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.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16102
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

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

Postby SwamyG » 24 Apr 2016 03:56

It is a noble thought to expect Pakistan to change. It is far nobler thought to think USA will change. If you can straighten a dog's tail, then the animal will not be called a dog anymore.

Friendship is sustainable ONLY among the equals. Rest is relationship formed on convenience, and not trustworthy.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53860
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 24 Apr 2016 04:26

+108.

Tweet and I will RT.

Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 782
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby Y. Kanan » 24 Apr 2016 04:34

Viv S - I find your blind faith in US benevolence disturbing, especially given that your expectations of what the Americans will do for us contradicts everything we've ever seen them do in our entire shared history.

The great US industrialist Henry Ford may have once flippantly said "History is bunk" but you really believe it.

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

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

Postby TSJones » 24 Apr 2016 05:00

one thing is for certain, sign no treaties and you then you will never have to expect guarantees.

ask for something and you may never get it or you might.......who knows? just luck of the draw

and India will never ask for help from the US, right?

US DoD budget is FY 2016 $585 billion, that they are willing to acknowledge that is.......

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23772
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 24 Apr 2016 05:09

TSJones wrote:Like China, the US budgetary items are not all reported under DoD. It's spread out under various other agencies like Department of Energy, National Institutes of Health, Department of Agriculture, etc. I think other nations may do the same.......

Of course, everyone does that. That is even genuine. But, Chinese numbers have to be distrusted because they fudge everything including their GDP etc.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 948
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

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

Postby KrishnaK » 24 Apr 2016 07:22

SwamyG wrote:It is a noble thought to expect Pakistan to change. It is far nobler thought to think USA will change. If you can straighten a dog's tail, then the animal will not be called a dog anymore.

Friendship is sustainable ONLY among the equals. Rest is relationship formed on convenience, and not trustworthy.


All relationship is based on interest. The durability of those interests translates to the relationship's trustworthiness. US aid to India especially during the cold war years was clearly defined in terms of interest - a democratic india would be a natural check to the growth of communism which was in the interests of the US. As an example the US provided ~ USD 3 billion in aid between 1950-6x when our GDP was ~ USD 40 billion (approx 500 mil in population with a per capita of $84). This when we chose to spurn all overtures from the US for an alliance. The US still articulates the same interests w.r.t. India 70 years since - a strong, stable democratic india is in the interests of the US. Expecting the US to not to articulate any of its other interests is plain stupidity.

Friendship is sustainable even amongst unequal parties so long as the underlying interests are enduring, what the each side brings to the table, their expectations, and a clear idea of the limits on their respective leverage.

chanakyaa
BRFite
Posts: 1292
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 00:09
Location: Hiding in Karakoram

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

Postby chanakyaa » 24 Apr 2016 07:27

Sidor saar, by discussing other cuntries here we run the risk dhaaga scope creep...so this one is my last on the subject.

Christopher Sidor wrote:...
The problem between "Ookraine" and "Russia" is not comparable to the situation between India and PRC. PRC does not see India as the cradle of it civilisation. "Ookraine" and Russia have a longer intertwined history which India PRC do not have. Moreover Russia and "Ookraine" are not competing for the same prize. India and PRC are.

But I would like to know how does the "Ookraine" - Russia -US triangle have sailence as far as India-PRC-US triangle is concerned?

Indians do not give a damn whether the world, let along China, considers it to be "cradle of civilization". And, not sure which prize India and China are after, but if both countries can satisfactorily meet the needs of ALL of its citizens they both win.

On your other question, leveraging legacy border disputes to create tensions and hatred between countries is time tested colonial technique that has worked very successfully. Legacy border disputes have been used very successfully to ruin neighborly relations between countries, with the intent to permanently damage the economies. So much posted on BR already. Ukraine situation was a renewed cold war with Russia, using Ukraine, at the expense of EU. Sure India is not interested in being a rent-boy.

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 904
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

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

Postby symontk » 24 Apr 2016 07:46

As the old saying goes, getting into a Mughal tent is very easy, but coming out will be outright suicidal

Once we have these agreements signed up, US will have all our politicians literally by their balls. Not a single politician would dare think coming out of these agreements in near future, even if they wanted

If signed, its for eternity for India, think like that

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5638
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

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

Postby vishvak » 24 Apr 2016 08:07

Friendship is sustainable even amongst unequal parties so long as the underlying interests are enduring, what the each side brings to the table, their expectations, and a clear idea of the limits on their respective leverage.

