Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 18 Mar 2009 00:08

Vadivelu wrote
Nation building is precisely what is impossible in India.


Precisely - can you see now why the nation-building has not been taken up - becuase many decided it was impossible even before trying? :)

To build the Indian nation one will have to subjugate the arrogance of the madarasi, the benevolence of the kannadiga, the dreaminess of the Bengali, the surliness of the Bihari, the machismo of the Punjabi and a whole horde of ethnic eccentricities.


That I am afraid is too much modeling! On the other hand someone who can generalize about millions of provincialites into single categories with distinct characteristics should find it easier to stretch the generalization a bit more and include all Indians in a single category!

India I am convinced is an accident in history.
Well life starts with an accident. Accidents are instantaneous specks on the long march of time. Is the accident over now? what is continuing then - surely if it still goes on breathing after the accident, there is more to it than a snip in the fabric of time!

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby John Snow » 18 Mar 2009 00:14

Excellent analysis by vadivelu but magnificiently flawed though!

The very short commings that he lists are actually strengths, the more pluralistic the more Fedralistic and less unicentric governance, historically that was the way India was and is going to be.

The unitary centralistic govet is most suited to a monolithic populace and that is why Pakis are going to be failure (" No man can serve two masters, ie Islam a unifying force and a inherited Indic federal{ sindhi, Punjabi, Baluochi pashtun etc} civilizational vestige imbeded in them no matter how much they deny it).

If islam is such a unifying force then why have problems between Syria, KSA, Iran Iraq Lebonan etc. If Judeo christian so much of a unifying force why the revulsion between Scotts English Irish English.


The very diverse sub nationalism allows each region to carve its own space and operate in its own region (to the max corruption other name of politics) like a well knit mafia having regional franchise.

Coming to be super power I have doubts but 60 years is too small a time for a nation of diverse interests to make a mark. PRC is Commie remember. (forgive sp mishtakes) :mrgreen:
Last edited by John Snow on 18 Mar 2009 00:16, edited 1 time in total.

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Vikas » 18 Mar 2009 00:15

Nation building ? Are we already not a nation ?
Yes building a nation is a work in process forever but we already are a nation for last 5000 years (or probably more). If someone raises doubt on these basic facts, then he/she should go back to basics before starting a thread or throwing ideas in the ring.
I think outsiders still can't understand the idea of India which permeates every nook and corner of this nation.
Pakistan, if it is able to shake the yoke of Islamic fundamentalism has a better chance of becoming an Asian superpower rivaling China.
Ignorance too like knowledge has no limit.

vadivelu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 24
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 07:38

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby vadivelu » 18 Mar 2009 00:21

Brihaspathi who waxes eloquent but lacks brevity ( an Indian failing) . I salute your intellect but am intimidated by it.

Why build a nation when the synergy to exist as a whole seems intrinsic?

ShyamSP
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2558
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ShyamSP » 18 Mar 2009 00:22

vadivelu wrote:Nation building is precisely what is impossible in India.

To build the Indian nation one will have to subjugate the arrogance of the madarasi, the benevolence of the kannadiga, the dreaminess of the Bengali, the surliness of the Bihari, the machismo of the Punjabi and a whole horde of ethnic eccentricities.

India I am convinced is an accident in history.


That subjugation leads to exactly opposite result of what you want. India is India because of "madarasi", Kannadiga, Bengali, Bihari, and Punjabi.

Are you thinking McDonaldization as nation building?

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

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby svinayak » 18 Mar 2009 00:22

John Snow wrote:Excellent analysis by vadivelu but magnificiently flawed though!

The very short commings that he lists are actually strengths, the more pluralistic the more Fedralistic and less unicentric governance, historically that was the way India was and is going to be.


Some people are afraid to take up the challenge and giveup right at the beginning.
They are afraid to admit it.
Spinster as you pointed out India is a old society which has bonds going back long time. Hence this confusion and frustration by many people trying to deconstruct it.

SRoy
BRFite
Posts: 1938
Joined: 15 Jul 2005 06:45
Location: Kolkata
Contact:

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby SRoy » 18 Mar 2009 00:25

VikasRaina wrote:Nation building ? Are we already not a nation ?
Yes building a nation is a work in process forever but we already are a nation for last 5000 years (or probably more). If someone raises doubt on these basic facts, then he/she should go back to basics before starting a thread or throwing ideas in the ring.
I think outsiders still can't understand the idea of India which permeates every nook and corner of this nation.
Pakistan, if it is able to shake the yoke of Islamic fundamentalism has a better chance of becoming an Asian superpower rivaling China.
Ignorance too like knowledge has no limit.


