U.S.-Japanese product.
Such projections help to characterize India’s value in the larger geopolitical context, and their underlying insight is sobering. Although India will likely be transformed into a genuine pole by 2050, it will remain fundamentally a balancing power—a swing state—rather than a colossus capable of either holding its own against a major rival such as China or defining the international system to its advantage in the face of possible opposition.



From http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/04/05 ... power/iwf5

American ability at shaping world order rests on its ability to forge alliances. It's ability to forge one that moderates China's behaviour rests on its ability to get India in that camp. It is in our interests to moderate China's belligerence as well.

The US much like India and other established democracies has been transparent about their large term strategic goals. There is no need for reading the tea leaves type conspiracy theories.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17076
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

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

Postby NRao » 15 Apr 2016 01:29

KrishnaK,

Thanks for data point post.

So, they are projecting China as #1, US as #2 and India as #3.

I get this EU stuff, but will it last into the 50s I wonder. If it does then it would be solid block, with not as many differences as now. But I very much doubt that model.

I still think India will be a solid #3. And India needs to prepare for that status across the board.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55340
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 15 Apr 2016 02:17

Rudradev did say the same thing on his own analysis.


KrishnaK, All I can say is US track record has been quite bad.
And to quote an American general "Just because you are paranoid, doen't mean there is no one out there to get you!"

So be cautious of Greco-Romans(in Judeo-Xian robes) bearing gifts.

---
Also on the article excerpt you posted in 2016 we are seeing Brazil meltdown and China economy in doldrums.
Thanks to that today the biggest coal producer in US has declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy: Peabody Energy Services of St Louis.

And if China + India would at 27% be bigger than the other groups.

Add Russia via the CA grouping at 30% it would be a Asian land based group.

Add EU with its 17% it would be Euro-Asia land based system with 47% of the World GDP.



---
All,

I don't see a role in Indo-China Sea for India to be in joint patrols wearing out our hard paid ships.
They are needed near home to protect Bay of Bengal and police the Arabian Sea.
Note my words usage.

Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 819
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby Y. Kanan » 15 Apr 2016 02:51

Viv S wrote:
chetak wrote:then, why did they shut off the GPS over cashmere during the kargil war?? It impeded the IAF bombing runs.

Why were the IAF pilots flying with 'hand-held' GPS-devices jury rigged into the cockpit, if the region had no GPS coverage?


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home ... 254691.cms

The space-based navigation system maintained by the US government would have provided vital information, but the US denied it to India.

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

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

Postby TSJones » 15 Apr 2016 04:13

Viv S wrote:
habal wrote:he is a pilot.

During Kargil? Should be some great stories there. Hopefully he'll share some of that on the BR blog.


I've been going by what the IAF brass stated -


Much of the IAF’s improved combat effectiveness during the campaign over time was a direct result of Western Air Command’s eventual replacement of classic manual dive bombing by MiG-23s and MiG-27s with the more accurate method of GPS-aided level bombing from safer altitudes above the effective reach of the enemy’s man-portable infrared surface-to-air missiles. As the command’s AOC-in-C at the time later recalled, “when the conflict started, there was only one squadron fitted with GPS. We [accordingly] acquired hand-held GPS instruments from the market and fitted them in the aircraft,” which allowed for “a somewhat ad hoc system… . With the target coordinates available, on approach to the target, pilots dropped their bombs at the determined distance from the target. We knew that if the coordinates were accurate, the results would be reasonable.” Air Marshal Patney added: “We also knew that the accuracy would be much better at lower heights. "at is why we resorted to night operations in those forbidding hills and at low levels of around 500 feet, something never done before anywhere in the world and that also with aircraft that had no modern aids and in an area where no radars could operate.”103 Air Chief Marshal Tipnis later applauded this novel initiative as the air war’s “biggest contribution to ingeniousness.” - Airpower at 18,000'


I don't think think the GPS signal was turned off.

here is a news article:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home ... 254691.cms

SHARIKOTA: When Pakistani troops took positions in Kargil in 1999, one of the first things Indian military sought was GPS data for the region. The space-based navigation system maintained by the US government would have provided vital information, but the US denied it to India.