Per Mr. TSJones above, there is no guarantee without agreement. There is no such thing like
US still articulates the same interests w.r.t. India 70 years since - a strong, stable democratic india is in the interests of the US.

Not without alphabet soups and alphabet canals.

member_26011
BRFite
Posts: 119
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_26011 » 24 Apr 2016 08:13

I propose a
Friendship Universal Cooperation and Kindness between INdia and US Agreement (Unprintable). Anything less won't do.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16102
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

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

Postby SwamyG » 24 Apr 2016 08:31

Krishna, when we talk about equality then the context is important. Why does American heart beat for Israel, even if Israel is an aggressor? It boils down to Judeo Christian heritage. Why does the heart beat for UK? Anglo Saxon JUdeo Christian heritages? To America some countries are friends, others either get in their way or help in their interests. That is how it is, nothing good or bad. Just reality.

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

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

Postby TSJones » 24 Apr 2016 08:39

I think ad hoc meetings and random events make for a much more interesting acquaintance. :)

kinda like going to Vegas and hitting the tables......

when it works......it's kismet, when it doesn't ........you get a lesson learned. :D

it's not your failures that count, it's how you deal with it........

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1690
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 24 Apr 2016 09:34

Karan M wrote:The People's Liberation Army must have one of the most extensive military industrial complexes in the world, employing some 700,000 employees in about 10,000 enterprises.


There is no doubt that China heavily outguns India in the size of it's military industrial enterprises. But it is not clear cut. Everything about China from its GDP figures to the size of it's military industrial enterprises is opaque. e.g. the PLA has for decades owned everything from hotels to pharmaceutical companies to coal mines to printing presses to auto assembly plants. The list goes on and on and numbers in the thousands. How many people are employed in these tertiary enterprises and how many are employed in producing military equipment and how many others are employed in R&D is not known. AVIC the first wiki link you gave indicates that they also produce automobiles!! Although dated, there is a book titled "China's Entrepreneurial Army", by Tai Ming Cheung, interesting reading about the PLA's commercial ventures.

But where IMO the Chinese differ from us Indians is that they aim for the biggest, largest, most powerful etc. etc. etc. They want large cars, we want micro cars, they want aircraft in the hundreds and thousands if possible, we are happy with 36 Rafale!! They want to be the biggest economy in the world, we.......... Sometimes they fall flat on their face, but they aim very high. That is something we have to learn from them.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10297
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

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

Postby Vayutuvan » 24 Apr 2016 09:51

TSJones wrote:Prince has died.... When Doves Cry :(

Man, I feel old......

I listened to only that song of his. I am a concert. Just that one song convinced me that He was truly a genius. Very tragic that he died young. But the silver lining is that presumable he left a treasure trove of a few thousands of recordings.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10297
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

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

Postby Vayutuvan » 24 Apr 2016 10:01

ramana wrote:+108.

Tweet and I will RT.

SwamyG: I second ramana. Please do tweet.

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

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

Postby Viv S » 24 Apr 2016 12:13

arshyam wrote:
Viv S wrote:In material terms, relatively little. In strategic terms, it serves to strengthen bilateral ties. Is also a stepping stone to the other two pacts.
And that is the bone of contention, given that there are no free lunches, and what the US gains from these agreements are not really clear. Hence the question of basing rights is raised by folks here - why else would they want these?

Its not a zero sum agreement. They've got LSAs with 80 countries. Same rationale applies when it comes to the 81st. And, in general, it supports their push to deepen ties with India. At the minimum it'd reduce the red tape involved in planning the 50 odd bilateral military exercises both states engage in every year.

Viv S wrote:Was it though? In 1989, the Russians were giving us firm support against a resurgent China. Three years later they were selling arms and transferring military technology to China. That's geopolitics for you.
That "long time" was in sarcasm :)

Yeah I got that. My point being that quick as the US' U-turn on China was, Russia's U-turn was even faster.

India of 2016 is not India of 1971. We must factor in changed economic and even military circumstances compared to 1971. Does the nuclear triad have no bearing here?

India of 2016 is indeed not the India of 1971. Then again, China of 2016 isn't the China of 1971 either. In 1971, China's nuclear capability was in its infancy (despite having conducted a series of tests) and the conventional military gap with India, quite narrow. And that gap would continue to narrow all the way to parity by the late 80s. Very different situation today, where that gap is a gulf today and continues to grow.

