India-US Strategic News and Discussion

[abhischekcc]

>>The policy is supposed to keep the indian economy domestic and pure domestic.

You are completely off the mark - the Delhi Mumbai Industrial corridor is primarily designed to serve the manufacturing requirements of Japan's exports. They do not have the population to sustain their exports, and China is too hard headed to listen to outsiders any more.

For now, just let us enjoy the benefits coming in. After we reach midle level income level, then we can think of doing other things.

[Singha]

indeed. there is no point in being poor and truculent - like north korea or pakistan. we need massive infusions of technology and manufacturing chain, which china has enjoyed and continues to enjoy.

[pgbhat]

MKB uvaacha

Look eastward at Sonar Bangla for the answer. The great game has reached Bangladesh. ConocoPhilips is already exploring oil reserves in the Bay of Bengal. The maritime boundary dispute between India and Bangladesh might be resolved in 2014 if the international court gives the verdict, as seems likely.
There are huge business opportunities opening up for Big OIl and the American companies in Bangladesh and Myanmar and their vast economic zones in the Bay of Bengal now that the maritime boundary dispute between the two countries has been resolved. Kolkatta is the gateway that connects the Indian market with the El Dorado.
To be sure, Mamata has a crucial role to play in the US geostrategy, which also happens to be a crucial template of Washington’s ‘containment’ strategy toward China. That is, provided she graduates from being a mofussil politician and mercurial street fighter and intellectually and politically develops what we Indians usually call a ‘vision’. This is a bit like ‘educating Rita’. Clinton is going to give Mamata the first lessons.
It is in the US’ interests that this thorn in the flesh of India-Bangladesh relations is clinically removed and immobilized once and for all. Before Clinton addresses the problem on Sunday, it seems External Affairs Minister S.M.Krishna has given Mamata a bit of tutoring on how the world functions. There is great convergence of interests between Clinton and Krishna in ensuring that Mamata becomes erudite at the earliest opportunity.
The US-Indian axis is working overtime to keep China out of Bay of Bengal. Now, Dhaka happens to be a crucial cog in the wheel of the US-Indian regional strategy. Clinton is dropping by over the weekend in Dhaka to cement a strategic partnership with Bangladesh. It is an urgent necessity that Dhaka should be incentivized to get over its allergy toward India.

[nvishal]

Indian market has a void that needs filling. It is primarily a domestic market but it still lacks demand or purchasing power to fuel consumerism.

This void(in retail) is vulnerable and will eventually be filled by either indians or non-indians. If the later gets an opportunity, they will also gain a leverage that will be strong enough to influence indias decision making capabilities.

There is no need to open the retail markets to non-indians then why is GoI doing it? Why has hilary herself arrived in kolkatta to lobby for FDI with a state minister? The reason could be that this(FDI) is one of the strings as part of a past agreement between GoI and the US.

Mamata, the left, AIADMK and the BJP are already against FDI in retail. With mamatas help the UPA could pass it.

[harbans]

I fail to understand the mindset of people who oppose FDI in retail say. What exactly is the fear? 40% of your vegetables get wasted because investment into cold storage does not provide returns. What mindset is afraid of competition. Why would a retail store stock a foreign cricket bat over a better quality Indian one for example. How do we give our foreign policy control up by opening up a sector where all can compete fairly. What lobbies are working behind opening up legitimate investments in India. So is China's foreign policy less independent considering they have opened up retail FDI a decade and more ago?

[gakakkad]

^both those states are US allies and will walk as per the masters tune.

The policy is supposed to keep the indian economy domestic and pure domestic. If we enter into economic arrangements with other states{a X buys and Y sells setup} then we will essentially be outsourcing a part of our foreign policy. It has to be avoided.

how come hoondai and japanese companies beat the living daylights out of amreeki car manufacturers ?

[Amber G.]

Contrast of two headlines . (First head line is from Tehran times)
India rebuffs Clinton’s call for reduction in oil imports from Iran

and
Hillary Clinton lauds India for reducing dependence on Iranian oil

[shyamd]

Latest from HC talks is that frank discussions took place with MMS. Sec Clinton told MMS that they know ISI is behind Haqqani and they think Haqqani is now more powerful than the Taleban itself now.

[SaiK]

I fail to understand the mindset of people ..

you have already seen the answer.. it is the "mindset"! just don't try to understand it.

[shyamd]

Found an article talking about it:

PM, Hillary share Pak terror concerns

PM Manmohan Singh and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, at the formers residence in New Delhi. (PTI Photo)
Cementing India-US ties further, visiting US secretary of state Hillary Clinton focused on the role of Pakistan-based terror groups in attacks in Afghanistan and India.
She met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and national security adviser Shivshankar Menon on Monday evening.

Both sideswere quite sceptical on whether Pakistan was doing enough to stamp out terror groups targeting its neighbours. She also revealed that the Jalaluddin-Sirajuddin Haqqani network was a bigger threat than the Taliban in Kabul.

Government sources told HT that Clinton discussed global issues, including Pakistan terrorism, Iran, Afghanistan and China. The meetings were marked by candid exchange of views and sharing of information about the regional environment. Clinton will meet external affairs minister SM Krishna on Tuesday before flying back to Washington.

It is understood that the Indian leadership explained its fresh initiative to engage with Pakistan in a bilateral dialogue to resolve outstanding disputes. However, the leadership remains unsure whether Islamabad can deliver on the 26/11 investigations and terrorism fronts.