I think what India was requesting was geospatial mapping data.

and the agency that provides that is the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency which is top secret.

as of yet. there is no treaty to share that. except maybe with the brits. after all, they are using our trident missiles.

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 » 15 Apr 2016 04:50

Isnt that info essential to awacs also and cartosats later generated our own?

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

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

Postby UlanBatori » 15 Apr 2016 05:04

Ah, So! India was asking
Where dem terrorists pls? U know if u figure out how to hold ur fancy Space Images right side up and look

And the Snooty Ones in the Pentagon sat on their thumbs until 2 years later when the terrorists CAME through the Pentagon walls.

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

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

Postby svinayak » 15 Apr 2016 05:17

ramana wrote:


---
All,

I don't see a role in Indo-China Sea for India to be in joint patrols wearing out our hard paid ships.
They are needed near home to protect Bay of Bengal and police the Arabian Sea.
Note my words usage.


China! China! China!

Why India need to buy X-xx planes from another country - Because of China
Why India need to sign the SLA - because of China
Why India need to patrol the seas with another country - because of China.

It is all about China which makes India take action. What about Indian needs!
Will India's border problem be solved with this.- Nobody can answer

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

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

Postby TSJones » 15 Apr 2016 06:24

Singha wrote:Isnt that info essential to awacs also and cartosats later generated our own?


yes, I *think* so. there has been a lot of progress since 1998 by other countries. but keep in mind this is sensitive stuff and according to old adage: "those who know ain't sayin' and those who are sayin' don't know".

I tried googling the NGIA and visiting their sites. My malware software that I purchased for my PC went nuts on the first NGIA website that I visited and I about had a heart attack and got the heck out before they could put some kind of tracker/cookie on my PC. They've got some kind of trade craft wizardry on their web apps. If it hadn't been for my malware they would have made me their mule.

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

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

Postby devesh » 15 Apr 2016 07:04

JE Menon wrote:Guys, there are US naval bases in Djibouti (Camp Lemonnier), Kenya (Manda Bay), Kuwait Naval Base, Fujairah Naval Base, Jebel Ali - and I'll bet there are in Saudi as well. If you are saying that such access is useless, then that's a different story altogether.


it is naivete to think India will ever be able to use those for its interests. If USA and India had parallel interests, then it's worth considering. But I see no overlapping sphere of interests. Especially when it comes to the Islamic menace, USA has been firmly in the Saudi/Sunni/Jihadi camp. Propping up Pakistan is simply a consequence of this choice they've made.

No, I see no strategic gain by having access when the big brother doesn't share your interests, and such is unlikely to allow his bases to be used for any purpose that runs counter to their interests.

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

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

Postby devesh » 15 Apr 2016 07:15

KrishnaK wrote:
Clearly, Modi seeks to transform India from being merely an influential entity into one whose weight and preferences are defining for international politics. While this desire is laudable, it appears that India’s climb to great power status will take time. Although contemporary projections of global growth out to 2050 suggest that India will become a true pole by then, they also conclude that it will remain the weakest of the principal entities—China, the United States, the European Union, and India—dominating the international system at that time.6 A detailed analysis from 2012 suggested that India, representing only 7 percent of the global product in 2050, will remain well behind China at 20 percent and the United States and the European Union at 17 percent each, though it will be somewhat ahead of Japan at 5 percent and comfortably lead Russia and Brazil at 3 and 2 percent, respectively. Assuming that current U.S. alliances survive until then, the Western democracies and Japan will still reign supreme with 39 percent of the global product, almost double that of China’s and similarly close to double China’s and Russia’s gross domestic products (GDPs) combined.7
It is in the greater Asia-Pacific region, however, that India can make a dramatic difference to the continental balance. If India allies with the United States and Japan, the resulting 29 percent of the global product will easily exceed China’s 20 percent in contrast to only the marginal advantage that the two democracies will enjoy if India sits out. Against China and Russia together (a total of 23 percent), India’s contribution will become even more valuable because it will erase the slight inferiority that will otherwise mark the collective U.S.-Japanese product.
Such projections help to characterize India’s value in the larger geopolitical context, and their underlying insight is sobering. Although India will likely be transformed into a genuine pole by 2050, it will remain fundamentally a balancing power—a swing state—rather than a colossus capable of either holding its own against a major rival such as China or defining the international system to its advantage in the face of possible opposition.



