Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

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.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15951
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby chetak » 04 Dec 2017 22:06

Cosmo_R wrote:This sent the BP up a notch:
As Obama Warns Modi, Ivanka Given Lavish Welcome in India

"Obama picked up on India’s main current social issue when he said that, along with other countries, it should ensure that a Muslim population felt integrated. “That is something that should be cherished and nurtured,” he said."

http://www.newsweek.com/obama-warns-mod ... dia-728327

Question: Did Obama say the same thing to his Indonesian hosts (he grew up in Indonesia) about nurturing and cherishing Hindus in Bali?
Or, Latinos in America? Where under his watch more deportations took place than under Bush?

Under that professorial veneer Obama harbors strong likes and a view that Muslims are persecuted everywhere

This article first appeared in
https://ridingtheelephant.wordpress.com ... ays-obama/

Where he changed the header to:

"India’s Muslims should be “cherished and nurtured” says Obama

Elliot is the BritCommie who I think wrote for WAPO. Usual 'White Mughal' stuff

https://ridingtheelephant.wordpress.com/about/



The hosts who paid him to come got their moneys' worth.

lootyens dilli and the congis/commies made their point.

for obama, it was just another day, another dollar.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48122
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby ramana » 05 Dec 2017 00:21

KLNMurthy wrote:
ramana wrote:Could be Haley too.

I suppose, but all the MSM is claiming that it won't be Namrata and it will be Mike.

I would expect (hope) Namrata to understand India's perspective. But given current information, we should prepare for Pompeo.



I wouldn't expect that. She has to be loyal to her country interests.

Malayappan
BRFite
Posts: 421
Joined: 18 Jul 2005 00:11

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Malayappan » 06 Dec 2017 08:23

U.S.-India Insight: Do Not Give Up on the Bilateral Investment Treaty
Rationale for the BIT for the Indian Side:
U.S. investors (including capital aggregators like pension fund managers and global life insurers) are well aware of many recent cases where investors have seen reversals due to government action. This is a very real threat in India, and a BIT is one “piece of the puzzle” to bring additional security. It may help un-stick capital that sits on the sidelines today.

Some interesting insights into commercial issues.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9821
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Vayutuvan » 06 Dec 2017 23:59

mappunni wrote:saavugrakki ghose :rotfl: :rotfl:

Sethalum She will come back as Pisas !!

Translation please, pretty please.

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5111
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby devesh » 07 Dec 2017 13:41

ramana wrote:
KLNMurthy wrote:I suppose, but all the MSM is claiming that it won't be Namrata and it will be Mike.

I would expect (hope) Namrata to understand India's perspective. But given current information, we should prepare for Pompeo.



I wouldn't expect that. She has to be loyal to her country interests.



something tells me Tillerson shouldn't be counted out just yet. He might yet survive. Some intriguing characters brought him to Trump's attention. For a purpose.

periaswamy
BRFite
Posts: 441
Joined: 07 Jul 2017 20:50

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby periaswamy » 07 Dec 2017 19:35

vayutuvan: "Sethalum She will come back as Pisas !!" Translation please, pretty please.


Even after she dies, she will torment us all as a vicious ghost.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6086
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby CRamS » 07 Dec 2017 21:15



I simultaneously weep profusely and laugh in contempt at why Bharat mata is cursed with a disgusting elite who control the narrative. In any self respecting country, the elite would have demanded answers from an ex president on why US p!sses on India like this, but instead we have the elite fawning over this Obama like colonial diseased rats falling over each other and celebrating his bogus remark on 'religious tolerance' and using that as a stick to beat BJP and ModiJi. As we have many times discussed, for this elite, India is not their country per se, but rather they consider themselves to be part of westernized slaves interpreting India for the benefit of their slave masters. Ackkk Thoo.

periaswamy
BRFite
Posts: 441
Joined: 07 Jul 2017 20:50

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby periaswamy » 07 Dec 2017 21:24

CRamS: I simultaneously weep profusely...etc.


