Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

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

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Singha » 06 Jan 2019 22:52

Hahaha all anglos on top as usual in these reports on education and national power

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21044
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Prem » 10 Jan 2019 01:07

he Road from the Khyber to the Bosporus: Partnerships, Perils and Opportunities


Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4840
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Neshant » 24 Jan 2019 11:50


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

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Singha » 24 Jan 2019 16:56

CNN


Airbus says its UK factories may not survive a disorderly Brexit

By Charles Riley, CNN Business

Updated 1111 GMT (1911 HKT) January 24, 2019


Davos, Switzerland (CNN Business)Airbus has warned that its plants in the United Kingdom may not survive if the country crashes out of the European Union, rupturing trade links and supply chains.

CEO Tom Enders issued the stark warning in a video released Thursday. He said a disorderly split would cause Airbus to redirect future investment and it could not guarantee that its existing factories would survive long term.

Airbus (EADSF) is headquartered in Toulouse, France, but has significant engineering and production facilities in the United Kingdom. One large production center in Wales makes the wings used on all Airbus civil aircraft. It has 14,000 employees in Britain and supports another 110,000 jobs through its supply chain.

"The UK's aerospace sector now stands at the precipice," Enders said. "If there is a no-deal Brexit, we at Airbus will have to make potentially very harmful decisions for the UK."

"Make no mistake, there are plenty of countries out there that would love to build the wings for Airbus aircraft," Enders said in the vide

ricky_v
BRFite
Posts: 403
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby ricky_v » 24 Jan 2019 18:41

look folks, a new maidan
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/23/venezuela-president-maduro-breaks-relations-with-us-gives-american-diplomats-72-hours-to-leave-country.html
Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido declared himself interim president on Wednesday, winning over the backing of the Washington and many Latin American nations and prompting socialist Nicolas Maduro to break relations with the United States.

Speaking to supporters outside the Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas, socialist leader Maduro said he would give U.S. diplomatic personnel 72 hours to leave Venezuela, which is suffering from a hyperinflationary economic collapse.

U.S. President Donald Trump formally recognized Guaido shortly after his announcement and praised his plan to hold elections. That was swiftly followed by similar statements from Canada and a slew of right-leaning Latin American governments, including Venezuela's neighbors Brazil and Colombia.

The U.S. State Department said in a statement that it would not remove American diplomats because it did not recognize the Maduro regime as the government of Venezuela: "The United States does not consider former president Nicolas Maduro to have the legal authority to break diplomatic relations with the United States or to declare our diplomats persona non grata."

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2483
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby ArjunPandit » 24 Jan 2019 22:08

chetak wrote:
Lalmohan wrote:Saudis don't need Gwadar do the? it will compete with their oil flows no?


it is a refinery that the saudis are building.

they are very interested in building another one in India too.

they are diversifying and adding value to their exports.

sir, while I dont disagree that Iran's conduct has been like that only, esp with their Kashmir lecturing recently. My post was that
1. Gwadar can't be the emerging business capital of Asia where cities like Tokyo, Shanghai and Mumbai exist
2. Coming to Iran, I doubt they are that naive, India's business through chabahar actually offers them a conduit to interact with world and byepass the US sanctions in limited capability. While Iran may shaft us, I dont think we have stood behind them either. They distrust is mutual. It's a question of who did more (In no way trying to justify Iranian past and current behavior)
3. It's a risk we have to take till we start imposing our will on nations, a good start could be hedging by retaking PoK (ignoring current feasibility aside) or being able to stand up to American browbeating (which is neither beneficial or practical). Chabahar is wealthy but not strong willed nation's work around in today's time. If we dont stand up why do we expect others to stand up for us.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3346
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Kashi » 25 Jan 2019 06:41

chetak wrote:the iranis have already made proposals to both the paki and the hans to link the two ports via a rail + road link.

iran is greedy.


If I remember correctly that was before Saudis were on the scene. Now with the Saud firmly planted in Gwadar, will the Iranis (greedy or not) have the same proposal?

Moreover, will the Saud allow the Bakis to link up with Chabahar?