From http://carnegieendowment.org/2016/04/05 ... power/iwf5




this analysis almost makes me laugh. I thought mercantilism was dead! apparently not. anyway, the theory behind this analysis is old and outdated. the obsession with "product" and comparing % figures results in a peculiar sort of ideological paralysis which makes you blind to other aspects of power: civilizational/cultural/social/religious/military-political-hegemony.

the obsession of the article is about finding some justification or the other for why USA will be the "pole" around whom all others have to conglomerate. more importantly, it's a future projection, so the tilt is to assuage any doubts about future hegemony of USA. For that reason alone, the ideological thrust needs to be taken into account.

For India, I see no possibility of any serious alliance with USA as long as they continue to prop up Pakistan. This is simply a no-go. It's either us or Pakistan. There cannot be both in the long run. If Pakistan is to survive and thrive, it will only happen eventually with the destruction of India and any notion of an independent Hindu country. This is simply unacceptable. And those powers which sell arms to Pakistan as counter-balance to India can in no way be considered allies of India. Let alone friends.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24767
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 15 Apr 2016 07:54

TSJones wrote:
I don't think think the GPS signal was turned off.

here is a news article:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home ... 254691.cms

SHARIKOTA: When Pakistani troops took positions in Kargil in 1999, one of the first things Indian military sought was GPS data for the region. The space-based navigation system maintained by the US government would have provided vital information, but the US denied it to India.




I think what India was requesting was geospatial mapping data.

and the agency that provides that is the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency which is top secret.

as of yet. there is no treaty to share that. except maybe with the brits. after all, they are using our trident missiles.



TSJones saab,

Is the Indian or US MOD manned by morons who will ask for and be allowed access to "geospatial mapping data" in a war zone during war?? Do you take us all for fools by bringing in a straw man??

especially when there was such a song and dance to provide "geospatial mapping data" in the aftermath of the nepal tragedy??

The mapping data was provided to us because India was the only power that had substantial air assets on the ground in nepal and more on call at very short notice and other countries were not averse to using Indian help to pull some of their irons out of the fire.

Despite the help we provided by allowing over flight permission for US military aircraft during the gulf war, the US so casually stabs us at the first opportunity, proving once again it's utter unreliability as a "friend".

we had and still do have, very very substantial interests, in the very regions that the US has attacked. WTF is the US to insist that we follow it's mandated sanctions when our own energy sources and national and economic security is affected by those very sanctions??

did the US offer to replace those "sanctioned" energy sources by shipping crude from the US, as a token of support?? No, they simply left us to fend for ourselves. Fine, the US should now bugger off and go find some other patsy to peddle it's snake oil.


If the US self interest is supreme, so is ours.

do you really think that we invested so much money and effort to develop our very own satnav system because of some denied "geospatial mapping data"?? which we would not have got under any circumstances. Come on, even you are no so naive

We have always had access to soviet MIL satellite data and that is no secret. The very first thing superpowers do during ANY period of tension, is to re position their MIL satellites immediately and temporarily over the (potential) conflict zone so as to obtain real time intel. we had russian, chinese and US satellites and just maybe israeli eyes in the sky over cashmere all through the initial kargil war and some time later the IA quietly and without fanfare straightened out the line by eliminating some key paki vantage points to safeguard our lines of communication.
Last edited by chetak on 15 Apr 2016 08:10, edited 1 time in total.