This is not fuel -- this is tar/bitumen for laying roads. Just do a web search on that product and the import/export documents for it. States that pretty clearly. Just because Indian journalists are a bunch of low IQ cretins, doesn't mean we have to explode into a ball of mucus and tears everytime they write some politically motivated BS that is not rooted in reality.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3344
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Cosmo_R » 07 Dec 2017 22:53

periaswamy wrote:
CRamS: I simultaneously weep profusely...etc.


This is not fuel -- this is tar/bitumen for laying roads. Just do a web search on that product and the import/export documents for it. States that pretty clearly. Just because Indian journalists are a bunch of low IQ cretins, doesn't mean we have to explode into a ball of mucus and tears everytime they write some politically motivated BS that is not rooted in reality.


Well said. :)

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 810
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Bart S » 08 Dec 2017 00:50

periaswamy wrote:
CRamS: I simultaneously weep profusely...etc.


This is not fuel -- this is tar/bitumen for laying roads. Just do a web search on that product and the import/export documents for it. States that pretty clearly. Just because Indian journalists are a bunch of low IQ cretins, doesn't mean we have to explode into a ball of mucus and tears everytime they write some politically motivated BS that is not rooted in reality.


It isn't just the journalists, some self-appointed 'environmentalist' has filed a case in the Supreme Court who banned the import and the govt is pleading for some exceptions to the ban to be allowed!

periaswamy
BRFite
Posts: 441
Joined: 07 Jul 2017 20:50

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby periaswamy » 08 Dec 2017 00:55

Bart S. It isn't just the journalists, some self-appointed 'environmentalist' has filed a case in the Supreme Court who banned the import and the govt is pleading for some exceptions to the ban to be allowed!



Why is the govt. bending over to the morons in the Supreme Court and ask them to mind their own business and not interfere in policy making? Who the hell are these unelected and self-electing jokers who have never faced an election to make policy decisions day after day? Is this BJP govt. really that witless to put the brakes on the SC judges?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48122
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby ramana » 08 Dec 2017 00:57

periaswamy, The whole article talks about how this pet coke is being used as a fuel as it burns hotter than normal coal.
And Reliance is ramping up its own production to match the imports.

I think industry should find ways to burn it cleaner and have sulfur scrubbers or else whole of North India will have acid rain.

Maybe burn this in electric generating plants and use the electricity instead of this distributed burning in furnaces.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2945
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Dipanker » 08 Dec 2017 01:00

India to ban imports of petcoke as concerns about air pollution grow

DECEMBER 6, 2017 NEW DELHI—India's government says it plans to phase out imports of a dirty fuel known as petroleum coke, or petcoke, after an Associated Press investigation found US oil refineries are exporting vast quantities of the product to India.

But when it comes to domestic use, the Indian government seems to be going in a different direction. The government this week argued in court that restrictions on petcoke around polluted New Delhi should be eased for certain low-impact industries. The move has infuriated environmentalists.

The AP investigation found the US sold about 20 times more petcoke to India last year than it did six years earlier after US refineries struggled to sell the product at home. In 2016, the US sent more than 8.8 million tons of petcoke to India, enough to fill the Empire State Building eight times over.

Petcoke is a bottom-of-the-barrel leftover from the refining of Canadian tar sands crude and other heavy oils. It's cheaper and burns hotter than coal. But laboratory tests on imported petcoke used near New Delhi found it contained 17 times more sulfur than the limit set for coal.

A day after the AP investigation was published, Indian Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Dharmendra Pradhan said the government was formulating a policy to end imports.
...

periaswamy
BRFite
Posts: 441
Joined: 07 Jul 2017 20:50

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby periaswamy » 08 Dec 2017 01:17

Study of Comparison of coke and petro coke

Utility companies used 3,852 dcd of petroleum coke (less than 5% of annual production) as a
power plant supplemental fuel blending with coal in 1996
, because petroleum coke has advantages
of low price (36% lower at Wst or 46% lower at %/MMBtu), high heating value, and low ash
content [I]. The disadvantages of petroleum coke as a fuel are expense of a dual solid bel
handling and crushing system, high sulfur, high nickel and vanadium content.