Which India? The civilization or nation state?

PS: This thread is a good example of well meaning Desis approaching a subject restrained by the bounds of Western framework i.e. Macaulite social engineering.

sivabala
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 10:55

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby sivabala » 18 Mar 2009 00:25

I do have a similar view as Vadivelu's. We as a nation have nothing much as common goal other than being day to day existence of individual rather than the country's future. So there is a lot of competing interests which will not let us grow because too much of energy will be spent in infighting. eg: Our elections. Its true we exist as a country for last 60 years. But we have not solved the Cauveri or Mullai periyar or NE or Kashmir or Marathi-Northie. You can say it is part and parcel of democracy. It may be true, but not good for a would be global super power.
Unless we minimize the internal energy loss we never will exhibit our power globally.
For uniting us we need a common enemy. China made a big mistake back then by attacking us. Have they waited for another 10 years there would not have been a need for war.
Some of you may remember the central had a department for National integration before 1962. that plan was dropped after the country united under one roof seeing the attack of enemy. To unite us we need a new enemy. The new enemy should be so powerful to threaten the existence of every body's life. Right now with the "chaltha hi" attitude we can't even manufacture an enemy like talibunnies. On the other hand, the Chinks are manufacturing the enemies and their emphasis on collective harmony helps them unite the country under one roof. Their strategy may fail someday. But, they have better chance to be super power at least for a short period. But us, with current level of democracy, we will never be a super power. However we can be happier as a free country with no danger to our existence other than minor damages like insurgencies, where the human losses can be balanced by our ever growing population.

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6617
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Dilbu » 18 Mar 2009 00:26

India expending enormous energy maintaining their individual status quo and power blocks. There is no virulent nationalism in Indians – even cricket does not do it as evidenced by the emergence of IPL.

The sole superpower – my country USA – preaches plurality but is essentially a Judeo Christian nation with the pursuit of wealth as the sole motivator. It has only 2 political ideologies and the military industrial complex wields the real power. Most western powers are fairly homogeneous. China’s CCP is ensuring this happens.

So the only problem you have with India is that it is not becoming a 'super power' due to non homogenous nature of its population. What is the definition of this super powerdom you mention? Is it economic power or is it military power? What makes you think the whole aim of a nation or nation building process should be to become a super power?

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6617
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Dilbu » 18 Mar 2009 00:32

You can say it is part and parcel of democracy. It may be true, but not good for a would be global super power.

What is this super power BS? So Amirkhan is the poster boy India should be emulating in her nation building? I dont believe becoming a super power should be the sole objective of any nation. Then there is this blind admiration of 'super power' China not considering the fact the it is controlled by a repressive communist regime.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 18 Mar 2009 00:44

Vadivelu wrote
Brihaspathi who waxes eloquent but lacks brevity ( an Indian failing) . I salute your intellect but am intimidated by it.

I sincerely apologize if my "intellect" has intimidated you - it was never my intention. But I am proud you acknowledge me as an Indian. In doing so you also unwittingly admit that there could commonalities shared by all Indians. :D

In my profession I am ususlly accused of being too "brief". I started out posting in this forum in my brief style, but soon it appeared that there were lots of confusions. So I try to expand now a bit more than my usual habit. You can refer to the "brief" exchange between me and Shivji about this.

Why build a nation when the synergy to exist as a whole seems intrinsic?

Instead of nation-building the term I usually use is "consolidation of the nation", and probably a better term will be "renewal". This imples that we already recognize that the foundation of a nation exists, but that it may not be reflected entirely in the current state superstructure. I guess you are distinguishing on the basis of a western concept of a nation which fuses "state" with "nation". India has evolved beyond that in order to survive historical onslaughts where "states" went down but the "nation" remained.

State and nation mutually helps each other to "progress" or strengthen. So even if the nation manages to survive without a compatible state, it is somewhat weakened or damaged. A renewal and consolidation then becomes important to restore both. Synergy is a strength in times of weak state, and is partly a result of the lack of a strong state in consonance with the underlying nation.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16003
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby RajeshA » 18 Mar 2009 01:18

I get the feeling, that the majority opinion on BRF is that Indians do not think sufficiently about national interests or about the essence of Indianness, and that has a severe effect on the strength of our nation. I have a different take on this.

I can't say, for how many other nations it may be true, but at least for India, it is my opinion that we do not need too much of nation building consciousness. It is more than sufficient, that most Indians go about their daily lives, thinking of themselves with whatever they identify themselves with, in order for India to succeed. Being a hard-working, more-or-less-honest person, looking after family, striving to get the best education for one's children, and open-minded to technological, social and economic changes taking place around him, is a qualification for a great citizen, and India has an abundance of them.