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 973
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

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

Postby V_Raman » 15 Apr 2016 08:08

Ramana - I will bite - I hope this comes across as analysis :-)

As for Rudradev's statement: "India as a nation that should be dissuaded from becoming an empire at all"

India is already an empire whether USA wants it or not!

We are probably the first in the history of mankind where a substantial unified territory was left behind by another fading empire with the expectation that it will collapse. Look like we will not and hence the heartburn.

Concrete issues for the Indian empire to become one with expansionist intentions are (in the order or priority)

Economic issue: money - we are a poor empire.

Military issue: no way to sustain war more than a short span due to dependence on other empires with conflicting intentions

Identity issues: what are we? Hindu/christian/Islamic? We dont know. IMHO to have expansionist traits, the polity must be majoritarian, whatever it may be.

Territorial issues: Tibet and POK.

For item #1 economy, we have the ability to turn it around and making concrete effort to lift off.

For item #2 military, I think the deep state has decided that we are close and are pushing boundaries with make in india for defence self-sufficiency.

For item #3 identity, modi is the inflection point. this is still an experiment. we need to wait and watch here.

For item #4 territory, India was/will play for status quo as we have the least capability here. This is where it gets tricky and conflicts with other empires. We need #2 in stages to deter others for status quo and can get it only with help from those other empires.

Whether USA wants India to not even be in a position to play for status quo is the question.
Last edited by V_Raman on 15 Apr 2016 11:26, edited 1 time in total.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24767
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 15 Apr 2016 08:40

America can't be trusted: Lessons from Ashton Carter’s India visit




America can't be trusted: Lessons from Ashton Carter’s India visit

The US defence secretary made the usual polite gestures, but Washington remains heavily 'invested' in Pakistan.

POLITICS | 5-minute read | 12-04-2016

Minhaz MerchantMINHAZ MERCHANT @minhazmerchant

Can the United States be trusted? Yes and no. Yes, if you're part of the Anglosphere comprising America, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

The US shares sensitive intelligence only with its Anglo-Saxon allies. For the rest, Washington is at best a tactical friend.

US defence secretary Ashton Carter's three-day visit to India, which ended on April 12, did nothing to change the basics of the India-US strategic partnership.

Carter made the usual polite gestures. He described India as a "very influential and powerful player" in the Asia-Pacific. Note the Asia-Pacific caveat - for the US, India is not a particularly influential and powerful player beyond the Asia-Pacific.

Also read - Why is US defence secretary Ashton Carter in India?

Carter added a soothing aside: "We are long past the point in US policymaking where we look at the India-Pakistan (relationship) as the whole story for either one of them. We have much more to do with India today than (we have) to do with Pakistan. There is important business with respect to Pakistan, but we have much more, a whole global agenda with India, an agenda that covers all kinds of issues."

This was taken by US and Indian analysts to mean, for the umpteenth time, that America has dehyphenated India from Pakistan. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The US remains heavily "invested" in Pakistan. It needs Pakistan as a buffer state. Washington knows exactly what Islamabad's game is: extract money and weapons from the US, continue to fund jihadi groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) against India, and fight anti-Pakistan factions of the Taliban while sheltering those which launch terror attacks on India.

Also read - How India must proceed ties with America

Pakistan in return for its duplicity receives blood money from Washington. To appease India, the US meanwhile makes periodic concessions: it scolds Pakistan after every terror attack on India, warnings which Islamabad ignores.

Washington then, in practised fashion, urges India and Pakistan to resume talks, as if admonishing two recalcitrant adolescents. Equivalence with India, which Pakistan craves, is thus established. Indian diplomacy is no match for this US-Pakistan axis of deception.

Our talented Indian Foreign Service (IFS) officers are schooled in the gentlemanly art of diplomacy. They struggle to make an impression on hard-nosed American diplomats who have a ruthless notion of US self-interest.