US has been running power plants since the 90s with a mix of coke and coal -- does not seem to be used on its own, as the tables on the last two pages of the paper in the link. reduction in coal burning plants in the US and EPA regulations seems to be reason for search for export market.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9284
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby arun » 13 Dec 2017 08:54

A reminder that the rhetoric of India and the US having shared interests only goes so far. At the Buenos Ares Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) the US attempts to stymie India’s efforts on ensuring food security:

India's Sharp Message To US As WTO Food Security Talks Teeter

periaswamy
BRFite
Posts: 441
Joined: 07 Jul 2017 20:50

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby periaswamy » 13 Dec 2017 09:52

US farm subsidies grow

Two years ago, when the most recent Farm Bill emerged from Congress, the measure's authors proudly announced what sounded like bold cuts in these controversial programs. The Senate Agriculture Committee noted in a press release that the new law would eliminate one big subsidy altogether and save taxpayers a total of $23.3 billion over the following 10 years.

Those projected savings, it turns out, were a mirage. According new estimates for Farm Bill spending over the next few years released by the Congressional Budget Office, total government aid to farmers will swell to $23.9 billion in 2017.


Over the decades, Congress has periodically changed the way these programs work. This latest Farm Bill ditched a politically unpopular subsidy program that wrote checks to farmers simply based on the number of acres they owned. In its place, the law set up new programs that pay farmers when commodity prices fall. And indeed they have been falling since the last Farm Bill.

If prices stay low, or rebound, spending under some of these new programs should decline, but only gradually — and within a few years Congress will once again revise the Farm Bill.

Orden does believe that over the long term, there has been progress in abolishing some of the most wasteful farm subsidies. "We used to do all sorts of things to maintain high market prices for farmers," he says.

For example, the government used to buy up large amounts of agricultural commodities and either store them or export them at much lower prices. It also paid farmers to take vast amounts of land out of production. Those programs, Orden says, were probably more damaging to the overall economy than the payments and crop insurance payouts that farmers get today.


So the US keeps a lot of farming capacity in its back pocket via these subsidies -- maybe this allows them to control commodity prices in the world market. This is related to their objection to "food security" in the WTO, esp. given this Trump admin is all about protecting the local economy.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9284
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby arun » 13 Dec 2017 14:20

X Posted from the Terroristan thread.

Palpable frustration oozes from the Secretary of State of the United States of America at the adroit way the US’ Major non NATO Ally aka MUNNA repeatedly sticks a finger up the US’ defecatory orifice and tickles it. One must compliment the finesse with which the Punjabi Military Dominated Deep State of the Mohammadden Terrorism Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan games the United States of America. I trust our Foreign Policy establishment are taking notes on the US can be handled starting with the WTO:

On "Meeting the Foreign Policy Challenges of 2017 and Beyond"
Rex W. Tillerson
Secretary of State
The 2017 Atlantic Council-Korea Foundation Forum
Washington, DC
December 12, 2017 …………………………….

The global effort to defeat ISIS and the global effort to defeat terrorism is one of the President’s top priorities, and that takes us to the South Asia policy and Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India. And the approach to this policy really was a regional approach. The President made a decision and announced the policy that we would remain in Afghanistan, we would remain engaged in the fight to defeat the Taliban, and that the time and effort would be conditions-based. He didn’t – he said it’s not a blank check. It’s not forever, so the Government of Afghanistan needs to understand they must continue their reform journey and they must continue to create conditions that will be inclusive to all ethnic groups within Afghanistan, including a place for the Taliban to participate in a legitimate government when the Taliban is ready to renounce terrorism, renounce the fight, and come to the table.

So the conditions-based approach is to ensure the Taliban know, you will never win a battlefield victory, and the way forward is going to be by engaging in a reconciliation process and ultimately joining a government in Afghanistan.

An important part of the regional approach is our relationship with Pakistan. The U.S. and Pakistan have had a long history of good relations, but that relationship has really deteriorated over the past decade and so now we’re engaged with Pakistan in a conversation to ensure our expectations of them are clear, that our concern is really about Pakistan’s stability. Pakistan has allowed so many terrorist organizations to find safe haven within its territories, and these organizations are growing in size and influence, that at some point I have said to the leadership of Pakistan, you may be the target, and they turn their attention from Kabul and decide they like Islamabad as a target better.

