India-US News and Discussion

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.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54384
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby ramana » 25 Sep 2009 00:50

Right on cue op-ed from Pioneer, 25 Sept., 2009

EDITS | Friday, September 25, 2009 | Email | Print |


India, US need each other

Sunanda K Datta-Ray

The “almost reflexive anti-Americanism” that US President Barack Obama spoke of at the UN on Wednesday as a recent global phenomenon has been a consistent feature of India’s discourse for many years. Ambassador Timothy J Roemer’s assurances on Pakistan and terrorism must be music to Indian ears but may not succeed in endearing his country to Indians once the euphoria has passed.

Defying Palmerston’s logic, bilateral relations are as complex as the current furore over austerity. Both paradoxes illustrate the conflict between principle and practice which the Vietnam war slogan “Yankee go home, but take me with you” highlighted. Mr Roemer must bear this in mind when he hears Indians accusing the US of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan or dragging its feet over the sequel to the 123 Agreement and yet grumbling that Mr Obama went to Egypt and Ghana while India had to be content with the Secretary of State and seven months late at that.

William B Saxbe, US Ambassador during the Emergency, commented on the quirk. “When I call on Cabinet Ministers, the President or governors, they all love to talk about their sons, sons-in-law and daughters in the United States and how well they’re doing and how well they like things. The next day I read in the papers the very same people are denouncing the United States as a totally different kind of country.”

India has always been coy about admitting its need for the US. Even when PV Narasimha Rao turned foreign policy round so that the two defence forces held joint military exercises, he avoided explicitly acknowledging the alliance. That was left to Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee who gave the term ‘natural allies’, coined by Gen Sunit Francis Rodrigues when he was Army chief, a deeper cultural and strategic meaning. An India that feels threatened by Pakistan and China, whose domestic stability is challenged by Maoist rebels and whose confidence has been shaken by allegations about the 1998 thermonuclear test, has greater need than ever for America’s friendship. {Whats common to all those things? And anyone recall the panchatantra tale of old man, young wife and the thief? All these originate from US.}

Military help alone would undermine the very concept of India and what it stands for. The need is for diplomatic support, economic and technological cooperation, and markets and investment to safeguard the growth rate amidst global recession. Economic self-reliance is the ultimate guarantee of India’s freedom.

In turn, the US seeks to sell India everything from pizza to washing machines, as Mr George W Bush told the Asia Society on the eve of visiting India. Just as more troops are necessary in Afghanistan to win the war against the Taliban, the US cannot do without the support of the region’s biggest power, which happens to be the world’s largest democracy, to win the peace.

It would be simplistic to explain Indian reticence about this interdependence in terms of a gulf between Indians and India, between the people and the Government. That may have been true of Asia’s fallen regimes in Seoul, Manila, Saigon and Teheran. It applies to Pakistan where religion makes Pakistanis anti-American which no Government can afford to be. Hence, an enraged mob burned the American embassy in Islamabad to the ground (suspecting the US of bombing Mecca) even though, despite various conspiracy theories about his death, Gen Zia ul-Haq was then as much an American protégé as South Korea’s Syngman Rhee or Iran’s Shah. But in India’s vibrant democracy, the people are the Government. The dichotomy is not between rulers and ruled but inherent in India’s psyche.

When Mrs Indira Gandhi, strident in her denunciations of the ‘Foreign Hand’, wanted to highlight her son Sanjay’s no-nonsense hands-on approach, she called him “very American”. Many such instances can be cited. Surveys in 2005 and 2006, one conducted by the BBC and the other by the Pew organisation, showed India to be one of the few countries that thought the US exercised a positive influence on global security and which welcomed Mr Bush’s second term. The former held that 62 per cent of Indians favoured his re-election while the Pew survey found that 71 per cent of respondents thought highly of the US.

Mr Natwar Singh may have understated the case, therefore, in suggesting to this writer that India is pro-US only because eight out of 10 External Affairs Ministry officials want their sons to go to the US. That may well be so, but so do eight out of 10 urban educated Indians. However, that ambition will not stop them from roundly berating the CIA and blaming American pampering of Pakistan whenever any problem crops up in India. Indian pride would be profoundly hurt to be told that India is hardly a matter of consuming interest for Americans.

Western analysts would attribute this contradiction to ingrained hypocrisy. And, yes, there is no denying that opportunism does play a part in the calculations of many Indians. I am reminded in this context of the CPI(M) mayor who asked the US consul-general to twin Calcutta with San Francisco. Reminded that Calcutta was already twinned with Odessa, the Marxist explained that he needed an official reason to visit his son — at public expense no doubt — who was studying in California. But some might also cite Ralph Waldo Emerson’s belief that “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.” Reconciling many contraries, the enlightened Indian can both want the Yankee out and to go with him. But neither expediency nor philosophical breadth makes for a steady and stable partnership.