Of course one could argue that nuclear capability has leveled the (otherwise tilted) playing field. But then would have to carry over that argument to the Pakistani side too - they too could argue that their nuclear capabilities have nullified India's conventional military advantages. Fact however remains, nukes are a weapon of last resort (explicitly so, in India & China's case given their NFU doctrines) and there is more than plenty space for a non-nuclear conflict in the interim (esp. in the air and at sea).

I agree with the convergence of interests, but disagree on the benefits of signing these agreements. They are too one-sided and won't help us when needed. In that case, why have an agreement at all?

This brings us to the core of the debate.

You'd have to be more specific - what exactly makes them too one-sided? Especially in light of the question about what the US is getting out of it ('no free lunches').

Viv S wrote:The US & China have formed a secret cabal designed to keep India down. - An obvious conspiracy theory.
How so? It was the US that floated the G2 theory, remember? Whether it went anywhere or not, the thought exists in the US side, and they chose to even publicly articulate it - so much for the conspiracy angle. The economic interdependence of US and China has only continued to grow ever since (please read the posts ramana sir linked from the US-China relationship thread).

The G-2 was a concept for bilateral discussions, one that was never implemented. It was modeled after the transparently conducted and far from insidious G-7, G-8 & G-20 conferences rather than being a Sykes-Picot style security agreement. Hardly conspiracy material.

Also, for the record, the only strategic step that has actually being implemented is the 'Pivot'. And the reception that received in Beijing was.. cold, to say the least, with phrases such as 'new Cold War' & 'US imperialism' bandied about.

Of course if one is told that the US & China are putting on one great giant public performance, have formed a secret diarchy in the background, and its all aimed at India (despite the fact that it has neither the economic nor the military heft to directly challenge either of them, for at least the next two decades), it isn't much of a stretch to label that a conspiracy theory.

Yes economic interdependence between China and the US has continued to grow. But then India and China's economic interdependence has grown even faster - in addition to the burgeoning trade there's also the BRICS, AIIB, SCO, BCIM etc.

And while economic interdependence can deter conflict, it can't prevent them, a fact proven by the events of the Great War 1914-18. Its why the US, China, Japan and India, while perfectly happy to trade together, haven't let up on military preparations for a potential conflict.

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

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

Postby Viv S » 24 Apr 2016 12:34

Y. Kanan wrote:Viv S - I find your blind faith in US benevolence disturbing, especially given that your expectations of what the Americans will do for us contradicts everything we've ever seen them do in our entire shared history.

I find terms like 'benevolence' naive in the current context. Is China's partnership with Pakistan and its projects all across the IOR, an example of its 'benevolence' towards fellow Asians? Recently we invited the World Uyghur Congress to attend a 'Democracy for China' conference in India; now was that because we suddenly discovered a new-found benevolence for Chinese minorities?

So where does it say that in the US' case, it can only be a outcome of 'benevolence'? Please see it for what it is - cold hard realpolitik, based on its own national interest.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23772
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 24 Apr 2016 14:55

Viv S wrote:Please see it for what it is - cold hard realpolitik, based on its own national interest.

Exactly. Unless there is similar or even greater benefits to India, we shouldn't consider any agreement. Now, that conclusion is for the incumbent government to arrive at because as arm-chair analysts we don't know the complete picture. From whatever I know, the returns are insufficient.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18825
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 24 Apr 2016 16:31

LDev, claiming China is opaque and hence the scale of its aerospace and military investments can be downplayed, is completely wrong.

There are a huge number of visitors to PRC who write about their experiences and visit facilities. Folks track aerospace in PRC regularly. See slide 5 onwards.
http://www.slideshare.net/talentneuron/ ... -landscape

Correlate this with supplier locations to get an idea of the scale. That means check the liaison offices maintained by key furren suppliers like Safran.
Image

This is merely aerospace which dwarfs the entire HAL-PSU-DRDO complex put together with their PRC equivalents. Hence India's funding and setup is anemic by global standards which gives two hoots about idealogical idee fixes and India's "i will give one rupee you do three rupees of work" or if you import this, what cut do I get. Or ingenious deals like this.

The world runs on the basis of places like these (http://weirdrussia.com/2015/08/10/the-c ... of-russia/) and efforts of that scale.

In fact the above aerospace firms are merely the tip of the iceberg as PRC's military complex is beyond the aero firms. We have one lab in each domain and one PSU manufacturer, which thanks to babus and entrenched vested interests at MOD were forced to remain license assemblers and their aspirations in R&D almost always shut down or la famiglia loyalists were put in key posts, eg BEML and the Tatra truck "assembly".