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19289
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby chetak » 25 Jan 2019 11:35

ArjunPandit wrote:
chetak wrote:
it is a refinery that the saudis are building.

they are very interested in building another one in India too.

they are diversifying and adding value to their exports.

sir, while I dont disagree that Iran's conduct has been like that only, esp with their Kashmir lecturing recently. My post was that
1. Gwadar can't be the emerging business capital of Asia where cities like Tokyo, Shanghai and Mumbai exist
2. Coming to Iran, I doubt they are that naive, India's business through chabahar actually offers them a conduit to interact with world and byepass the US sanctions in limited capability. While Iran may shaft us, I dont think we have stood behind them either. They distrust is mutual. It's a question of who did more (In no way trying to justify Iranian past and current behavior)
3. It's a risk we have to take till we start imposing our will on nations, a good start could be hedging by retaking PoK (ignoring current feasibility aside) or being able to stand up to American browbeating (which is neither beneficial or practical). Chabahar is wealthy but not strong willed nation's work around in today's time. If we dont stand up why do we expect others to stand up for us.


why do we need to stand up for iran?? who are they to us? they are looking down at us through the colored lens of the old persian empire, the fallacious "conqueror's" mentality.

we don't run them down in any way like they do to us.

we only ask that they do the same.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19289
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby chetak » 25 Jan 2019 11:43

ArjunPandit wrote:
chetak wrote:
it is a refinery that the saudis are building.

they are very interested in building another one in India too.

they are diversifying and adding value to their exports.

sir, while I dont disagree that Iran's conduct has been like that only, esp with their Kashmir lecturing recently. My post was that
1. Gwadar can't be the emerging business capital of Asia where cities like Tokyo, Shanghai and Mumbai exist
2. Coming to Iran, I doubt they are that naive, India's business through chabahar actually offers them a conduit to interact with world and byepass the US sanctions in limited capability. While Iran may shaft us, I dont think we have stood behind them either. They distrust is mutual. It's a question of who did more (In no way trying to justify Iranian past and current behavior)
3. It's a risk we have to take till we start imposing our will on nations, a good start could be hedging by retaking PoK (ignoring current feasibility aside) or being able to stand up to American browbeating (which is neither beneficial or practical). Chabahar is wealthy but not strong willed nation's work around in today's time. If we dont stand up why do we expect others to stand up for us.


chabahar is a sleepy, overgrown village sort of a place and it will remain so for quite some time to come.

the concept of such ports being the commercial capital of anything is the outpouring of a diseased mind and a fevered imagination. At best, it is just another link in a long trade route, albeit an important one in terms of cargo transshipment.

It is just their awkward way of trying to sell the port to gullible investors and to attract non iranian money to do their work for them. good luck to them.

krishna_krishna
BRFite
Posts: 731
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 04:14

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby krishna_krishna » 27 Jan 2019 21:39

"US - Taliban agree on troop withdrawal plan, Sources Tell VOA"

@jaketapper

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4840
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Neshant » 28 Jan 2019 01:59

krishna_krishna wrote:"US - Taliban agree on troop withdrawal plan, Sources Tell VOA"

@jaketapper


The Taliban have successfully defeated the US, if true.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Austin » 28 Jan 2019 19:30

Video : India needs to ally with US to counter China: Fareed Zakaria to India Today at Davos

https://www.indiatoday.in/india-today-a ... 2019-01-26

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Austin » 28 Jan 2019 22:09

Watched the interview with Fareed , he seems to have a very patronising attitude towards current GOI and hatred towards DT

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52534
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby ramana » 06 Feb 2019 21:51


Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3536
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Paul » 06 Feb 2019 22:01

behind a wall


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Austin » 07 Feb 2019 14:21

China, Not Russia Real Reason Behind US Exit From INF Treaty – Indian Analyst
"The primary reason of the withdrawing of the US from the INF Treaty is not Russia. It is China, whom the US wants to stop at the world stage. Definitely, the US will try its best to include China and some other countries, like India, in a treaty akin to the INF. But, I am afraid that such a kind of treaty will not take place in the near future, especially when the US has unilaterally withdrawn in the first place", Rajiv Nayan, senior research associate at the Delhi based Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, told Sputnik.

Analyst Rajiv Nayan observes that "Russia is unlikely to jump into the arms race immediately, as it has enough missiles and other weapons that can ensure its security in the region, especially in the backdrop of a shift in the theatre of war to East Asia from Europe".


Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21044
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Prem » 21 Feb 2019 07:24

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles ... ontainment?
The New Containment

This new world requires a new American foreign policy. Fortunately, the country’s own not-so-distant past can offer guidance. During the Cold War, the United States chose to contain the Soviet Union, successfully deterring its military aggression and limiting its political influence for decades. The United States should apply containment once again, now to Russia, China, and Iran. The contemporary world is similar enough to its mid-twentieth-century predecessor to make that old strategy relevant but different enough that it needs to be modified and updated. While success is not guaranteed, a new containment policy offers the best chance to defend American interests in the twenty-first century.Now as before, the possibility of armed conflict exerts a major influence on the foreign policies of the United States and countries throughout Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. The Cold War divided the world into rival camps, with regions and even countries split in two. Today, similar cleavages are developing, with each revisionist power seeking its own sphere of influence separate from the larger U.S.-backed global order.Now as before, the revisionist powers are dictatorships that challenge American values as well as American interests. They seek to overturn political, military, and economic arrangements the United States helped establish long ago and has supported ever since. Should Vladimir Putin’s Russia succeed in reasserting control over parts of the former Soviet Union, Xi Jinping’s China gain control over maritime commerce in the western Pacific, or Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s Iran dominate the oil reserves of the Persian Gulf, the United States, its allies, and the global order they uphold would suffer a major blow.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4840
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Neshant » 22 Feb 2019 15:03

Russia appears more on the defensive than offensive.

There must have been an agreement on US withdrawal from Syria in return for Russia's non-involvement in Venezuela.

Their bigger long term problem is China which they are far more wary of than NATO.

rhytha
BRFite
Posts: 269
Joined: 07 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby rhytha » 23 Mar 2019 15:36

New Roadmaps for Asia: The 'Free and Open Indo-Pacific' and the 'Quad'

NEW YORK, March 19, 2019 — In an age of anxiety about regional security in Asia, two new ideas have gained traction: the "Free and Open Indo-Pacific" and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogues (the "quad"). Both ideas would involve India, Japan, Australia, and the United States. In a Tuesday night conversation at Asia Society, ASPI's Daniel Russel discussed the "FOIP" and the "quad" with Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, president of global corporate affairs at Tata Group, and Akitaka Saiki, a member of the board at the Mitsubishi Corporation. (1 hr., 15 min.)


siqir
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 66
Joined: 20 Mar 2019 08:32

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby siqir » 23 Mar 2019 19:22

very good show by s jaishankar

the host was a total obama hack pretending trump did not exist
these people still not accepting reality

that map @5:08 put up by the japanese seemed a deliberate insult to show us up as small
in fact indian ocean is 70 m kmsq while pacific is 165 m kmsq or just over double
sj countered it well by saying we see pacific as just our periphery have our own history and also brought up jp helping brits put down sg mutiny

curt answer by sj that china should look at signal they are sending with azhar etc at un

@22:20 famous huawei song rings out lol

japanese point on rep for quality of projects vs china just being cheap is now questionable
a lot of jp quality scandals have come up recent one being a building co fudging earthquake resistance data
we should not take qa for granted on our hsr

personally i am suspicious if indo pacific is just greater east asia co prosperity sphere now just an arc
is japan really a democracy with current hullabaloo over new emperor and abe being a dynast and no heeding okinawa protests
can we trust jp to not pull a moon jae in and fold into sinosphere especially once gdp table flips from usa to cn
afterall they have not forgotten who used nooks on them

japanese on nhk atleast will usually show only g3 ie jp eu usa get together to ponder fate of world so it is interesting to see this

chanakyaa
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 00:09
Location: Hiding in Karakoram

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby chanakyaa » 16 May 2019 06:17

Technology and trade have now been fully weaponized. Did Chinese know that the manufacturing privileges awarded to them 30+ years ago would come back and haunt them? Is Wipro, TCS, Infosys next in his second term?

China's Huawei, 70 affiliates placed on U.S. trade blacklist

What if uncle said to country XYZ, that if you don't behave the way we want you to behave, we will ensure that not a single computer works in your country? What if uncle decided to stop selling microprocessors or software to countries for not behaving? How long will it take the nationalist governments to fall?

chanakyaa
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 00:09
Location: Hiding in Karakoram

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby chanakyaa » 17 May 2019 07:29

US warns EU over 'poison pill' defence plans (france24)
The United States has sent a stern warning to the European Union that its plans to boost defence cooperation within the bloc could unravel decades of transatlantic cooperation and damage NATO.