Mr Sitaram Yechury once claimed India under Mr Vajpayee and Mr Manmohan Singh was trying to be the new Pakistan vis-à-vis the US. Perhaps some Indians nurse that yearning. But the apposite parallel is Japan, especially at a time when India is at last beginning to resist encirclement. The Chinese have already noted that the bilateral agreements on expanding military, space and civil nuclear power generation cooperation signed during Ms Hillary Clinton’s visit are expected to impact on South Asia’s balance of power.

After talking to Japan’s Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama on Wednesday, Mr Obama described their relationship as “a cornerstone” of the prosperity and security of both countries. Mr Hatoyama, who sometimes sounds anti-American, called it “a key pillar” of Japan’s foreign policy.

With the compulsions of the Cold War and non-alignment over, both statements should also apply to India-US relations. They probably do, despite the verbal vagaries.

-- sunandadr@yahoo.co.in


He skirts around and looks at all issues except the core one that inavariably US policies tend to hurt India even if not directed at her. Look at the recent NPT adherence resolution in the UN. It hits India without addressing the core security issues for India. That resolution doesnt address the US and PRC proliferation to India's enemies. As a recent de-colonized country that got of the British colonialism India wasn't going to get colonised again even if it was indirect. That is the core reason for so called anti-Americanism.

India has her tryst with destiny to keep and cant let others chain her.

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

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 25 Sep 2009 02:41

ramana wrote:

India has always been coy about admitting its need for the US. Even when PV Narasimha Rao turned foreign policy round so that the two defence forces held joint military exercises, he avoided explicitly acknowledging the alliance. That was left to Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee who gave the term ‘natural allies’, coined by Gen Sunit Francis Rodrigues when he was Army chief, a deeper cultural and strategic meaning. An India that feels threatened by Pakistan and China, whose domestic stability is challenged by Maoist rebels and whose confidence has been shaken by allegations about the 1998 thermonuclear test, has greater need than ever for America’s friendship. {Whats common to all those things? And anyone recall the panchatantra tale of old man, young wife and the thief? All these originate from US.}


This is the new world order NWO which we have been hearing for a long time. The historical capital of Indic civilization is the prize for the global superpower for long term WORLD hegemony - 500 years even 1000 years.

Masaru
BRFite
Posts: 242
Joined: 18 Aug 2009 05:46

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Masaru » 25 Sep 2009 03:01

SSridhar wrote:
I am not sure whether the gentle SM Krishna has suddenly decided to be combative, aggressive or even forceful etc. We cannot attribute these qualities unless he consistently exhibits such behaviour. This could very well be unintentional rather than pre-meditated. By the way, I do not consider the self insertion into Baloch affairs at SeS as macho or clever. I consider that as a blunder but there is a separate thread for discussing that anyway, not here.


Quite correct interpretation!

Krishna 'goofs up' on Taliban, govt denies it

All the misplaced hopes of bravado bestowed upon SMK is after all a goof up. He was just shooting off his mouth with little regard to the fact that his statement could be construed as a strategic shift in policy! A second S-e-S in making; and another round should start to attribute 'chankianness' to the mindless babbling that comes out of the so called 'leaders'.

The interview created a tizz, with MEA officials maintaining Krishna was "misquoted and misinterpreted". Later, the foreign office officially denied that Krishna had said anything of the sort.

Stressing that there was no change in India's policy on Afghanistan, the MEA spokesperson said, "The minister has been misquoted in his interview with the Wall Street Journal and he did not say that there should be a political settlement with the Taliban."

darshan
BRFite
Posts: 1860
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 04:16

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby darshan » 25 Sep 2009 08:51

William B Saxbe, US Ambassador during the Emergency, commented on the quirk. “When I call on Cabinet Ministers, the President or governors, they all love to talk about their sons, sons-in-law and daughters in the United States and how well they’re doing and how well they like things. The next day I read in the papers the very same people are denouncing the United States as a totally different kind of country.”

How about some names? :roll:

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby hnair » 25 Sep 2009 10:20

Now that is what I call professionalism of our Cabinet Ministers.
They know the difference between personal life and public life 8)

Shree William B Saxbe should stop being a :(( baby

darshan, get the cabinet list at that point and the entire list is probably what you are looking for.

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

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 25 Sep 2009 11:21

Local news showed MMS being greeted by Obama at Pittsburgh

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Sanku » 25 Sep 2009 12:30

hnair wrote:Now that is what I call professionalism of our Cabinet Ministers.
They know the difference between personal life and public life 8)
.


Indeed I am impressed, I am one of the few that our politicians (the real ones) are actually a good thing for India however lousy they may be.

The inherent dichotomy that Mr Datta-Ray speaks about comes from the fact that US itself is dichotomous, it has Indophiles like Oppenheimer spouting Shrimad Bhagvat as well as Nixons.

Let the Americans first fix their dichotomy before wondering why we have dual standards in dealing with Americans.