Indians can make India grow into being the world's foremost technological and economic power. All India needs for this growth is some peace and stability. Our most mighty weapon is our mental arrow pointing forwards. In fact India can grow despite our politicians, and even the underworld. They can only slow us down a bit. Even terrorism cannot stop us.

Let the common people do what they do best. Let them believe that the world is a good place, a positive joyful place, a place where demons are not waiting around the corner. If our media spins out all those feel-good tales to them, let the people savor these. The nation lives in all Indians, whether they know it or not.

So I look at my country very optimistically.

So I would urge those, who so thoroughly feel the patriotism for this nation, and are worried about the neighborhood, and the Jihadist sleeper cells amongst us, that they should stop cursing the aam aadmi in India or looking with disgust at him, for his lack of strategic intellectual depth and awareness of all the mortal dangers lurking around. He and his heroes like the Mayawatis and the Lalus give this nation her essence.

It is however up to our strategic community, our security forces, our military, our intelligence agencies, our police, to ensure that India gets that grace period to build ourselves up. They cannot be allowed to have those blinkers on their eyes. They need to see the truth, the naked truth, and act when the situation demands it.

So to all those intent on national awakening, I will simply say, "Relax". The blood in the arteries of this nation is flowing and pumping. The nation is awake to growth!

It is the leaders and the strategic community, which need to pull up their socks.

satya
BRFite
Posts: 718
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby satya » 18 Mar 2009 01:56

Indians are nationalists except its definition & expression doesn't fit the definition of national interests as propagated in current literature. A simply issue , ask a person from village or a lower middle class person from urban area what he wants from state/government and last thing he ask is kill so n so person or get his property in my name , but rather something simply give me way to move ahead , why do we want everyone to be intellectuals theorizing each & every move as nationalist not nationalist in its strict western definition .They are needed ie aam aadmi not worrying about each move & countermove in geopolitical scenario unless your work/job or perhaps hobby but we don't need a billion generals but perhaps a billion soldiers doing various chores to move India ahead. Point is average Indian is progressive & his moves & thoughts are always to move ahead & he is always learning from his & his ancestors mistakes ( move of Brahmins in UP atleast some of them to align with Mayawati is one such instance )

Why we talk about nation building , why not look at us as always an empire & think instead of empire building not some past glory days but plain simple empire building in present day requirements /federalism , whatever i read about old india civilization , we use to have raja & maharajas if not wrong maharajas= emperor , we always had various ethnicities & so on maybe we need to accept India always as an empire & out grow out of this nation thing . All talks about Nation building & greatness of Indian ends up with either ROP community finding its new prophet in India or being told of Bay of Bengal or Arabian Sea their choice which one they wana chose ( something like that )

Federalism was dreaded perhaps because of back stabbing by competing interests tht brought Brits to India that made sure its was suffocated under JLN & IG but emergence of all these regional satraps points towards a certain trend ie Federalism . Maybe JLN too thought of India as a nation first & not as an empire thereby making sure all powers rest in Delhi & its representatives in state capitals.

Apologies for this rant for am just dipping my feet in intellectual stream of this thread .

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby John Snow » 18 Mar 2009 02:11

I am now intimidated by certification required and acknowledged by none other than brihaspati, who is no other than DEVA GURU the beta noire of Sukra the equally well learned guru of asuras. :mrgreen:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ramana » 18 Mar 2009 02:14

Dont start that intimidation bit. 8)
Dont ask Jupiter to dumb down his message. We already have a troll who is saying that Jupiter is adopting a superior tone. And opens new threads to find his own pond.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21191
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Prem » 18 Mar 2009 02:18

Remind me of my Angrezi literature teacher Dr. T Singh against whom were many complaints that he does not teach Angrezi in Punjabi.
Vadivelu who is "us" in your definition of Desi? As per your question this US do not exist.

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Vikas » 18 Mar 2009 11:50

SRoy wrote:
Which India? The civilization or nation state?

PS: This thread is a good example of well meaning Desis approaching a subject restrained by the bounds of Western framework i.e. Macaulite social engineering.


Both civilization as well as the nation state. I don't buy the BS that India came into being on 15th Aug 1947. It was always there since time immemorial.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby shiv » 18 Mar 2009 15:09

Er when my girlfriend gave birth to a baby it was an accident of history - but then the baby was there and would not go away.. Come to think of it - the Earth itself is an accident of history. The expression "accident of history" has a vaguely synonymous Sanskrit word associated with it "Karma".