Luckily thanks to DRDO's efforts to cultivate private suppliers (and now being copied by PSUs which can't afford to scale up and be as vertically integrated as in the MiG era), we do have many private SMEs supplying. But until L&T et al scale truly (right now they have a portfolio of 17 products in production) we are still much smaller than the competition.

PRC have a host of labs and often with colocated manufacturing units. This is very similar to the soviet era model wherein the labs and factories were colocated or aligned to one another in a fixed manner. NIIP for instance, part of the Almaz Antei network, would work with Ryazan, the manufacturer of the radars. India copied the model, but without anywhere the same level of investment or scale. NIIP for instance competes with Phazatron. At their peak, at any time, both firms had multiple radars in development and if one labs program failed, the other stepped in (e.g. NIIP supplanting Phaza on the Su-27, but Phaza continued with N019 for the MiG-29s). T-72 variants vs T-64 ones (ended up with the T-80 line).

Apart from this, in PRC there is Norinco, which is OFB on steroids. If you want anything ground related, they have it. Multiple MBT programs from Type-96/98/99 variants to the MBT-2000, a variant of which was rebadged as the Al Khalid. They are into civilian goods as well, and equipment but primarily military.

Then there is CASC, which handles the space stuff and whose depth of investment again dwarfs ISROs. Merely some 150,000 people strong.

Net, the PRC invests & as did Russia, they have huge amounts of resources on tap. They care two hoots about public vs private and all such legerdemain. All they are bothered with are the means to acquire and project power.

The interesting thing is to track relative performance within their so called groups. There are clearly leaders. Both will be state owned but one is either better run or has better access to top resources and Govt support (much the same way as with Soviet Union where Sukhoi it is said, stifled MiG post the breakup). In PRC, Chengdu with the J-10 and now the J-20 is considered Tier 1. SAIC went onto reverse engineer and license configure Flanker variants. Time will tell who has the better foot forward but the scale of effort speaks for itself. Two huge aerospace complexes with dedicated teams, one of which is given unlimited access to whatever is available from abroad (eg Lavi) and then MiG (J-20 has more than a passing resemblance to MiGs concepts) and then there is Shenyang which is given a complete TOT deal for Flankers from Russia & then funded to come out with more and more variants (including carrier borne versions).
They may never be equal to Indian Flankers bought off the shelf from Russia, but that is not PRC's aim either. The scale of effort makes it clear they want to own everything they have.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1690
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 24 Apr 2016 18:49

Karan M wrote:This is merely aerospace which dwarfs the entire HAL-PSU-DRDO complex put together with their PRC equivalents. Hence India's funding and setup is anemic by global standards which gives two hoots about idealogical idee fixes and India's "i will give one rupee you do three rupees of work" or if you import this, what cut do I get. Or ingenious deals like this.


:) Agree, My last on this since it is OT. My anecdotal experience. About 5 years ago when flexible displays were not in the public lexicon, an overseas Chinese person I met told me about a JV he was going to set up in China with $30 million of his own money to which the PLA was going to be adding in $70 million, as it's share of the equity, and then use PLA clout to get another $300-400 million from Chinese banks to fund the project. This Chinese person claimed to have got the technology from Toshiba though it was originally from Kodak. I have no idea whether this was legitimately obtained or stolen. As it turned out this Chinese person (a great gambler) went to Macao 2 days before his big meeting with the PLA generals and lost all his money in the casinos!! (By the way, I know, the Vegas casinos have a standing offer to send him a private jet if he wishes to come to their tables) Imagine any PSU in India doing these kinds of shenanigans :shock: For the PLA it was access to technology which could have a military spin off at best and even if there was eventually no military application for this specific product, it was a commercial profit generating venture. They did not care whether the technology was legally obtained or stolen. This is the kind of public-private combination with no idealogical/ethical boundaries that is common in the PLA military/industrial ventures. How does India compete with something like this?

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20999
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 24 Apr 2016 19:23

ldev wrote:
Karan M wrote:This is merely aerospace which dwarfs the entire HAL-PSU-DRDO complex put together with their PRC equivalents. Hence India's funding and setup is anemic by global standards which gives two hoots about idealogical idee fixes and India's "i will give one rupee you do three rupees of work" or if you import this, what cut do I get. Or ingenious deals like this.


:) Agree, My last on this since it is OT. My anecdotal experience. About 5 years ago when flexible displays were not in the public lexicon, an overseas Chinese person I met told me about a JV he was going to set up in China with $30 million of his own money to which the PLA was going to be adding in $70 million, as it's share of the equity, and then use PLA clout to get another $300-400 million from Chinese banks to fund the project. This Chinese person claimed to have got the technology from Toshiba though it was originally from Kodak. I have no idea whether this was legitimately obtained or stolen. As it turned out this Chinese person (a great gambler) went to Macao 2 days before his big meeting with the PLA generals and lost all his money in the casinos!! (By the way, I know, the Vegas casinos have a standing offer to send him a private jet if he wishes to come to their tables) Imagine any PSU in India doing these kinds of shenanigans :shock: For the PLA it was access to technology which could have a military spin off at best and even if there was eventually no military application for this specific product, it was a commercial profit generating venture. They did not care whether the technology was legally obtained or stolen. This is the kind of public-private combination with no idealogical/ethical boundaries that is common in the PLA military/industrial ventures. How does India compete with something like this?


by learning the "business" principles from them. we cannot afford to be squeamish where national interest is concerned.

you can't buy the tech, they won't gift it or even sell the tech, What other way is left??, if it is determined to be absolutely necessary for national interest??

the actual problem is that reverse engineering is never as simple as it seems. It takes a certain kind of intellect and agile instincts to get into another engineer's mind.

sheeesh, even the pakis know how to steal tech, why not us??

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18825
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 24 Apr 2016 20:00

ldev wrote:
Karan M wrote:This is merely aerospace which dwarfs the entire HAL-PSU-DRDO complex put together with their PRC equivalents. Hence India's funding and setup is anemic by global standards which gives two hoots about idealogical idee fixes and India's "i will give one rupee you do three rupees of work" or if you import this, what cut do I get. Or ingenious deals like this.


:) Agree, My last on this since it is OT. My anecdotal experience. About 5 years ago when flexible displays were not in the public lexicon, an overseas Chinese person I met told me about a JV he was going to set up in China with $30 million of his own money to which the PLA was going to be adding in $70 million, as it's share of the equity, and then use PLA clout to get another $300-400 million from Chinese banks to fund the project. This Chinese person claimed to have got the technology from Toshiba though it was originally from Kodak. I have no idea whether this was legitimately obtained or stolen. As it turned out this Chinese person (a great gambler) went to Macao 2 days before his big meeting with the PLA generals and lost all his money in the casinos!! (By the way, I know, the Vegas casinos have a standing offer to send him a private jet if he wishes to come to their tables) Imagine any PSU in India doing these kinds of shenanigans :shock: For the PLA it was access to technology which could have a military spin off at best and even if there was eventually no military application for this specific product, it was a commercial profit generating venture. They did not care whether the technology was legally obtained or stolen. This is the kind of public-private combination with no idealogical/ethical boundaries that is common in the PLA military/industrial ventures. How does India compete with something like this?


Best part is that guy would have been 1 of 2-3 types used to do this. Even if he fails, the other options remain.
Varyag purchase from Ukraine is another famous case.

We compete by just throwing open our business to our big ticket industrial firms with a proven record (IMHO, Tata & L&T) and creating a roadmap of every system we may need for which we get to subsystem level and create two paths of access (one within one group, say CSIR-Samtel-L&T for say some avionics item and another of another group) and open the funding spigot.. and then fund, track, reward the doers.

Ensure GOI has a key say in tech acquisition and IPR (they are funding it) and make sure DRDO et al work on the core high end programs to set the roadmap and also ensure they retain the edge for talent and strategic programs (you DONT want to end up with Thales or Denel or SAAB owning all the keys to your BMD or owning the radars there for instance). In each tech group you should have 2-3 developers, suppliers should be allowed to cooperate (national goals so no predatory killing of each others suppliers).

And if other firms want to get in at the high end, they have to take a higher cost/price burden and prove themselves. IMO we can do it provided there is real leadership

What the furren groups want is this - throw open Indian defence to them, don't insist on Make in india or offsets (just some assembly is ok). Move screwdrivering to pvt sector. Allow full FDI so they can buy off select Indian companies which are critical to Agni, strategic programs.

That will be a disaster and counter what DRDO, tata, L&T and select PSUs like BEL, ECIL have achieved in key areas.. instead aim should be multiple programs funded by MOD for the long term in multiple groups and established indian private, public houses..not shady fly by the night operators who pop up in Dilli with Make in India posters behind their mugs.

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

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

Postby Cosmo_R » 24 Apr 2016 20:21

vayu tuvan wrote:
TSJones wrote:Prince has died.... When Doves Cry :(

Man, I feel old......

