India-US Strategic News and Discussion

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Nov 2012 12:38

VikramS wrote:Sridhar:

It does not take the lead in defining or defending her national interests. It does not show the capability, the intent, or the will to chart its own course.

VikramS ji, I absolutely agree with you. That is the complaint from ASEAN as well in the current context.
See this post in the Geopolitical Thread.
PS: Somehow, the link doesn't seem to work. It is Page No 85 posted on 17 Nov 12

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 18 Nov 2012 15:31

CRamS wrote:
...

The WWII holocaust of Jews that Palestinians had nothing to do with, will always be used to justify any barbarity by Israel. Also, unlike India, Israel has nothing but contempt at the very idea of sitting with Palestinians in an equal footing to talk; all they want is total subjugation of Palestinians.

...

OT but this shows a very common type of misunderstanding about the Jewish and Israeli mindset. Imagine a worldwide population that is about the population of Delhi, and Europeans wiped out about half of those people in a short period of 2-3 years. Imagine that you are facing Palestinians who have a very good case but can justifiably be seen as the pointy end of a very long and powerful and nuclear-armed global ummah spear who can't wait to wipe out the other half. Ordinary considerations of justice and fairness will go out of the window to be replaced by apad-dharma, the law of not taking any chances at all that jeopardize your people's survival. I find it perfectly understandable and justified.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 18 Nov 2012 23:32

KLNMurthy garu,
Well said, sir.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 19 Nov 2012 04:29

Ordinary considerations of justice and fairness will go out of the window to be replaced by apad-dharma, the law of not taking any chances at all that jeopardize your people's survival. I find it perfectly understandable and justified.

Which is odd, because Jews like Chomsky and Naomi Klein don't.

When the Jews seek redress from Christians, they will have a right to demand justice from Muslims.

Palestinians are the object of a displaced rage against the Christian that dare not speak its name. I mean that quite literally-when was the last time a Jew badmouthed the religion of peace, even to an idol worshipper?

All their gods need to come down to Earth so that they may be judged by thinking men.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 19 Nov 2012 04:47

Neither Chomsky nor Klein represent the people of Israel nor one of my heros the well meaning Richard Stallman. They are sitting in US (or Canada in case of Klein) and far removed from the daily rough and tumble the Israelis and the Palestinians go through.

disha · Post by **disha** » 19 Nov 2012 11:59

Obama visit to Myanmar is considered big. Very big here in US., news channels are playing it up eclipsed only by Israel/Hamas pow-wow.

Obama visits Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar - on the sidelines ASEAN summit is held and Ranjan Mathai has "thanked the chinese for investing in India's infrastructure"., and India wants access to IT/Pharma products into China.

ASEAN has resolved to settle its disputes among themselves, nobody wants China to be the 800 pound gorrilla in the south of china sea., but nobody wants the yankees there either!

And did India facilitate Ombaba's visit to Myanmar?

Interesting data points, the above moves and gyrations are putting chess to shame.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 19 Nov 2012 12:05

During his address to the joint Parliament when he visited India in c. 2010, Obama was critical of India about not strengthening democracy in Myanmar by having a relationship with the military junta. Of course, India has been painstakingly and patiently working its relationship with Myanmar from Jaswant Singh's days. The Indian stand has been vindicated by the recent turn of events, including Hillary Clinton's visit there and now Obama's. India has played a big role in this. There is no doubt about that.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 19 Nov 2012 12:10

sanjaykumar wrote: When the Jews seek redress from Christians, they will have a right to demand justice from Muslims.

Thats crazy. Why should they do that. Do they have a death wish and hope for a immediate liquidation with all support turned off ASAP? It is better for them to play the lesser devil against the better one.

They can take other issues when the immediate and ever present existential issues are sorted out.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 19 Nov 2012 13:36

Last time there was regime change in Nepal, has that improved relations with India?

Here is link to articles by Yubaraj Ghimire on current situation in Nepal.
List of articles - The Indian express

I hope there are no such self goals this time and intentions are obviously diplomatic.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 19 Nov 2012 16:38

both india and the us have a shared interest in bringing burma out of beijing's influence
us did it by supporting anti-government groups
india did it by persuading the government to change direction
india needs burma as part of its eastern strategy - plus huge player in bringing development to NE states and economic transformation of the bay of bengal region

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 19 Nov 2012 16:59

sanjaykumar wrote:Ordinary considerations of justice and fairness will go out of the window to be replaced by apad-dharma, the law of not taking any chances at all that jeopardize your people's survival. I find it perfectly understandable and justified.