Kudo's India (hopefully MMS would also learn this Indic trait and let it override his Oxford mindset)


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

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 26 Sep 2009 13:05

http://docs.google.com/present/view?id= ... 82fwgch7fs

Added by SSridhar

The above is a slide presentation on India and India-US relationship.

Acharya, it helps to have captions along with URLs.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23911
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby SSridhar » 26 Sep 2009 13:43

Slide 24 in what Acharya has posted above describes how while Indian presence increased in the US since the 60s, the Indo-US relationship began to nosedive.

I would like to add the following:

Too many events were happening around the world in a rapid succession such as the Palestine problem, the division of Germany, the Suez canal issue in 1956, the question of Apartheid, the Cold War, Nuclear proliferation issues, the Korean War, Treaty-of-Peace with Japan, the struggle of the Afro-Asian countries against colonialism, entry of People's Republic of China (PRC) to the UN in spite of its occupation of Tibet by the fall of 1950, the Indian military action in Goa, the transfer of pockets of French possession in India, the Afro-Asian Bandung Conference in 1955, the invasion in Vietnam, the suppression of the Hungarian uprising by the USSR where India chose not to condemn the Soviet Union, to name just a few. In many of these crises, India was a leading voice. Having chosen to stand for unbending moral correctness, many of these events naturally seemed to pit India against the Western powers as India's stand on most of these issues was in direct conflict with them. In fact, India’s quest to be a leading light in establishing a just world order had started even before it got independence. The INC (Indian National Congress) sponsored a medical team led by Dr. Kotnis to serve the Chinese during the aggression by Japan in the Second World War. The INC again reacted strongly against the Balfour Declaration that displaced the Palestenians from their lands. Later, India refused to have any diplomatic relationship with Israel fearing a backlash from Muslim community in India as well as Islamic countries of the Middle East that were meeting India’s crude oil requirements. Just before independence, Nehru convened the Asian Relations Conference in New Delhi in March, 1947 in which he propounded free India’s foreign policies.

This led India to a tumultuous relationship with the Western powers rather than a consistent and smooth one, with India turning to a more-than-willing Former Soviet Union (FSU) at times of need, further exacerbating the relationship with the Western bloc. This mutual distrust and the frequent antagonistic forms it took, never really helped in furthering a natural convergence of interests otherwise befitting India and the Western democracies. While India did not seek any military alliance with the West, it certainly wanted a deeper relationship and economic cooperation. However, it was not forthcoming. The US simply ignored India for the most part. It felt that India’s position of ‘neutrality’ was immoral’ as was explained by Secretary of State John Foster Dulles in President Eisenhower’s tenure. Dulles was put off by his encounters with an acerbic and sharp-tongued Krishna Menon, India’s representative in the UN and Nehru’s refusal to sign the Japan Peace Treaty. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles’ visit to India in May 1953, followed by Vice President Nixon’s visit in December of the same year worsened the situation for India. Their negative impressions about India and extremely positive opinion about Pakistan followed by President Eisenhower’s decision in January, 1954 to engage in a military relationship with Pakistan, defined the India-US relationship for the next four decades.

From a purely strategic standpoint, Pakistan therefore appeared to be a far more attractive option than India. Its Army was perceived as the successor to the British Indian Army in thwarting the onward march of Communist Russia through Afghanistan into the Middle East. The non-military Public Law 480 (PL 480) assistance to India was strongly objected to by Pakistan and the US curtailed the assistance. The continued US support for Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir and its line of reasoning was another constant source of irritation in the India-US relationship. To make matters worse, the US Administration was strongly opposed to the liberation of Goa from colonial Portugal. India’s swift military action on December 17, 1961 to liberate Goa after patient and protracted negotiations lasting over 14 years with an adamant Portual had failed, was termed as ‘an act of aggression’ by the US.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby RamaY » 26 Sep 2009 20:48

Acharya wrote:http://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dfbftrdr_282fwgch7fs

Added by SSridhar

The above is a slide presentation on India and India-US relationship.

Acharya, it helps to have captions along with URLs.


Do not know who prepared the presentation. Note the differences in Indian map in slides 21 and 33.

I have been in the US for 12 years. IMO, most of India's negative image is created by Indian immigrants themselves.

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

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 26 Sep 2009 21:21

SSridhar wrote:
From a purely strategic standpoint, Pakistan therefore appeared to be a far more attractive option than India. Its Army was perceived as the successor to the British Indian Army in thwarting the onward march of Communist Russia through Afghanistan into the Middle East.

Army is percived as the legitimate power center of the country. Political military center is given higher importance.
India with its noisy democracy is considered weak and considered easy to manipulate.

Pakistan provided addition benefit of the support of KSA and other sunni govts in the ME which were the focus of US in the 1970s and after 1979.
Kissinger says that US has regard for the people of India but preferred Pakistan.

csharma
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby csharma » 27 Sep 2009 00:03

US support for Pakistan was something that has roots in the British strategists Olaf Caroe in particular.
This support continues till date. The only time the support receded was when the Russia was seen as a weak player to play the great game With the resumption of great game with India and China as a players, US has resumed its support to Pakistan.