I listened to only that song of his. I am a concert. Just that one song convinced me that He was truly a genius. Very tragic that he died young. But the silver lining is that presumable he left a treasure trove of a few thousands of recordings.


He was a genius and who knows what is in the 'vault'? BTW few know he wrote this. It is sung by Sinead O'Connor

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2cdyy ... es-2_music

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36400
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 24 Apr 2016 23:09

People from India are lovely but hard to understand


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04 ... stand.html

Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 782
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby Y. Kanan » 24 Apr 2016 23:43

Viv S wrote:
Y. Kanan wrote:Viv S - I find your blind faith in US benevolence disturbing, especially given that your expectations of what the Americans will do for us contradicts everything we've ever seen them do in our entire shared history.

I find terms like 'benevolence' naive in the current context. Is China's partnership with Pakistan and its projects all across the IOR, an example of its 'benevolence' towards fellow Asians? Recently we invited the World Uyghur Congress to attend a 'Democracy for China' conference in India; now was that because we suddenly discovered a new-found benevolence for Chinese minorities?

So where does it say that in the US' case, it can only be a outcome of 'benevolence'? Please see it for what it is - cold hard realpolitik, based on its own national interest.


Ultimately this all boils down to a simple fact.

Russia has never threatened us. They never put sanctions on us. They didn't help our mortal enemy acquire nuclear weapons. Thousands, tens of thousands of our countrymen have died as a direct result of US support to the Pakistani state.

There are those (like you) that would have us cozy up to the US at the expense of our relationship with Russia, which has already pushed the Russians closer to China and Pakistan. Can anyone tell me why? What have we gotten in this exchange? C-17's? Chinook helicopters? Nothing that Russia couldn't have provided an equivalent for, probably cheaper and without the constant threat of cutting off spares hanging over our heads. Now we see powerful interests in India wanting to take this new relationship further, while the US is still backing Pakistan, refusing to pressure them into ceasing their cross-border terror, helping them shut us out of Afghanistan, and giving us no reason beyond wishful thinking to imagine they'd actually help us if the Chinese attack along the border. The US is only interested in keeping China out of the S. China sea, and if we have another war with Pakistan, we can be 100% certain they'll sanction us, cut off spares for all the US military eqpt we've bought, and provide satellite intel to help Pakistan kill Indian troops, just as they have always done in the past. This is not the basis upon which one builds a strategic partnership and starts throwing away long-time though not always reliable friends.

I honestly believe India is better off with no friends (assuming we've already blown the Russian relationship) than becoming part of the US plan to contain China. We gain nothing tangible from this and we effectively lose Russia and become more dependent on a nation with a proven track record of screwing us that persists to this day.

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

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

Postby Cosmo_R » 25 Apr 2016 02:12

"They didn't help our mortal enemy acquire nuclear weapons. "

"The Soviet Union provided assistance in the early Chinese program by sending advisers to help in the facilities devoted to fissile material production, and in October 1957 agreed to provide a prototype bomb, missiles, and related technology"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and ... estruction.

But then perhaps China is not a mortal enemy.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3622
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

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

Postby Kashi » 25 Apr 2016 04:31

Cosmo_R wrote:But then perhaps China is not a mortal enemy.


They were not in 1957, not apparently so.

Plus the Soviets eventually split with the Chinese and signed a friendship treaty with India in 1971

Pkaistan has been our mortal enemy since Aug 14th, 1947 and continues to be so, have waged 4 wars against us (with the aid of US supplied weapons) and continue to send terrorists to India. No US-Paki split visible on the horizon innit?

Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 729
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

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

Postby Suresh S » 25 Apr 2016 04:39

I honestly believe India is better off with no friends (assuming we've already blown the Russian relationship) than becoming part of the US plan to contain China. We gain nothing tangible from this and we effectively lose Russia and become more dependent on a nation with a proven track record of screwing us that persists to this day.