Of all the billions of spermatozoa that some mammalian ancestor of humans expended - one particular spermatozoon went on to give rise to the human race - among whom one person is Bill Gates and the other is me. Accident of history?

When control does not exist over long term parameters like the formation of planets and continents - everything becomes an accident of history. But humans as a survival trait try to micromanage their environment to suit certain aspirations - (whose psychological basis is also an accident of history). The fact that something is declared an accident of history means zilch.

It acquires same meaning only when it is used as a strawman to try and say that within the timescale of the last < name your number > years (out of billions of years of history in the universe) entity "X" appears to be more of an accident of history than entity "Y" and therefore people should not try and plan for entity X (because it is an accident of history) but it is fine and dandy to plan for entity Y.

But hey every goddam thing eventually is an accident of history - including my being born Indian when my real love is for Pakistan.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16003
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby RajeshA » 18 Mar 2009 16:12

shiv wrote:But hey every goddam thing eventually is an accident of history - including my being born Indian when my real love is for Pakistan.


Love for Pakistan is no accident of history. It is a conspiracy by the Universe itself against Logic and Philosophy, as it happens with no basis in rhyme or reason, but it still happens regardless of whether it is in the heart of an Abdul or of Barrack Nero Obama himself, which makes me believe that the Universe has inculcated a death wish in the human genetic code, to be attracted to and be pulled in by a black hole called Pakistan, where every Jihadi is calling out to mankind, "Come, Lets die together"!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ramana » 19 Mar 2009 00:56

Read this with the Shyam Saran speech posted before.

EDITS | Thursday, March 19, 2009 | Email | Print |


Chinese threat looms large

G Parthasarathy

While India received overwhelming international sympathy and support during the 26/11 terrorist outrage, the Chinese reaction was one of almost unbridled glee, while backing Pakistani protestations of innocence. The state-run China Institute of Contemporary International Relations claimed that the terrorists who carried out the attack came from India. Moreover, even as the terrorist strike was on, yet another Chinese ‘scholar’ gleefully noted: “The Mumbai attack exposed the internal weakness of India, a power that is otherwise raising its status both in the region and in the world”. Not to be outdone, the Foreign Ministry-run China Institute of Strategic Studies warned: “China can firmly support Pakistan in the event of war”, adding: “While Pakistan can benefit from its military cooperation with China while fighting India, the People’s Republic of China may have the option of resorting to a strategic military action in Southern Tibet (Arunachal Pradesh), to thoroughly liberate the people there”.

Rather than condemning the terrorists and their supporters, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang urged India and Pakistan to “maintain calm” and investigate the “cause” of the terror attack jointly. The visiting Chairman of Pakistan’s Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen Tariq Majid was received like a state dignitary by Chinese leaders, with promises of support on weapons supplies ranging from fighter aircraft to frigates. The Chinese then got into the diplomatic act, purporting to show that they were actually Good Samaritans seeking to promote peace and reconciliation between India and Pakistan. The rising star in China’s diplomatic hierarchy, Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei, visited Islamabad and met the Pakistani leadership, including the ubiquitous Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kiyani. Rather than asking Pakistan to curb the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba Mr Yafei stressed the need for Pakistan and India to address “outstanding issues through dialogue and cooperation”. Shortly thereafter Mr Yafei landed up in Delhi, again with the object of demonstrating to the world that China had urged ‘restraint’ on India and promoted India-Pakistan dialogue. Mercifully, for once, our pusillanimous mandarins signalled that we did not need China’s purported ‘good offices’ in dealing with the fallout of 26/11.

Just as China was becoming a net importer of oil in 1993, Gen Zhao Nanqui, a senior official of China’s People’s Liberation Army proclaimed: “We can no longer accept the Indian Ocean as an ocean of the Indians”. Another naval analyst Mr Zhang Ming recently proclaimed that the islands of India’s Andaman and Nicobar archipelago could be used as a metal chain to block Chinese access to the Straits of Malacca. China has used such arguments to boost its naval presence in the Indian Ocean. Adopting a ‘string of pearls’ strategy to encircle and contain India in the Indian Ocean, it has acquired base facilities at Gwadar and Pasni in the Makran coast of Pakistan, virtually at the mouth of the Persian Gulf. It is building a fuelling station in the port of Hambantota in southern Sri Lanka, a container facility with naval and commercial access in Chittagong, and linking its Yunnan province to the Indian Ocean through Myanmar. It has gone as far as Mauritius and Maldives for securing a strategic presence, with promises of massive economic assistance to these countries. China has also planned its most ambitious project in the Indian Ocean, proposing a canal access across the Isthmus of Krai in Thailand, linking the Indian Ocean to its Pacific coast.