We want to work with Pakistan to stamp out terrorism within their boundaries as well, but Pakistan has to begin the process of changing its relationship with the Haqqani Network and with others. I understand that this is a relationship that has emerged probably for, in their view, good reasons a decade ago, but now that relationship has to be altered because they – if they’re not careful, Pakistan is going to lose control of their own country. We want to work with them in a positive way. We’re willing to share information with them and we want them to be successful. But we cannot continue with the status quo, where terrorist organizations are allowed to find safe haven inside of Pakistan.


From the US State Department website:

On "Meeting the Foreign Policy Challenges of 2017 and Beyond"

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9284
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby arun » 13 Dec 2017 14:59

X Posted from the Terroristan thread.

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson:

“Pakistan is still an important and valued partner of the United States”:

Townhall
Rex W. Tillerson
Secretary of State
I. Steven (Steve) Goldstein
Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs
Dean Acheson Auditorium
Washington, DC
December 12, 2017

STAFF: Ladies and Gentlemen, the Secretary of State. (Applause.)

SECRETARY TILLERSON: Good morning. Good morning, all. Please, have a seat. ………………..

……….. So in that region of the world, obviously, a heavy, heavy emphasis on counterterrorism. That’s really the big threat that we’re dealing with there.

Out of that also emerged the new South Asia strategy for Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India. And I think the President took a very bold decision by asserting that we will be in Afghanistan with our military presence and continue to fight terrorism and fight the Taliban on a conditions-based effort. There is no timeline. We’re there until this thing is brought to a conclusion. It’s not a blank check. It’s not a forever. But we’re going to stay on the ground and support the Afghan Government. The Afghan Government has to continue to deliver on the needed reforms and create the conditions to have an inclusive government that allows for participation of all the ethnic groups in Afghanistan, including the Taliban. When the Taliban are ready to come to that negotiating table, there will be a place for them to participate in a future Afghan government.

And so the policy there in Afghanistan and in that region is to deny any safe haven to terrorist organizations, because there are a number of terrorist organizations operating in the Afghan-Pakistan region. Our policy is deny them the ability to have a safe haven where they can organize, they can recruit fighters, they can raise money, they can plan and carry out attacks against our allies, our own homeland, as we know they did in the past. So the entire policy in South Asia is to achieve that. And we achieve that by eliminating the safe havens, having some organizations who today have been fighting decide they don’t want to fight anymore, they’d rather talk about how to live, and create the conditions for a reconciliation process within Afghanistan and ultimately a peace process.

In our efforts with Pakistan, Pakistan is still an important and valued partner of the United States. Over the last decade, the relationship has drifted, and we’ve got to bring this relationship back to one of common interest. Today that’s just not the case. And so we’re engaged in very, very frank discussions with Pakistan over the concerns we have about their own stability and their own future and the threat they’re under by allowing terrorist organizations to operate in their territory, and how we can work together to bring stability and peace to the whole region. And again, we’ve got a great team working in that region as well. A lot of work left to do.


SECRETARY TILLERSON: Well, I’m smiling. (Applause.) I am learning to enjoy it. (Laughter.)

Look, it’s – this is a hard job. I mean – I mean, it’s difficult because of the issues, the complexity of the issues that you deal with. You wake up every morning, and the team that works closely with me in my front office know, because I say this many times to them, I start every morning with the thought, “How can I keep someone from being killed today?” I never had to start my mornings with that thought for 41 and a half years. I did worry about people’s safety in my old career, because there were a lot of risks, and we did lose people, regrettably, due to operation problems. But this is a different – I didn’t have to spend a lot of time worrying about civilians being killed, children being killed, people’s rights, their dignity being violated in unimaginable ways. So I start every day with that simple question: What can I do today to keep someone from being killed? And I’ve had a – I’ve had to really struggle with getting used to that, because I take it very seriously.