The following excerpts are from an article called "The Making of US Foreign Policy for South Asia"
Offshore Balancing in Historical Perspective


In the dying days of the raj at the close
of the second world war, Caroe began to
worry about what he came to call, in a
prescient phrase, “the wells of power”, the
oil resources of the middle east in general
and of the Gulf and the Arabian peninsula
in particular. For a variety reasons he
facilitated, then welcomed the partition of
India into successor states, India and
Pakistan. Indian independence was ex-
pected to bring the anti-imperialist
Jawaharlal Nehru to power, an eventuality
that Caroe feared not least because
Nehru couldn’t be trusted12 to use the
diplomatic and military resources of an
independent India to secure middle east oil
for British use and, more broadly, for the
use of the Atlanticist world of America
and Europe.


Caroe was attracted to Jinnah’s theory
of two nations and to his plan to Partition
the subcontinent into a Muslim Pakistan
and a Hindu India. Like Kipling before
him, Caroe was attracted to Muslim char-
acter and culture13 and sympathised with
Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s call for a Muslim
state on the subcontinent. A Jinnah-led
Pakistan would be a more suitable vehicle
to help secure the “wells of power
”.



It is in this context that we can say that
Sir Olaf Caroe used the circumstance of
India’s Partition to help launch Pakistan
on a 50-year career as the vehicle of
America’s practice of offshore balancing
against Indian hegemony in the south Asia
region. While this outcome was not neces-
sarily Caroe’s overt objective, he did mean
to make Pakistan the fulcrum of his strat-
egy to protect the “wells of power” and
to contain Soviet Russia and he did mean
to sideline Jawaharlal Nehru’s India.

shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2201
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby shravan » 27 Sep 2009 00:04

Is India a Polish joke?

Aditya Sinha is the Editor-in-Chief of ‘The New Indian Express’ and is based in Chennai

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Sanjay M » 27 Sep 2009 05:20

shravan wrote:Is India a Polish joke?

Aditya Sinha is the Editor-in-Chief of ‘The New Indian Express’ and is based in Chennai


Thanks for that posting. We certainly need more such articles to examine the dynamics of Atlanticist machinations, in order to know how to protect ourselves from their effects.

I think we also need a 'Let Us Understand the US' thread, more than a thread for China.

Meanwhile, from NYT:

On Several Foreign Policy Fronts, Events Force Obama to Turn to Plan B

Heh, Plan B for Bush. From dialoguing with Iran to threatening containment measures against it.
From cackling at federal bailouts to clamouring for more.
From calling for a withdrawal from Iraq to keeping troops there.

I think I once posted an argument by Stratfor's George Friedman that Obama would be compelled by the pressures of reality to maintain the policies of his predecessor. Clearly though, Bush wanted missile bases in Eastern Europe, and Obama is now backing down from this - which tells me this policy eventually would have had to be abandoned anyway. I don't think Obama would have invaded Iraq, had he been in power at the time of 9/11. But on the rest of it, he might have been compelled to do what Bush did.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6794
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby CRamS » 27 Sep 2009 05:46

Sanjay M:

I wonder if your Atlanticist drumbeat has taken a beating with the Polish joke :-). But I am glad you came to the conclusion I have been trying to instill in you, namely in mathematical terms, given any e > 0:

|| dems(foreign_policy, international_issue) - reps(foriegn_policy, international_issue) || < e for all international_issue.

For example, how different was Bush's rhetroic than this from Obama? Man this hurts, TSP buggers getting away with murder.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21154
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Prem » 27 Sep 2009 08:17

shravan wrote:[]Is India a Polish joke?[/url]

Aditya Sinha is the Editor-in-Chief of ‘The New Indian Express’ and is based in Chennai


From the above link

Our pro-US establishment may argue (and we might agree) that the joint statement at Sharm-el-Sheikh was not a self-goal in Indo-Pak relations; our government may argue that we can keep meeting Pakistan so long as we continue to pressure Islamabad to act against Hafiz Saeed. Our commentators may argue that these will suffice to ward off US pressure on us. We, however, would be wise to note Poland’s despair this week, and not to delude ourselves that we are special. The US can pull the red carpet out from under our feet anytime it chooses.

Is BR language creeping in the elite system of india?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23911
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby SSridhar » 27 Sep 2009 12:36

csharma wrote:US support for Pakistan was something that has roots in the British strategists Olaf Caroe in particular.


csharma, absolutely. That was why I said in my post above, Its (Pakistan's) Army was perceived as the successor to the British Indian Army in thwarting the onward march of Communist Russia through Afghanistan into the Middle East.

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

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 27 Sep 2009 21:00

Sanjay M wrote: Is India a Polish joke?

Thanks for that posting. We certainly need more such articles to examine the dynamics of Atlanticist machinations, in order to know how to protect ourselves from their effects.

I think we also need a 'Let Us Understand the US' thread, more than a thread for China.


See how value of India is seen below most nations.
I have read through your comparison on India and Poland and it seems to me that you are giving your nation a bit too much credit, Aditya. First, while Poland is not in the G20, it is only due to the fact that Europe is overrepresented in the club - indeed, Poland is the 18th largest economy in the world. Interestingly, Spain, which has a larger economy than India, is also not in the G20. Second, Poland is the fastest growing economy in Europe, and is almost alone in Europe in illustrating positive eocnomic growth in 2009. Third, Poland is shaping its economy around high value added manufacturing and skill-based jobs, building industries that are quite sustainable in the long-run. India, on the other hand, is used as a provider of outsourced services such as call centers and low-value IT services that will be shifted as soon as the nation's wages increase. China is the nation ion the region that is building sustainable industries and assets for its countries. Fourth, Poland is a l By Charles
9/26/2009 9:40:00 AM

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4473
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby sanjaykumar » 27 Sep 2009 22:01

Yes indeed.

A better class of beggar


http://www.economist.com/displayStory.c ... N=88423242


Credit for Poland

Apr 16th 2009

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20704
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Philip » 28 Sep 2009 18:43

http://pubrecord.org/commentary/5460/se ... nt-page-1/

Seven Former CIA Directors Want To Bury The Truth
By Melvin A. Goodman
The Public Record
Sep 23rd, 2009

Last week, seven former directors of the Central Intelligence Agency, who made their own contributions to the CIA’s low esteem over the past 35 years, asked President Barack Obama to make sure there is no criminal investigation of the crimes associated with the Agency’s detentions and interrogations policies over the past eight years.....

AnimeshP
BRFite
Posts: 514
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 07:39

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby AnimeshP » 28 Sep 2009 21:28

Nightmare presidency

Scathing editorial from Daily Pioneer on Obama ... check out the comments section :lol:
Although I am pretty sure that our MSM will continue to sing paens to Obama :roll:

He may not relish the comparison but it is now becoming increasingly obvious that Mr Barack Obama is the most hostile American President for India since Richard Nixon.


Sixty years ago, Harry S Truman had limited first-hand knowledge of great power bargaining but turned out to be farsighted enough to anticipate the Cold War. Mr Obama is the antithesis of this phenomenon. He is completely out of his depth and will probably leave behind a dangerous and unsure legacy. India could have done without this neophyte.
Last edited by AnimeshP on 28 Sep 2009 23:31, edited 1 time in total.

kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby kshirin » 28 Sep 2009 22:50

Let us not jump too hastily to conclusions - was not the goal of universal disarmament our original contribution to the debate on N arms?
I still think that we just need to play our cards right to be on the right side of the winning side. Obama's initiative for the de-escalation of nuclear tensions with Russia is a good step, the removal of BMDs for example. We need to find a way out of the corner we have got into with creative diplomacy.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Sanjay M » 29 Sep 2009 04:31

Obama is the Atlanticist candidate. He cares little for US national interests, and only for the interests of the special-interest constituencies whom he dotes upon. Oh, he's got an amiable oratorial style, like Clinton before him, but if you're not blinded by the grin, you'll see that he's a welfare-statist and a re-distributionist. This is the soma to be thrown to his epsilon voter constituents, in order to obtain their immediate devotion and obedience, as the Atlanticist coterie around him attempts to re-shape international affairs more to their liking (which is why they became his coterie, after all)

India is yet another fly in Obama's ointment, if only because we're one of the countries whose interests are to be excluded by his Atlanticist coterie, and thus we have a tendency to resist their agenda.

He wants to create unskilled jobs domestically, but India pushes outsourcing
He wants to manage trade imbalances, but India pushes globalization
He wants to impose a global test ban, but India hints it may have to test again.
He wants to save money by dropping Bush's Moonshot program, but India suddenly finds water on the Moon.

A multipolar world is returning, and Obama will soon have to learn about what Narasimha Rao plaintively called the "Aurangzeb Principle" -- ie. as soon as you whirl to confront one adversary, others will immediately jump on your back from other directions.

This is going to wear US hegemonism down, and ultimately force the US to revert back to a more benign form, focusing more on its own national interests, as opposed to being a "superpower" crusading on behalf of extra-territorialist lobbies and their ill-defined agendas.

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

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 29 Sep 2009 04:46

Great Post

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Sanjay M » 29 Sep 2009 05:09

CRamS wrote:Sanjay M:

I wonder if your Atlanticist drumbeat has taken a beating with the Polish joke :-). But I am glad you came to the conclusion I have been trying to instill in you, namely in mathematical terms, given any e > 0:

|| dems(foreign_policy, international_issue) - reps(foriegn_policy, international_issue) || < e for all international_issue.

For example, how different was Bush's rhetroic than this from Obama? Man this hurts, TSP buggers getting away with murder.