Krishna is expected to take up the need to rein in the Lashkar-e-Taiba and its chief patron Hafiz Saeed in his meeting on Tuesday. Cutting out any confusion, Clinton went on record in Kolkata that it was she who had authorised the $10 million bounty on 26/11 main accused Saeed.

During the discussion on Afghanistan, the two sides were concerned about the role played by the Haqqani network, which has been responsible for a string of brazen attacks and suicide bombings in Kabul. The netwok is backed by Pakistani's ISI and has links with LeT's Saeed.

Iran also came up for discussion, with the Indian leadership and the visiting dignitary conveying their points of view without imposing any diktats on each other.

[Prem]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 09538.html
U.S. Envoy to Assess India Compliance on Iran Oil

'NEW DELHI—A U.S. special energy envoy, Carlos Pascual, will visit India next week to assess Indian oil refineries' capabilities to shift crude imports from Iran to other suppliers, an evaluation that will help determine what New Delhi needs to do to head off U.S. sanctions that come into effect next month.After a three-day India visit that included meetings with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and several other top officials, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she was encouraged by the steps India has already taken to reduce Iran imports. But she pressed Indian officials to do more, saying significant .The U.S. is calling on several countries, including India, Turkey, China and South Korea, to substantially reduce purchases of Iranian oil by June 28 or face sanctions on financial institutions that do business with Iran's central bank. The U.S. is pushing Iraq and Saudi Arabia as alternative suppliers. Japan and the European Union have already taken steps to dramatically rein in Iranian oil imports, earning waivers from possible U.S. sanctions.
Pressure from international sanctions helped bring Iran back to the negotiating table last month in Istanbul, Mrs. Clinton said, and India can help sustain that pressureMr. Krishna said India is reliant on Middle Eastern oil imports to meet its surging demand for fuel—and said India also has deep cultural ties in the region. This week India is hosting a business delegation from Iran."Iran is a key country for our energy needs," Mr. Krishna said. India, he added, would base its decisions on "commercial, financial and technical considerations."
That sets up potentially tense discussions next week when Mr. Pascual, a senior State Department official, arrives to survey the Indian energy scene. Since Washington has thus far been vague about how much individual countries need to reduce imports to avoid sanctions, Mr. Pascual's efforts will help determine what specific Indian facilities must do, a U.S. official said.One issue for India is that some of its refineries are designed to handle the kind of heavy crude Iran supplies and would need to be converted to process alternative varieties of crude, the official said. S.M. Krishana and Hillary Clinton before their meeting in New Delhi, Tuesday.In a news conference, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Krishna spoke positively about growing U.S.-India trade, which is expected to surpass $100 billion this year, as well as expanded military and counter-terrorism cooperation. ..

[svinayak]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 09538.html
U.S. Envoy to Assess India Compliance on Iran Oil

'NEW DELHI—A U.S. special energy envoy, Carlos Pascual, will visit India next week to assess Indian oil refineries' capabilities to shift crude imports from Iran to other suppliers, an evaluation that will help determine what New Delhi needs to do to head off U.S. sanctions that come into effect next month.After a three-day India visit that included meetings with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and several other top officials, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she was encouraged by the steps India has already taken to reduce Iran imports. But she pressed Indian officials to do more, saying significant .The U.S. is calling on several countries, including India, Turkey, China and South Korea, to substantially reduce purchases of Iranian oil by June 28 or face sanctions on financial institutions that do business with Iran's central bank. The U.S. is pushing Iraq and Saudi Arabia as alternative suppliers. Japan and the European Union have already taken steps to dramatically rein in Iranian oil imports, earning waivers from possible U.S. sanctions.
Pressure from international sanctions helped bring Iran back to the negotiating table last month in Istanbul, Mrs. Clinton said, and India can help sustain that pressureMr. Krishna said India is reliant on Middle Eastern oil imports to meet its surging demand for fuel—and said India also has deep cultural ties in the region. This week India is hosting a business delegation from Iran."Iran is a key country for our energy needs," Mr. Krishna said. India, he added, would base its decisions on "commercial, financial and technical considerations."
That sets up potentially tense discussions next week when Mr. Pascual, a senior State Department official, arrives to survey the Indian energy scene. Since Washington has thus far been vague about how much individual countries need to reduce imports to avoid sanctions, Mr. Pascual's efforts will help determine what specific Indian facilities must do, a U.S. official said.One issue for India is that some of its refineries are designed to handle the kind of heavy crude Iran supplies and would need to be converted to process alternative varieties of crude, the official said. S.M. Krishana and Hillary Clinton before their meeting in New Delhi, Tuesday.In a news conference, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Krishna spoke positively about growing U.S.-India trade, which is expected to surpass $100 billion this year, as well as expanded military and counter-terrorism cooperation. ..

Isnt this the job of the Indian government to make sure all its refineries are supplied with crude from the world suppliers and create hedge against any disruptions in oil supply. Why is this outsourced to a foreign country.