Agree with what you say kanan.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16483
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

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

Postby NRao » 25 Apr 2016 06:09

Suhasini Haider seems to have found a pattern that may explain why the LEMOA was not signed.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2581&p=2010097#p2010097

More pertinent to this thread:

Significantly, neither the LEMOA nor the commercial shipping agreements were actually concluded or signed during the visit that saw the Defence Secretary in India for three days, his second such visit in a year. Officials have variously blamed the fine print, the timing, the unease over the U.S.’s F-16 sales to Pakistan, and the visits (being planned then) by the Defence Minister and the National Security Adviser to China as reasons for putting off the signing, but none of them fully explains the failure to clinch an agreement that the U.S. considers one of the “foundational agreements”, expected to ease the two countries’ militaries into a tighter embrace. The expectation is the signing may happen in the next few weeks or possibly in months, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is understood to be considering another visit to Washington to bid farewell to U.S. President Barack Obama, but the moment has been missed.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 948
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

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

Postby KrishnaK » 25 Apr 2016 06:27

SwamyG wrote:Krishna, when we talk about equality then the context is important. Why does American heart beat for Israel, even if Israel is an aggressor? It boils down to Judeo Christian heritage. Why does the heart beat for UK? Anglo Saxon JUdeo Christian heritages? To America some countries are friends, others either get in their way or help in their interests. That is how it is, nothing good or bad. Just reality.
How is US support for Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan different from the UK or Israel ? Transparency leads to greater understanding and perception of predictability, comfort level. Civilizational familiarity does play some part in this. Judeo Christian/anglo saxon/dharmic/civilizational mumbo jumbo gets blown way out of proportion on this forum. Repeating it ad nauseam does not make it a reality.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20999
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2016 08:31

snahata wrote:I honestly believe India is better off with no friends (assuming we've already blown the Russian relationship) than becoming part of the US plan to contain China. We gain nothing tangible from this and we effectively lose Russia and become more dependent on a nation with a proven track record of screwing us that persists to this day.


Agree with what you say kanan.



At the very least, we cannot ditch the Russians. They have been with us through thick and thin and stood with us like a rock.

If we ditch them now, when they seem to be in need, it smacks of ungratefulness and rank opportunism, which is what we are accusing the US of doing.

The US is very insistence that we sign up with them because, among other things, they want to show up the Russians for what the Russians did to them in syria and the whole shebang of the ISIS imbroglio. We should not abandon our old friends, specially when we have already factored in the Russian-sino détente.

better the proven Russian friendship, however cantankerous at present, than the dubious and fatal amreki embrace

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23772
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 25 Apr 2016 10:48

NRao wrote:Suhasini Haider seems to have found a pattern that may explain why the LEMOA was not signed.

Whatever 'pattern' she seems to have 'discovered' appears to be not well reasoned.

Her argument is that the euphoria of the first year's scorching pace of Modi has now given way to sobriety, push back from bureaucracy etc. and that is why many agreements are delayed.

In reply, I would say that all those 'pending' agreements that Ms. Haidar has cited, have been in the works for nearly a decade and have in fact acquired some urgency only after Modi came to power. The LEMOA (or LSA) has been under negotiation since 2004 and is about to be signed though the recent Carter visit belied the expectation created by the media and vested interests. Apart from Ms. Haidar and a few on social media, even Carter, whose country stands to gain the most from this deal is not disappointed by the slight delay! The Oz CECA is stuck due to tariffs and Mode 4 which covers movement of skilled professionals issue, problems we have with all Western countries. The EU FTA, under negotiation since 2007, has been stalled since 2013. This FTA is unlikely to give India much benefits and its delay may be even advantageous. The original Rafale deal is dead and new one is being fleshed out. The delay in the new Rafale deal is not because there is any lethargy on India's part but by the hard bargaining going on!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 25 Apr 2016 12:48

Posting this here because of the manner in which the truth has been carefully hidden from the US public and world about 9/11.Similar "truths" may appear years from now about 26/11-what the US knew and didn't inform India about.The Headley mystery and role he played as a US double agent was hidden from India It is inconceivable that the UIS intel establishment knew nothing about the planning of 26/11 by the perfidious Pakis.The fact that the UK knew attacks were planned and kept quiet has just been revealed in the media about GCHQ (UK NSA equiv) interceptions of Paki communications. The US secrecy about the Saudi role in 9/11 is abundantly clear as the Bush family and Bin Laden family have been the closest of business partners for decades,not to mention the Bush family and House of Saud.Read "House of Bush House of Saud" by Unger.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 99091.html
Saudi Arabia, 9/11, and the secret papers that could ignite a diplomatic war
There is growing clamour for declassification of the pages along with allegations about attempts by the Saudis to keep their alleged role in the attacks hidden
Kim Sengupta Diplomatic Editor
The allegations of Saudi involvement in the attacks come against a backdrop of the ultra-conservative Kingdom’s funding violent Islamist groups AP
Twenty-eight secret pages of a report locked away in a room in the Capitol in Washington lie in the centre of a crisis between America and Saudi Arabia which threatens to have severe and widespread repercussions.

The US Congress is considering legislation which would enable the families of victims of the September 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia, presented by the West as its most valuable ally in the Middle East, over alleged links with al-Qaeda terrorists who carried out the attacks on New York and Washington.

The issue had cast a long shadow over the recent visit of President Barack Obama to Riyadh, with the Saudis threatening to sell off $750bn of American assets they hold if the bill is passed by Congress.


READ MORE
Obama knows 9/11 was linked to Saudi Arabia – but it has oil
The classified pages are in a file titled “Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive Narrative Matters”, which have never been published from the findings of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into the attacks which killed 3,000 people and injured more than 6,000 others.

Former President George W Bush claimed the publication of this part of the report would damage America’s national security by revealing “sources and methods that would make it harder for us to win the War on Terror”.

But there is growing clamour for declassification of the pages along with allegations about attempts by the Saudis to keep their alleged role in the attacks hidden. The latest public figure to demand disclosure was Rudi Giuliani, the mayor of New York at the time of the attacks.

A Saudi prince, claimed Mr Giuliani, had given him a cheque for $10m (£7m) in an effort to persuade him to deflect attention away from the Kingdom. The former mayor said he returned the cheque after tearing it up. He declared: “His money he can keep and go burn it in hell. The American people need to know exactly what was the role of the Saudi Arabia government in the attacks: we are entitled to know who killed our loved ones and who almost killed us all.”

It was reported on Sunday that White House House officials have said privately that at least some of the 28 pages will be made public.

Inside the White House on 9/11
And former Democratic Senator Bob Graham, the former head of the Senate intelligence committee, reiterated his belief that Saudi Arabia was involved in the attacks at the highest level. He said "The most important unanswered question of 9/11 is: did these 19 people conduct this very sophisticated plot alone, or were they supported? So who was the most likely entity to have provided them that support? I think all the evidence points to Saudi Arabia. I think it covers a broad range, from the highest ranks of the Kingdom through these, what would be private entities.”

Two Congressmen, both of whom have seen the secret document, are behind the bipartisan motion for declassification. Stephen Lynch, a Massachusetts Democrat, held that the report offers evidence of links between “certain Saudi individuals” and the terrorists behind the 2001 attacks. Walter Jones, a Republican, said it also sheds light on why President Bush was so opposed to publication : “It’s about the Bush administration and its relationship with the Saudis.”

The allegations of Saudi involvement in the attacks come against a backdrop of the ultra-conservative Kingdom’s funding violent Islamist groups, often with the encouragement and support of the West. This continues now with accusations that the Saudis have supplied money and arms to the most extreme of the rebels fighting the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4725
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

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

Postby svenkat » 25 Apr 2016 15:44

@Hiranyareta Haha!! This redneck Marxist learns that merely growing a beard doesn't results in higher IQ.Watch from 54:23
[youtube]olQlPZuEWLY?t=3263[/youtube]

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 » 25 Apr 2016 17:10

Cruz and kasich form.mahagatbandhan to stop Trump

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Apr 2016 18:26

Guess what our PM is rumored to do next. Make a special trip to the US to bid Obama good bye. Who does that? Not, Mr. Eleven? or Mr. Rasputin? (Copyright for Mr. Eleven to ramana).

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20999
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2016 18:27

ShauryaT wrote:Guess what our PM is rumored to do next. Make a special trip to the US to bid Obama good bye. Who does that? Not, Mr. Eleven? or Mr. Rasputin? (Copyright for Mr. Eleven to ramana).



a poke in the paki eye??


seriously, for a guju businessman, as he claims to be, this is a tad bit over the top and reducing our value in the process
Last edited by chetak on 25 Apr 2016 18:30, edited 2 times in total.

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

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

Postby Christopher Sidor » 25 Apr 2016 18:28

This drama of US Republican party with regard to Donald Trump baffles me. At this moment Trump obviously has required support from most of Republican party members if not an outright majority. And in democracy the person with maximum number of votes win. Plain and simple. If the rank and file of Republican party are behind Trump then give him the nomination. This shenanigans of the Republican establishment makes the proposed Republican convention look like the guided democracy of Pakistan or Iran where what the elite decide is more important than what people want.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16859
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Postby Rahul M » 25 Apr 2016 18:40

just for context, major saudi snub to obama.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcaAKxep7Lw

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20999
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2016 19:02

Rahul M wrote:just for context, major saudi snub to obama.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcaAKxep7Lw



the deep state will never overlook this snub. The saudis are in for a bit of a rough ride now, for some time to come, even after the change of the president.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DrRatnadip and 69 guests