You can call it a drumbeat if you like, as I'm perfectly aware how it sounds. But to our snoozing sleepwalkers, anything can feel as jarring as a drum. Indeed, it takes a drum to wake snoozers out of their sleep.

The fact is that India's support to the IMF is then underwriting these lacklustre economies, which themselves don't have the size or ability to compete with larger players around them.
Whatever the Poles can invest in to upgrade their manufacturing, the Germans and even the Russians could outmatch them on.

The Opel deal between the Germans and Russians is an example of how industrial collaborations, present and future, will outmuscle the ability of smaller economies to compete.

In return for funding mediocre economies like Poland's we should use our place on IMF to get funding for our preferred friends, whether these be Sri Lanka, or Myanmar, or Namibia.

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4473
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby sanjaykumar » 29 Sep 2009 07:59

Atlanticist seems to be quite elastic in its ambit, perhaps it should be more rigorously defined.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

x-posted from Afghanistan thread

Postby Sanjay M » 02 Oct 2009 18:23

I knew this would happen:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01894.html

White House officials are resisting McChrystal's call for urgent U.S. action on Afghanistan, which he underscored Thursday during a speech in London. Officials also are questioning important elements of the general's assessment, which calls for a vast expansion of an increasingly unpopular war. One senior administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the meeting, said, "A lot of assumptions -- and I don't want to say myths, but a lot of assumptions -- were exposed to the light of day."

Among them, according to three senior administration officials who attended Wednesday's meeting at the White House, is McChrystal's contention that the Taliban and al-Qaeda share the same strategic interests and that the return to power of the Taliban would automatically mean a new sanctuary for al-Qaeda.


I've told you that the Atlanticist lobbies are maneuvering to have Taliban rehabilitated. They are claiming that Taliban can be allowed to come back, and that they can be dealt with, because they are ideologically different from AlQaeda.

When movies like "Road to 9/11" came out, showing how the US Democrats were at fault for allowing the Taliban/AlQaeda menace to get out of control, the Democrats were immediately furious and indignant, insisting that they were the ones who were most aggressive against terrorism while Bush was a terrorist-appeaser.

But you can see that once again, left to their own devices, the US Democrat Whitehouse and their Atlanticist coterie will rush to accommodate Islamist terrorists like Taliban, allowing them to return to power. You can see the arguments for this being constructed gradually, and being laid into place.


Mark my words - once the Taliban return to power, and the Afghan civil war resumes, then the Taliban will quickly take help from AlQaeda to fight the civil war. And AlQaeda will be more than willing to offer itself up for this purpose, because when they say "The Base", they know that only Afghanistan can be that base.

But AlQaeda has now smelled greater opportunity in going after Pakistan's nuclear weapons.
Apparently, they weren't smart enough to go after the Pakistani state during the previous round of Afghan civil war that occurred prior to 9/11. It's only now in the wake of Pak-US "alliance" in the war against Taliban, that the jihadis have decided to target the Pak state, with the eventual hope of overthrowing it and acquiring its nukes.

So once the Taliban come back to power again, a wiser AlQaeda might see its best opportunity in continuing the drive to go after Pakistan's nuclear weapons. There will be more Baitullah Mehsuds being supported, and more Swat Valleys.

The Americans are like Prithvi Rai Chauhan (and so are we, obviously). They keep pulling back from finishing off the jihadis, thus allowing the jihadis to learn and improve themselves for the next round of conflict. Jihadi Darwinism. It's therefore only a matter of time before the jihadis win.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6794
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby CRamS » 02 Oct 2009 19:13

Sanjay M:

You thesis is based on 2 falwed or at best questionable assumptions:

1) That there is such a monolithic powerful group called "Al Queda". To me, Taliban, "Al Queda" (assortment of Arabs and possibly East Africans seeking vengence against US for its blind support of Israel and exploting oil respurces), TSPA/ISI and their munnas (LeT, Jaish) etc; are all different manifestations of the same phenomenon: isalmic extremism. US trying to differential between these scum is why the so called 'global war on terror' is just a 'global fraud on terror'.

2) This Atlanticist nonsense that we have beaten you enough with, so I won't harass you anymore on that one :-).

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54384
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby ramana » 02 Oct 2009 22:39


Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Sanjay M » 03 Oct 2009 07:31

CRamS wrote:Sanjay M:

You thesis is based on 2 falwed or at best questionable assumptions:

1) That there is such a monolithic powerful group called "Al Queda". To me, Taliban, "Al Queda" (assortment of Arabs and possibly East Africans seeking vengence against US for its blind support of Israel and exploting oil respurces), TSPA/ISI and their munnas (LeT, Jaish) etc; are all different manifestations of the same phenomenon: isalmic extremism. US trying to differential between these scum is why the so called 'global war on terror' is just a 'global fraud on terror'.


Whether AlQaeda itself is monolithic or hydra-headed is of little consequence to the points I was making. The fact is that they are committed to the overthrow and ejection of the West from the Islamic sphere, and the Middle East in particular.