[Prem]

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Keep-Cal ... o/(page)/2

Few expect India to turn off the spigots right away. Replacing $11 billion worth of Iranian oil each year isn’t easy. But for a variety of other reasons, including internal politics, some analysts say that India will be either unwilling or unable to deliver on Clinton’s request.“It’s entirely reasonable to request this, but the question is; will they be able to pull it off?” says Sum it Gangu ly, a professor of political science and Rabindranath Tagore Chair of Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University. “It comes down to coalition politics and a small number of people who still want to unfurl the banner of non-alignment.”
Matters are not made easier by the fact that the current government of India is a coalition propped up by smaller left-wing parties, adds Mr. Gangu ly, none of whom are particularly fond of the United States or its push for open and free markets.“India thus far has failed to come up with an answer to the question of what they want from the US, and what kind of relationship they want to have with the United States,” says Gangu ly. “I fear that some people in the US are starting to ask, is this really worth it.”

Even when it comes to Iranian oil, India and the US don’t need to agree to disagree. India simply hasn’t made up its mind, and some question whether India even has the option to consider a cutoff.A 56-member delegation of the Iranian Chamber of Commerce is also present in New Delhi to remind the Indian government that, as the chairman of the Iranian delegation said, “you need oil and we need to sell.”Again, in worse times, America might see this as Indian two-faced diplomacy. But the overall state of US-Indian relations is positive. The question is whether Clinton has the kind of leverage to get India to do more than what it is already willing to do, which in the case of Iranian oil, isn’t much.

[Raja Bose]

The dear Prof. Ganguly needs to ask his masters about their arming of Pakistan and the fact that:

“US thus far has failed to come up with an answer to the question of what they want from India, and what kind of relationship they want to have with India,” says Gangu ly. “I fear that some people in the India are starting to ask, is this really worth it.”

[ramana]

The recieved wisdom is that a nuclear armed Iran will be threat to India due to the 'n+1' country syndrome. The wisdom being the acquisition of nukes by 'n+1' country reduces the operating space for the 'n' countries which really are the P-5.

India should revist this axiom considering it is the 6th country which is status quo, has no Imperial ideas, no 'Out of Area' ops now or in future and is surrounded with two nuke armed neighbors and has two others in proximity to it (FSU and US in the waters). To make matters worse the US tries to depict India as a trouble maker while molly coddling the TSP and backing up PRC.

Iran is not surviving by Inddian oil purchases. While India needs Iranian oil to run the daily life. Removing Iranian oil for the market will drive up the price of oil and otehr oil is controlled by KSA and others who are under defacto US pawns.

In such circumustances is Iranian acquisiton of nukes such a bad thing for India? Its already threatened by so many and constantly big undermined by West.
So what benefits will India get that it should not have got?

[Prem]

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/05/39819.php
Two can play cynical geo-political games

I wrote here about how the Obama administration undid much of the good work performed by the Clinton and Bush administrations to create a solid partnership between the U.S. and India. Obama tilted away from India and towards Pakistan, which he hoped would become a reliable ally in the struggle against the Taliban.
As a symbolic part of this re-ordering, Hillary Clinton skipped India in her initial tour of Asia. In light of the administration’s overall stance on South Asia, it was impossible for India to miss the significance of Clinton’s gesture. This week, however, Ms. Clinton made a stop in India. Her mission was to persuade the government to sign on to international sanctions against Iran. India relies on Iran for 12 percent of its oil, and so far has been unwilling to go along with the sanctions. I hope that India cooperates in the international effort against Iran. But its reluctance to throw in with the U.S. is understandable at several levels. India has problems with its neighbors – Pakistan, China, and, presumably, Afghanistan once the Obama causes the U.S. to bail out. It is natural, therefore, that India would want decent relations with Iran, given India’s need for oil and since Iran is likely to acquire nuclear weapons whether India joins the boycott or not.Having tilted towards India’s arch-adversary Pakistan in order to advance our interests in Afghanistan, the U.S. shouldn’t be surprised if India tilts away from us in order to advance what it takes to be its regional security and economic interests.

( Czeck the Remarks)

[shyamd]

The problem with the Indo US relationship is that it is still top driven. The top are quite pro India but SD walla's are still pro TSP. This needs change. Pentagon sees TSP as an adversary. We will have to navigate through this and have more direct links with the top to get things done.

[shyamd]

Aligned on non-proliferation but energy ties guided by national interests, PM tells Hillary

Sandeep Dikshit
Share · print · T+
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is on a visit to India, called on UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi in New Delhi on Monday.— PHOTO: AFP
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is on a visit to India, called on UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi in New Delhi on Monday.— PHOTO: AFP

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Monday told U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that India was aligned with the international community on checking the spread of nuclear weapons but would be guided by its national interests on securing its energy supplies.

India's stand on non-proliferation and approach to importing oil was reiterated during an 80-minute unstructured meeting between Ms. Clinton and Dr. Singh that was described by informed sources as “cordial'' during which “a lot of issues were discussed.''

The meeting preceded an address by Ms. Clinton in Kolkata where she dwelt on specific U.S. expectations from India in dealing with the Iranian nuclear issue. “The reason why India, China and Japan and European countries are being asked to lower their supplies is to keep the pressure on Iran,” she said while commending Japan for doing so despite last year's tsunami and a shutdown of its nuclear programme.

But during her interaction with Dr. Singh, Ms. Clinton dwelt on the “broader regional and global implications'' if the U.S. pressure through sanctions on Iran did not force it to completely open up its nuclear programme for inspections. The Indian delegation was in a listening mode while Ms. Clinton spoke of attempts by the P5 + 1 grouping to engage with Iran and apprehensions among the neighbours about its recalcitrant behaviour.

The meeting did not see Ms. Clinton seeking a further reduction in Indian purchase of Iranian oil and this task is likely to be entrusted to U.S. Special Envoy for global energy issues Carlos Pasqat, who will visit Delhi later this month during a swing through the region to convince countries such as India that import a substantial quantity of oil from Iran.

The two leaders also discussed how both nations could contribute to sustaining Afghanistan after the 2014 withdrawal of western forces.

Ms. Clinton also told the Prime Minister about last week's U.S.-China strategic dialogue.

Under the bilateral rubric, India mentioned the seven indigenously designed nuclear plants it was putting up and reiterated its commitment to providing civil nuclear business to U.S. companies.

In Kolkata, Ms. Clinton expressed her reservations about the limited nuclear liability legislation: “We have made it clear that under the legislation that was passed it will be difficult for U.S. companies to participate because we have private companies that are in the market place whereas other nuclear companies are backed up by their governments.''

But according to officials privy to the meeting and who will be at delegation-level talks on Tuesday, Westinghouse is moving ahead with the project to set up six reactors in Gujarat and a team had visited the site.

They intend going full steam ahead once legislation and rules relating to the liability on suppliers in case of an accident go through the no-objection process in Parliament.

[ramana]

MKB uvaacha

Look eastward at Sonar Bangla for the answer. The great game has reached Bangladesh. ConocoPhilips is already exploring oil reserves in the Bay of Bengal. The maritime boundary dispute between India and Bangladesh might be resolved in 2014 if the international court gives the verdict, as seems likely.
There are huge business opportunities opening up for Big OIl and the American companies in Bangladesh and Myanmar and their vast economic zones in the Bay of Bengal now that the maritime boundary dispute between the two countries has been resolved. Kolkatta is the gateway that connects the Indian market with the El Dorado.
To be sure, Mamata has a crucial role to play in the US geostrategy, which also happens to be a crucial template of Washington’s ‘containment’ strategy toward China. That is, provided she graduates from being a mofussil politician and mercurial street fighter and intellectually and politically develops what we Indians usually call a ‘vision’. This is a bit like ‘educating Rita’. Clinton is going to give Mamata the first lessons.
It is in the US’ interests that this thorn in the flesh of India-Bangladesh relations is clinically removed and immobilized once and for all. Before Clinton addresses the problem on Sunday, it seems External Affairs Minister S.M.Krishna has given Mamata a bit of tutoring on how the world functions. There is great convergence of interests between Clinton and Krishna in ensuring that Mamata becomes erudite at the earliest opportunity.
The US-Indian axis is working overtime to keep China out of Bay of Bengal. Now, Dhaka happens to be a crucial cog in the wheel of the US-Indian regional strategy. Clinton is dropping by over the weekend in Dhaka to cement a strategic partnership with Bangladesh. It is an urgent necessity that Dhaka should be incentivized to get over its allergy toward India.

The biggest waste in the GOI is the MEA and its retired officials who have never bothered to educate Indians about geostrategy, geo-economics or strartegy for India in the new world. All they write is rehashed political and bureacratice polemics and confuse the readers.


For instance MKB writes like Mamta Didi is not an Indian. He thinks she needs to be hectored by Amercian Evita.


JLN's biggest failure was in not creating a nationalist foreign service for India. It got filled with self deluded half commies like himslef.

[UBanerjee]

^both those states are US allies and will walk as per the masters tune.

The policy is supposed to keep the indian economy domestic and pure domestic. If we enter into economic arrangements with other states{a X buys and Y sells setup} then we will essentially be outsourcing a part of our foreign policy. It has to be avoided.

This is one of the most foolish and short-sighted things I've ever read proposed seriously.

[shyamd]

Teesta: US sees China angle, for early resolution

Jayanth Jacob, Hindustan Times
New Delhi, May 07, 2012

India and Bangladesh on Monday stressed working on a political consensus to resolve the Teesta issue that also holds hostage the transit arrangements between the two countries. And for the obvious strategic reason, the visiting US secretary of state Hillary Clinton joined the issue as the Americans sense the transit issues being hostage to water-sharing pact coming in the way of South Asia getting an alternative route to South East Asia, which bypasses China.

The issue came up for review between external affairs minister SM Krishna and his Bangladesh counterpart Dipu Moni in New Delhi on Monday.


"I have assured Moni that India remains committed to an early solution on Teesta issue," Krishna said.

Meanwhile, in Kolkata, Clinton spoke of her interest in Teesta issue.

Before meeting west Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee, Clinton said: "These are certainly on the list of things I will want to talk about."

Stating the US had no interest in how the water-sharing pact was arrived at, she said it wanted the issue to be amicably resolved as "these will become hot issues, literally hot issues in the future."

"Water is an issue that will increasingly become contentious… The alternative will be perhaps a conflict, which will lead to dislocation, refugee problems and destabilisation that we are seeing in places in North Africa. We have to work together," she said.

But with the Myanmar opening up, the US sees a golden opportunity in connecting the South Asia with South East Asia bypassing China. And as long as Teesta pact is not signed the transit agreement between New Delhi and Dhaka will not come through.

In other words connecting, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Thailand or even up to Vietnam is can have run into the water pact tussle.

[ramana]

Aligned on non-proliferation but energy ties guided by national interests, PM tells Hillary

Sandeep Dikshit
Share · print · T+
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is on a visit to India, called on UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi in New Delhi on Monday.— PHOTO: AFP
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is on a visit to India, called on UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi in New Delhi on Monday.— PHOTO: AFP

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Monday told U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that India was aligned with the international community on checking the spread of nuclear weapons but would be guided by its national interests on securing its energy supplies.

India's stand on non-proliferation and approach to importing oil was reiterated during an 80-minute unstructured meeting between Ms. Clinton and Dr. Singh that was described by informed sources as “cordial'' during which “a lot of issues were discussed.''

The meeting preceded an address by Ms. Clinton in Kolkata where she dwelt on specific U.S. expectations from India in dealing with the Iranian nuclear issue. “The reason why India, China and Japan and European countries are being asked to lower their supplies is to keep the pressure on Iran,” she said while commending Japan for doing so despite last year's tsunami and a shutdown of its nuclear programme.


{What benefit does India get out of this? What national interests are served by this toeing the US line? While at it, its US that did not sanction PRC on the ring magnets case in 1995 under HC's husband's watch. They did not control the TSP acquiring nukes from PRC, missiles from North Korea Their officials gave lies as Congressional testimony in the aftermath of the Ghauri test in 1998.
Recently the US sheltered Paki terrroists Daivd headley who had an active role in enabling the 26./11 terrorist attack on Mumbai. US still is the biggest hold out to accomodate India in the UNSC by itself and thru its proxies.}

But during her interaction with Dr. Singh, Ms. Clinton dwelt on the “broader regional and global implications'' if the U.S. pressure through sanctions on Iran did not force it to completely open up its nuclear programme for inspections. The Indian delegation was in a listening mode while Ms. Clinton spoke of attempts by the P5 + 1 grouping to engage with Iran and apprehensions among the neighbours about its recalcitrant behaviour.

The meeting did not see Ms. Clinton seeking a further reduction in Indian purchase of Iranian oil and this task is likely to be entrusted to U.S. Special Envoy for global energy issues Carlos Pasqat, who will visit Delhi later this month during a swing through the region to convince countries such as India that import a substantial quantity of oil from Iran.

The two leaders also discussed how both nations could contribute to sustaining Afghanistan after the 2014 withdrawal of western forces.

Ms. Clinton also told the Prime Minister about last week's U.S.-China strategic dialogue.

Under the bilateral rubric, India mentioned the seven indigenously designed nuclear plants it was putting up and reiterated its commitment to providing civil nuclear business to U.S. companies.

In Kolkata, Ms. Clinton expressed her reservations about the limited nuclear liability legislation: “We have made it clear that under the legislation that was passed it will be difficult for U.S. companies to participate because we have private companies that are in the market place whereas other nuclear companies are backed up by their governments.''

Then form a govt investment vehicle to to channel the US program !}


But according to officials privy to the meeting and who will be at delegation-level talks on Tuesday, Westinghouse is moving ahead with the project to set up six reactors in Gujarat and a team had visited the site.

They intend going full steam ahead once legislation and rules relating to the liability on suppliers in case of an accident go through the no-objection process in Parliament.

[svinayak]

The biggest waste in the GOI is the MEA and its retired officials who have never bothered to educate Indians about geostrategy, geo-economics or strartegy for India in the new world. All they write is rehashed political and bureacratice polemics and confuse the readers.


For instance MKB writes like Mamta Didi is not an Indian. He thinks she needs to be hectored by Amercian Evita.


JLN's biggest failure was in not creating a nationalist foreign service for India. It got filled with self deluded half commies like himslef.

Do you see any hope in the future regarding right vision

[ramana]

You need parallel articulation of the vision and educate the rest of the people so they understand. No pointin crying over lost opportunities and wasted efforts.

[SaiK]

There should be an alternative approach for oil requirement.. what ever happened Iraq's 50% oil share, and where is it going? I thought the war is long over.

Natural gas is something to be considered for variety of applications and uses... that can be obtained from Indian oceans.

[ramana]

it could be non tariff barrier to slow down Indian economy to match the rest of the world.

[ramana]

An alert member thinks the HC visit to MB in Kolkata could be due to forth fron machniations. Recall before the 2009 elections the acting US envoy went to Hyderabad to visit Chiranjeevi and everyone wondered why visit that joker? It was to ensure that TDP doesn't get elected and then support NDA. Its another thing that guy later joined INC.
Same way this could be to ensure MB is mollycoddled and investment assured to not support any NDA front.
So there could be other reasons than woman to woman ties between two Evitas.

[Prem]

Asia: The Grand Design
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... nd-design/

The image was a triumph for India: Secretary Hillary Clinton standing on stage next to her counterpart, Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna, chastising Pakistan for not doing enough to stop terrorists operating within its borders, and not arresting the mastermind of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, Hafiz Saeed, who walks free in Pakistan despite a US price of $10 million on his head.Secretary Clinton’s willingness to take this very public stand probably, Via Meadia suspects, sweetened the rest of Clinton’s message: that India should do more to cut economic ties with Iran. Friends help friends.The burgeoning relationship with India is one of the many pieces of the George W. Bush foreign policy agenda that continue to flourish in the Obama years. Under Bush, with Democratic support, the US accepted India’s nuclear program (a shift that infuriates Pakistanis to this day). President Obama’s first state dinner was in honor of India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. That Secretary Clinton went to both China and India on her tour of Asia is also the kind of signal that diplomats have no trouble reading: for the US, relations with Asia’s two rising giants are part of an overall regional strategy.After Secretary Clinton’s most recent trip to Asia began tumultuously in China, where the Americans and Chinese managed to work together to avoid a crisis (though the Chen Guangcheng story develops day by day), Clinton moved to Bangladesh, where she promoted microfinancing and the role of women in development. From there it was on to the Indian state of West Bengal, where she met Chief Minister (Ms.) Mamata Banerjee to promote foreign investment in one of India’s most important states, and then to New Delhi, where she stood on stage to drive home the close relationship between Washington and Asia’s most powerful democracy.

The deepening US-India relationship is a key piece in a very elaborate program. Ever since President Obama announced a “pivot” to Asia and Secretary Clinton declared this to be “America’s Pacific Century,” Washington’s Asia policy has been firing on all cylinders. Security treaties with the Philippines, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan and Australia have been expanded. Australia agreed to station US Marines in Darwin, and to consider plans to develop a base for unmanned drones on Australian territory deep in the Indian Ocean. Japan’s Prime Minister recently visited in Washington to discuss new forms of regional cooperation and the dispersal of thousands of American troops from bases in Japan to elsewhere in the Pacific. US forces have participated in war games with the Philippines and offered to mediate territorial disputes between China and its neighbors; American diplomats have arranged for Chinese human rights hero Chen Guangcheng to study in the United States, visited previously off-limits Myanmar, and built new partnerships with Indonesia, India, Malaysia and numerous other countries across Asia.

This is grand strategy in action and despite the inevitable partisan sniping it is likely that a Romney administration would mostly build on what the Obamans have done, just as the Obamans stand on the shoulders of Bush.

Although American foreign policy is already deep into its Asian century, American media coverage remains centered on the Atlantic. (At this moment this is partly because it is so hard to tear one’s eyes away from the immense, slow motion train wreck taking place in the EU.) But Americans generally need to learn more about the new focus of our foreign policy; for one thing, they need to know just how deeply our military is engaged in the protection of the Asian security order. From Japan to Mongolia to Australia, American military personnel are present on bases run solely by the US or in collaboration with the host country, and military advisers are also attached to American diplomatic missions. Add those to the various island chains in the Pacific from Hawaii east to places like Guam and Samoa, and you can see a network of power and alliances that American presidents, secretaries of state and strategic thinkers have been working on since George Washington took the oath of office.As Asia becomes more important in the world, America’s links with and presence in Asia continue to grow

( Lukk at the Map)

[Prem]

http://www.cfr.org/india/india-sees-us- ... ace/p28182
How India Sees the U.S. Presidential Race

Though U.S.-Indian relations have dipped from the high point they reached during the George W. Bush administration, when the countries signed an important civil nuclear agreement (TIME), they are still "in reasonably good shape," says C. Raja Mohan, an expert on U.S.-India relations. President Obama's November 2010 trip to India bolstered trade and economic ties and helped ease fears that Obama administration policies toward Pakistan and China would run counter to India's interests, says Mohan. The two countries have differences on issues such as Iran and the Middle East, and some in Washington are frustrated "that the strategic partnership with India has not yielded the expected benefits," says Mohan. Mohan says Indians watching how the U.S. presidential race shapes up show a growing appreciation of "how political developments within the United States can affect Indian interests."

How are U.S.-Indian relations these days?
India-U.S. relations are in a reasonably good shape. But the kind of excitement that dominated the bilateral relations in the Bush era is certainly absent. This is due in part to the reluctance of the Obama administration to put a big, transformative issue like the civil nuclear initiative on the bilateral agenda. The focus instead is on deepening bilateral engagement and making steady progress on a broad range of issues. In Delhi, the Manmohan Singh government, which had invested much domestic political capital in reordering the relations with the United States during the Bush years, no longer has the political energy to pursue a bold agenda with Washington.
What are the main issues between our countries?
In some quarters of the United States there is palpable frustration that the strategic partnership with India has not yielded the expected benefits. Whether it is the purchase of the U.S. nuclear reactors or American fighter aircraft, Indian decisions have left some stakeholders in Washington disappointed. The idea that the relationship has been "oversold" has gained some traction in Washington.

On the multilateral front, especially on the Middle East, India follows an independent policy that is not always in alignment with the American approach.On Iran, India supports the objective of preventing proliferation and fully implements the UN sanctions. But Delhi is reluctant to abandon its engagement with Tehran, which is critical for India's regional policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan following the feared U.S. retreat from Afghanistan. India is also having some difficulty in coping with the unilateral U.S. sanctions against Iran.The United States is also concerned about the absence of second-generation economic reforms in India and Delhi's inability to move rapidly on bilateral defense cooperation.Some of these [issues] are linked to the broader political and administrative paralysis that has gripped Delhi.
From the Indian side, there is recognition that Obama has advanced the bilateral relationship, but Delhi misses the special attention it got from the Bush White House.[Still,] there is no denying the substantive advances in the bilateral relations in recent years and the current unprecedented breadth and depth of the economic, political and security engagement between the two countries.
Do Indians pay much attention to U.S. presidential campaigns? Do they feel that it matters to India who is in the White House?The Indian chattering classes have always shown a keen but general interest in the U.S. presidential campaigns. With expanding Indian stakes in the United States, there is growing awareness of how political developments within the United States can affect Indian interests.
Is Mitt Romney known in India?

Very little. Some of Romney's foreign policy advisers are familiar in Delhi, and India is bound to invest in getting to know Romney better in the coming months.

There is regular speculation in India's press about two Indian-American governors, Bobby Jindal [of Louisiana] and Nikki Haley [of South Carolina], as possible GOP vice presidential candidates. Both Jindal and Haley deny any interest.

There is always great interest in the political advances made by the leaders of the Indian-American community in the United States. But the policy establishment in Delhi knows that neither Jindal nor Haley would want to wear the "India badge" on their sleeves. Delhi is acutely aware of the contributions of the Indian-American community to the improvement of bilateral relations with Washington, but it is conscious of the importance of solidifying India's outreach to the American political mainstream.

Is there any particular bias in India toward the Democratic or Republican parties?

During the Cold War, there was greater empathy in the Indian political class toward the Democratic Party. Arguably, the political bias in Delhi now favors the Republican Party, which is seen as less protectionist than the Democratic Party. India is more comfortable with the Republican geopolitical appreciation of India's value in the international system.

Delhi remains wary of the Democratic Party's foreign policy establishment, given its interventionist impulses, especially the itch to mediate on the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan and its focus on human rights issues. Obama, to be sure, has walked away from the initial temptation to focus on Kashmir and has overruled the non-proliferation community in the United States in his effort to implement the Bush deal on integrating India into the global nuclear order.

Delhi is concerned about muscular Republican policies in the Middle East, which complicate India's domestic politics.

[nvishal]

I fail to understand the mindset of people who oppose FDI in retail say.

It's simple fundamentals of economics. X buys from Y and Y buy from X. Together they make up a market. If one of them fails to sustain the other's needs then it creates a void which attracts and pulls Z(from elsewhere) to exploit this vulnerability. One of them(Either X or Y) is going to loose.

In simple words, the population of india needs to sustain the population of india. Nothing more and nothing less.

[harbans]

It's simple fundamentals of economics. X buys from Y and Y buy from X. Together they make up a market. If one of them fails to sustain the other's needs then it creates a void which attracts and pulls Z(from elsewhere) to exploit this vulnerability. One of them(Either X or Y) is going to loose.

I really don't know where you came up with this..economics are about creating efficient interdependencies too and changing those when one component of the interaction can be replaced with a more efficient one. That's how the real world works. When you post what you wrote, you have already in reality contradicted yourself, as servers hosted in different countries transmitted your data, you typed on a device which has been made by citizenry of several countries, software written again across many countries, nationalities all that provided one component of service at a cost that was acceptable to you. Every thing each one of us does from morning to sleeping, think a little here..and calculate for yourself in the real world how many interdependencies come into play.

India does not possess every kind of raw material, machinery or technological expertize. No nation on earth has that. So to develop say our roads faster we need maybe technology, capital, resources, manpower etc. We may have for example technology and manpower but not all resources or capital to do so fast enough. So common sense dictates we get those resources from the most efficient supplier, and capital at the least expensive terms. While we may need capital and some resources, there are countries that neither have manpower, nor resources but have the capital. So they import the most efficient manpower and efficient resources from where ever.

Your approach to the above would be remaining cut off. Economic activity would die out slowly as inefficiencies become so large and building a simple road too expensive.. The State would resemble North Korea soon. This is how nature is built. Some countries have more resources, some less. Some have only one, some none. Yet each has to find a way to overcome their limitations by offering something in return. That my friend is how basic economics really works for good in real life and people and nations become wealthy, prosperous and healthy. Not shutting oneself up in a cocoon.

[ramana]

harbans and nvishal,
We have a whole economic forum to discuss economics questions. Thanks, ramana

[Advait]

In an ideal situation, the next time Modi's visa is denied, GoI should cancel or kick out a major American contract/ company.

That is the only language Americans understand. As has been pointed out here, has any Paki/Bangladeshi politico's visa be denied inspite of what the Hindus there have to put up with.

Hindus in America are well-educated, well-off, but there is no Hindu lobby. The "Indian" lobby is co-opted by dhimmis and (how do I say this politely) by nondharmics.

American morality is very relative. They give so much coverage to the Jewish victims of genocide but not to the gypsy victims of the same genocide. Gypises still face massive social and institutional discrimination in eastern Europe. But not publicity or advocates or movies for them. The Armenian genocide is also not recognized by the American government and most of the media outlets also do not use the term. Nor is there a memorial to the Rwandan genocide in D.C or all the other genocides.

Moral: Its all about money, power and influence in U.S., just like everywhere else.

[ramana]

Advait, Its not simple like that. The psecs that support UPA need the US to make a tar baby out of Modi. US denial of visa supports that image. So why will the UPA govt do anything to facilitate the erasure of that image?

The SIT report shows that last ten years of propganda on Gujarat riots is just political propaganda. If the SC hadnt instituted the SIT people would never know as the narrative is what is framed by UPA appointed commissions which truly were to fix Modi's image as Hitler re-incarnated with Indian Muslims as new Jews! In fact they even used Biblical language which felt familiar as I went to Catholic school but did not connecc as my mind was slow. There was a cottage industry in Silicon Valley of video tapes and DVDs of Gujarat riots and narrative using inflammatory language which is now proved to be all lies.


There is group called I C A that promoted the stuff.

[Advait]

Ramana, what you said is right. I was talking more about the bigger picture/ideal response stuff. Hindus are not united and think too much about pleasing others. That is what it boils down to in the end.

[ramana]

Why do you want Hindus to unite on this? This is not a Hindus issue.

Modi undestands this and is improving Gujarat's economy to show that he is relevant to Indian economy which is growing by leaps and bounds and is an important US interest. So he is using the same economy stick that MMS talks about but does nothing with.

[shyamd]

No Pak hyphenation in India-US ties

Unlike her husband and former US president Bill Clinton, who administrated a sugar coated pill to Indian Parliamentarians post-Pokhran on non-proliferation, CTBT and dialogue with Pakistan in March 2001, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton does not mince words or believe in diplomatic parlance of the bygone era.

While credit is due to Bill, his successors George W Bush and Barack Obama for redefining the India-US relations, Hilary Clinton has no small role to play in cementing the ties between the two largest democracies in the world.

During her three day trip to India this week, the diplomatic buzzwords of the past decade like India-Pakistan hyphenation, restraint, Kashmir or nuclear flashpoint were all missing as Clinton candidly discussed the regional neighbourhood with Indian leadership.

For Washington watchers, it was a welcome relief that Secretary Clinton did not link Pak based terrorism directed against India to either the political issue in Kashmir or to the bilateral dialogue between the South Asian neighbours. This was a sea change from the unsolicited advice given by visiting US joint secretary level officers like Robin Raphael, Karl Inderfurth or Christina Rocca, who were feted like viceroys by India and Pakistani establishment and media, in the past decade.

Known to be the only one who wears pants in the Obama administration, Clinton minced no words in her assessment on Pakistan with the Indian leadership. She apparently told Krishna that if Pakistan thought that they could keep a snake in their backyard for their neighbours then the leadership and the Army are sadly mistaken. (Prove it then)

Secretary Clinton made it amply clear that US does not have a segmented approach to terrorism emanating from Pakistan-Afghanistan arc. Her comment that it was she who had authorised the $10 million bounty over 26/11 main accused and Lashkar-e-Taiba amir Hafiz Saeed was a message to her own State Department and the US ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter, who made light of the reward. While Munter has now quit after the Saeed howler, the state department and its representatives in India are still to get the message clearly.

It is not that Secretary Clinton is charmed by India or is anti-Pakistan. She firmly has US interests in her mind and virtually berated New Delhi during her July 2011 strategic dialogue visit on New Delhi ignoring US for the multi-role medium combat aircraft deal and the liability clause in the Indo-US nuclear deal.

To her credit, Secretary Clinton has normalised the India-US relationship, where everything is discussed frankly without any barbs. The bilateral engagement is now a continuous process with leaders picking up from where they left last time. Both sides now routinely share perceptions on China, Iran, Afghanistan or even Eurozone crisis. It is signficant to note that while the leadership of both sides is comfortable with each other, the bureaucracy still carries baggage from the past.

As US state department still cannot forget the days of beer with Pakistan Army generals in Murree in Marghala hills, some New Delhi babus are stuck in time wrap of US 7th Fleet moving into Bay of Bengal during the 1971 Indo-Pak conflict.

The imperious and outdated mindset of the US state department was evident this week when slanted stories of Clinton pushing West Bengal chief minister Mamta Bannerjee on FDI in retail and Teesta Water Treaty with Bangladesh started appearing on the eve of US foreign minister’s visit. The fact is that nothing of the sort was either on the agenda or discussed between Clinton and Mamta during their meeting on May 7. Perhaps this was the agenda set in convergence with the Cold War warriors in the two countries. Now it is nobody’s case that India should blindly jump into US camp or start opposing it tooth and nail on account of its own rising power status. India needs to protect its own interest and not be afraid of engaging any country on its own terms.

While western media has tried to make Iran into a new irritant in Indo-US relations, the two sides showed a great deal of maturity this time in not falling into the trap laid out for them. The fact is that India has reduced its crude oil intake from Iran by nearly 18-20 per cent since last year, but it also not possible for New Delhi to jump onto Saudi-Sunni bandwagon in Middle-East and make life difficult for its 6 million expats in the Gulf.

Although India has made its stance amply clear on Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon, New Delhi cannot blindly follow US interests in the restive region. This was spelt out in black and white by the Indian leadership to Secretary Clinton this week and the latter understood the problem and wisely choose not to ratchet up the divergence. The Indian policy on Iran is just like its engagement with Beijing—dictated by its own self-interests.

While New Delhi scored a self-goal on its ties with Sri Lanka on voting on human rights resolution due to political compulsions of the UPA government, time has come for India to realise that diplomacy is not conducted on emotions but hard cold facts.

The meeting between Secretary Clinton and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was a demonstration of two allies moving forward bilaterally without comprising their own positions. Just as State department needs to know that bilateral relationship with India is not just deal making and business, South Block should know that Americans are not out to fool them into a reckless strategic decision.

No no MMS Sell out onleeee....

Anyway, still US has to answer for Headley amongst other issues.

[Amber G.]

No Pak hyphenation in India-US ties
Edited Later: Just saw above ... deleted the excerpt, but kept the heading.

[ramana]

Asia: The Grand Design
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... nd-design/

( Lukk at the Map)

Can someone mark on same map the PRC string of pearls bases please in different color for comparison?

[SaiK]

It would be interesting to see that.. and please add in ours as well, just for comparisons.