Even Pakistan's foreign policy machinery is slicker than India's. High commissioner Abdul Basit has New Delhi's foreign correspondents eating out of his hand. He hosts Hurriyat separatists, announces "suspension" of talks with India, and is still feted by Delhi's gullible chattering classes.

The Americans caught on to the weakness of Indian diplomacy decades ago. They treated Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi with polite deference but had no hesitation sending the Seventh Fleet to the Bay of Bengal to silently threaten the Indian Army during the 1971 Bangladesh liberation war.

The insouciance hasn't changed much. Carter and his boss, President Barack Obama, doff their hats in recognition to India's growing consumer markets and military footprint, but remain focused on self-interest.

The US continues to sell not only F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan (knowing fully well they will be used in a future conflict with India, never on the Taliban), but attack helicopters as well.

Also read - Selling F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan is not a sign of 'American duplicity'

As The Times of India reported last week: "The Obama administration on Monday awarded a $170 million contract to Bell Helicopter of Texas to manufacture and deliver nine AH-1Z Viper attack helicopters to Pakistan, continuing the US policy of arming a country that many of its lawmakers say is two-faced about fighting terrorism. The American reward for Pakistan came even as Islamabad continued to protect Masood Azhar, leader of the terrorist outfit Jaish-e-Mohammad, with Chinese support, while subverting New Delhi's efforts to bring to justice Pakistani perpetrators of terrorist attacks in India."

This duplicitous policy comes down directly from a man with whom Prime Minister Narendra Modi has supposedly developed a special rapport: President Obama.

It is Obama who makes it a point to lecture India on talking to Pakistan after every jihadi terror attack on Indian soil sponsored by Islamabad. And it is Obama who hyphenates India with Pakistan in public statements.

For Obama, Indian lives matter less than America's overwhelming interest in rewarding Pakistan as a "frontier state" against the Taliban - notwithstanding that Punjab-based terrorist groups like the LeT continue to receive arms, training and money from the Pakistani army and ISI.

Also read - America is on India's side against Pakistan terror

In an anodyne op-ed in The Times of India on Monday, April 11, Ashton Carter wrote solemnly: "The United States and India also have a shared vision for peace, stability and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region, as outlined in the Joint Strategic Vision President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Narendra Modi released last January. The United States and India will work together to maintain the progress and stability, that combined have helped so many nations in the region, including India, to rise and prosper. We share a commitment to important principles, including peaceful resolution of disputes, freedom of navigation and overflight, countering terrorism and a belief that countries should make their own security and economic choices free from coercion and intimidation."

Washington is well aware of Pakistan's internal problems. The country faces a growing insurgency in Balochistan. Sindh separatists too are beginning to agitate for independence. The Pashtuns on both sides of the Durand line, in Pakistan and Afghanistan, seek a separate Pashtunistan.

The US fears that a Yugoslavia-type Balkanisation of Pakistan will bring chaos to a region which Russia continues to cast a baleful eye on. In this geopolitical replica of the 19th century Great Game, India - nice, gentlemanly India - suffers the most.

Modi has deferred to Obama over the past two years. He has received little in return. A curtain must be drawn on a counter-terrorism strategy, midwifed by Washington, that hasn't worked. Nice countries, like nice guys, finish last.

#India-US Ties, #Manohar Parrikar, #Ashton Carter
Last edited by chetak on 15 Apr 2016 08:44, edited 1 time in total.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21195
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 15 Apr 2016 08:41

Ashton Carter pushes India-US strategic partnership, but does India have the will?
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.co ... -the-will/