A May 1 letter from two of President Donald Trump's top defence officials, seen by AFP, is the latest sign of deep misgivings in Washington about the EU's push to make its military spending more coherent.

The letter to EU diplomatic and security chief Federica Mogherini says "poison pills" embedded in proposed rules would shut third countries such as the US out of European projects -- and hints at retaliatory measures.

The concerns focus on the European Defence Fund (EDF), a seven-year 13-billion euro ($14.6 billion) pot approved by the European Parliament last month, and the EU defence cooperation pact known as PESCO.

"The draft EDF regulation and PESCO general conditions represent a dramatic reversal of the last three decades of increased integration of the transatlantic defence sector," the letter says.

The proposed rules "would not only damage the constructive NATO-EU relationship we have built together over the past several years but could potentially turn the clock back to the sometimes divisive discussions about EU defence initiatives that dominated our exchanges 15 years ago," the letter warns.

Along with the warnings, the US officials also make a veiled threat to hit back, saying the EU would object to similar US restrictions "and we would not relish having to consider them in the future".

EU countries launched PESCO in late 2017 to try to harmonise a highly fragmented approach to defence spending.

Under the pact, countries cooperate on projects to develop new military equipment such as fighter planes and drones, and on support systems such as military hospitals and training centres.

The US letter chimes with bitter divisions within the bloc on what rules to set for non-EU allies such as the US, Norway -- and for Britain after Brexit -- who want to contribute to projects.

A group led by France wants to set tough rules, arguing the aim is to improve cooperation within Europe and achieve "strategic autonomy" -- ending the historic reliance on the US to guarantee the continent's security.

A rival grouping led by the Netherlands and Sweden favours a more inclusive approach, arguing that Europe should not shut out longstanding allies with strong defence expertise, like the US.

Washington argues that shutting out third countries by making the rules too tough will ultimately lead to more money being wasted and make it harder to ensure European and US military systems can operate together in NATO.

European defence officials say there is some misunderstanding of their plans in Washington, insisting that close cooperation with NATO is in place to ensure projects dovetail with the alliance's priorities.

They also note that the money available under the EDF -- 13 billion euros over seven years -- is little more than loose change in the defence sector.

But there is also sympathy in some quarters for US concerns about PESCO.

A government official from one EU state said PESCO should not have "a complete open door" but warned against closing it too far.

"There's a difference with some other countries in the union or within PESCO like France or Spain, who really want to put ten locks on this door and prevent everybody from coming in," the official said.

"At my house I have only two locks and that's enough to keep burglars out but it helps me open it easily and host visitors."

Mogherini said the EU was preparing a "clear and complete reply" to the US concerns, but insisted the EU would remain open to American defence manufacturers.

"The EU is actually at the moment much more open than the US procurement market is for the European Union companies and equipment," she told reporters.

"In the EU there is no 'buy European' act and around 81 percent of international contracts go to the US firms in Europe today."

uskumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 24 Aug 2009 23:41

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby uskumar » 17 May 2019 10:28

chanakyaa wrote:Is Wipro, TCS, Infosys next in his second

Sir outsourcing is already being targeted at multiple levels by restricting h1 and l1. I had posted sometime back on tax on money sent from America to Indian captive units. I think that's one reason I think data localization is being pushed. Next step will be private Internet for India or splinternet. Outsourcers will sooner or later need to move into product development. Regarding CPU, I don't think it is any coincidence that 2 premier institutes iit mum and Chennai are working on designing CPUs. We lag fab facilities though.

ricky_v
BRFite
Posts: 403
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby ricky_v » 20 May 2019 16:49

a bit dated, microscopic for the nonce
https://www.fenae.org.br/portal/fama-2018-1/news/the-privatization-of-water-nestle-denies-that-water-is-a-fundamental-human-right.htm
But Chairman, Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, believes that “access to water is not a public right.” Nor is it a human right. So if privatization is the answer, is this the company in which the public should place its trust?