When I say I’m learning to enjoy it, I am. I’m learning to enjoy it because I’m getting to know all of you better. And one of the things that you get enjoyment from are the people that you have the privilege to work with every day, and that was true for 41 and a half years of my life. And so coming to a place where I didn’t know anybody and I don’t know much about you, that’s why I say I’m learning to enjoy it. Because now, having gone through everything I just described to you and have had great colleagues of yours supporting me and helping me through this year, I am enjoying it more. I enjoy the people. I enjoy you. And that’s why – when you say, “Do you enjoy it?” The actual task at hand of dealing with North Korea? I don’t enjoy that. I mean – (laughter) – but I enjoy working with Susan Thornton on it. Dealing with [b[Pakistan[/b] – I don’t enjoy that. But I enjoy dealing with Alice Wells and Ambassador Hale on it. You’re great people, and I’m – because I’m now making more and more acquaintances and connections, and I have more time with people, I’m beginning to understand them – I enjoy that. That’s what I enjoy, is I enjoy you. And we’ll get some things done. (Applause.) ………………..


From the US State department Website here:

Remarks at Town Hall

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21892
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby SSridhar » 14 Dec 2017 07:58

The US and its anti-terrorism narrative - G.Parthasarathy, Business Line
Former US president Barack Obama astounded audiences in New Delhi when he proclaimed that the US had no evidence of Pakistani government complicity in the prolonged stay of Osama bin Laden in Abbotabad. Obama’s statement was particularly [astonishing because bin Laden lived in a huge mansion with a large family barely a kilometre away from the Pakistan Military Academy. It is impossible for any foreigner to live even for a day in Abbotabad cantonment without the knowledge and approval of the Pakistani army.

Obama was fully aware of Pakistani complicity in providing bin Laden safe haven. He also turned a blind eye to Pakistani assistance to the Taliban, which resulted in the killing of over 2000 American soldiers. Obama firmly believed he needed Pakistani cooperation in arranging for an early withdrawal of American forces in Afghanistan. Moreover, he was quite ready to withdraw American forces from Afghanistan at any cost and even consider a significant role for the Taliban in the future governance of Afghanistan.

It was for this reason that he readily agreed to a dialogue involving the US, Pakistan, the Afghan government and the Taliban. Denying Pakistan’s role in bin Laden’s stay was considered imperative to achieving this aim. Obama’s policies also involved the US and Pakistan treating the legitimate government of Afghanistan and the Taliban virtually as sovereign equals, while giving Pakistan a significant say in the future governance of Afghanistan.


Twist in the narrative

Pakistan’s hand was also strengthened by support from Russia and China, who coordinated their efforts with Pakistan to equate the status of a recalcitrant Taliban and an isolated Afghan government. Taking note of Pakistan’s imperatives, China and Russia sought to create a new narrative, averring that the real threat of global terrorism came not from the Taliban, but from the Islamic State (ISIL), whose cadres, it was claimed, were shifting to Afghanistan. Iran, not surprisingly, was helped by Pakistan to establish contacts with Taliban leaders. Taliban supremo Mullah Mansour was killed in an American drone strike in Baluchistan while returning from Iran. This suited Pakistan just fine as it would help it to claim that the Tehriq-e-Taliban, which was fighting against it from Afghan soil, was really nothing but an ally of the ISIL. But, given public and Congressional opinion in the US, Obama could not achieve his cherished objective of bringing back American combat forces from Afghanistan while attempting to virtually hand over Afghanistan to Taliban/Pakistan control, despite having held office for eight years.

Pakistan’s ambitions received a setback with the unexpected election of Donald Trump. Trump had made it clear that he was not going to forget the loss of American lives, nor quietly withdraw from Afghanistan and hand it over to Pakistan-backed Taliban rule. He was determined to listen to his military advisers to make the Afghan military strong enough to resist Taliban depredations by providing it firepower and airpower. The US declined to join the Russia-China-Pakistan initiative to promote dialogue between the Afghan government and the Taliban while ignoring Taliban-sponsored terrorism.

Cue from India

Indian diplomacy persuaded the American establishment and Trump himself that Pakistan-sponsored terrorism had to be tackled not just across Pakistan’s borders with Afghanistan, but also its borders with India. On June 27, the Modi-Trump Declaration proclaimed the will to meet threats from not just the al Qaeda, ISIS and Taliban, but also the Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba ‘D (Dawood) Company’, and the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen. Naming the Hizb was a categorical American rejection of Pakistan’s claims that it was helping a “freedom struggle” in Jammu and Kashmir.