China has reinforced these measures by sending its first naval expeditionary force spearheaded by two destroyers into the Indian Ocean, purportedly to deal with piracy off the coast of Somalia. A Chinese fleet last entered the India Ocean in the 15th century, when an expeditionary force under Admiral Zheng He sailed across the Indian Ocean to Calicut, Muscat, Maldives and Mogadishu. President Hu Jintao’s China appears desirous of reviving the imperial ambitions of the emperors of the Ming Dynasty! As China strengthens its Navy acquiring aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines, India will soon find that unless it combines the boosting of its maritime muscle with imaginative diplomacy in its Indian Ocean neighbourhood and on China’s Pacific shores, it will be strategically marginalised and outflanked by an assertive and expansionist Beijing, which appears bent on exploiting the high costs of imperial overreach by the Americans in recent years. Given the manner in which China has joined hands with Pakistan to sabotage India’s quest for permanent membership of the UN Security Council and the devious role it played in the Nuclear Suppliers Group to undermine moves to end global nuclear sanctions against India, we should have no doubt that ‘strategic containment’ of India will remain the cornerstone of Chinese foreign policy in the foreseeable future.

New Delhi should also have no doubt that China will exploit the American economic downturn and the pro-Chinese views of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to get the Americans to revert to the policies of the Nixon, Carter and Clinton presidencies and to make common cause with China on issues like nuclear non-proliferation, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and even on Afghanistan and Pakistan, while undermining Indian interests. Echoing the Pakistani line, China’s Communist Party mouthpiece, the People’s Daily, recently suggested that for the United States to deal with problems in Afghanistan, it should not merely involve itself in the Afghanistan problem and the Pakistan problem but also in the ‘India-Pakistan problem’. Ms Hillary Clinton has characterised the US-China relationship as the “most important bilateral relationship in the world in this century”. Her visit to China was followed almost immediately by the visit to Beijing of a senior Pentagon official, who joyously proclaimed the resumption of defence ties with Beijing.

The Bush Administration had an overarching strategic vision of its relations with India, premised on New Delhi’s pivotal role in confronting terrorism, safeguarding the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean, and in promoting strategic stability in Asia. But with election around the corner and the UPA Government in a lame duck mode, Washington, DC, is unlikely to take any interest in fashioning a larger vision for India-US relations. The challenge we face in coming months is how we can pursue our interests in the aftermath of the 26/11 carnage without making the India-US relationship predominantly determined by developments on our western border. The decision to curb outsourcing by the Obama Administration, without any prior consultations, manifests an American propensity to act unilaterally and peremptorily on issues of vital interest to India.


This image of PRC among the MEA mandarins is at variance with the picture portrayed in the PRC Economy thread which is a dragon afflicted with fungus.

Wonder if we need to argue between thse two images in a new thread where we have posts containing the SS and his cohort and the other picture?

satya
BRFite
Posts: 718
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby satya » 19 Mar 2009 01:13

KS uvacha :

They Need Each Other-KS
For all those people who are convinced that the present financial crisis has shifted the balance of power from the US to China and since China holds a large chunk of US Treasury bonds it is in a position to call the shots Chinese premier Wen Jiabao has some news. He says he is "a little bit worried'' about the safety of the Chinese assets in the US and called on the US "to maintain its good credit to honour its promises and to guarantee the safety of China's assets". The message is clear. Just as China has leverage with America thanks to its large holding of US Treasury bonds, the US has a similar hold on China, with its power to reduce the value of those assets. Therefore, the two countries have to collaborate with each other to ensure neither damages the other's interests.

In a sense their collaboration will be a significant contribution to the stability of the global economy, which is under severe strain. To that extent it is beneficial to the entire international community. There has been a widespread tendency to read too much into Hillary Clinton's visit to Beijing and project it as the Americans kowtowing to the Chinese. No doubt Clinton was careful with her words and indicated that for the present Tibet and human rights have to move to the back burner. This was general prudence. At the same time, a naval face-off has taken place between the two countries in the South China Sea. Too much should not be read into that either. The basic fact is that in the ongoing financial crisis the US and China are mutual hostages and should be expected to behave with prudence towards each other.

In the present circumstances, China's hard earned money, the product of the sweat and toil of the Chinese working class, is in the US and that has enabled the US consumer to splurge excessively on credit, triggering this crisis. While this may be now called Marxism with Chinese characteristics, in earlier times it was known as colonial exploitation. China was able to do this because the present global system is an unalloyed capitalist system which permitted comprador elements in China to exploit the Chinese working class and place that surplus at the disposal of US consumers. In the process, China has also become beholden to the US. Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong must be rolling in their graves.