Which is odd, because Jews like Chomsky and Naomi Klein don't.

When the Jews seek redress from Christians, they will have a right to demand justice from Muslims.

Palestinians are the object of a displaced rage against the Christian that dare not speak its name. I mean that quite literally-when was the last time a Jew badmouthed the religion of peace, even to an idol worshipper?

All their gods need to come down to Earth so that they may be judged by thinking men.

I don't know about you, but I form my own opinions and don't take them as being handed down, whether it is from big name Jews or others. I find it odd that you find this odd and that you consider name-dropping to be a form of debate.

Sorry to continue the OT, but I don't think you really understand the survival imperative of a very small tribe of people (about 0.1% of the world's population). They don't care about arbitrary rules like, if you go after Muslims then first you have to go after Christians first. That's just silliness to someone whose survival is under threat, who has nearly been wiped out once. They will do whatever it takes, harm whomever they deem fit, to make sure it happens "never again." They are a people who refuse to become extinct like Zoroastrians or (quite possibly) Hindus.

I have no idea what you mean by the gods should come down to earth to be judged by thinking men business. Do you want the Jews to stand before a world full of people who want them extinct, and ask them for their judgment and maybe, permission to continue to exist in some marginal fashion? I think the Jews have already answered that with, no thank you.

Think of a cornered cat with super-powers defending its kittens. That's Israel. It's not fair to someone who happens to be in the way of the slashing claws, but it will happen and the cat will not care. I think the stereotypical Muslim mind will never get it, nor will the stereotypical Hindu mind, although for different (actually quite opposite) reasons.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 19 Nov 2012 18:34

KLNMurthy,

Your points above and in the last one are well taken. But what I am saying is that Israel's brutalization of Palestinians with connivance from US is basically tantamount to justifying daylight thuggery. If this is what we are witnessing in the post colonial world, imagine what the colonial period must have been for the colonized natives.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 19 Nov 2012 18:49

SSridhar wrote: India may not need Israel-like love from the US. TSP has survived for so long and had the audacity to terrorize India because of the US support (especially in the 80s and 90s as far as terrorism went). India needs US to back off from propping up Pakistan diplomatically, politically and militarily (and of course India needs to effectively have a policy and show some much wanted spine).

I would like to see this point articulated by India's foreign policy elite, which none has done to date. Is US power so intimidating and mesmerizing at the same time that after this kind of a policy, and now some bogus soothing words, "past" actions of US are forgotten? I put past in quotes because I am still not sure if US has broken with its past. Certainly form public statements, only terror against the west and Israel is the gold standard, while terror against India is rarely acknowledged. In private, I am sure there has been some action, give the relative infrequency of TSP pigLeT attacks agianst India. Is US just calibrating TSP behavior to suit its interests or has US decisively told TSP to back off from India, and in return, its munnas in Delhi are on the Aman Ki Asha path?

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 19 Nov 2012 19:00

CRamS wrote:KLNMurthy,

Your points above and in the last one are well taken. But what I am saying is that Israel's brutalization of Palestinians with connivance from US is basically tantamount to justifying daylight thuggery. If this is what we are witnessing in the post colonial world, imagine what the colonial period must have been for the colonized natives.

Actually I have full sympathy for the Palestinians' plight, however they need to realize that unless they stop ranting and raving about eliminating Israel and the Jews, and actually learn to understand the Jewish point of view--a tall order--they can expect Israel and the Jews to keep them indefinitely under suppression out of sheer self defense. Lot of Jews will be unhappy and heartbroken about the pain they are inflicting, and will even admit that it is morally wrong, but at the end of the day, they will fall in line with the program, because, "Sareeram aadyam khalu dharma sadhanam", i.e., without a physical body morality and dharma have no meaning, therefore they have to do whatever it takes to physically survive as a people.

It may not be fair, but it is up to the Palestinians to convince the Jews that they mean them no harm. As it stands, they can't even eliminate the Jew-hatred from their childrens' comics and textbooks.

Madhusudhan · Post by **Madhusudhan** » 19 Nov 2012 21:25

Excellent post KLNMurthy - I have been struggling with similar thoughts about Israel and Palestine but you have articulated it perfectly!

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 19 Nov 2012 21:50

Here let me drop a few more names that people can exclude to form their independent views on the Middle East.

http://www.masada2000.org/list-M.html

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 20 Nov 2012 01:17

The situation is heart-breaking, but somebody has to start the process of pulling back from the edge. A little bit of non-violent non-cooperation in the mold of Gandhi, King, and Mandela would garner lot more support for the Palestinian cause than the extremist ways instigated by the powers be sitting elsewhere. The Palestinians are the sock puppets whose lives are sacrificed in a bigger game.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 20 Nov 2012 04:10

CRamS wrote:KLNMurthy,

Your points above and in the last one are well taken. But what I am saying is that Israel's brutalization of Palestinians with connivance from US is basically tantamount to justifying daylight thuggery. If this is what we are witnessing in the post colonial world, imagine what the colonial period must have been for the colonized natives.

CRS,

It's not a black and white issue. Many of the same people who talk of Israel's 'brutality' also accuse India of the same in J&K. Now, India is not doing settlements and such but the point remains valid.

The entity called Hamas has a charter that calls for the annihilation of Jews in the 'holy lands'. Now, even with that Israel (at saner times) has tried to negotiate with them. The likes of Bibi Netanyahu and Likud are extremists and want 100% of it all, but Israel did offer a two state solution more than once but the problem on the Palestinian side is that the only person capable of making that deal, Yasser Arafat, balked at the very end and called for the second Intifada.

It is quite tiring to hear 'colonial' this and 'White man' that when the real issue is a gazillion times more complicated.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 20 Nov 2012 04:47

>> Now, India is not doing settlements and such but the point remains valid.

What is the point and how does it remain valid?

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 20 Nov 2012 06:47

abhishek_sharma wrote:>> Now, India is not doing settlements and such but the point remains valid.

What is the point and how does it remain valid?

That the same Western Leftist elite cabal that makes a cause of castigating Israel also blames India for 'occupation' and 'human rights abuses' in J&K.

The same Western Leftist elite cabal that calls for Israel to give up lands also calls for India to make 'territorial concessions' to TSP

etc.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Nov 2012 07:01

What do they will have to write after Palestine is destroyed? what if no trace of history is left? do they still blame India for an equal destruction actually without having to use any form violence? Keeping quite many a times does not mean foreign affairs.. the right things must be made aware to the world what and where we stand.

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 20 Nov 2012 07:08

November 19, 2007
$1 = 39 Rupees

November 19, 2012
$1 = 55 Rupees

This is called effectively ruling the world (i.e. making Indians poorer or worse off than 5 years ago).....Rest is all noise

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 20 Nov 2012 08:20

^ that is because of the open patriation-repatriation of $.

You cannot have that and also have the interest rate disparity of ~9% and ~2% between INR and USD.

The market is balancing this out.

So in a way INR gets double whammy. It has to absorb the depreciation in $ value and also the Indian inflation factor.

Some idiots running Indian economy for past few years. I can only show pity if people think there is no alternative to achieve high economic growth.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Nov 2012 09:12

USD -> Chippanda yuan is in inverse.. 1:6

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 20 Nov 2012 16:55

India, a big part of my plan: Obama tells Manmohan

India is a big part of my plans,” U.S. President Barack Obama said on Tuesday as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh congratulated him in person on his re-election.

Dr. Singh, who came face-to-face with Mr. Obama on three occasions in Phnom Penh for the first time after he was re-elected President, told him: “Congratulations on your re-election.”

The two leaders, who attended the East Asia Summit and the retreat in the Cambodian capital, shook hands and exchanged pleasantries.

Meanwhile, National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon held a 90-minute meeting with his U.S. counterpart Tom Donilon in Phnom Penh and discussed bilateral relations and other issues of mutual interest.

Sources said it was a very fruitful interaction on several issues of mutual interest.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 20 Nov 2012 19:28

chanakyaa wrote:November 19, 2007
$1 = 39 Rupees

November 19, 2012
$1 = 55 Rupees

This is called effectively ruling the world (i.e. making Indians poorer or worse off than 5 years ago).....Rest is all noise

That is a very convuluted way of looking at the world. A weak rupee makes our exports more competitive, and thus creates jobs. How is that unworthy or undesirable?

Exchange rates are more a reflection of economic realities (demand and supply) rather than political alignement (although that is an indirect factor).

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 20 Nov 2012 19:33

abhischekcc wrote:
That is a very convuluted way of looking at the world. A weak rupee makes our exports more competitive, and thus creates jobs. How is that unworthy or undesirable?

Exchange rates are more a reflection of economic realities (demand and supply) rather than political alignement (although that is an indirect factor).

ABCC garu,

Your view is extremely naive on the other extreme.

A weak rupee vs USD makes does our exports more competitive, but do we export to USA? Mainly IT/ITES etc? That means the benefits go to the ITES employed, who will pay taxes.

But at the same time A weak rupee also makes the other imports (there are a ton of them) very expensive and the burden has to be born by entire India.

Another issue we do not realize is that rupee gets weaker against majority of the currencies in a convoluted manner.

If you take Chinese yuan as an example, how can India balance the trade with this kind of type economic policies?

Fidel Guevara · Post by **Fidel Guevara** » 21 Nov 2012 07:00

VikramS wrote:Sridhar:

India has to show that it is willing to assert for her interests

OT, but a small example. I would like India to assert that flights to/from Europe/USA land or take-off at Delhi at a decent time.

China said to the airlines "You want the Beijing/Shanghai business, you better make sure 80% of your flights land and take-off between the normal hours of 7AM-7PM local time." As of now, if you want to travel to Europe or North America from Delhi, you can only take the 1AM-3AM time-slots. Only very few exceptions, and those are usually much more expensive.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 21 Nov 2012 07:46

SSridhar wrote:India, a big part of my plan: Obama tells Manmohan
India is a big part of my plans,” U.S. President Barack Obama said on Tuesday as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh congratulated him in person on his re-election.

Be afraid, India, be very very afraid.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 21 Nov 2012 11:02

my thought exactly especially after the comment by sec panetta

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Nov 2012 18:18

I'll be upright about it. l don't like the idea of a Paki sucker John Kerry becoming US Secretary of State. I would rather have somebody else become US Secretary of State - US Ambassador to UN, Susan Rice, for example.

There is however a GOP movement to block her nomination, even before she has been nominated.

GOP on Susan Rice: She's not fit to be US Secretary of State: Digital Journal

May be GOP want to stop Susan Rice's nomination, so that Obama picks Senator John Kerry instead and Republicans can take over one Senate seat from Massachusetts. Whatever be the reason, now that the GOP have started an attack on Susan Rice, Obama would be duty-bound to nominate her for the US Secretary of State, simply on principle.

I hope she becomes the next US Secretary of State.

How does it affect India? Not much, but it keeps away that Jerk Conny from the post!

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 21 Nov 2012 19:01

R-man,

Lets leave aside the Israeli Palestinian fight, and US slavish support to the former, but on your assertion that western left holds Israel and India at the same equivalence, you could not be more off the target. At best the so called "left" in US raps Israel on its knuckles for some feel, good pompous criticism, but sticking to the bogus Biblical claim of Israel's ownership to everything there. When it comes to India, boy oh boy, every liberal pipsqueak will be eloquent on India's treatment of Kashmiri Muslims, Daleeets, you name it.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 22 Nov 2012 00:24

Jonah Goldberg | Where George W. Bush succeeded, Mitt Romney fell short

Compassionate conservatism increasingly faded from view after 9-11. Bush ran as a war president first and a compassionate conservative at best second in 2004. Still, it’s worth remembering that Bush won a staggering (for a Republican) 44 percent of the Hispanic vote. Romney got 27 percent.

Moreover, according to exit polls, Romney decisively beat Obama on the questions of leadership, values and economic expertise but was crushed by more than 60 points on the question of which candidate “cares about people like me.”

I still don’t like compassionate conservatism or its conception of the role of government. But given the election results, I have to acknowledge that Bush was more prescient than I appreciated at the time.

welcome to american vote banks.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 22 Nov 2012 00:36

american govt did not build the internet

According to government mythology, the world owes the existence of the internet to the government, and computer communications would not exist today without the government thinking up the idea of computer networks. This fairy tale is usually based on the claim that the first network using the technology used in today's internet was built for the government agency Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). It leaves out the inconvenient fact that ARPA's computer network was built not by government bureaucrats, but by Bolt Beranek and Newman, a private-sector firm in Massachusetts. The proponents of the government narrative typically suppress the role of BBN and also remain silent about the state of computer communications in the early 1960s.

Politicians like Al Gore and Barack Obama have sought to take credit for the development of the internet in order to push their belief that the world would be a better place if entrepreneurship were replaced by legislation and bureaucracy. Their attempts to credit the government for the existence of the internet is similar to crediting the Nazis for the existence of the airline industry. Just as ARPA was the first customer of the packet switched network in the days of circuit switching, the Nazis were the first to purchase a jet plane in the era of propeller-driven aircraft.

The role of politicians in the development of the internet is best exemplified by Ted Kennedy, who, upon learning that BBN had won the contract for building ARPA's "Interface Message Processor," sent BBN a congratulatory message for winning the contract to build the "Interfaith Message Processor" and thanked them for their ecumenical efforts!

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 22 Nov 2012 05:53

The fact that the government used a private contractor doesn't mean the private sector built it.

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 23 Nov 2012 13:47

Video: U.S.-India Military Engagement

http://csis.org/multimedia/video-us-ind ... engagement

The above is a 70min CSIS video about india-US relations. They are discussing about deepening indo-us relations through military exercises.

The histories of india-US relations naturally repel each other. There's no doubt that these two states are enemies pretending to be friends. With extremism in the af-pak region getting out of hand and a rising china, the americans are compelled to find a solution. This compulsion takes a very funny turn when the americans decide to ignore everything from US activities in india to david headley to indian spies defecting to US to bankrolling pakistan as a counter to india.

It always surprises me to see a state reach out as a friend even when it's neck deep in complicity. We already see that in pakistan and china but acknowledge it as an intrinsic behavior. It's interesting to see the americans show this familiar behaviour. All animals have the trait of instinct so even when you offer it food, it approaches with caution; the fear of the unknown. In the case of indo-us relations, much is already known to us because of ready made history.

If india ignores the pacific, it's going to be militarized. India has no problem with a militarized vietnam, thailand or cambodia. I say we keep off and let the militarization begin. S Amer Latif and the CSIS can get lost.

India must let china confront US hegemony. If the chinese manage to convince the saudis to divert some of the resources(oil) to mainland china, it's good. Give a safe corridor to the chinese in the indian ocean for resource transit. A chinese military base in the middle-east is going to change everything.

Regarding manufacturing, china must dominate. There are plans by some nations to shift some plants away from china and into india. Don't fall for this trick because it weakens china against US.

from the above video wrote:The US-India relationship is going to be a generational issue

That new generation of indians are going to forget indo-us history

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 23 Nov 2012 16:13

nvishal wrote:If india ignores the pacific, it's going to be militarized. India has no problem with a militarized vietnam, thailand or cambodia. I say we keep off and let the militarization begin.

I say we supply military hardware and fast track the militarization process.

nvishal wrote:Give a safe corridor to the chinese in the indian ocean for resource transit. A chinese military base in the middle-east is going to change everything.

No need to give China any breathing space, it should be made very clear by India about the laxman rekha that China shouldn't cross.

nvishal wrote:Regarding manufacturing, china must dominate. There are plans by some nations to shift some plants away from china and into india. Don't fall for this trick because it weakens china against US.

This is a ridiculous argument, if companies decides to set up manufacturing units in India then it is advantage India so why do you want India to lose this opportunity ??? Such a thing will only make India's industrial base stronger and if China becomes weaker due to this then it's only icing on the cake.

nvishal wrote:That new generation of indians are going to forget indo-us history

What do you mean by this ???

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 23 Nov 2012 17:01

nviashal, ultimately, India must not care for China or the US. Only Indian interests are permanent and others are ephemeral.

For over five decades China has been an implacable enemy for India. It has gone to extreme extents to harm my country and even destroy it. Even to this day, when trade touches USD 100 Billion, it has not wavered from that evil desire.

The US has also been checkmating India through its economic, political and military clout for five decades now. After the early 90s and the demise of the Cold War, it has been pivoting towards India for various geo-political and geo-strategic reasons even while ensuring that it does not make the same mistake with us that it made with China in the early 70s - that of going overboard in its ambitious strategy thereby developing a new powerful nation that could threaten the US interests itself in the future.

In this very high stake game, India has to play very carefully keeping in mind the needs of one-sixth of the humanity, a significant chunk of which is impoverished, within its borders. If India needs to keep its interests in global warming etc by siding with China, India should do that. If it has to send a strong message to China over its aggression and assertiveness, it has to do that as well by siding with the US and countries of SE Asia and East Asia. The trick is to strike the right balance keeping India's interests and India's interests alone in mind.

The Chinese are as hegemonic, if not worse, as the Americans. Why should India help the Chinese have military bases in the ME, or have unfettered freedom of navigation in the IOR (when it threatens IN in South China Sea) ? These very same bases and the SLOCs will be used to threaten my country later by the Chinese, especially when it already surrounds us menacingly from Bangladesh and Burma through Sri Lanka and Maldives to Pakistan. If shifting of the manufacturing base out of China would help India's teeming millions, India should welcome that. India should not once again commit the cardinal sin of putting China's interests ahead of its own when that greatest practitioner of Realpolitik, Nehru, forsook UNSC seat on principles of admission of PRC into the UN. We have been suitably and handsomely rewarded by China over the years for that generosity.

At the same time, I recognize that the US must not willy-nilly co-opt India into its geo-poitical and geo-strategic calculations, which does not bring us any substantial dividends at least cost. To that extent, going too close to the US should be avoided too. However, the security environment surrounding India is such that no other country on Earth faces the kind of threats that India faces every single day. There are certain inevitable steps that India has to take regarding its militarization. There is no doubt that a vastly stronger and superior China is seeing India as an enemy and is unwilling to change its policies. The kind of nasty things it has done, or continues to do, to India is too long to be listed here. May be, in another post.

Of course, the India-US military exchanges and cooperation have grown extraordinarily. The US has also become a huge supplier of arms and possibly technologies as well. Far reaching political accommodations have been reached between India and the US which have benefitted it or about to benefit it. That is the realpolitik that we have to play. Definitely, there is no free lunch and we would be expected to reciprocate too, as in Iran for example. It is a challenge to maintain our independence in foreign policy making while tangoing with the US.

It would have been the same had the Chinese chosen to do the same. But, it has not happened and there is a complex territorial dispute with that country which is absent in the case of the US. The Chinese have nukes targetting us from Tibet. It is this absence of a desire to normalize relationship with us, along with the implacable enmity and their inflexibilty in dispute resolution, that prevents a closer relationship from developing with them. The Chinese leadership should realize that keeping in view that up until the late 50s, we stood solidly behind the Chinese when they were practically shunned by everyone. But, Realpolitik is devoid of such emotions and the Chinese showed it to us effectively in c. 1962.

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 23 Nov 2012 21:41

SSridhar, I'm familiar with the situation. My entire argument was based on the point that we don't take sides. After all, the china-US power tussle is not india's war.

Why should India help the Chinese

my logic was simple. Resources on planet earth are limited; but consumers too many. At the current rate of depletion, capacity has become almost maximum. One is eating too much(west) and the rest are getting crumbs. We have a historic moment now where one of the crumb eater(china) might get a significant share from what the west(mostly, the US) already has on its plate.

In this predicament, two things can happen:
1) West and China learn to share
2) The west and china go to war

Option no. 2 seems almost impossble because option no. 1 is there for the choosing. The flaw with option no. 1 is that it allows(with unkils permission) chinese hegemony over the far east. I don't think the far east states would like that. The aussies won't like that and nor will the japanese. Hence it's difficult for me to imagine how option no. 1 would work in practicality.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 23 Nov 2012 23:45

nvishal wrote:Video: U.S.-India Military Engagement

http://csis.org/multimedia/video-us-ind ... engagement

The above is a 70min CSIS video about india-US relations. They are discussing about deepening indo-us relations through military exercises.

The histories of india-US relations naturally repel each other. That new generation of indians are going to forget indo-us history

AT arounf 23 min the speakers talks about Indian policymakers caution with the relations.
THen he talks about 2014 political structure where states will become infleuntial in policymaking. This is red alert on how they are playing with the political structure and trying to use it for their interest.