Here is just one example, among many, of his company’s concern for the public thus far:

In the small Pakistani community of Bhati Dilwan, a former village councilor says children are being sickened by filthy water. Who’s to blame? He says it’s bottled water-maker Nestlé, which dug a deep well that is depriving locals of potable water. “The water is not only very dirty, but the water level sank from 100 to 300 to 400 feet,” Dilwan says. (source)

Why? Because if the community had fresh water piped in, it would deprive Nestlé of its lucrative market in water bottled under the Pure Life brand.

chanakyaa
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 00:09
Location: Hiding in Karakoram

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby chanakyaa » 26 May 2019 19:26

Modi Season 2, Episode Pakistan: Give pressure a chance
The image of Pakistan's foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, who not long back had not only boasted about the ‘googly’ that the Imran Khan government had bowled by opening the Kartarpur corridor but also displayed his toxic sexism while referring to the Indian External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, sitting somewhat diffidently next to her during the SCO foreign ministers meeting in Bishkek told the story of the desperate efforts of Pakistan to re-engage India in some sort of a dialogue. As is the wont of his class – feudal from South Punjab – Qureshi pretended to be all sweet and honey and claimed (wrongly, as it turns out) that his Indian counterpart had brought sweets so that the two sides could “speak sweetly”. Later, after it became clear that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had won by a landslide, Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan congratulated him and expressed the hope of “working with him for peace, progress and prosperity in South Asia.”

Over the last few days, reports coming out of Pakistan make it clear that the Pakistanis are sending out signals that they are keen on engaging India in a dialogue. Among the options being explored by Pakistan is to appoint a National Security Advisor who could then open a back-channel with his Indian counterpart. Within India, the usual suspects have once again started a campaign to restart talks with Pakistan. There is also some talk of international ‘pressure’ coming on the next government to engage Pakistan.

The possibility of Modi being tempted to smoke the peace pipe with the Pakistanis cannot be entirely ruled out. But this is a temptation that he must shun, just as he must shun the ‘let’s rescue Pakistan (and CPEC :wink: ) from itself’ lobby that has become active inside India – an example of this is the sales pitch of using Pakistan's economic vulnerability to incentivise peace. Some twenty years ago, the same lemon was sold to Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. He initiated the Lahore Bus diplomacy, and Pakistan Army’s business units were given fat contracts to supply sugar to India. The reward for this initiative was Kargil!

In his first term, Modi made at least half a dozen attempts to put the engagement process with Pakistan back on the rails. But every effort of his was rudely rebuffed by the Pakistanis. For instance, the Ufa meeting in Russia was followed by the attack on Gurdaspur and the Lahore visit of Modi was followed by the Pathankot attack. Even after Pathankot, Modi was ready to give peace a chance by accepting Nawaz Sharif’s offer to investigate the attack and punish the perpetrators. Of course, nothing of the sort happened because the ‘deep state’ and the military establishment in Pakistan stymied all efforts to book the Jaish-e-Mohammad which was responsible. The Uri terror attack, however, was the last straw for Modi who finally realised that dialogue and diplomacy with Pakistan was a Mug’s game.

The massive mandate given by the people of India to Modi, in part on account of the assertive and aggressive steps taken by him to punish Pakistan’s export of terror in India – ‘Surgical Strike’ in 2016 and the ‘Balakot’ airstrike earlier this year – will be wasted and India will be back to square one if the government once again falls in the talks trap. Modi must rid India of the Prithviraj Chauhan syndrome – giving the enemy an honourable exit when he is down and out, only to see him recover and regain strength and attack again – that has guided, nay dogged, Indian policy making for decades. If there is one lesson of the last seven decades, it is to never throw a lifeline to an enemy like Pakistan when he is down.

The sweet reasonableness dripping out of Islamabad is not because there has been a change in policy or strategy, but because Pakistan has its back to the wall and would therefore like to avoid a conflict-like situation with India. Increasing tensions with India don’t suit Pakistan; lulling India into inaction does. With an economy on the ropes, a dysfunctional polity and mounting strategic challenges, the last thing Pakistan wants at this stage is a hot border with India. But this is precisely the reason why this is the time for India to press home the advantage. Because even as Pakistan confronts a failing economy, a failing polity and a failing strategy, it has continued with its deeply inimical policy towards India. This is manifested in its efforts to agitate on the Kashmir issue, continue pushing in terrorists, conduct hostile operations against Indian interests in the region and beyond, and pretty much doing everything and anything that hurts or harms or threatens India, including a missile test to signal the intentions to confront India.