Ashton Carter’s ongoing visit to India has elicited much interest. As a pro-active and India-focussed defence secretary, he has definitely striven to take the India-US strategic partnership to a higher level. Joining the dots of recent history, it was President George Bush who recognised the value of a strategic linkage with India and commenced the process of giving it substance early in his second term. The India-US nuclear deal, setting the stage for the strategic dialogue, was first negotiated in 2005.Carter comes to New Delhi in the backdrop of introduction of a bill in US Congress to coordinate with India on an annual basis to develop military contingency plans for addressing threats to mutual security interests of both countries. The bill also calls for developing strategic operation capabilities.It has been a quarter century since the end of the Cold War and a little over a decade since the Bush initiative of 2005. Examining convergence of interests and identification of threats has been an ongoing exercise resulting in different levels of joint training and cooperation. With the conceptualisation and now the execution of Act East policy of the Indian government, India is focussing increasingly on the Indo-Pacific region, which the US would also like to encourage.
While the right noises are being made in the politico-diplomatic realm of the relationship, how much of this is translating into greater understanding in the military-strategic domain is questionable. There are some constraints which must be looked at pragmatically.Capacity becomes the constraining factor in such strategic relationships. However, the classic perception of capacity looks at it mainly from the angle of kinetic operations. It needs to be considered more holistically here.It would include strategic stamina, political will, and diplomatic capability to maintain equilibrium in relationships, logistics capability and the existence of a scientific temper to absorb new technologies. It would also mean the conceptualising of doctrines for war fighting and maintenance of stability in a No War No Peace scenario. This would be a tall order for a nation which has yet to publish a single paper on its national security strategy.
The US strategic community is robust and always ahead in the doctrinal lexicon of war of words, terminologies and catch phrases which take its partners some years to understand, absorb and act upon. The length of such partnerships and growth of generations of leaders at tactical, operational and strategic levels through contingencies involving political gamesmanship, posturing and operations other than war prepare partners to be effective participants of the deep linkages which such relationships bring with them.Much is dependent on trust which also arises from convergence of strategic thinking, stamina and intent to play it through. International strategic partnerships endure only if all the ingredients are present. Is there such a situation in the current dispensation of the India-US strategic partnership?This is highly questionable although the dots of intent may all be there. History and generational growth sometimes bestow elements which act as constraints rather than binders.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 15 Apr 2016 08:51

Singha wrote:I think they can error the signal by 100s of meters by area. Allegedly done in georgian war


Not by 100 meters but by 40-50 km according to Pitor Butwoski in his book Russian AirPower , I can check the book for exact phrase but he mentioned like Russian Airforce was surprised to find the GPS signal error was introduced by 40- 50 km , Another time he mentioned this happened was when Tu-160 was landing in Venezuela and they found the GPS was way off mark by many km.

krishna_krishna
BRFite
Posts: 911
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 04:14

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

Postby krishna_krishna » 15 Apr 2016 09:03

Guru's lets get back to awesome discussion we had in last few pages. Based on real incidents and instances this is what NDA II's Massa policy under Modi has been (Rhetoric and optics aside purely actions):

In strategic terms, India seeks to avoid unnecessarily needling China with any explicit or implicit containment strategies, implying that New Delhi will not be party to any quadrilateral or multilateral initiatives that have containment in mind. In fact, the new leadership is pushing an agenda for greater strategic cooperation to encourage more balanced Chinese behavior, acting as a regional moderator rather than balancer. Yet even while pursuing a policy of more engagement, the new government has acted to enhance and modernize military capabilities and improve infrastructure in border areas. To be sure, dealing with China will be an incremental process underpinned by comprehensive economic engagement backed by credible capability development dictated solely by core Indian interests.

Relations with the U.S. will remain largely transactional, implying greater quid pro quo: attempts at trade restrictions, visa issues, transfer of technology etc. will all be evaluated at the altar of strict reciprocity. Strategic partnership will also be evaluated on its long term regional impact and understandings of long term US regional commitments. India is unlikely to blindly follow U.S. strategic calculations. Rather, it will shape its responses on its own understanding of the state of play and the long-term consequences. Issues like natural allies and concerts of democracies will be downplayed in favor of a more pragmatic approach to relations.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Balaji, Yashu and 38 guests