The fact is that the Atlanticists are seeking to recover their pro-jihadist strategy from its 9/11 debacle in the same manner as a sub-prime remedy. They want to make a distinction between "good" jihadi assets (Taliban) and "bad" jihadi assets (AlQaeda).
The Atlanticists seek to separate these two categories, in order to rehabilitate and continue "good" jihadi operations to meet the Atlanticist needs, while discarding the "bad" jihadis which pose excessive liability to them.

The Atlanticists are trying to bail out the Bank of Jihad, which has recently seen a collapse in its credibility in the West, as a result of the 9/11 market crash.




2) This Atlanticist nonsense that we have beaten you enough with, so I won't harass you anymore on that one :-).


As for your claim of the Atlanticist problem being "nonsense", you seem to be in obvious ignorance of the long history of Euro-centrist thinking in the West. Clearly, for them, "blood is thicker than water".

Atlanticism is the main scourge of India's existence, without which we would have been able to overcome the Pakistani and even the Chinese problems long ago. They've always tried to tip the scales against us, in their selfish desire to keep the balance of power exclusively tilted in their own favour. One day, we can repay them in the same coin.

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Sanjay M » 04 Oct 2009 00:21

My goodness -- all these Simmering Caste Tensions

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 04 Oct 2009 05:12

I've told you that the Atlanticist lobbies are maneuvering to have Taliban rehabilitated. They are claiming that Taliban can be allowed to come back, and that they can be dealt with, because they are ideologically different from AlQaeda.


There is one report that Pakistan thinks India has been in touch with the Taliban too!!

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Sanjay M » 04 Oct 2009 05:47

Bah, they kept claiming Baitullah Mehsud was an 'Indian agent' :roll:

Sanjay M
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4892
Joined: 02 Nov 2005 14:57

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Sanjay M » 04 Oct 2009 23:05


Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9252
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Hari Seldon » 05 Oct 2009 03:49

Fox news running headline/banner reads "Slumdog nightmare: More children die in Indias's slums than is sub-saharan Africa. India now has 60 per cent of the world's child malnutrition cases.'

Lez hope such psy-ops wil prod our babus into doing something about this - more accountable, transparent, clean and local service delivery network. Impossible? perhaps. But we haven't tried it yet only.

/
Such yeomen service the goras are doing. Such selfless and noble concern for us SDREs. Aren't we blessed already
/snark.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby arun » 05 Oct 2009 08:57

X Posted.

US aid for fighting the war on terror was diverted, with US blessing, to “buy and support capability against India”.

A lesson that needs being absorbed by our ruling classes …………. When expedient the US can be guaranteed to set aside all talk of being natural allies and having shared democratic values and will sell India down the river.

AP quoting Maj. Gen. Mahmud Durrani (Retd), Pakistan's Ambassador to the U.S. under the Gen. Musharraf dictatorship :

Billions in US aid never reached Pakistan army

By KATHY GANNON (AP) – 11 hours ago

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The United States has long suspected that much of the billions of dollars it has sent Pakistan to battle militants has been diverted to the domestic economy and other causes, such as fighting India. .....................

Some of the money from the U.S. even went to buying weapons from the United States better suited to fighting India than in the border regions of Afghanistan — armor-piercing tow missiles, sophisticated surveillance equipment, air-to-air missiles, maritime patrol aircraft, anti-ship missiles and F-16 fighter aircraft.

"Pakistan insisted and America agreed. Pakistan said we also have a threat from other sources," Durrani said, referring to India, "and we have to strengthen our overall capacity. "The money was used to buy and support capability against India." ..................

AP via Google

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

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 06 Oct 2009 01:42

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_sta ... FnZXRzb2Jh

Obama to honor India with his first state dinner




By DARLENE SUPERVILLE, Associated Press Writer – Tue Sep 29, 7:43 pm ET
WASHINGTON – And the first state dinner of President Barack Obama's administration goes to ... India.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is coming to America for a state visit Nov. 24, just before Thanksgiving. Such visits include an elaborate arrival ceremony on the White House South Lawn, one-on-one time with the president and, in the evening, a state dinner.
It's a plum presidential nod of recognition for the world's largest democracy and most stable U.S. ally in a hostile corner of the world.
But why India first?