Therefore, instead of creating space for Pakistan by entering into yet another desultory dialogue with it, India needs to use the space made available by Pakistan's problems to increase the power differential and the force differential between the two countries. Entering into any kind of dialogue with Pakistan and lowering tensions with that country at this time will tantamount to giving Pakistan an escape route. Far from ushering in peace in the region, any space India makes available for Pakistan will be exploited by it to prepare for the next round of conflict after it has recouped and recovered its strength. For anyone in India to think that the time is ripe for India to make another attempt for striking a grand bargain with Pakistan, is utterly delusional and will be nothing short of committing a historic blunder.

Although a case can be made for keeping open lines of communication, but entering into any kind of structured or formal dialogue at any level would be a strategic error. Even, the line of communication that is opened must be used only for conveying to the Pakistanis what they need to first deliver substantially, if not entirely. In other words, the communication must centre on the prerequisites for an engagement at the political level. For this to happen, two things are required.

First, the communication channel has to be at an appropriate level. The Pakistani plan to appoint a NSA to hold a conversation with his Indian counterpart isn’t going to work. Pakistani NSAs, even if they are retired generals just don’t have the same weight as the Indian NSA. If at all there has to be a back channel opened between India and Pakistan, then it must be between the Indian NSA and the Pakistani army chief. Anything short of that will always run the real risk of India not getting what it sees.

Second, the Modi government must prepare a set of metrics on which it will measure and judge Pakistan's professed intentions for good relations. These very same metrics will also come handy in warding off whatever international pressure comes on the government to re-engage Pakistan. These metrics are the political and security equivalent of the ‘prior actions’ that IMF expects Pakistan to take to prove its bona fides in the economic sphere. Without Pakistan meeting these metrics, engaging that country would be a waste of time.

On the issue of terrorism, the metric has to go beyond the usual eyewash actions like passing a new law, banning an organisation, seizing funds and sealing offices of terror outfits, or even placing terror masterminds and cadres under preventive detention. The only metric to judge whether Pakistan is serious in crushing the jihadist terror groups is that their top leadership is not only prosecuted but, also punished under the stringent anti-terror laws that operate in Pakistan. Anything less isn’t going to hold any credibility given Pakistan's past perfidy. Other ‘prior actions’ can include things like ceasing state-driven and military-directed hostile propaganda, stopping the funding of shady ‘NGOs’ that carry out anti-India campaigns, shutting down extremist organisations that incite and instigate violence against India, dismantling the jihadist infrastructure in a visible and verifiable manner.

Until there is delivery on these metrics, India must keep up the pressure and exploit Pakistan's vulnerabilities instead of letting them off the hook. The military pressure shouldn’t be eased. For Pakistan’s armed forces to stay in a constant state of alert is an extremely expensive proposition which they cannot afford given the state of their imploding economy. Just the way post Pulwama crisis has blown a fiscal hole in Pakistan's finances. This is not a sustainable proposition for any length of time, even less so with IMF breathing down Pakistan's neck to cut government expenditure, including defence spending. Further economic pressure can be imposed by undercutting Pakistan’s exports. The Modi government must also use its political and diplomatic heft to isolate Pakistan and mount more pressure on it in international forums like FATF.

Most of all, in its Season 2, the Modi government needs to double down on building the sinews of the Indian armed forces, and giving them the capability and capacity to effectively operationalise the doctrine underlying the Balakot airstrikes and the earlier Surgical Strikes. The attendant benefit of this will be the pressure it will put on Pakistan to match up or shut up: If they try to match up, they spend themselves into ruin; if they shut up, it will go a long way in addressing the export of terrorism from Pakistan into India. Of course, there will be those who will argue that China will step in to fill the breach. But China isn’t a costless option for Pakistan. It will demand its pound of flesh which will sooner, rather than later start rusting the relationship between the ‘Iron Brothers’. The relations are already showing some signs of strain. If these strains can be deepened, it will address the big strategic challenge confronting India – breaking the Sino-Pak nexus.

Finally, the Modi government needs to get its strategic communications strategy in place. A well-directed and well-crafted psy-war campaign that psychologically degrades the enemy and exploits its many fault-lines, vulnerabilities and insecurities — is not only a very cost-effective but also an operationally effective way to gain ascendancy over the enemy.