This situation is not likely to last more than two years when recovery will set in. There is wide expectation that China will be a major engine driving this recovery. Perhaps that is undeniable. But will the new world, recovering from the recession, be a replica of the model that we have now? The US will have to start looking at ways and means of reducing its debt burden for future generations. Excessive consumer spending based on foreign loans needs to be curbed. Already there are claims that the American public has started cutting consumption and stepping up savings.

The pace of recovery will be influenced by new technologies which may emerge in the next few years. Green automobiles and clean energy are two areas where such possibilities exist. President Barack Obama has been laying stress on the exploration of such technologies. The pace of a Chinese recovery, especially in the export sector, will depend on the pattern of consumer spending in the US and the rest of the industrialised world. If China cannot recover its export markets, and domestic social turbulence increases simultaneously, what will be the implications for China's economy and polity?

When American entrepreneurs established enterprises in China and profited from them in more ways than one, it fitted in with the US schema of using Chinese soil, labour, raw materials and their surplus export earnings for the benefit of the US consumer. Will they continue past practices of making China a preferred destination for their investments? After this experience, will the Chinese persist in their ways? The more China invests in its infrastructure, the more stimulus domestic consumption receives.

The financial crisis has caused massive unemployment running into millions. There has been no disruption of global transportation, no destruction of property or infrastructure, and no massive medical emergency though. Let us superimpose on this scenario a few nuclear strikes. That will give us an idea of what the world will have to cope with in case of a nuclear war. Can we think of causes for which China, the US or Russia will resort to nuclear strikes or threaten such strikes? It should make us pause and reflect on the limitations of the use of military force between major powers in this mutually interdependent world.

Therefore, how we shape our world in the years to come has to be thought through. Linear thinking is not likely to be helpful in this exercise. The only certainty is that knowledge will be the basic foundation for prosperity in the coming decades and much of the investments will be made on education, health care and research and development. Knowledge-based societies are hardly likely to be authoritarian.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ramana » 19 Mar 2009 02:06

Brihaspatiji, Please post your color map posts in the new thread for continuity. Thanks, ramana

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 20 Mar 2009 03:29

There is a consistent lack of a strategic doctrine from GOI. Or it lies so deep that we never see any evidence of it. If the story of Obama admin putting Menon under pressure is even half true, India loses another opportunity for psy-ops. If the US admin was conveying the TSP strategic assertion that they cannot fight in the west because their troops are tied up in the east, India should have promptly counter demanded that if TSP cannot relieve the troops it rushed to the Indian border rather suspicously quickly to the Indian border during 26/11, then it is fine with India. India will make up the numbers needed on the western front with Afghanistan. TSP has to be constantly put on the backfoot, in strategic "flanking" moves. Which basically means TSP should be put in the horns of agonizing dilemma at every opportunity.

Both TSP and PRC should be made to run around plugging holes in the dyke in opposite directions in as many places as possible. The runup to the Indian elections would have been a golden time - when the Jihadis as expected have reduced their terror strikes within India, for any such strike will weaken the prospects of the UPA whose return to power is the best thing to happen for the Jihadis. But the GOI could have used this very same quiessence from Jihadis to spring some surprises on TSP.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 21 Mar 2009 01:16

One of the ways in which PRC and US could try to get rid of their financial dilemmas is by promoting short wars away from their own borders. This is being discussed in the US+PRC thread.

Now how far has China ever really gone for full fledged expeditionary adventures? Except in the case of the Korean war, and the proxy war support for the Vietnamese in their scond phase of "liberation/unification" campaign, and of course the "Himalayan" campaign - China has never really faced off other modern national armies. For all the talk of PLA prowess, how far is really the PLA worth it as a force to reckon with. The Korean war was a stalemate, with huge Chinese losses, so much so that apparently the communists had urged Stalin to reconsider his "order". In the Vietnam front, once again the PLA did not directly get involved in the combat. In the Indian case, it was a campaign against an army which had not been prepared by its government to face or expect Chinese aggression. The PLA is perhaps good against "weak" Asian powers or unprepared armies. It can also perhaps play good the game of helping guerrilla fighters against its "enemies". The PRC will bluff and bluster as much as possible as if its seconds away from declaring war, but I do not think the CCP wants to take the risk of the PLA suffering reverses.