India should not relent on its campaign against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. The US Congress had developed a bipartisan consensus to deny American assistance to Pakistan unless it ends its support for the Taliban and India-focused groups such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba. The US Congress had, in fact, also drafted legislation incorporating such conditions on aid to Pakistan. New Delhi was, therefore, surprised when the Trump administration moved legislation to delink aid to Pakistan from its support for India-focused terrorist groups. The focus was entirely on Pakistan support for terrorism in Afghanistan. The White House, however, condemned the release of Hafiz Mohammed Saeed on November 25 stating: “If Pakistan does not take action to lawfully detain Saeed and charge him for his crimes, its inaction will have repercussions for bilateral relations and for Pakistan’s global reputation.”

It is clear that while the Trump administration is determined to strengthen the Afghan armed forces adequately to deal with Pakistan support for the Taliban, it will have to be reminded continuously that India looks forward to its abiding by its word during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington and act against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism across South Asia. While the White House staff and large sections of the Pentagon deeply distrust Pakistan, there are sections of the State Department and “liberals’ in the American think tanks and mainstream “liberal media” which have historically resorted to India-bashing. It is, therefore, crucial that India strengthens the bipartisan consensus in the US Congress to condition aid to Pakistan on its ending terrorism not just in Afghanistan, but across the entire South Asian region.

Regional concerns

It should also be made clear to Washington that our participation in the US, Japan, Australia, India ‘Quad’ cannot be confined just to the security of sea lanes in the Indian and Pacific oceans. Washington should also deal firmly with issues of terrorism across the Indian Ocean. Trump’s visits to Japan, South Korea, China, Vietnam and the Philippines clearly established that the US needs partners if it is to get the Chinese to respect international conventions and treaties, in the Indo-Pacific Region. The Quad partnership, however, cannot be selectively confined to issues of US interest alone. Trump could well consider diluting his emphasis on strong action against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism in his Afghanistan policies also while yielding to his domestic “compulsions”.

The writer is a former High Commissioner to Pakistan

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3512
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby KLNMurthy » 14 Dec 2017 08:38

ramana wrote:
KLNMurthy wrote:I suppose, but all the MSM is claiming that it won't be Namrata and it will be Mike.

I would expect (hope) Namrata to understand India's perspective. But given current information, we should prepare for Pompeo.



I wouldn't expect that. She has to be loyal to her country interests.

Of course she has to be. I meant having a more intuitive understanding of (if not sympathy for ) India's pov, contrasted with say, Hillary or Kerry.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 6143
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby disha » 14 Dec 2017 10:18

^Namrata Nikki Haley will be more holier than pope. Do not expect any quarters from her.

—-

Ombaba’s perfidy is exposed, at the very least it is fun to watch the state dept constertations due to agent orange LoL

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2945
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Dipanker » 14 Dec 2017 10:25

Posting it here because it affects India indirectly, $700 million is lot of money Pakistan can use against India.

Trump signs bill that includes $700m reimbursement for Pakistan

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump has signed into law a $700 billion defence bill that includes up to $700 million to reimburse Pakistan for supporting US military operations in Afghanistan.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21892
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby SSridhar » 14 Dec 2017 11:40

The release of the Coalition Support Fund, the removal of LeT's name from the aid bill after pressure from Pakistan, the inclusion of India in the portfolio of the US Special Representative to Afghanistan, the renewed interest the US is showing in mediating between India & Pakistan are all continuation of the same Obama policy, which in turn was a continuum of the US policy over the previous five decades.

The US State Department has institutionalized its belief that peace in Afghanistan is impossible without peace between India & Pakistan. The South Asia policy review by Trump is therefore doing more of the same.

The US has a clear policy with respect to India-China-Pakistan. The India-US relationship would see positive movement when it comes to China especially if India makes more concessions like CISMOA, BECA et al. The India-US relationship wouldn't see any change in the fundamental US position when it comes to Pakistan. Thus, the US pursues a twin-track in its policy prerogative with us. Again, the same as during the Obama regime.

Those who expected no change in the US policy with Trump so far as India-US-Pakistan relationship was concerned stand vindicated.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 6143
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby disha » 14 Dec 2017 13:19

^In nutshell, the deep state strikes back


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: anupmisra and 19 guests