The building blocks of a robust and realistic policy on Pakistan had started taking shape in the last two years of Modi Season 1. It is now imperative that in Season 2, Modi takes that policy further. And, that is possible only if no quarter is given to the terrorist state of Pakistan.

ricky_v
BRFite
Posts: 403
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby ricky_v » 28 May 2019 20:22

maidan when?
https://emerging-europe.com/news/belarus-russia-take-steps-towards-creating-union-state/
The Belarusian and Russian governments have agreed on stepping up joint efforts to prepare an “action programme” regarding the integration of the two countries under a union state by June 21, Belarusian state news agency Belta reports.

Speaking after a meeting with Russian prime minister Dmitry Medvedev, Belarusian PM Sergey Rumas instructed his government to “reconcile the views” between the two sides.

“We have similar views on most of the things concerning the further advancement of integration. We are already working on most of these matters within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union but taking into account the mutual will and views of the two countries, we could do this work faster within the framework of the Union State of Belarus and Russia,” Mr Rumas said, adding that two sides have differing views on roughly 30 per cent of the provisions, including the energy sector.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2483
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby ArjunPandit » 28 May 2019 20:33

has sushant sareen read UBji's statement "give peace a chance, destroy pakistan"

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1720
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Bart S » 28 May 2019 22:00

He also uses TSP in the last line :D

ricky_v
BRFite
Posts: 403
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby ricky_v » 04 Jun 2019 00:49

https://power.lowyinstitute.org/countries
https://power.lowyinstitute.org/downloads/Lowy-Institute-Asia-Power-Index-2019-Key-Findings.pdf
There is often a temptation to reduce the complexity of Asia’s international
order to a two player game between the United States and China. In reality
the Indo-Pacific ecosystem is created and sustained by a much wider array
of actors. Japan and India, the third and fourth ranked powers, fall within two
points of each other and occupy a distinct tier ahead of the most sizeable
middle powers.
India and Japan are separated by oceans, distinct geopolitical contests and
legacies, and vast demographic differentials representing young and old
Asia. However, both major powers must contend with fading US strategic
predominance and the sharpening ambition of China. Each is helping at the
margins to adapt the broader regional order to contemporary realities.
Japan is the quintessential smart power, using the country’s limited
resources to wield a top-four ranking across the four influence measures.
It finishes in the top two, only six points behind China, for diplomatic influence.
Setting regional standards and maintaining an inclusive multilateral
architecture has become a key organising principle under the premiership
of Shinzo Abe. Tokyo successfully resuscitated the Trans-Pacific Partnership
(TPP) in 2018, which became the TPP-11 together with ten other economies
minus the United States.

Whereas Japan is an overachiever in long-term decline, India is an
underachiever relative to both its size and potential. Despite Prime
Minister Narendra Modi’s Act East Policy, and a strong top-four showing
across the resource measures, New Delhi trails in sixth and eighth place
for economic relationships and defence networks, and is down two places
in diplomatic influence in 2019.
What India lacks in influence it makes up for in scale. The opposite holds true
for Japan. Whereas India is ranked fourth for its military capability Japan has
ceded ground and dropped from sixth to seventh place for military capability.
India’s economy is predicted to double in size and reach approximate paritywith the United States by 2030. In the same time frame, Japan will have
fallen behind Indonesia, currently the sixth-largest economy regionally.
In this sense the major powers offer each other complementary strengths
and weaknesses, which creates a ripe basis for enhanced cooperation.
Tokyo has cultivated strategic ties with New Delhi, now firmly enshrined in
Japan’s Indo-Pacific concept.

we dont stack up well in some military aspects,signature capabilities, defence networks in asia itself accordingly.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52534
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby ramana » 04 Jun 2019 01:03

I notice on Youtube there is a huge pro-Indian culture movement going on in Ukraine.
Dance groups, music etc.
And not just Bollywood but full Bollywood culture.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52534
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby ramana » 27 Jun 2019 04:26

Interesting set of articles in Texas National Security Review (TNSR) Journal:

https://tnsr.org/volume-2-issue-2-february-2019/

Arun.prabhu
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26

Re: Geopolitics/Geoeconomics Thread- June 2015

Postby Arun.prabhu » 04 Jul 2019 16:25

Peter Zeihan has some interesting analysis on the Hong Kong protests:


https://us11.campaign-archive.com/?u=de ... 557eb8dbd5

https://us11.campaign-archive.com/?u=de ... 49b9610ebe

If zeihan is right, the world is in for a very interesting next few decades.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Neela, Sachin, VikramA and 61 guests