As I have said before, one of the two traditional pillars of the Chinese state is toterring. This is the bureaucracy, eaten away with corruption. The other one is the army, which is perhaps being used by the CCP now in many areas of civilian life and perhaps even economics (an old Red Arny formula perfected during the "base area" experiments). This exposes the army to corruption and possible negative repercussions in those who are idealists among the army. In such a situation, can the CCP take the risk of experimenting with the only remaining tool for existence in its hand? What would be the repercussions for the regime, if either way, the PLA is successful against India (when the PLA can itself want greater share of state power) - or in case of failure, both PLA and mass disillusionment with the CCP?

Image

Here I have included a map for possible movements by the four key elements - US,PRC,Russia, India. If we actually include the PRC+India strategic playground we can see that the circle is centred in Myanmar. Thus one way forward for India emerges in this neglected area which can ultimatley unhinge the pivot of PRC now. At the moment the pivot of PRC policy is in the North - around Kashmir, Afg and northern TSP. But India can turn this pivot around into Myanmar. India has so far played a safe game here. But the military junta is aging. The generational replacement factors will come into play. India should now clearly take a stand for democracy in Myanmar. Not many "superpowers" can afford to "disagree". Ensuring international support, India can take the side of the pro-democracy movement, and if necessary pledge more "concrete" support. The PRC is heavily involved with the Junta, and will react against Indian moves in panic. This can utilized by India to further estrange the PRC from the commons in Myanmar.

Either way PRC loses. If it takes military action to preserve the dictatorship it cannot be supported formally by US or Rus. With possible reversal of military fortunes, the entire axis of PRC military planning against India unravels. PRC now is concentrating on AP and Kashmir. The task is to draw it away further to the east, including all the potential flashpoints where national or ethnic interests clash with PRC designs. A strong nuclear capable fleet based in the Pacific that keeps the nerve centres of PRC under range is a possible distraction.
Last edited by brihaspati on 21 Mar 2009 02:09, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ramana » 21 Mar 2009 01:24

can you shrink the map in interests of Forum display?

Thanks, ramana

What map software are you using?

Also can you post an ulta (rotated) map of Eurasia for discussion purposes?

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 21 Mar 2009 02:19

used stock maps in my folder. Probably from an earlier GIS overlay in my work. Trying to use Google-Earth now, have some problems. Do you want to include the Mediterranean in the rotated map?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ramana » 21 Mar 2009 02:30

Yes as it will be part of the area of interest.

BTW for all others some old fashioned ideas on geopolitics. Indinas need to understand geo-politics as thats one area they are not familiar with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geopolitics

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_the_Heartland

and


Mackinder's world


Research Project

And try to read Brezinski's Grand Chessboard- a plan of US domination in the 21 century.


Yes they all look old fashioned but I submit a new way of old thinking is going on in the dance of the snake and the scorpion.

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

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby svinayak » 21 Mar 2009 03:00

http://www.apcss.org/core/Conference/CR ... 9-21ES.htm

http://www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=132



Check this document
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4812906/India-and-Geopolitics

It is part of a Paki group

Group belong to Pakistanis Group_add




The People’s Republic of China, situated at the gates of Mackinder’s “pivot region” or Heartland, and with access to the sea, possesses sufficient human and natural resources to make a bid for Eurasian mastery sometime in this new century. Russia, though currently undergoing a new time of troubles, still occupies the Heartland and possesses vast human and natural resources, as well as thousands of nuclear weapons. The nations of Western, Central and Eastern Europe are moving toward economic unity and, perhaps, political unity, with Germany playing a leading role. Whatever specific power constellation emerges, however, U.S. foreign policy will continue to be shaped by Mackinder’s geopolitical vision of a Eurasian-based world hegemon.
Last edited by svinayak on 21 Mar 2009 03:53, edited 1 time in total.

Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Keshav » 21 Mar 2009 03:10

Brihaspati wrote:Not many "superpowers" can afford to "disagree". Ensuring international support, India can take the side of the pro-democracy movement, and if necessary pledge more "concrete" support.


One should be careful before stating that the US will not support a dictatorship or failed democracies. It has done it before and it will do it again if the brass assume America will profit or at least, not be disadvantaged by it.

What's your exit strategy if we threaten China, the world backs off, and we're left hanging with the AoE?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ramana » 21 Mar 2009 03:11

Where are you coming from? He isnt threatening anyone.

Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Keshav » 21 Mar 2009 03:27

ramana wrote:Where are you coming from? He isnt threatening anyone.


Are you talking to me?

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 21 Mar 2009 03:32

Keshavji,
I did not say that India threatens PRC. India supports the pro-democracy movement and gives it more "concrete" help. It could be along the lines of 68-71 for BD, (Agartala Conspiracy Case). Taking this political line in the current world political situation, will force the "supers" to at least formally keep their mouth shut. It is baiting PRC. If it moves it loses. If it does not move it loses. At the minimum its military expenses increase to feed the Junta.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ramana » 21 Mar 2009 03:36

Keshav wrote:
ramana wrote:Where are you coming from? He isnt threatening anyone.


Are you talking to me?


I posted right after you and offcourse I am talking to you. where is the confusion?

Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Keshav » 21 Mar 2009 03:46

ramana wrote:I posted right after you and offcourse I am talking to you. where is the confusion?


I wasn't sure what you meant by "threaten". I wasn't aware that I had threatened anyone, but now I know thats not what you meant. Sorry for the confusion.

I did not say that India threatens PRC. India supports the pro-democracy movement and gives it more "concrete" help. It could be along the lines of 68-71 for BD, (Agartala Conspiracy Case). Taking this political line in the current world political situation, will force the "supers" to at least formally keep their mouth shut. It is baiting PRC. If it moves it loses. If it does not move it loses. At the minimum its military expenses increase to feed the Junta.


Wouldn't PRC see the baiting as a threat?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't want the Western powers to get involved in the struggle? Or do you want them on India's side? Or is either fine for you?

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Atri » 21 Mar 2009 03:58

Keshav wrote:
Brihaspati wrote:Not many "superpowers" can afford to "disagree". Ensuring international support, India can take the side of the pro-democracy movement, and if necessary pledge more "concrete" support.


One should be careful before stating that the US will not support a dictatorship or failed democracies. It has done it before and it will do it again if the brass assume America will profit or at least, not be disadvantaged by it.



USA supports democracy in regions which are strategically irrelevant to them.. I don't thing Myanmar is relevant to USA.. They will support (at least in principle) the democratic movement...

Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Keshav » 21 Mar 2009 04:10

Chiron wrote:USA supports democracy in regions which are strategically irrelevant to them.. I don't thing Myanmar is relevant to USA.. They will support (at least in principle) the democratic movement...


Hmm... I suppose this makes sense. I suppose it depends how the Chinese spin the story and how they sell it to the USA. On the surface they are not partners but are profiting from one another. The Chinese are always ansy and will interpret it as a threat. It just depends on whether or not the USA feels this will be a detriment to its monetary interests.

Alright. I cede to Brihaspati's plan of action ;)

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

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby svinayak » 21 Mar 2009 04:12

Chiron wrote: Not many "superpowers" can afford to "disagree". Ensuring international support, India can take the side of the pro-democracy movement, and if necessary pledge more "concrete" support.

One should be careful before stating that the US will not support a dictatorship or failed democracies. It has done it before and it will do it again if the brass assume America will profit or at least, not be disadvantaged by it.

USA supports democracy in regions which are strategically irrelevant to them.. I don't thing Myanmar is relevant to USA.. They will support (at least in principle) the democratic movement...


Google for Karen people
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_people
http://www.hilltribe.org/karen/

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Karen_people
The majority of Karen are Buddhist-animist influenced by the Mon who were dominant in Lower Burma until the middle of the 18th century. Ko Tha Byu, the first convert to Christianity in 1828 was baptised by Rev George Boardman, an associate of Adoniram Judson, founder of the American Baptist Foreign Mission Society. Persecution of Christians by the Burmese authorities has continued to this day fueled by the belief that Western imperialists have sought to divide the country not only on ethnic but on religious ground.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby brihaspati » 21 Mar 2009 04:31

Keshav wrote
Wouldn't PRC see the baiting as a threat?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't want the Western powers to get involved in the struggle? Or do you want them on India's side? Or is either fine for you?


Yes PRC may see it as a threat - but then they will have to weep before the world that they do not support democracy and are in favour of a military junta. Anyway, no one is saying anything about PRC here isnt it? India is simply talking about democracy in Myanmar by my proposal :mrgreen: If that creates problems for any power - they can come out and give their reasons!

No I do want majority of world powers with India in this at least diplomatically. Main thing is that they do not help the junta. If they fight among each other about this and come to a stalemate (like USSR vs US during '71) that is also fine.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby ramana » 21 Mar 2009 10:20

We need a thread for keshav and vadivelu to be together.

Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1120
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: Future strategic scenario for the Indian Subcontinent

Postby Hiten » 21 Mar 2009 19:25

Japan focus - Redrawing India's Geostrategic Maps with China and the United States

BR Monitor finds mention in the writeup :)
-----
update:
had not read before posting

appears to be very old and loony...my bad sorry


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 27 guests