It was just four years ago that President George W. Bush and Singh raised their glasses and toasted the U.S.-India relationship at the start of a July 2005 state dinner.
Indian officials, however, have watched warily since then as the U.S. has become more engaged with its archrival, Pakistan, focusing on greater military cooperation in dealing with Islamist extremists there and in neighboring Afghanistan. Honoring Singh with what is considered one of the grandest and most glamorous of White House affairs 10 months into Obama's presidency may allay some of those concerns, along with perceptions that Pakistan has surpassed India as America's best friend in South Asia.
It also may be Obama's way of closing the loop with all the major U.S. allies as his freshman year in office draws to a fast close.
Obama's first-year international itinerary has taken him to the major European power centers of England, France, Germany, Italy and Russia. He has toured the Middle East and is scheduled to visit China and possibly other Asian countries in November, before Singh visits.
The president has even scheduled a day trip to Copenhagen this week — he'll spend more time in the air than on the ground — in a bid to personally boost his adopted hometown's chances of bringing the 2016 Olympic Games to Chicago.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton hand-delivered the state-visit invitation from Obama during her July trip to India.
Singh, re-elected to a second term earlier this year, and Obama met on the sidelines of a London economic summit in April, and discussed cooperating on the economic downturn, climate change and counterterrorism. Obama later called him a "very wise and decent man."
After years of mutual wariness during the Cold War, U.S.-Indian relations are at a high point, thanks partly to the Bush administration's push to allow American civilian nuclear trade with India. The Obama administration has used that accord as a foundation for improving ties and hopes of cooperation on the president's priority issues, such as climate change and countering terrorism.
"We are very committed to this relationship," Clinton said of India when questioned about deepening U.S. relations with Pakistan.
But a trip to India so far has escaped the sights of the president's travel planners.
That's where the state dinner comes in.
Obama's first one will be the talk of the town, perhaps second only to his inauguration and the parties that followed in terms of celebrity star power and got-to-be-there fever.
A ton of planning is involved, from creating the invitation itself to compiling a guest list. Meals, desserts and wines are tasted until the right pairings are found. Flowers must be chosen and arranged just so, along with the seating, place settings and entertainment.
Responsibility for the planning falls to first lady Michelle Obama and her staff, and people will be waiting to see what twists she and her social secretary, Desiree Rogers, will put on one of the White House's most staid traditions.
Early state dinner rumblings after Obama took office were about opening the events up to "real people."
Inquiring minds also want to know what other changes may be in store. Will they eat in the State Dining Room or shift chairs to the larger East Room? Will dinner courses be prepared with vegetables pulled from Mrs. Obama's popular South Lawn garden?
Would they consider putting their well-dressed guests on boats headed down the Potomac River to Mount Vernon? John F. Kennedy did that for his first state dinner a just few months into his term, in May 1961, for the president of Tunisia.
Or how about dinner and black-tie inside a big tent in the Rose Garden? Bill Clinton did that for his first such dinner a year and a half into his presidency, in June 1994, for the Japanese emperor.
Bush held his first dinner eight months in. It was for Mexico, less than a week before the terrorist attacks of September 2001.

sid_ashar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 18
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 08:46

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby sid_ashar » 06 Oct 2009 03:24

http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/oct/ ... i-lama.htm
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/obama ... rt/525316/
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... -u-s-tour/

For all that talk during BOs campaign about moral authority and changing washington, he comes across as one of the worst... Hillary and BO, two of the worst hypocrites on the planet. But I guess, one person's hypocrite is another's saviour. Lesson for india, dont expect anything from this administration. Arunachal and J&K will be next. Hope they have finally realized that most democrats, specially the ones in power now cannot be trusted. I am surprised that we are even considering doling out money to US corporations for billions of $$ worth of defence equipment (which indirectly funds US aid to Pakistan). As a start, remove the F16 and F18 from the MRCA trials. Show some spine.

Wonder what all those PIOs in the US who voted for BO have to say now..

-Sid

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4460
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 06 Oct 2009 05:59

Is Obama leaning to China on Arunachal issue? - B Raman

...
The United States officials were reportedly worried that the Chinese anger, over the Dalai Lama's [ Images ] visit to Arunachal Pradesh, might come in the way of the success of Obama's promised efforts to persuade Beijing [ Images ] to resume its dialogue with His Holiness. It is not clear whether they gave any advice to His Holiness in this matter.

It is learnt that officials of the Obama administration have stepped up pressure on the advisers of His Holiness -- to persuade the Dalai Lama not to raise any controversy over Arunachal Pradesh for the time being -- till the American President succeeds in persuading the Chinese to resume their dialogue with the representatives of His Holiness.
...
...
It is learnt that the formats of the joint exercises between the three wings of the armed forces of the two countries, which were agreed upon during the Bush administration, are being reviewed in order to delete elements, which could cause concern to not only China, but also Pakistan -- such as joint exercises between the two armies in the Siachen area to enable US army personnel to get exposed to high altitude conditions, joint naval exercises in the seas to the east of India etc.
...
...
The Obama administration seems to be thinking that all that it needs to do to humour India and soften the blow -- due to its steady reversal of the pro-India policies initiated by the Bush administration -- is to accord the honour of a state visit to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [ Images ] in November and play up the ceremonial honours accorded to him.

In the last few days, officials of the US State Department have been briefing the media about the kind of honours that will be accorded to Dr Singh when he visits Washington. These are meant to show that there has been no change in US policies towards India under the Obama administration. The reality is that on every matter, which is of concern to India, greater attention is being paid to China's sensitivities and concerns.




Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests