India-US Strategic 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.
krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5829
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby krisna » 23 Jan 2011 09:27

ramana wrote:Krisna, Have you read Jarhead?

Hersh is right. At the very outset BRF had speculated on this aspect of chaplains reading the gospel before patrols etc. OBL had claimed it was Crusade.


Nope, I just checked that Jarhead is a book made into a movie(google).
I do remember about crusades or similar type when west go to war. there are missionary types also among the soldiers. But this is coming from a mainstream journalist is causing some consternation among the folks.

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9265
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Hari Seldon » 23 Jan 2011 10:46

^^ Yup, but nothing like cold, hard reality to break that jar on the head only.

For all practical and visible purposes, unkil's crusade has failed in the ME only. A trillion $ sunk and what to show for it? The new Iraqi constitution explicitly calls for preserving Iraq's muslim (read shia) majority character. Iranian influence in Baghdad is higher than when Saddam was in power.

Am sure I'm missing something, some big picture, megatrend-line kinda stuff since its hard to believe the sole hyperpower etc etc can mess up so magnificently only.

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

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 23 Jan 2011 21:36

http://www.hindustantimes.com/NY-court- ... 53655.aspx


NY court summons Kamal Nath in Sikh riots case: Report
Agencies
January 23, 2011
First Published: 11:09 IST(23/1/2011)
Last Updated: 11:13 IST(23/1/2011)

Urban Development Minister Kamal Nath has been summoned by a New York court in connection with the 1984 anti-sinkh riots case, according to a report on The Indian Express website. The report says that the US has declined diplomatic immunity to the minister. A civil lawsuit was filed in a New
York court last April alleging his involvement in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots in New Delhi, the report said.

However, there are no legal proceedings related to the 1984 riots against the Minister in India.

The report said that a member of the NGO in New York filed an affidavit saying she served the summons to Kamal Nath outside the consulate which, Nath’s lawyers say, is false as the area was heavily barricaded by NYPD due to presence of large number of Sikhs. Their claim is that the summons was never served.

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

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby RamaY » 23 Jan 2011 21:46

^ Karma for taking internal matters to external players.

Two cats fight for the roti and the monkey takes it away :(

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15999
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby RajeshA » 23 Jan 2011 21:48

Hari Seldon wrote:^^ Yup, but nothing like cold, hard reality to break that jar on the head only.

For all practical and visible purposes, unkil's crusade has failed in the ME only. A trillion $ sunk and what to show for it? The new Iraqi constitution explicitly calls for preserving Iraq's muslim (read shia) majority character. Iranian influence in Baghdad is higher than when Saddam was in power.

Am sure I'm missing something, some big picture, megatrend-line kinda stuff since its hard to believe the sole hyperpower etc etc can mess up so magnificently only.


As Iraq has gone Shi'a, the Gulf Emirates would be even more paranoid about Iranians and Shi'a. The more paranoid they are, the closer they will try to get to the Americans. Shi'ite Iraq, Iranian Nuclear Program, etc. all help to control the Gulf Emirates, where much of the Oil lies.

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3172
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby vera_k » 23 Jan 2011 22:01

India seeks diplomatic immunity for Kamal Nath in 1984 anti-Sikh riots

Sources in the Indian embassy in Washington said a demarche was made out to the state department for granting diplomatic immunity to minister following the case filed against him by an NGO, Sikhs for Justice, in April last year.

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

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 23 Jan 2011 22:06

um I dont see why Saddam being left in place would not be even better and save $1 TR.

- saddam being sunni elite, suppressed the iraqi shia BUT he also hated the iranian(shia), so no chance of iraqi and irani shias coming together on his watch
- he gassed the kurds, turkey (the nato munna) also beats up the kurds on occasions..no conflict there
- saddam also hated the gulf sheikhdoms and invaded kuwait - his presence was a cememt to keep the gulf sheikhdoms under US control more than the vague and distant threat from iran.
- saddam had no love for osama and his gang and did not give them any shelter

infact he was the perfect candidate for the US to maintain its control of the gulf and keep things predictable, the iraqi military and industry had withered under sanctions and was a minor issue.

so beats me why they had to throw him out :D I am missing the brilliant strategy and pakplan somewhere...

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15999
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby RajeshA » 23 Jan 2011 22:07

WTF has USA to do with 1984 riots? I would fully support incarcerating any Congressiya or otherwise who partook in hurting Sikhs, but in India! America should go ****!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15999
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby RajeshA » 23 Jan 2011 22:10

When Saddam invaded Kuwait, he went against America's order for the region! Even if some people say, America allowed that invasion, but letting Saddam keep Kuwait, would not have been in America's interests. Having waged a war against Saddam in 1991, there was no going back! Saddam had ceased to be an American asset!

ManjaM
BRFite
Posts: 1217
Joined: 15 May 2010 02:52
Location: Padvaralli

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby ManjaM » 23 Jan 2011 22:11

JE Menon wrote:>What it is , is a call to convert

Indeed, that is why I said his Islamic brothers would refer to it as "Daawa" - in short the philsophical underpinnings of the Alabama lunatix statement is not much different from those that support Jamaat ud Daawa.


Over the years Sahib, I have seen more and more of my white amriki friends declare themselves Christian. This is usually accompanied by (in this order)
1 - curiosity about the other in me
2 - exploration of the "other" along familiar academic lines (caste, cow, curry)
3 - declaration of a complete understanding of indian culture esp the negitives and atttempting to explain to me what india is.
4 - friendship replaced by a sympathy (because i havent heard the call, and i will go to hell)

I dont believe the numerous studies that declare that Amrika is less Christian. The Christian right wing is gaining ground is all important institutions, not to mention the general population as a whole. Fully expect to see and hear more statements such as one by the Gov of AL in the coming years. Politicians usually adopt more extreme versions of the popular sentiment and this will be no different.

How this impacts India - More aggressive conversion activity across all states, more money flowing in, more interference with the internal running of the country and an increased threat to all that is perceived anti or un christian. US is not Pak, but i can bet that we will see more direct action against abortion doctors, temples, mosques and such in the next 20-30 years. Rajiv Malhotra had in "Invading the sacred" talked about how Hindus is particular are already identified as the other the same way Jews were back in the early 20th century. All this is a direct consequence of increasing christianization of the US and directly impacts US world view.
Last edited by ManjaM on 24 Jan 2011 06:51, edited 1 time in total.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8925
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Mort Walker » 23 Jan 2011 22:11

Kamal Nath is a corrupt Kangressi who as previous union minister for forests wrecked parts of MP's ecosystem. The people from Chindwara district in MP are under his grip and is easily re-elected.

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

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 23 Jan 2011 22:20

I have no idea about his linkage to the delhi riots if any...but the issue here like the indian UK diplomat goes beyond that specific case...

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3172
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby vera_k » 23 Jan 2011 23:02

Mort Walker wrote:Kamal Nath is a corrupt Kangressi who as previous union minister for forests wrecked parts of MP's ecosystem. The people from Chindwara district in MP are under his grip and is easily re-elected.


That may be, but in this instance, the significance of Kamal Nath is in his close association with the Gandhi family.

Kamal Nath, the Gandhi buddy

Till Sanjay lived, Nath was seen as Mrs Gandhi’s third son. The slogan “Indira Gandhi ke do haath, Sanjay Gandhi, Kamal Nath” drives home the point.


The case against Kamal Nath

Kaul disclosed that Kamal Nath had turned up at Rakab Ganj saying that he had been sent by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.


The unanswered questions about his role in the Rakabganj Gurdwara episode might well hold the key to uncovering the high-level conspiracy behind the 1984 carnage.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Cosmo_R » 23 Jan 2011 23:24



Singha:

so beats me why they had to throw him out :D I am missing the brilliant strategy and pakplan somewhere...


It's a pakplan. Start with this conversation between SH and April Glaspie the US Amb. on July 25, 1990:

http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html

Glaspie effectively told SH that the US would look the other way.

BTW SH was seen as an up and comer during the 1960s and finally maneuvered into power in 1978 for the purpose of pitting Iraq against Iran as revenge for the Khomeini takeover.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/217.html

Same folks who brought you Iran contra and drugs being sold in Baldwin Heights in LA to finance anti-Sandinista rebels. Not to mention AfPak 1 and many other too numerous to mention.

Added later: Bush Sr. did not go all the way to Baghdad in 1990. What Cheney learned from GW1 was that you can make a profit (US got $10bn more than it 'shelled out' from allies). So, the idea of the self financing war was born: Seize Iraq, create a dagger pointed at KSA and control a ***load of oil and then pay for thr through lucrative 'rebuilding' contracts.

In short, we have met the enemy and he is us. They don't call them 'spooks' for nothing.

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

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 23 Jan 2011 23:48

ManjaM wrote:
Over the year Sahib, I have seen more and more of my white amriki friends declare themselves Christian. This is usually accompanied by (in this order)
1 - curiosity about the other in me
2 - exploration of the "other" along familiar academic lines (caste, cow, curry)
3 - declaration of a complete understanding of indian culture esp the negitives and atttempting to explain to me what india is.
4 - friendship replaced by a sympathy (because i havent heard the call, and i will go to hell)

I dont believe the numerous studies that declare that Amrika is less Christian. The Christian right wing is gaining ground is all important institutions, not to mention the general population as a whole. Fully expect to see and hear more statements such as one by the Gov of AL in the coming years. Politicians usually adopt more extreme versions of the popular sentiment and this will be no different.

How this impacts India - More aggressive conversion activity across all states, more money flowing in, more interference with the internal running of the country and an increased threat to all that is perceived anti or un christian. US is not Pak, but i can bet that we will see more direct action against abortion doctors, temples, mosques and such in the next 20-30 years. Rajiv Malhotra had in "Invading the sacred" talked about how Hindus is particular are already identified as the other the same way Jews were back in the early 20th century. All this is a direct consequence of increasing christianization of the US and directly impacts US world view.


http://www.cfr.org/publication/11341/ch ... olicy.html

The new breed of Christianity say that Indian culture is responsible for their corrupt culture due to 60s cultural revolution in US and the influence of Beatles and other groups who endorsed Indian cultures. There is a sense of revenge and also painting of a target on India to change it so that it does not come back. This kind of dangerous view of the other culture is developing inside few groups within the US.

Watch for Indian EJs start having similar view about Indians in general.

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ ... ds-country
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0302/p01s01-usfp.html
http://www.e-ir.info/?p=3850

http://ask.metafilter.com/60927/The-Chr ... ign-policy

http://www.amazon.com/Defending-Christi ... gy_b_img_b

http://www.sens-public.org/spip.php?article326

http://www.thepresidency.org/storage/do ... /Scott.pdf

http://projects.vassar.edu/1896/foreignrelations.html

http://www.sydneyanglicans.net/life/thi ... gn_policy/

shyam
BRFite
Posts: 1453
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby shyam » 24 Jan 2011 05:48

Singha wrote:NY court summons Kamal Nath in Sikh riots case: Report

Where is Anderson of Union Carbide?

AKalam
BRFite
Posts: 285
Joined: 04 Jan 2009 05:34
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby AKalam » 24 Jan 2011 14:52

About the expensive war efforts ("crusade" as described by some) of the US, here are some ideas from an anti-establishment insider:

Ron Paul before the Iraq war. Wise man see. Fools Rush in.

part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EywYDhPeY8

part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6X8xKqO92M

Perpetual War is Expensive! Jan 20 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGeC5fjpHUo

Doctors Ron and Rand Paul at AC360 with Anderson Cooper Jan 3 2011.wmv
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3pv5mtgQeA

A brief discussion and my opinion on Ron Paul's ideas:

1. Anti immigrant, or more specifically anti non-european immigrant and Isolationism: This is consistent with opinions of familiar conservative and paleo-conservative figures such as Pat Buchanan and late Samuel Huntington. Large scale Hispanic/Mestizo immigration is a cause for valid concern for the majority of European origin in the US, but an Arizona law or putting national guard on the border will not solve this problem. What is needed is to create a stable political structure in the form of a Latin American Union that includes all countries in South and Central America including Mexico. A developed and powerful EU like entity in the South hopefully will create jobs so people will not have to migrate North for a better life. That is what the US needs to work on, if they ever hope to stem this flow of constant migration of the economically disadvantaged and marginalized. So if the Pauls think a hands off approach will do the magic, unfortunately it won't. Paul's anti imperial policy is good, such as closing off bases, though a bit naive, in the absence of other balancing forces in different parts of the globe, but one can gradually move in that direction. Pure isolationism is patently unwise, as it assumes that any large system can survive by itself alone in this increasingly interconnected world. An enlightened policy of guidance for building local and regional centers of power in the form of regional large systems will relieve the US of the headache of global peace keeping and balancing of power. This is similar in a way to the dismantling of Mercantile empires of the past century.

2. Balancing the budget and moving away from a fiat currency controlled by the Feds: I don't think Pauls are gold bugs and want to reintroduce gold based dollars, but using the Fed inter bank rates and money supply (dollar printing machines) to control economic cycles can be dangerous as politics sometimes gets into Fed policies and misuse and abuse the system causing problems. So I tend to agree with Pauls that budget should be more balanced and govt. expenses cut down as much as possible, but fiat currencies are here to stay, whether they are the US Dollar or Euro or Yuan or any future international reserve currency that is based on a weighted basket of currencies, that takes into account the GDP contribution of respective economies. So this new currency may contain lets say 20 currencies of the world's 20 largest economies (G20), with weight given according to its GDP share among G20 economies. Of course if regional systems take shape and they have Euro like new common currencies of their own, these will then take part in the international reserve currency. Moving away from the Dollar/Euro reserve currency regime towards a more fair system for all parts of the globe becomes more essential everyday as more people in different regions find out how they are being unfairly penalized due to whims of countries that can print their currencies at will, bring down the value of their currency and thus levy an instant inflation tax on the rest of globe, who holds these currencies as reserve.

Socialism and generous state welfare system is good as it provides a safety net for the bottom tier population, but it should not be at the expense of future generations, using excessive govt. borrowing, because as a policy it is unsustainable in the long term. One should only spend as much as one has, frugal life style can be a virtue as it is better for the planet and its environment, it is as true for individuals as it is for nation states. Money wasted in useless luxuries can be better utilized in educating young minds and making them more healthy. If a system cannot ensure the health, well being and thus maximizing and utilizing the creativity of the largest numbers of its population, then competing systems will gain the upper hand, who does a better job at ensuring these for their population, which as a result will make the better performing system more competitive.

3. Reducing ties with Israel: Keeping Israel as the 51st state has been a costly venture for the US. The Pauls support a policy of gradually cutting close economic and political ties with Israel. Although this seems to be a non main stream position now, my prediction is that over time, the US population will become increasingly aware of the heavy cost of close ties with Israel. This will also give Israel as a state to find creative solutions to sustain itself and survive as a viable state in the future, without depending so heavily on the US.

4. Corporate America: The Pauls I believe are no friend of big corporations, but their adamant libertarian principle of small govt. may not be a practical solution to counter the damaging effects of greed by corporations, who need to be regulated aggressively to make sure that corporations serve the interest of the people and not the other way around as it is the situation now, where the entire political class, Republicans and Democrats, are both slave to corporate interests and funds. The majority of SCOTUS is also in corporate pocket it seems. So "accidents" don't just happen, oil companies like BP will always try to cut corners to increase share-holder profits, without considering the full consequence of the risks they take with public commons property.

5. Race relations: OK, the Pauls may have a genuine problem in this area. Although Rand Paul talks about legalities in property rights and letting restaurant owners decide for themselves to make a "white only" restaurant, even if technically he may have a fine legal point, these kind of talk is unhelpful, because it will alienate a large chunk of not only black, but Hispanic and other non white minorities as well. Instead of making a white only restaurant or excluding blacks or others from housing en masse, it is more logical to distinguish offending customer or tenant who may be obnoxious or noisy and use existing laws more strictly to deal with such offensive elements. Lets not allow people to discriminate based on the color of their skin (or ethnic origin), when you open a business for public. If you do not let someone in your home, or your immediate circle of friends or you don't date a person of certain race or ethnicity, I believe existing law has nothing to say about such private choices.

Overall, I would say that the Pauls have many good ideas and a genuine good heart to do good just like Obama does, but they need to evolve from their current positions to appeal to a larger voting public and thus make a difference in the future of the US of A, despite the apparent success of Tea Party movement so far.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby ramana » 25 Jan 2011 00:40

K.P> Nayar writes in Telegraph

India hand ousted from Obama Admin

I think its re-election mode of the administration and nothing do with the hand!They want soem oen who can proclaim how amny jobs were gained by Admin policies. A toady and not a policy maker.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby ramana » 25 Jan 2011 01:07

Important to read the review atleast!

Pioneer book review

AGENDA | Sunday, January 23, 2011 | Email | Print | | Back


What went wrong in 1971

January 25, 2011 1:23:49 AM


Myths and Facts: Bangladesh Liberation War
Author: BZ Khasru
Publisher: Rupa & Co
Price: Rs 595


The book looks into the reasons that led to the Bangladesh war and how the world powers tried to shape its outcome, says Ved Marwah

The Bangladesh liberation war was perhaps the most important event in post-Independence India. The author, BZ Khasru, lives in the US and is the editor of a financial publication in New York. In the book, Myths and Facts: Bangladesh Liberation War, based on the recently declassified secret US Government documents, the author pieces together a coherent but tragic story of what went wrong during those fateful days of 1971. He analyses what led to the war, how it was conducted and how the world powers allowed and shaped its outcome.

India, China, the US and the USSR played the most crucial role. In this fascinating story, Khasru exposes the hypocrisy of the then American Government and how it completely ignored the colossal human tragedy which could have been prevented had the US played a positive role instead of looking through the prism of what it then regarded as its national interest. In addition to the ruthless military rulers of Pakistan, the US and, not surprisingly, the Chinese Governments were primarily responsible for the terrible and unforgivable event.

The people of India and Bangladesh had to bear the brunt of the Pakistani Army’s atrocities. Millions of hapless refugees crossed over to the Indian side to escape the relentless persecution. The book also analyses how “political leaders, blinded by their misguided personal ambitions, plunge their people into untold miseries, and how an inaccurate reading of diplomatic subtleties leads to disastrous policies”. ZA Bhutto’s dubious role comes for special mention. US President Richard Nixon looked at the unfolding tragedy in terms of how it would affect the balance of power in fighting the war against communism. He had no compunction in egging on China to stop India from intervening in the tragic situation. Nixon’s “disdain” for India and its leadership blinded him from seeing the situation from the human angle.

The author traces “America’s disdain for India to the pre-Partition time as far back as 1942 — when a US technical mission invited by the Indian Government to investigate India’s industrial resources, to recommend production of war materials, came under harsh criticism in the Indian press”. China was another country that had its own reasons for disliking the Indian leaders from Nehru’s days. “China’s disdain coincided with Nixon’s own”. All the key US officials — Nixon, Henry Kissinger and William Rogers — blamed India for the war to justify their support for Pakistan.

Kissinger’s negative role in that period has also been highlighted in the book. The American miscalculations about the war were primarily based on its misperceptions. Kissinger articulated them on more occasions than one. He was convinced that India did not want an independent Bangladesh and would ultimately back off from precipitating a war with Pakistan. The US “saw a foothold in Pakistan as an essential ingredient in ensuring the West’s continued grip on West Asia and its oil, the lifeblood of the West’s economy”.

The US Government was fully aware of the tragic event, but instead of pressurising the Pakistani generals to stop the genocide, it put its weight behind them. It is doubtful if they would have dared to do what they did if they were not fully confident of the American support. “The US Embassy in Islamabad...opposed any action by Washington, describing the military action as a reasonable action by a ‘constituted’ Government using force against citizens accused of flouting its authority.” The US Government chose not ask the question: How could the martial law administration call almost the whole Bengali population opposing the military rulers ‘miscreants’? Khasru brings out why despite opting for autonomy in the December 1970 elections, Bengalis had little choice but to harden their stand against the Pakistani Government as a result of its crackdown in March 1971.

The author is right when he says that “India’s involvement in the Bangladesh war was perhaps more fortuitous than preplanned. New Delhi’s war policy evolved gradually, shaped by events at home and abroad”. The Indian Government remained in favour of a united Pakistan till the end. When the Pakistani military cracked down in East Pakistan, India’s estimate of its own best interest shifted in favour of an independent Bangladesh under a moderate leadership. Delhi supported the formation of a provisional Government by the escaped leaders in India, but withheld the formal recognition of this Government-in-exile. Mrs Indira Gandhi maintained that Delhi was not involved except because of the large influx of refugees into India. There is an interesting account about how internal differences and rivalries among the Awami League leaders had cropped up even among the members of the provisional Bangladesh Government in Calcutta. India was also aware that Khandakar Moshtaque Ahmed, the Foreign Minister of the provisional revolutionary Government, was an “admittedly pro-Western”, right-wing politician who was “maintaining independent contacts with the US”. These rivalries came to the fore soon after the liberation of Bangladesh and played a key role in the later events in the country. He headed a Government after the assassination of Sheikh Mujib.

According to Khasru, “India’s Defence Minister Jagjivan Ram and several other military rulers had opposed a ceasefire until India had taken certain unspecified areas of Kashmir and destroyed the war mechanism of Pakistan”. But Mrs Gandhi decided to declare a unilateral ceasefire. The decision, according to him, “resulted from strong pressure put on her by Moscow, which incorrectly perceived Nixon meant business when he dispatched a naval fleet into Bay of Bengal”. After the Indo-Soviet treaty, Moscow did not want to take the risk of precipitating events that could escalate the conflict and drag the USSR into it. There is an interesting observation about how the Pakistani military ruler suffered from the delusion that “his brave Muslim warriors would prevail against Hindu soldiers, whom he perceived to be timid”. It is unfortunate that many senior Army officers still continue to suffer from this delusion. Ever since their defeat, they have been preparing to avenge the humiliation Pakistan suffered in 1971.

Differences among Mrs Gandhi’s advisers — India’s Ambassador in Washington LK Jha, Principal Secretary PN Haksar and Foreign Secretary TN Kaul — played a minor role in the US assessment. “Jha, unsurprisingly, blamed Haksar and Kaul for India’s trouble with the US. Haksar, he said, was on his way out: Maybe Kaul, too” during a meeting with Kissinger on October 11, 1971.

The book contains photocopies of many secret US documents that have now been declassified. It also includes a number of fascinating pictures of the international leaders of that period who were closely connected with the event. Many of the facts given in the book may not be new to the Indian reader, but coming out as they do on the basis of facts culled out from the declassified American documents they make interesting reading.

It is a well-researched book and should be read by not just those who are interested in the history of Bangladesh, but all who want to know how events in our region are messed up by superpowers in their own misperceived national interests.

-- The reviewer, a retired IPS officer, is former Governor of Jharkhand, Manipur and Mizoram

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 25 Jan 2011 05:09


Manas
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 46
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Manas » 25 Jan 2011 10:41



This is a big deal. The U.S. backing up rhetoric with on the ground action. It will certainly expect India to reciprocate in cash (commercial/defence deals) & kind (vote with the U.S. in international bodies).

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

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby RamaY » 25 Jan 2011 11:44

If US delivers on what it promised, there is nothing wrong in buying F-18s, provided there is uninterrupted supply of parts.

Besides FGFA, LCA-MKII, AMCA, and indigenous UCAVs are India's future. Everything else is a stop gap measure.

At current growth rates by 2020 India will add >$150B capital assets to its defense budget beside the $30B operational budget. This $10B contract can be amortized well before the first MMRCA fighter is inducted into service.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Johann » 25 Jan 2011 14:56

ramana wrote:Important to read the review atleast!

Pioneer book review

AGENDA | Sunday, January 23, 2011 | Email | Print | | Back


What went wrong in 1971

January 25, 2011 1:23:49 AM


Myths and Facts: Bangladesh Liberation War
Author: BZ Khasru
Publisher: Rupa & Co
Price: Rs 595


The book looks into the reasons that led to the Bangladesh war and how the world powers tried to shape its outcome, says Ved Marwah

...According to Khasru, “India’s Defence Minister Jagjivan Ram and several other military rulers had opposed a ceasefire until India had taken certain unspecified areas of Kashmir and destroyed the war mechanism of Pakistan”. But Mrs Gandhi decided to declare a unilateral ceasefire. The decision, according to him, “resulted from strong pressure put on her by Moscow, which incorrectly perceived Nixon meant business when he dispatched a naval fleet into Bay of Bengal”. After the Indo-Soviet treaty, Moscow did not want to take the risk of precipitating events that could escalate the conflict and drag the USSR into it.


I've commented here on this a couple of times. Nixon had admitted that he depended on a 'madman strategy' for extracting concessions from a traditionally tough and hostile Soviet leadership, i.e. appearing dangerously unpredictable. It worked every time in a crisis - the Bangladesh war, the Yom Kippur War, the Vietnam war, etc. Of course it was mostly bluff. Nixon was certainly not willing to fight WW III. In some ways he was like Khrushchev in the risks he took, but the difference is that he didn't blink. One wonders if he would have taken such risks without the very high level intelligence he obtained on the Soviet leadership through the FBI's penetration of the Communist Party of the USA.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Lalmohan » 25 Jan 2011 14:59

Manas wrote:


This is a big deal. The U.S. backing up rhetoric with on the ground action. It will certainly expect India to reciprocate in cash (commercial/defence deals) & kind (vote with the U.S. in international bodies).


in the peaceful exploration of space, sure - we'd all like that

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2394
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby VinodTK » 26 Jan 2011 02:51

Cross posting from Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments thread

US reopens door to tech exports

India is also being placed in a category free to import from the US material that could be used in the construction of missiles or nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, but not verifiably intended for such use.

Though the dismantling of the export controls was announced by President Barack Obama on his November tour of India, it became effective Monday with the publication of a notice updating the US's Export Administration Regulations.

The third part of the deal, membership for India to international export control regimes such as the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the missile technology control regime, an administration official said, work is under way.

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 26 Jan 2011 05:42

Hundreds of Indian students may be deported from US

Hundreds of Indian students, mostly from Andhra Pradesh, face the prospect of deportation from the US after authorities raided and shut down a university in the Silicon Valley on charges of a massive immigration fraud. The Tri-Valley University in Pleasanton, a major suburb in San Francisco Bay Area, has been charged by federal investigating authorities with being part of an effort to defraud, misuse visa permits and indulge in money laundering and other crimes.

According to a federal complaint filed in a California court, the university, which was raided and shut down last week, helped foreign nationals illegally acquire immigration status. The university is said to have 1,555 students. As many as 95% of these students are Indian nationals, the complaint said. Investigations by Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) found that while students were admitted to various residential and online courses of the university and on paper lived in California, in reality they "illegally" worked in various parts of the country as far as Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Texas.

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5829
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby krisna » 26 Jan 2011 05:53

As Doctors Age, Worries About Their Ability Grow
One-third of the nation’s physicians are over 65, and that proportion is expected to rise. As doctors in the baby boom generation reach 65, many are under increasing financial pressures that make them reluctant to retire.


there is a shortage of doctors in usa, will continue so in foreseeable future.
with baby boom generation starting to grow old, it will be more difficult to reduce shortage. Economy is not helping these docs to retire. Immigration is going to stay for long time to reduce the shortage.

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5829
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby krisna » 26 Jan 2011 08:40

How US glosses over the truth
In January 2000 Congressman Frank Pallone introduced a House Resolution seeking to designate Pakistan as state sponsor of terrorism. The Resolution listed specific charges against Pakistan and its promotion of cross-border terrorism. The draft was sent to a sub-committee where it died. The State Department marked its copy ‘What a bunch of crap!’

Perhaps out of curiosity, Ms Barbara Elias, the Director for the Afghanistan, Pakistan, Taliban Documentation Project at the National Security Archive of the George Washington University, filed an appeal with the Department of State’s Appeals Review Panel. She asked what American diplomacy had to hide. Two years later, Ms Elias finally won her appeal. To her surprise, she found the words: “What a bunch of crap!”
Ms Elias commented in her blog at the National Security Archives: “I had a hearty chuckle, finding it quite funny that a person employed by the Department of State (I don’t know who) would write ‘bunch of crap!!’ on a copy of a House resolution, and that the Department of State had tried so hard to prevent the public from knowing it had ever happened.”

Nineteen months before 9/11, the Resolution tabled by Democrat Pallone and one of his Republican colleagues was quite visionary. It is worth quoting some of their points:


* Whereas reliable reports from Western media sources have cited Pakistan as a base and training ground for terrorist groups, and the Pakistani Government’s demonstrated reluctance to halt the use of its soil for terrorist organisations;

* Whereas media reports have implicated Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence directly in terrorist activities, as well as the international drug trade;

* Whereas a large number of terrorist organisations, such as the Harkat-ul-Ansar (later re-named Harkat-ul-Mujahideen), Lashkar-e-Tayyeba, Hizbul Mujahideen, Hizbe Wahdat, Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Sipah-e-Mohammad Pakistan, and Al Badr are based and receive support from Pakistan;

* Whereas Pakistan has hindered US and international efforts to apprehend Osama bin Laden;

* Whereas in November 1979, according to the US Department of State, the Government of Pakistan allowed for the US Embassy and the American Cultural Center in Pakistan to be destroyed by fire, which led to the death of two Americans;

* Whereas Pakistan has acknowledged its ‘political and moral’ support of the separatist movement in Kashmir...

This is what someone in the US State Department called “crap”!

In the wake of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, improving relations with Islamabad became top priority for Washington, DC. According to CIA documents, Pakistani officials knew that Washington was “reconciled to a Pakistani nuclear weapons capability”.

Another briefing of National Security Archives points out: “China’s role as a leading provider of sensitive technology to Pakistan has repeatedly strained US-China relations, and has complicated efforts to expand US-China trade.” Business may have been more ‘complicated’ for the Americans, but the fact remains that China has been Pakistan’s main support to acquire the bomb.

Another declassified document admits that during the 1980s, “the US was criticised for providing massive levels of aid to Pakistan, its military ally, despite laws barring assistance to any country that imported certain technology related to nuclear weapons. President Ronald Reagan waived the legislation, arguing that cutting off aid would harm US national interests”.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby abhishek_sharma » 26 Jan 2011 12:44

The myth of the innovation nation

http://rothkopf.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/25/the_myth_of_the_innovation_nation


...

But there is one trap associated with this approach that the president and the country need to beware. It is the widely subscribed to notion ... often cited by politicians and op-ed writers ... that somehow there is something special, some gene in American DNA, that makes us uniquely capable when it comes to innovation. This idea is offered up like it is our ace-in-the-hole, our economic Get Out of Jail Free Card. Once we tap into this unique dimension of the U.S. character those Chinese and other Asian robots won't be able to hold a candle to us. They lack our creativity. They lack the United States system's special innovation ecology -- built around ideas like the degree to which we welcome failure and let the resulting Schumpeterian winds fill our sails propelling us onward to our next great triumph.

Now, there is certainly some truth that other societies are less welcoming to the errors which often are part of the innovative process (some have, for example, inadequate bankruptcy laws, others risk-averse cultures). And there is also truth to the idea that some societies promote conformity in creativity-suppressing ways. And of course there is considerable truth to the fact that America has been the home of some great innovation and remarkable stories of entrepreneurship that have made us a world leading economy for decades. But the reality is that the idea that the United States has somehow cornered the market on innovation is an overblown myth.

Take the most important inventions in history. Naturally many of them actually were created in other hotbeds of innovation that existed long before the United States -- whether it is the Chinese invention of gun powder or paper, or the Arabic invention of algebra or the printing press, progress somehow muddled through without the United States. If you take more modern innovations however, it is not exactly as though the United States has dominated when it came to the big ones.

For example, go to About.com and look up the top inventions researched by their readers. While it's as arbitrary as any other such list the top ten are: the telephone, the computer, television, the automobile, the cotton gin, the camera, the steam engine, the sewing machine, the light bulb, and penicillin. Of these, the phone was "invented" by Alexander Graham Bell in the United States, he was born and raised in Scotland, moved to the United States as an adult and died in Canada. And, of course, prior to his patenting of the phone, original work was done on its invention by a range of others including Innocenzo Manzetti in Italy, Charles Bourseul in France, and Johann Philipp Reis in Germany. The fathers of computing from Babbage to Turing lived in Britain. The first television was invented by a German, Paul Nipkow, and the term was coined by a Russian, Constantin Perskyi. The first self-propelled vehicle was invented by a Frenchman, Joseph Cugnot, and the first practical car by Karl Benz. The camera's origins were in France with Niepce and Daguerre. The first steam engine was developed by Thomas Savery in England and improved upon by Scotland's better-known James Watt. Sewing machine? Invented by French tailor Barthelemy Thimonnier. The light bulb? No, not Edison. Probably the first credit should go to Humphry Davy of England or Sir Joseph Wilson Swan, also of England. Penicillin? A Scots-born Englishman, Alexander Fleming.

Want to argue these? You say the car was popularized by Henry Ford or that Edison "perfected the light bulb" as Philo Farnsworth did the TV? Well, that's just the kind of imitation and replication, of incremental gain, that we often accuse "less" innovative nations of (see attacks on Japan circa 1990). Want to talk about other inventions? The European origins of the airplane? The Englishman who invented the World Wide Web? Where the cutting edge green technologies are currently being developed today?

The point is that big ideas do not happen exclusively or even predominantly in the United States. And while U.S. patents are, of course, primarily won by Americans...the point regarding the patents opens another hole in the Innovation Nation theory. The trick with innovation is not just having the idea, it's bringing it to market. This in turn means bringing it to scale. Well, for much of the past century the natural place to do both was the U.S. because of our manufacturing prowess and because we were the world's biggest market. Well, guess what? Manufacturing is now less than 20 percent of the U.S. economy and falling fast. We are losing some skill sets permanently. Biggest market? In terms of GDP, while we still have an edge, China is closing quickly and in terms of number of potential 21st Century consumers? We're not even close for many products. We're not even second or third. (India and the EU will finish ahead of us.) Investment capital? This key fuel for growth is flowing to new markets with ever greater velocity and many are homes to huge and growing pools of local money, as well.

It's these changes that are hinted at by the fact that the past decade is the first in U.S. history in which we have actually not only not created a net new job, we've lost a couple million. That fact should raise an important question in the minds of the president, Congress and all who truly want to enhance U.S. competitiveness: what happened? Was it the rise of new markets? A fall in our educational standards? The rise in the standards of others? Our failure to invest in infrastructure? The fact that as we are winding down our programs of research and development -- including, for example, the innovation driving space program -- others are starting up new ones?

The answers are likely to confound and frustrate many. The United States' only path to renewed growth and sustained leadership is via innovation and enhanced competitiveness. But we have no natural right to lead in these areas. We have no special "gene."

...


abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby abhishek_sharma » 26 Jan 2011 12:50

George Shultz Interview, Former US Secretary of State

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11433

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby abhishek_sharma » 26 Jan 2011 15:17

Menon-Clinton talks in Washington this week

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article1123691.ece

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby shukla » 26 Jan 2011 18:55


Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Johann » 27 Jan 2011 23:35

Something I came across last week.

