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.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4749
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Neshant » 04 Jan 2019 21:55

India should have replied to Trump that :

"US knows the origins of these terrorists in Afg but chooses to do nothing about it".

kumarn
BRFite
Posts: 437
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 16:19

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby kumarn » 04 Jan 2019 22:40

And wouldn't it be a day dream come true for the chinese or anyone who wants to screw us? Pakis will simply whore themselves to bleed india, economy or no economy.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17885
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby chetak » 04 Jan 2019 22:54

yensoy wrote:
chetak wrote:sanctioning India is not that easy anymore.

If there is any move by the US to hurt Indian interests on chabahar, the quad in the indo pacific will just as easily become a triad and all those alphabet soup agreements that the amerikis forced on us will remain just paper bound only.

India's non alignment days are long over. If not the US, it will be russia.


Who said anything about sanctioning India? Sanctions exist against Iran, and US can take actions as it sees fit to impose those sanctions; and these can hurt countries that do business with Iran including us. Chabahar is in Iran, the same place we import a ton of fuel from (in rupees, at low prices I may add). Banks and intermediaries (Chennai petrochemical corp for instance), their international finances, their officials can be acted against under the sanctions that already exist. US have very magnanimously :eek: given us a waiver for 6 months, and we fully expect they will continue - but this can stop.

I am only enumerating the specific threat to us from the US in the scope of Afghanistan.

Will the US be able to hurt us strategically? No, that ship has sailed and the worst is history: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/us-turned-blind-eye-to-pakistans-nuclear-programme-in-70s-after-chinas-intervention-documents/articleshow/67192594.cms.


any sanction involving chabahar and specifically impacting Indian operations will be a sanction against India.

It matters not a whit that iran is being sanctioned or sought to be sanctioned.

India's economic security re oil or operations from chabahar is beyond any ameriki interference or meddling.

We need to draw red lines.

Najunamar
BRFite
Posts: 129
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 16:40
Location: USA

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby Najunamar » 05 Jan 2019 22:21

Once we establish our capabilities (kaveri engine etc.) there may not be a need to establish red lines as such sanctions will hurt US more than India. But, we need to progress on a war footing on such tech fronts to make the pain unbearable to not just Khan but to the whole world if they dare try such shenanigans again.


pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10454
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby pankajs » 12 Jan 2019 14:07

ArjunPandit wrote:^^very similar to my thoughts. In fact a presence in afghanistan will make pakis focus on two ends. Their economy can not sustain a two front war. If not they will have to direct some more proxies back to afghanistan. Imagine the cost they have to incur on the fencing of afghan border. Now we know that fencing is just one part of it. There are patrols, electricity etc all needed for it. Can pukis afford it?

Presence is very generic and broad term. It could be described in different terms.

They way that I see it.

1. Cultural - India has a deep and long cultural presence.
2. Diplomatic - We have a decent presence.
3. Defensive police force - We have around 400 Indo-Tibetan Border Police already deployed to safeguard Indian missions, etc.
4. Covert presence - If one is to believe Bakistan, India has a sufficiently meaningful presence. Enough to raise the hackles of the Bakis.
5. Funding locals - Again if one believes Bakistan, Indian are already playing that game.
6. Small Offensive Army units for showing the Indian flag - Meaningless
7. Large offensive IA units to actively take on Taliban and other Baki proxies in Afghanistan - Logistical nightmare.

By my understanding, we are already present in Afghanistan when seen from point 1 to point 5.

Now the "two front war" scenario could mean proxy war on Af-Bak border [4. Covert + 5. Local] or deployment of large offensive units IA on the Af-Bak border. Bakistan, by its own admission, is already facing a two front war.

The current Indian posture is good enough to keep both the borders active and the activity could be notched up quite a bit with allocation of additional resources. That should not be a problem for a evolving India.


chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17885
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

Postby chetak » 13 Jan 2019 00:44

pankajs wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:^^very similar to my thoughts. In fact a presence in afghanistan will make pakis focus on two ends. Their economy can not sustain a two front war. If not they will have to direct some more proxies back to afghanistan. Imagine the cost they have to incur on the fencing of afghan border. Now we know that fencing is just one part of it. There are patrols, electricity etc all needed for it. Can pukis afford it?

Presence is very generic and broad term. It could be described in different terms.

They way that I see it.

1. Cultural - India has a deep and long cultural presence.
2. Diplomatic - We have a decent presence.
3. Defensive police force - We have around 400 Indo-Tibetan Border Police already deployed to safeguard Indian missions, etc.
4. Covert presence - If one is to believe Bakistan, India has a sufficiently meaningful presence. Enough to raise the hackles of the Bakis.
5. Funding locals - Again if one believes Bakistan, Indian are already playing that game.
6. Small Offensive Army units for showing the Indian flag - Meaningless
7. Large offensive IA units to actively take on Taliban and other Baki proxies in Afghanistan - Logistical nightmare.

By my understanding, we are already present in Afghanistan when seen from point 1 to point 5.

Now the "two front war" scenario could mean proxy war on Af-Bak border [4. Covert + 5. Local] or deployment of large offensive units IA on the Af-Bak border. Bakistan, by its own admission, is already facing a two front war.

The current Indian posture is good enough to keep both the borders active and the activity could be notched up quite a bit with allocation of additional resources. That should not be a problem for a evolving India.


whichever way you slice it saar, when push comes to shove, ummah is ummah.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests