MRCA Discussion - October 2, 2010

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 15 Mar 2011 12:48

RSoami wrote:Nahi sirjee,
I disagree...Being friends with everyone is the wrong strategy...1962 must have taught us that...And I am saying that when talking of national interest...
By being friends with everyone we are making ourself vulnerable to be left in the lurch at crisis times by everyone and ....that when we are surrounded by two hostile neighbours....
I guess I am stretching my luck by typing all this in MRCA dhaaga..So i will stop..
By the way, would not mind seeing F16 being bought at all...
Regards
Have fun
Ta

Actually the strategy is to avoid antagonizing everybody around. China became very assertive as Obama took over, as a consequence, all the countries bordering it, rushed to US for help. One of the fallout of this assertiveness was the US Secretary of State wading into one of the so called China's core interest, South China Sea and Spartaly islands issue.

We have to be wiser than this. With two enemies at our borders, One in the west and the other in the east and north, we need not go and start stuttering around and adding to list of enemies or aggravated countries. And top it off we can avoid the mistakes of our enemies.

It is not a question of being week or being afraid, it is being wiser.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Mar 2011 12:51

Christopher Sidor wrote:
Actually the strategy is to avoid antagonizing everybody around.
It is not a question of being week or being afraid, it is being wiser.

Being aligned with US creates more enemies currently

kit · Post by **kit** » 15 Mar 2011 13:02

Acharya wrote:
RSoami wrote:.
...I am only saying that we should have the foresight to see that they are going to need us(against China and terrorism) for a long time and in this context buying an American plane is not that bad...Or in fact aligning with US of A is not a bad option....
We have this mentality of trying to be friends with everyone rather than aligning with a few according to changing strategic scenarios...
Regards
This the not the change India wants to align with deeply which is against Indian interest.
Just by being indifferent to American alignment India can influence the future of the global order. US is constrained not by lack of sufficient power but by lack of global cooperation. India is needed but they are unwilling to give what India needs
Mentality of being friends with everyone is the correct strategy in the new century. Indian interest is the most important.

The emerging powers cannot dictate the shape of the coming era, but they can block and complicate U.S. initiative. From its new position, the United States confronts not a rigid bloc of emerging powers, but complex and shifting coalitions of interest. The greatest risk lies, not in a single peer competitor, but in the erosion of cooperation on issues vital to U.S. interests and a stable order. U.S. power is indispensible for that purpose, but not sufficient.

When historians assess America's role in the world after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, they will judge the early failures in Afghanistan, and weigh the costs of the Iraq war against its eventual outcomes (still uncertain). They will balance the deepening of the strategic relationship with India against the deterioration, and eventual reset, of relations with Russia.

They will surely debate this question: did American overstretch amplify the impact of the rise of the "emerging powers?

The emerging powers cannot dictate the shape of the coming era, but they can block and complicate U.S. initiative.

U.S. power is indispensible for international order, but not sufficient. No longer the CEO of Free World Inc., the United States now holds a position akin to that of the largest minority shareholder in Global Order LLC.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... r?page=0,0

The Americans are definitely on retreat from Asia, their emphasis on long range power projection capabilities from the American soil itself is proof.However the geopolitical realities require 'real time' presence for American interests.They need a democratic power for their requirements, a power that *will* be amenable to american interests and policies,in effect a stooge.So how to make a stooge ?
India does seem too big to be a stooge.But if you can tie a elephant in the right places you can control even that.Economics aside the American thrust and heave for the MRCA deal is to secure the strategic leverage over India.
By the way an american plane is bound for the finals and the winning.No prizes for guessing that.The whole UPA cabinet looks 'west' nowadays.No pun intended.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Mar 2011 13:06

kit wrote:
By the way an american plane is bound for the finals and the winning.No prizes for guessing that.The whole UPA cabinet looks 'west' nowadays.No pun intended.

It may be psy ops

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 15 Mar 2011 13:35

Obama pushes for 'Jet deal'
TimesNow

The United States has begun to exert pressure on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in what coould be called open lobbying for F-16 fighter planes. TIMES NOW is in possession of copy of the letter sent by US President Barack Obama to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh exerting pressure for a fighter deal.

In a letter addressed to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh dated February 4, 2011 Obama stated that buying Amercan Boeing F/A-18 IN and Lockheed Martin F-6IN will improve strategic ties between India and US.

In his letter to Manmohan Singh, US President Barack Obama wrote, "In the spirit of this friendship I want to underscore the strategic importance the US attaches to the selection of a US proposal in India's medium multi roll combat aircraft competition."

Obama also stated , "Additionally you can be confident in probity and transparency of doing business with American companies.''

"The United States Government is offering India two of the most advanced multi mission combat aircraft in the world-the Boeing F/A-181N and the Lockheed Martin F-16IN. Let me assure you the US is a willing capable & relaible defence partner to India. High technology defence sales are increasingly a cornerstone of our strategic partnership. this typw of technology is only provided to our closest allies and partners."

"During my visit in November 2010, we committed to expand our relationship in new and ambitious areas, giving our peoples a vision of a strategic partnership that promises decades of close collaboration in the pursuit of the shared goals of prosperity and security. Through our recent initiatives, the United STates has demonstrated its commitment to India's rise and its global leadership role. (The selection of a US proposal for the MMRCA tender will strengthen our partnership, launch our defence cooperation on an ambitious and rewarding trajectory, and provide strategic continuity to our growing relationship.''

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 15 Mar 2011 15:26

shukla wrote:Obama pushes for 'Jet deal'
TimesNow

Time for MMS to show that he has some spine.

vardhank · Post by **vardhank** » 15 Mar 2011 15:45

kit wrote: By the way an american plane is bound for the finals and the winning.No prizes for guessing that.The whole UPA cabinet looks 'west' nowadays.No pun intended.

Two cents...
Do I think the F-18 or F-16 are the best planes for India? No. I'd prefer the EF or Rafale, and no, I, personally, would prefer not to depend on the USA.

BUT...
Do I think selecting an American plane would be a sell-out? (This seems to be the general feeling here.)
No.

My reason, trying to think from the government's point of view is that maybe no number of jets is as good a guarantee of security than having the USA on your side. It might be 'weaker' thinking, but it does have merit. Especially if you're not looking to attack anyone but simply to make sure no one bothers to attack you, it isn't too bad. I'd prefer self-reliance, but this also works. And all the more so if you're confident enough in your indigenous armaments/weapons systems industry (and your other deals) to not have to depend on the ones you buy from the USA. In that sense, it makes the MMRCA a credible sacrifice - $10 billion in a one-time payoff to get the playground's biggest bully on your side.

If you're sharp enough, you can play this card very well, reminding the USA that some 15,000 workers back there depend on us wanting their planes - nothing influences the State Department more than senators who might lose their seats in Congress.

jai · Post by **jai** » 15 Mar 2011 16:41

RSoami wrote:...They are keeping them afloat till they need them...Once US withdraws from Afghanistan I think this nautanki will stop and then US of A will need India to keep tab in things around here...
...I am only saying that we should have the foresight to see that they are going to need us(against China and terrorism) for a long time and in this context buying an American plane is not that bad...Or in fact aligning with US of A is not a bad option....
We have this mentality of trying to be friends with everyone rather than aligning with a few according to changing strategic scenarios...
Regards

I don't think so. Amrikhans have been supplying weapons to Pukis for the last 40 - 45 years - are they so blind that they can not see where these are being used ?

The same pukis are today peddling nukes all over the world, to people who may well turn them against Amrikhans - but has that come in the way of supplying more weapons to pukis ?

The khans will always be tied to pukis, now more so after the Afghanistan scenario as they also now know about the danger of pukis' biggest manufacturing and export industry - terrorism. They will have no option but to buy peace with the pukis by giving them more and more weapons - and will sell the same weapons to us at high prices to finance the free dole to pukis. The pukis also know that they have a winner on their hands in terms of their terrorists - it gives them the power to squeeze amrikhan balls when they want to get dole and weapons - they will now never give up this USP.

On the other hand, the amrikhans have used the taliban - created from their own money in pukistan against the soviets, so maybe they are ok with the jihadis as they know they can use their services against their enemies as in the past, and therefore are turning a blind eye.

There will never be a war between Amrikhans and the dragon - the trade surplus in the hands of the dragon will ensure that....nothing more than shadow boxing - they both know that...as it helps both of them to sell weapons - earlier it was the russians and amrikhans - if there is no "enemy" in the world - why would anyone want to spend billions in weapons ? So each sold billions worth weapons to their respective lobbies. Now that is over, you need another enemy - to continue business as usual, and dragon wants to sell their weapons too...so both may well be using the time tested formula to make money from the rest of the peace loving suckers.

Terror is a means to further weapons sales....makes you wonder sometimes - who are the real terrorists and who is the biggest threat to global peace.

MMS would in my humble opinion be a fool to fall for khans blackmail right now...its another matter all together if Monia has already determined otherwise..I am dreading the shameful day..we can just hope and pray for better sense to prevail.

So we need to stay friends with all including the khans, only buy from them what is real high tech and what we need, and stay the course on buying the best from where ever it is available. Our only real friendship should be with our own national interests. For the rest, friendships, strategic partnerships etc etc should clearly not depend on business with us....because if business volume was to dictate strategic partnerships - the dragon already far outscores us basis their trade volumes with Khan !!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Mar 2011 16:53

LM coercing Bharat Dynamics actually never should be considered as offsets. Lot of game playing as started. MRCA contract should include offsets within the scope of MRCA and its LRU/subcomponents.

higher power play begins. IAF could soon be sidelined on their real requirements for the future, while they may be satisfied for the current.

koti · Post by **koti** » 15 Mar 2011 17:59

IAF could soon be sidelined on their real requirements for the future, while they may be satisfied for the current.

Mind elaborating how this is Sir?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Mar 2011 18:45

ombaba's letter is an open invitation to poodledom
as such it is not to be taken lightly, but the question remains - is poodling what we want?

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 15 Mar 2011 19:10

Lalmohan wrote:ombaba's letter is an open invitation to poodledom
as such it is not to be taken lightly, but the question remains - is poodling what we want?

So looking to improve relations equal 'poodling'

Get real.

I find Indians' lack of faith in their own country disturbing.

India is a growing power with massive resources. After 280 MKI, 250 FGFA, AMCA and LCA Mk II, how is 126 MRCA going to make India anyone's poodle? MRCA is small potatoes.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Mar 2011 19:17

ah but george, india prizes her strategic independence much more than anything else. we see the UK, Aus, Japan and we wonder if that is the price we are willing to pay? sure they are rich, but have they kept their souls?

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 15 Mar 2011 19:31

Lalmohan wrote:ah but george, india prizes her strategic independence much more than anything else.

And my point is that you're crazy if you think 126 planes compromises your strategic independence. Wake up and realize the power of your own country.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Mar 2011 19:31

but it isnt just about 126 planes is it?

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 15 Mar 2011 19:32

Lalmohan wrote:but it isnt just about 126 planes is it?

Even if it grows to 200 or 250, that still doesn't change anything.

If you're talking about the other agreements, I'm confident that India will either negotiate an acceptable agreement or refuse to sign.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Mar 2011 19:33

well, i'd be for it if the US stops all military aid and sales to pakistan

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 15 Mar 2011 19:39

Lalmohan wrote:well, i'd be for it if the US stops all military aid and sales to pakistan

That's not the sort of policy change that happens overnight, but if you want to influence US positions, better relations are a key first step. It's a simple fact that the more important a country is to another, the more important its views are considered.

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 15 Mar 2011 19:51

I think it is safe to presume that the deal is already made with the us companies,maybe, when obmacame.. its just the scam season which theywant to get over now... there is really no pressure on spineless politicos to go for the best fighter for IAF ,.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 15 Mar 2011 20:09

What is being overlooked is the fact that to all but the terminally blind, a major confrontation is slowly developing that involves the pukes, china and a large chunk of Indian territory. It is going to define “India” in the next century and is as close to a sure thing as we can get. Both the US and India can see it clearly and hence the urgent purchases.

This is not the time to chant “be friends with everyone” or go swadeshi on weapons. It is the time to seriously protect our ass and have the confidence instead to state that the next war will be a two-front one and will not be fought in Indian territory. Witness the raising of new mountain attack formations (repeat—mountain ATTACK formations) that fit very well with GPS-aimed ultra-light howitzers, Apaches, Chinooks, C-17s and C-130Js and are a complete turnaround in strategy for India, IMO a very refreshing and timely one. Everyone who matters has got the message.

Being the largest user of the F/A-18, C-17, P8, Apache and Chinook outside the US and having massive clout and tie-ups with an aerospace behemoth like Boeing is very much in India's strategic interest in this scenario. It will bring us the kind of infra we need to develop our own single-crystal-blade tech along with a lot of other things. And no, there's no shame in that--even the Americans did not invent satellites, missiles and jets all by themselves.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Mar 2011 20:18

George Welch The dissatisfaction is not with the country but the leadership. So don't go on as if leadership is the country.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 15 Mar 2011 20:23

This "Obama Pushes for Jet Deal" letter is a fake --- No official correspondence from the WH would have so many mistakes. Note them in red...

shukla wrote:Obama pushes for 'Jet deal'
TimesNow

The United States has begun to exert pressure on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in what coould be called open lobbying for F-16 fighter planes. TIMES NOW is in possession of copy of the letter sent by US President Barack Obama to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh exerting pressure for a fighter deal.

In a letter addressed to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh dated February 4, 2011 Obama stated that buying Amercan Boeing F/A-18 IN and Lockheed Martin F-6IN will improve strategic ties between India and US.

In his letter to Manmohan Singh, US President Barack Obama wrote, "In the spirit of this friendship I want to underscore the strategic importance the US attaches to the selection of a US proposal in India's medium multi-roll combat aircraft competition."

Obama also stated , "Additionally you can be confident in probity and transparency of doing business with American companies.''

"The United States Government is offering India two of the most advanced multi-mission combat aircraft in the world-the Boeing F/A-181N and the Lockheed Martin F-16IN. Let me assure you the US is a willing, capable & relaible defence partner to India. (Should be "for" India.) High technology defence sales are increasingly a cornerstone of our strategic partnership. this typw of technology is only provided to our closest allies and partners."

"During my visit in November 2010, we committed to expand our relationship in new and ambitious areas, giving our peoples a vision of a strategic partnership that promises decades of close collaboration in the pursuit of the shared goals of prosperity and security. Through our recent initiatives, the United STates has demonstrated its commitment to India's rise and its global leadership role. (The selection of a US proposal for the MMRCA tender will strengthen our partnership, launch our defence cooperation on an ambitious and rewarding trajectory, and provide strategic continuity to our growing relationship.''

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 15 Mar 2011 20:35

..Now I have heard so many times that US of A wont and cant go to war with China that my ears ve started bleeding..The most common argument is that American economy is closely linked to China`s.
....Well, there was a lot of American money in Germany in the 30s..In fact German economy stood back on its feets after the first world war because Americans were investing heavily there....That did not stop the two from going to war...
...Now take into consideration the challenge of a different culture from a different society to western dominance...Why wouldnt Unkill resist it...
... The line of argument that Unkill wont fight China is ridiculously naive..
Regards

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Mar 2011 20:37

unkil will not fight china directly for the same reason that it did not fight the Soviet Union directly
i.e.
M.A.D.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 15 Mar 2011 20:42

...China is at least two decades behind Unkill as of today..It probably is only a step ahead of us...
Probably...
If China didnt know that Taiwan would ve been militarily recovered...
...Overestimation of Chinese abilities and criminal underestimation of our own ability!!!...bheri bad

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Mar 2011 20:51

GeorgeWelch wrote: ombaba's letter is an open invitation to poodledom
as such it is not to be taken lightly, but the question remains - is poodling what we want?

So looking to improve relations equal 'poodling' Get real.

I find Indians' lack of faith in their own country disturbing.

India is a growing power with massive resources. After 280 MKI, 250 FGFA, AMCA and LCA Mk II, how is 126 MRCA going to make India anyone's poodle? MRCA is small potatoes.

That's not the sort of policy change that happens overnight, but if you want to influence US positions, better relations are a key first step. It's a simple fact that the more important a country is to another, the more important its views are considered.

US policy to Pakistan in the last 50 years and in the sub continent has deeply affected an entire generation of Indians in the last 50 years. This will remain in the memory of Indians for a long time and they will work to make sure that Indian interest is important in any global change or new world order.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Mar 2011 21:09

Correct, it is the change in the leadership and constitutional amendment that is required for us to feel the power we have. And, it would not just be enough. The power we have is still largely on papers. FGFA, AMCA etc is way too much think of the future. MMRCA is more nearer than these super duper 5th gen or pseudo 5th gen a/c. The only genuine 5th gen is "the raptor".

Indian power projection should be subdued till we have AMCA done. Till then, we have to make sure, nothing weird happens from the leadership ba-booze party and sign up to unbelievable strategic choke point.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 15 Mar 2011 21:22

Lalmohan wrote:ombaba's letter is an open invitation to poodledom
as such it is not to be taken lightly, but the question remains - is poodling what we want?

If the government has to answer this question then, is that still a question? I think the right question is, what is the degree of poodling our government has decided on? Is the current level of poodling required. Is the trajectory towards more poodling or less or both?

Not all poodles are the same. But a poodle India did become. I can list many thing to document this fact, but it will be OT for the thread.

Maybe a separate thread to debate the eligibility of we being a poodle, needs to be debated. Maybe in some people's eyes, not until we have American bases, will it satisfy this requirement of being a poodle, but for some others like me, when every geo-political issue, goes through the US and as the US gets increasing strategic influence that affect Indian interests, I would have to reasonably conclude that India is a poodle and the trajectory is distinctly towards being more of the same.

But I do think that the question above is no longer a question for a Poodle we are.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 15 Mar 2011 21:36

ShauryaT wrote:I would have to reasonably conclude that India is a poodle

I would have to reasonably conclude that you have no idea what you're talking about. India looks after her own interests. To the degree that those interests coincide with others, great. But the message has always been clear: India first.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 15 Mar 2011 22:09

ShauryaT - examine the question - was India not a soviet poodle till its (soviet) collapse? The answer to that may help you understand the future. Russia is in no position to be a world power anymore. The Chinese are on the rise and will get Puki help (in addition to Myanmar and maybe to some extent even Sri Lanka). India needs alliances with like minded nations to counter China. Forget Pakistan, think China. The US-Paki relation is bound to fail in the long run. Pakis are and will remain Chini poodles.

It is in India's interest to engage the west.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Mar 2011 22:46

~~Did not our first PM beg for US help to protect us against forces from NE? We are sort of poodle since then.~~ The degree and variations are definitely debatable., and the definitions vary as well.

Now, total independence is not possible for us, and that day in the distant future may be plausible but not possible due to various reasons that goes out of topic here.

So, I guess the poodle argument must be dropped and work towards our defense requirements, including those that might choke us by agreements and logistics.

--
PS: ramana, sorry. I took that was true. striking it out.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Mar 2011 22:50

Ombaba letter means that the GOI wants to select something else hence the pressure. Or GOI has selected one of the planes and hence the letter to claim having influenced it for US doemstic audience. Recall the Admin is in campaign mode already.

Either way its bad for the GOI political point of view.

Further they bought C-17s already and hisab chuka diya. Its time to pay the rest of the NSG players.

SaiK,
Its wrong picture. Lets not base arguments on incorrect data. The reality is PRC has to go nuke if they attack India.

manum · Post by **manum** » 15 Mar 2011 23:22

ShauryaT wrote:
Lalmohan wrote:ombaba's letter is an open invitation to poodledom
as such it is not to be taken lightly, but the question remains - is poodling what we want?
If the government has to answer this question then, is that still a question? I think the right question is, what is the degree of poodling our government has decided on? Is the current level of poodling required. Is the trajectory towards more poodling or less or both?

Not all poodles are the same. But a poodle India did become. I can list many thing to document this fact, but it will be OT for the thread.

Maybe a separate thread to debate the eligibility of we being a poodle, needs to be debated. Maybe in some people's eyes, not until we have American bases, will it satisfy this requirement of being a poodle, but for some others like me, when every geo-political issue, goes through the US and as the US gets increasing strategic influence that affect Indian interests, I would have to reasonably conclude that India is a poodle and the trajectory is distinctly towards being more of the same.

But I do think that the question above is no longer a question for a Poodle we are.

Aah...in a complex society like us, obviously you can always reach a summation of "India is a poodle" and get away with it. we are equally a poodle and not...if you think its as easy being an idealistic and survive (while being fundamentally huge with hunger to fill the gaps), without give and take, its great...

but we are too big to be standing stationery at one place...fitting in one kind of theory of yours...its on you to take half full or half empty glass...I wonder some people should be permanently kept in FAQ section as example.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 16 Mar 2011 01:28

The growing strategic partnership between India and the US is a development that has a sound underlying basis. The two states are natural allies. The Cold War created some peculiar dynamics - democratic US aligned with terrorist Pakistan, democratic India aligned with totalitarian USSR, etc. - but these dynamics are being gradually undone and a partnership of pluralistic free-market oriented democracies is increasingly the order of the day. India and the US will be two of the leading members of the pluralistic democratic club of nations, and face common challenges e.g. islamic terrorism, Chinese imperialism, a genuine response to the climate change challenge, etc. The currents of history will draw our nations closer and closer in the 21st century.

Now, what has all of the above got to do with an acquisition of jet fighters?

Whether we acquire US aircraft or not, the partnership between India and the US will continue to grow stronger. After all, what is the alternative?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Mar 2011 02:39

You are sounding like ABV!

US doesn't need allies. Its needs subservient minions to do their bidding and who get cowed! COW(Coalition of willing) that way the fig leaf of international consensus is there to avoid wrath.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 16 Mar 2011 03:43

Think 2030 or 2040, with Chinese GDP approaching or exceeding US GDP, significant Chinese technological capabilities, and significantly expanded Chinese military power. If this China is as prickly and malign as today's China, not just the US, but the whole world will need India: a rich, strong, and benevolent India. The strategic partnership is insurance.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Mar 2011 04:44

US is way too powerful to either cow (as ramana puts it) us down or make us cower under our ragged dhotis.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 16 Mar 2011 04:45

Unkil just wants to hitch up with the No. 1 long-term superpower now while the price is low. India is expected to overtake china sometime in the next 3-4 decades because of simple demographics.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Mar 2011 04:51

kidding right? dunno what dragon is planning eh~ show me the money!

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 16 Mar 2011 12:24

eklavya wrote:The growing strategic partnership between India and the US is a development that has a sound underlying basis. The two states are natural allies. The Cold War created some peculiar dynamics - democratic US aligned with terrorist Pakistan, democratic India aligned with totalitarian USSR, etc. - but these dynamics are being gradually undone and a partnership of pluralistic free-market oriented democracies is increasingly the order of the day. India and the US will be two of the leading members of the pluralistic democratic club of nations, and face common challenges e.g. islamic terrorism, Chinese imperialism, a genuine response to the climate change challenge, etc. The currents of history will draw our nations closer and closer in the 21st century.

Now, what has all of the above got to do with an acquisition of jet fighters?

Whether we acquire US aircraft or not, the partnership between India and the US will continue to grow stronger. After all, what is the alternative?

So what is the use of ties being natural if it cannot correct the situation as above... I feel natural is not defined by way of governing or there is no reason for Sino Soviet split or Sino -America honeymoon... It is based on similar interests and respect for each other which exceed the temptation of making the smaller partner, a pawn...