This is from October 1984 (i.e. Reagan's first term), and declassified at the end of the Clinton administration as part of their big push towards less secrecy.

National Security Decision Directive 147, US Policy Toward India and Pakistan
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nsdd/nsdd-147.pdf

The sections followed by an s in parentheses (s) were those that were classified as secret at the time, while those with a u were unclassified. Note this is not from the DoD, or State Department, or the CIA, but rather the White House, and represented the basic outline of high level policy.

What is interesting is the kind of importance the Reagan administration attached to arms sales and technology transfer to win India over and undermine Soviet influence. This is a sea change from the LBJ, Nixon and Carter years (1964-1980), and of course led to cooperation on things like the LCA, etc in the Rajiv Gandhi era. This is the same Reagan policy that resurfaced in a big way in the Bush years. This is not surprising given the number of people who had ties to the Reagan administration.

Of course the big struggle between India and the US were the terms of such sales - what if any restrictions would be accepted on nuclear and missile programmes, etc (see the references to non-proliferation). For all the give and take its the Americans who have made much bigger adjustments on this issue.

The archive of Reagan Administration NSDDs can be found here, although there are a few that are still classified and unreleased
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nsdd/index.html

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby ramana » 27 Jan 2011 23:53

It was a result of the meeting between Mrs/ Gandhi and Reagan at Cancun, where they both realized that it was not in either interest for FSU to sit in Afghanistan.

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

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 28 Jan 2011 00:02

ramana wrote:It was a result of the meeting between Mrs/ Gandhi and Reagan at Cancun, where they both realized that it was not in either interest for FSU to sit in Afghanistan.

That is not the point.
The US allowed Pakistan to proliferate and wage jihad against India. They also started supporting the APHC at the same time when they allowed cooperation with India.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby JE Menon » 28 Jan 2011 15:44

From the perspective of American interest during the cold war, why should the US prevent Pakistan from waging jihad against India?

As for looking the other way when Pakistan proliferated, it tells us something about the US. Moreover, Pakistani proliferation has not really damaged India has it? Pakistan getting nukes for itself was a problem for us, but the US apparently also turned a blind eye to Pakistan spreading these technologies. Now in my opinion these activities by Pakistan have not harmed India, but rather the US. It has constrained the US, maybe even deterred it. Was China fighting there with the shadow sword? Maybe, but probably not, because it too is now, in effect, deterred by the Pakistani nuclear capability.

I find no rational underpinning for the idea that America was specifically out to get India to the extent that it was ready to let Pakistan proliferate to Libya. It was half-baked strategy, circumstantial and electoral expediencies, political realities in both the US and in India, as well as the obvious cold war background. It did not take long after the cold war for US-India to get talking seriously - in fact interesting discussions began in the early 1990s itself. And of course POK-II acted as a sort of dhaba rest before high-speed acceleration.

The US will likely never get as informally close at the higher levels to the Indian military establishment as it did with Pakistan. However, on a 360 degree relationship, India is already much closer than Pakistan ever was. That is a fundamental difference.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby ramana » 28 Jan 2011 20:45

Acharya wrote:
ramana wrote:It was a result of the meeting between Mrs/ Gandhi and Reagan at Cancun, where they both realized that it was not in either interest for FSU to sit in Afghanistan.

That is not the point.
The US allowed Pakistan to proliferate and wage jihad against India. They also started supporting the APHC at the same time when they allowed cooperation with India.



I was replying to Johann's post about the Reagan admn stance on arms sales to India. And is revelant to that.

You can make your point by itself.

It does not flow from my point.

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

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 28 Jan 2011 23:19

That is correct.
The geo political situation for India deteriorated after the afghan war and has reduced policy option for external policies for the govt. The threat scenario forced India to go nuclear which changed the global order. This may taken a different trajectory if the US engagement with Pakistan was of different nature.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby ramana » 29 Jan 2011 01:55

So far noting has appeared in the wiki pees to warrant the US informing GOI about potential damaging leaks! Either they have more to come or were indulging in strategic ally melodrama!

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Postby Cosmo_R » 29 Jan 2011 02:21

JE Menon wrote:From the perspective of American interest during the cold war, why should the US prevent Pakistan from waging jihad against India?

As for looking the other way when Pakistan proliferated, it tells us something about the US. Moreover, Pakistani proliferation has not really damaged India has it? Pakistan getting nukes for itself was a problem for us, but the ....


True enough and well put. Somewhere in the depths (shallow) of the paki mind, the proclaimed 'fear of Hindu India' is just a fig leaf for a broader global agenda. The Jihadi elements in the PA have probably crossed the Rubicon: their hatred of America now exceeds that for India. They feel they have defeated Britain (in their Raj days), the FSU and now the great Shaitan.

In short, what goes around, comes around. The loose nukes are too valuable to waste on India, they are destined to be used against the US and then China (even Cohen writes that China may be the big loser in crumbling Pakistan). Why stop at blackmailing India when the world is your oyster.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests