India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

[SSridhar]

If GoI had decided to sign the LEMOA, they should not have delayed it at least. They should sign it before Parikkar goes to China. What's the point? Who cares about sensitivities? Certainly China never cared for ours. And, after the joint statement, the world knows that this is going to be signed. At least, let us have the pleasure!!

[Vayutuvan]

Meanwhile China has told India that India occupied Kashmir is a disputed territory.

NRao garu: To characterize an integral part of India in those words is an unkind cut (unless you are saying that that's what the Chinese call it).

[Vayutuvan]

It is very inspiring to know that we are moving like Pakistan, Turkey. China you say....

Those nations moved in a direction that benefits them and not others.

NRao: Turkey straddles and controls Bosphorous straights. Pakistan is the key to Afghanistan as far as the US is concerned, especially now that US and Russia have fallen out with each on Ukrain/Syria.

[NRao]

I should have perhasp placed it in quotes. That is the Chinese PoV.



On more serious matters, does India have a deep state? And, one specifically to deal with Pakistan? Not talking of the backdoor channels, etc, not at a political level. One at an actionable level?

[Cosmo_R]

@VivS^^^: "25 years from now, we should have narrowed the gap with China a great deal, though at that point China will have comfortably surpassed the US, baring some major internal/global catastrophe. But we're still in 2016, and the heft we may have in 2040 (to say nothing of 2055) is long way off."

No empire survives the test of time unless it has a 'self correcting' real time mechanism that is built-in. The Brits ruled for a long time but they were done because they could not adapt. The Roman Empire is also a case in point. And so it will be with the Han Empire: they cannot overcome the inbuilt contradictions. One child= unbalanced M/F ratio; backyard steel mills disaster in the 1950s to vast credit availability driven (vs demand) steel disaster today. China cannot adapt—its culture and political setup dictate 'more of the same' when they ought to let the economy zig/zag based on market demand.

India can adapt. If anything we are elastic in our dogma and that's a good thing. And our system allows us dissent and the freedom to take the road not well traveled. For the Han it is binary: "you go now yes? or what you want?

The Chinese in 2050 will be a ho hum player much like Japan today. Diversity as in India and the freedom for individuals to have the freedom to do 'stupid' (I'm not talking anti-national) things, iterate and succeed.

The US is the epitome of a self correcting state/society. In 2008, the Europeans were sniggering at the financial meltdown and the immigration issues. Today, the US is rock solid where the euros are skating on very thin ice and their immigration issues constitute a burden vs. the short term cheap labor benefits the US is enjoying.

For us the lesson is focus on bijlee/pani/sadak/sanitation/education and the ability to kick out non performing politicians who don't deliver basics. And of course, the ability to defend the nation state while it finally enjoys growth.

[Cosmo_R]

If GoI had decided to sign the LEMOA, they should not have delayed it at least. They should sign it before Parikkar goes to China. What's the point? Who cares about sensitivities? Certainly China never cared for ours. And, after the joint statement, the world knows that this is going to be signed. At least, let us have the pleasure!!

It will be signed when he lands in Beijing

[Vayutuvan]

RD: There is a small haddi in Russian kebab of standing guarantee for Chinese access to Europe, namely Ukrain. The wild card is Belarus. If the US starts meddling in Belarus, then China will have to depend on the US/Pakistan combine to get to Gwadar. Can India stop the plans by choking off somewhere around NA/POK? That seems unlikely. Chahbahar is important in that light.

[Cosmo_R]

@krishna_krishna" ^^^

Here's a thought for debate. Let's focus on Ash Carter (the DoD is the one that wants LSA/CISMOA/BECA): we want the same relationship and interoperability with CENTCOM as they (DoD) want us to have with PACOM.

This is something he can deliver and what this gets us is access to the minds if not hearts of the paki inclined (think after retirement). He can't deliver us from Hindu phobes in US universities or the Mumbai 2008 stuff.

If we really want to deal with US and punch above our weight, we need to understand and exploit their bureaucratic rivalries.

If PACOM/CENTCOM don't ring a bell, Google pro consuls and CENTCOM. You'll get an idea of how they shape policy unlike our armed forces. The F-16s you mention come into this focus. I hope I'm being subtle enough without being obscure.

As a State, you have to manipulate the levers of power of erstwhile allies and adversaries. That is the 'Hidden Mace' the Chinese are fond of quoting The pakis have used CENTCOM, we need area denial.

[chanakyaa]

Last several pages of discussion has been phenomenal...

A thousand times, no. We need to pull out ALL the stops to make sure that both the CPEC route via POK/NA, and if possible the Af-Pak-Gwadar route via Afghanistan, cannot work for China. We have to destroy any sense of security Beijing might have regarding the carrots that the US is holding out to China. Too bad for the US and its interests. It is in OUR interest that these routes never become established routes of commerce that the world economy depends on, and that the "international community" will later band together to protect if threatened.

Again the assumption that the US is desperately trying to create and protect trade-routes for China, in contradiction of the rather obvious geopolitical rivalry between the two, takes one further into area of insidious conspiracies.

Your response was to RD's post, but here is my 2 paisa for what it is worth. I do subscribe to the Ramana's post below for following reasons. Decades ago US (or its companies) made a strategic decision to indirectly invest in China in part by moving manufacturing and made huge investments over time in multiple ways. It wasn't made so China can one day turn back on the hand that fed them. You will see that the stable currencies in the Asian countries, pegged to dollar, were conveniently setup to establish/facilitate stable export sweatshops. Yes, it is possible and very likely that over time Chinese may start dreaming world from their own POV and possibly a post-US Asian dominance. From US perspective, they can not and may not be able to control the natural rise of Asian countries in pure economic terms. If their goal is to keep the dominant position by defeating the rising Asian countries, they would rather let one prosper (i.e. China) and subdue the other one, as done for India in multiple ways BRFites know very well about. It is very much possible that US relationship with China may develop the way it is playing out with EU. Tacit understanding between US/China may be much deeper than the artificial difference blurted out in the media.

---
RD my gut instinct was US wants to protect China by engaging India.
You have given the rationale.

+1

[SaiK]

wish geronimo ops was done after LSA. ooooo... etch & di phut!

even w.o LSA, the khans will enjoy tanduri chicken and pork vindaloos on a fine spine scratch.

a major next event would be called "operation durex"

[ldev]

Fascinating discussion!!

Just follow the money!! The answer is straightforward. I think Shri Modi understands it and is trying to position India.

PS: IMO a lot of major decisions by global political leaders are made based on confidential information that is not in the public domain. And so on forums such as this where we rely on publicly available information the discussion/arguments mirror the story of the 3 blind men and the elephant.

[nvishal]

About 8-9 years ago, a retired US naval general who had served in this region had argued with me that any Indian blockade during sino-india war would be blown away by the USN.

At the time, I didn't understand it because we all thought that deigo was looking at China. It dawned much later over me that that deigo was actually looking at all India, China and pakistan playing one against the other.

I think RUDRA has accurately summarised the actual game. The pivot to Asia policy is aimed at clearing naval blockades.

This means that in an event of war with China, a naval blockade by the IN is going to invite the USN.

Does anyone else see the similarities of the current situation with the 1971 situation?

[Vayutuvan]

Ldev: 4 blind men and the elephant - one feeling the tail, another the legs, another the ears, yet another the trunk. Add one more feeling the torso and it becomes five blind (amriki) carters and the (Indian) oliphant.

[JE Menon]

Major analysis happening. Wonderful reading. Small question, meanwhile:

Do people think that the sale of F-16s and Vipers to Pakistan recently (let's not call it a sale, call it a donation) happened without consultation with India? And if it did, why did India basically say "go ahead we'll make some noise that can be ignored" and continue with business as usual. No balls or no agenda? Or both?

I'm having difficulty with the case being made that the us is playing the "balance of power" game, but at the same time wants to "protect" China by "managing" India? Why? They like China more?

There is also an underlying assumption pervading through many posts that somehow India itself has no game plan of its own. Do we really think so? Then the fact that we are where we are now is by accident? I personally don't think so. Can a case be made that we could have been better positioned (in terms of the aggregates of power) than we are now. Sure it can. But much better? I think that's entirely debatable, especially without 20-20 hindsight.

At the moment it seems to me to be a 5-way game (if you include the EU) - each of Russia, the US, India, China & the EU are circling each other warily. Everyone has, technically, good relationships (channels of communications) with each other, with varying degrees of cordiality. Someone, sooner or later is going to make a lunge against someone else, a lunge that might actually cut, or come too close. And that will then, determine how the configuration ends up. So far that lunge - likely to be driven by internal factors more than by exeternal - has not been made, though it looks very much like China will be the first to do it. In my opinion, it has the least stable of the leadership structures.

[RajeshA]

India: A+

“India is doing great. Nobody talks about it,” Trump said earlier this year.

Published on Jan 27, 2016
By Aditi Malhotra
What Donald Trump Thinks About India: Wall Street Journal

[JE Menon]

>>India is doing great. Nobody talks about it

Actually that's incorrect. People are talking about it, but in ways that the Americans are finding difficult to parse... But at least Trump has caught a sense of it, which is that India is doing great but people are talking about it much less than they should be. But who's complaining? Not India, as far as I can tell.

[nvishal]

The Chinese trade with the world in US dollar currency. Theoretically, all those trade dollars will eventually have to return to source - ie, pass through the US market. So as the Chinese grow, the Americans grow also and they have to print more paper notes to facilitate this.

Technically, the Chinese trade is part of the American market and the Americans want to secure it. That means securing the Chinese trade routes.

Now imagine the Chinese were to trade in Russian ruble or the Chinese yuan. Do you think the Americans would still be talking about right to passage or navigation?

The Americans station it's men and assets across the worlds oceans for security. This also allows them to secure these oceans to protect its trade and markets.

[NRao]

- self deleted -

Thx.

[SaiK]

LOL, I like the "Obama's birthplace" sticker.

---

On the A+, and a symmetrically (correlated/hunch->strong evidence) connecting om-baba-upavasi periods, I do feel this is positive.. in the sense, nothing to worry about on political hate, as they destroyed all evidences when maun ji's office was smoking documents. JMT madam ji's instructions never mind.

---

NRao, remove that point 8 takeaway. that is 100% pure undie tv nonsense

[johneeG]

US is playing balance of power. Its as clear as it can be.

They need China because of economy. China was initially developed as a counter to Soviets.
India counters China. India is also needed for economy.
Pakistan counters India.

India(until Modi) seems to have no gameplan. Its clearly seen in complete lack of seriousness in developing military industrial complex. Or lack of development of border infrastructure in north east. Right now, India's hope seems to be the emergence of BRICS. But, it will be dominated by China and Russia unless India learns power projection and develops military industrial complex.

[JE Menon]

>>About 8-9 years ago, a retired US naval general who had served in this region had argued with me that any Indian blockade during sino-india war would be blown away by the USN....

>>This means that in an event of war with China, a naval blockade by the IN is going to invite the USN.

Who's the running dog of imperialism now? The notion that there will be an Indo-China war with the IN blockading the Chinese and the USN then blowing away the IN seems more like a Chinese fantasy (with significant input from our Paki brethren) than an Indian fear. The notion that India (which has been attacked for decades by the Paks and hasn't responded) will start a war with China is delusional. If China starts the confrontation, much more likely, let's say the probability that the US will support China is 100% (unlikely, if history is any guide), even then the probability that the USN will blow away the IN in these circumstances is not high. Much more likely is that the Chinese will push their luck in the South China Sea or in other areas of contention and will get into a knife fight with a littoral country. Then the US will make a choice, to intervene or not. Either way, the end of that is not going to be with a closer relationship with China.

Also, it means that all American engagement with India - all the statements, all the deals, etc. - are serving the objective of grand strategic deception aimed at fooling India into thinking that the US will "take it's side" in the event of a war with China, only to give it a kick in the nuts at the right point. Fine. Then what, the US will work happily with a stronger, meaner China as allies to rule over the world happily ever after?

Finally, I really doubt that the Indian state works on the basis of assumptions that someone will take our side in the event of war. If anything, it is the other way around - everyone will be against us, any support is a bonus to be highly suspected of ulterior motive.

One more thing, of course the US is playing a balance of power game. Everyone is. It is the only game in town. But how does a balance of power game support the notion of the US taking the side of China exclusively hold water? That is not balance. It is the epitome of imbalance. What the US is doing now, getting closer to India, is the clearest indication that it is playing a balance of power game. We are doing the same with the US - as a signal to the other 4 in the circle (including the US). It is a five-way contest. At the moment, we are the weakest in many respects, but getting stronger quickish.

[johneeG]

It seems to me that China would not want a war with India just as India tends to avoid a war against pak.
Because
a) stronger country has more to lose.
b) four fathers from around the world can help the weaker country with money, weapons and diplomatic support. Four fathers can also put sanctions on the money and weapons of stronger country.

But, China has managed to rid itself of many weaknesses and has developed strengths.

Edit:
I am not convinced that US wants to help China vis a vis India. And I am not convinced US is behind China Pak economic corridor.

[Philip]

The key phrase in the media report about the intent to sign a logistics agreement shortly, is that it will not be prejudicial to India's "friends".In other words,the US cannot operate/enjoy facilities in India if they are engaged in mil activity against any "friend" of India.

Now would India allow such facilities if the US arbitrarily engages itself in a spat with China? China could then turn up the heat on India both in the NEast as well as POK/Aksai Chin. Nevertheless any signing of such a "Logistics" agreement would imply that we have sacrificed our sovereignty to a foreign power,something that we've never done even with the Russians/Soviets at the highest period of friendship,in '71+ China will definitelty view any signing of such an agreement as a hostile move against it no matter how much we protest and any such protestations will be like weak tea.

However,one cannot deny that China has brought together the nations of ASEAN,the Far East,ICS littoral nations and India and the ANZ duo into an informal grouping of nations threatened by China and thus have a common enemy.China's intense aggro esp in the ICS has brought the threatened nations of Asia closer together and the military magnetic pull of the US is attracting those afraid of China. India from this intention on Logistics allowing,is hedging its bets.

[ldev]

Now imagine the Chinese were to trade in Russian ruble or the Chinese yuan. Do you think the Americans would still be talking about right to passage or navigation?

For many reasons, too numerous to list here, the US dollar is treated as a "safe haven" currency, the renminbi is far from it despite Chine'a trade flows which aggregate about US $3.5 trillion equivalent. Global wealth on the other hand is about US $150-$200 trillion depending on how it is counted. A 10% variation in that global wealth on account of the stock/bond/commodity/gold markets can cause a swing of $15-20 trillion in funds flows. Now tell me whether Chinese trade of $3.5 trillion matters a sh*t in this big picture where small amounts of wealth flows can dwarf Chinese trade in determining the fate of the US $ as a global reserve currency.

Also, you may be aware of renminbi swap lines set up by the Chinese Central Bank with various countries. Two countries that used those swap lines in the last couple of years were Pakistan and Argentina when both countries had foreign exchange issues. But what did Pakistan do? They drew down on the swap line and promptly swapped the Chinese currency into US $ which were far more usable to them.

You may also be aware that when the US Federal Reserve reversed interest rate course, within the last year, all the dollars used to finance Chinese commodity/real estate speculation also reversed course and at one stage there was US $100 billion leaving China every month. Suddenly even $3 trillion of reserves looked far too small for China.....it had all the makings of a huge financial crisis. Does a currency such as this look like a global reserve currency?

[NRao]

Suddenly even $3 trillion of reserves looked far too small for China

It is down to a @2 trillion, in a matter of weeks. Front page NYT article on Chinese money and families fleeing (to Vancouver, CA).



However, coming back to the topic India-US, just wanted to add one small bit of info (in addition to Chinese troops along the Indian border in PoK) (forget about crossing the borders in AP, etc). Two years ago a Taiwanese DefAnal actually laughed at the thought of a Chinese "4th Fleet". His argument and rightly so at that point in time, was that China had no infrastructure in the region to support a "fleet". And, to some extent even Indians followed that argument.

Well, today everything is standing on its head. You see the Chinese "4th Fleet" is Indian Ocean specific. China HAS built a system to support such a "fleet" in the IOR - Djibouti being the HQ for support (the Fleet HQ is on that large island next to 'Nam - Hainan?). BTW, this fleet will be a virtual fleet, where ships are assigned to it as and when a need arises.

So, it is no coincidence that the IN suddenly say they will increase the number of assets to 200 by 20XX. And, not surprised a few weeks after the US SecDef says, we support such an increase. And, now, talks of talking subs between India and the US!!!! Go figure.

[ShauryaT]

Philip: Very true, it is a loss of sovereignty and no two ways about it. Many people retain a colonized mind set. I will go on a limb and say that the Modi government has made NO strategic case to sign these foundational agreements. Under balling them as something of no strategic consequence is fooling the Indian people or maybe fooling selves. It has to be looked upon as surrendering our strategic maneuvering space. What some are hoping for is to be free riders as India has been many times. i.e: take no risks, bear no costs but somehow expect fruits in the process.

But maybe all is not lost, but BK maybe more hoping here, so here is his view.

No LEMOA — possible reasons

The Logistics Support Agreement the US has been keen on and which the visiting US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter had hoped to sign, has been put off. This despite advance notices in the media of the draft-Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA), a watered down variant of the standard LSA providing restrictive, case-by-case, access for the deployed military of each side to the other’s military bases for replenishment and R&R purposes, being ready for signature. However, LSA is “tweaked” it will still bear the taint of a formal military partnership, will be used more by US forces in the IOR theater than Indian forces will use American bases and, hence, will always be one-sided. Moreover, where’s the need for such an agreement tying India down, willy-nilly, to the US strategic camp when in these past many years, US assets have been refueled and replenished on an as and when requested-basis w/o any formal accord?

So, the signing of LEMOA is postponed. That’s a relief for the nonce. A last minute rethink may have been occasioned for the followings reasons: (1) It would have raised a political storm. However tattered the country’s unaligned status, deciding so overtly to go over to the US side, as it were, reduces hugely India’s room for policy maneuver. (2) The troubling transfer of F-16s and Viper attack helos to Pakistan in the face of Delhi voicing its discomfiture, suggests Washington’s ongoing military supply relationship with Islamabad is unlikely to be moderated even a bit whatever closeness may be achieved by higher degrees of military cooperation. Meaning in practical policy terms, while the US retains its policy latitude, India losses its freedom of action. (3) China can be kept quiet with fluid and contingent partnerships of the kind India has tried out, including with Southeast Asian states, Japan, Taiwan, Russia, and US, perhaps, far better than by signing on with the US. And most importantly (5) It will really throw a monkey wrench into the hardy and resilient Indo-Russian relations. Moscow had formally warned Delhi that should it sign CISMOA, for instance, the Akula-II in service with the Indian Navy would be immediately pulled, and the 2nd such SSN — the Iribis, will, of course, not be lent to India, and the transfer of other more advanced Russian military hardware could also be affected. Why specifically the Akula pullout? Because, per sources, the Russians fear that the air-to-submarine communications, which this agreement will technically facilitate, will permit the Americans to spoof the communications hardware on the ex-Russian SSN, etc., a risk the Russians are unwilling to take notwithstanding any assurances in this regard at any level by the Indian state. The ending of a Russian role in the country’s strategic armaments field will be a singular development, and perhaps grievously hurt India’s strategic posture in the future. This warning may have led to the draft- CISMOA, which was also negotiated, being put on ice.

Indira Gandhi signed the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with the Soviet Union in summer 1971 as cover for the military operations she expected to launch in East Pakistan later in the year. But she successfully prevented Moscow in subsequent years from using this document as a tool for Russian navy to gain permanent military access to India’s warm water ports — despite sustained political and diplomatic pressure from President Leonid Brezhnev. It is precisely military access when required that the US too seeks some 45 years later, except the Bharatiya Janata Party government of Narendra Modi, over-tilting to the West, is not proving as adroit in maintaining distance from the US or in balancing American, Russian and Chinese influences. Modi seems smitten by America (and the West, generally), and losing the plot on how to further the national interest. LEMOA is the thin edge of the wedge. It will be used by Washington to widen the US military and other presence in India, which an over-committed Modi, a little too gung-ho on the supposed technology benefits of getting close to America, will be unable to resist.

Before the prime minister proceeds down a ruinous path that will terminally hobble India, he should get some credible persons, even if informally, to do an objective analysis of the comparative levels of military technology the country has procured from the US and Russia, and if Russian tech TOT deals haven’t fructified, whether it is not the extant DPSU and public sector dominated-mil R&D system and entrenched arms import lobby to blame, and whether his “make in India” programme really needs such treaty intimacy with the US for it to prosper. Of course, if such a study is tasked to the usual lot of compromised, retired and serving, civil servants, MEA diplomats, and militarymen, we already know what their conclusions will be, and it will be a wasted effort.

Modi, Parrikar, and those advising them should pause and consider if they are doing the right thing by the country in light of the historical record of India’s relations with the United States, and US’ own interests in the immediate region and Asia, and its overarching deep political and economic interlinkages with China. Modi is here today, may not be here tomorrow, but India will always be there. Don’t do anything, Mr Prime Minister, that will harm India’s prospects.

[Agnimitra]

Have you had a strange feeling about the nature of the J&K separatist movement lately? I feel it has taken a turn away from the old path of overt Islamization (which had bad-PR associations, given the kind of publicity Taliban, Pakiban and Al Qaeda garnered for themselves over the last 15 years).

It has, since Modi's election, adopted more of the intifada/"Orange Revolution" color it used to have in the Robin Raphel days... designed to give it a sense of "respectability" as a "true democratic movement for self-determination" in international eyes.

This is noticeable. It may also be in anticipation of resettlement efforts that Modi promised - of KP's - and fears of unspoken resettlement by other Indics, to frame the complete picture. [But beyond some rumours, I am not sure if actual resettlement is happening. In fact, even many KP's I speak to have no interest in going back.]

[manjgu]

guys since u r talking abt panama papers..can someone explain what it is for finance challenged people like me?

[member_23370]

As BK said, as long as India needs Russia for SSN, SSBN and other critical fields I don't see India signing anything other than transactional deals with US. It is probably the correct approach given their closeness to pakis.

[TSJones]

some countries such as Panama, have laws by which individuals and corporations can set up businesses and corporations to take advantage of Panama's low taxation and secret or confidential business records policies. It's not necessarily illegal to do this as long as the all applicable laws are being followed by the individual or corporation. And please note, it depends upon the country in which the individual or corporation resides that the definition of legality depends upon.

for instance, in the US. it is legal for *corporations* to take advantage of Panama's tax haven laws as long as the money from their foreign operations stay overseas, but NOT individuals. US individuals must report all sources of income.

while in India, the individual or the corporation can take advantage of such tax laws. So no illegality is there.

Same apparently for Russia.

So a lot of politicians and celebrities take advantage of these laws. and thus don't pay a lot of taxes in their home country.

And also crooks and thieves who launder their money from their ill gotten gains.

[Prem]

Major analysis happening. Wonderful reading. Small question, meanwhile:

At the moment it seems to me to be a 5-way game (if you include the EU) - each of Russia, the US, India, China & the EU are circling each other warily. Everyone has, technically, good relationships (channels of communications) with each other, with varying degrees of cordiality. Someone, sooner or later is going to make a lunge against someone else, a lunge that might actually cut, or come too close. And that will then, determine how the configuration ends up. So far that lunge - likely to be driven by internal factors more than by external - has not been made, though it looks very much like China will be the first to do it. In my opinion, it has the least stable of the leadership structures.

More likely to happen in North Pacific. Irrational NOKO, fearful SOKO and Chinese inherent hatred toward Japanese. Think of it, it does serve the interests of many inc India.War with India won't help much the CHICOM as winning war with Japan to revenge the insult. Building Indian Military strength is one way to keep Chinese off balance and not stare at Japan etc which may draw USA into war at this juncture . All of he main players are buying time and keeping powder dry. Hopefully it remains same till Modi make India grow enough to subtly pull Bodhies of these Toadies and they mortally wound each others to satisfy their inner Pakistaniat . India can learn from pre WW2 USA and shall remain friend to all of them and work on intensifying their suspicion against each other.

[Rudradev]

I'm having difficulty with the case being made that the us is playing the "balance of power" game, but at the same time wants to "protect" China by "managing" India? Why? They like China more?

JEM:

It isn't just "managing India" and "protecting China"... let's not hang too much on the semantics of what are essentially very reductive one-word descriptions of complex policies.

Indeed, the term one hears very, very often (in what purports to be "serious" literature issuing from US think tanks) over the last couple of decades is "managing China's rise."

China is rising, as everyone has known for a while. Some of that rising is indubitably good from the US' point of view, particularly for large corporations, big players in financial markets, and their lobbies in Washington. Hamiltonian policy imperatives dictate that the best way to keep a nation "on-side" is to get heavily entangled with its economy... so that anything the Chinese do that could directly harm the US would in turn harm the US economy, and thus inescapably harm the Chinese economy.

This has, for the most part, been achieved. The Chinese have a limit beyond which they will not actively try to harm the US directly. That in itself determines a certain parity of interests between these two so-called "geopolitical adversaries". Nothing like this was ever achieved by Washington with respect to the Russians or Iranians, for example... so the threat perceptions for those two nations are entirely different.

But what about growth in other dimensions than the economic? China also has hegemonic ambitions: domination of territory, foreign markets, and natural resources in its own imperium, particularly the near-abroad. It wants to create an expanding sphere of influence in which it is top-dog, and also challenge the current top-dog (the US) in that expanding area. This is DISTINCT, mind you, from directly harming the US... it is more of a rivalry or competition for dominance over third parties... not so different from, say, the Portuguese/Dutch/British fighting for influence over overseas colonial possessions even if they were not actively at war with each other on their home turf.

This is where the "managing" comes in.

The US doesn't want to confront China to the point of restricting all its hegemonic growth. Rather, it wants to channelize that expansion, as far as possible, in directions that don't conflict with defined and established US interests, and in fact become dependent on US dominance in its OWN defined spheres of interest.

Hence: the US does NOT want China to expand eastward (push into the Pacific, or Western Pacific littoral states, which are US clients.) The US does NOT want China to expand southeast or due south, into ASEAN. But southwest is perfectly OK. Due west and northwest are tricky... if the Chinese expand their sphere of influence in those directions, then from the US perspective, it must happen in such a way as to bring China into greater CONFLICT and less COOPERATION with Russia and Iran, and it is preferable that it happen in such a way as to coincide and synergize with the US' own interests in those directions.*

India is a different story. India has not risen as China has, as far and as quickly as China has, for various reasons. Hence "managing" India involves a different set of issues for the US. The US no longer sees us as a basketcase of the 50s, 60s, or 70s... far from it. The Hamiltonian economic entanglements, however, have far less interpenetration in the US-India scenario than the US-China scenario. Part of the reason for this is that India is a democracy and cannot grow economically by diktat.

India, for the US, is at a very different place on the ascending ladder than China is. We are climbing the ladder at a different pace than China was and is. It is not in the US' interest to grind India down. But neither is it in the US' interest to push us up at a rate that would threaten China... this is what I fervently believe, even though it flies in the face of all the "counterweight to China" rhetorical soundbites doing the rounds on twitter and news-trading websites. The US WANTS China to keep expanding in a direction that could potentially threaten India, rather than potentially threatening US clients like Japan and Soko; meanwhile, the US also wants India to become more dependent on the US as a result of feeling threatened by Chinese expansion... something that would, in turn, make India's FUTURE growth more manageable for the US.

This is how empires do their thing. It is subtle and doesn't lend itself to neatly-defined rhetorical posturing, but there it is IMHO.

*Footnote: THAT is why the CPEC or Af-Pak to Gwadar models make sense for the US. The Chinese build their own infrastructure all the way from eastern China manufacturing hubs across the Tibetan plateau and to the Karakoram Highway (all security guaranteed by PLA up to this point). They continue building across POK/NA into Pakistan and link with Pakistani arteries leading up to Gwadar (security guaranteed by PLA plus Pakistan armed forces and security forces along this stretch.)

But what happens after Gwadar? Is it worth the huge expense of building and maintaining this fantastically complex and difficult infrastructure, the CPEC, only to get Chinese goods to Gwadar? Who is going to buy all these goods there... Altaf Hussain's Ammi? No... the whole point of bringing Chinese goods to Gwadar is so that they can be loaded on ships and taken to their real markets in West Asia and Europe.

BUT who guarantees the security of ships plying the critical leg of this trade route between Gwadar and West Asia/Europe? The US, of course, via maritime dominance of CENTCOM.

Just as a co-dependency has evolved between American consumer markets and Chinese manufacturers, the US would like to extend that Hamiltonian entanglement by evolving a co-dependency of CPEC trade route and CENTCOM maritime security, with the added investment of energy suppliers going the other way (bringing oil and natural gas into Gwadar and trucking/pipelining it back up along the CPEC to eastern China). A whole ecosystem is thus built around this trade route in which China, the US, the Pakistanis, the EU (end customers of Chinese goods) and the ME nations (original suppliers of energy) become inextricably committed.

The one nation that can play spoiler... with its armed forces poised along the chicken-neck of the CPEC in POK/NA, and its navy capable of shutting down the Pakistani coast... is India. IF India allows this plan to proceed as envisioned, we will find ourselves overwhelmingly opposed by a large bloc of nations to anything that could interfere with the trade route in which they have all invested so much.

That is why it is imperative to disrupt this in any way we can.

[V_Raman]

After a long time, great riveting analysis on BR! Kudos!

India needs tech to develop the Mil-Ind complex. There is no choice to USA to get that. They control all the levers. They gave it to China. They will extract their pound of flesh. It is up to us to dance.

[V_Raman]

In my simple head - after this discussion - US wants to manage India's rise to its east and align china with ME. How do we get our rightful territory back in the west is the conflict.

[member_23370]

These is no choice called USA. You have to work on your own. Period.

[Rudradev]

In a nutshell: the US views China as an empire that should be dissuaded from challenging the US' own empire, and India as a nation that should be dissuaded from becoming an empire at all.

Their solution for China is to tie up the fortunes of China's empire with those of the US' empire so that both prosper or fail together.

Their solution for India is to persuade India to become a client of the US rather than a contending empire in our own right. This is done by strengthening the Chinese empire's expansion into India's sphere of influence, and then promising India protection from the threat of the Chinese empire's expansion... all the while blowing smoke up the a$$es of Indians that we are a "great nation".

Note that NOWHERE have I said that India is helpless or paralyzed or without hope (I do believe it was between 2004-2014, but I have faith that things are turning around now). I am just articulating what I see as the US strategy. Having recognized that, it is up to India to formulate our own strategy accordingly.

[ramana]

Exactly. The biggest problem Indians face is those recognizing reality are tarred as advocating positions while its vice versa!
At root of US thinking is East India Company. In fact first flag was the same!

East India Company between 1605 to 1757 used to be the protectee and protector of Indian trading.

US is reverting to that role.

Only replace India with China.

V_Raman now simplify RD's post into one sentence to get the gist!!!8

* I want participation and not just observation.
Its forum not a bulletin board.

[Philip]

The hard truth.The US cannot handle China.Their threats will be simply tossed aside.The Chinese mentality doesn't give s fu*k for the US.The Chinese know that "power stems from the barrel of a gun". Moralising India on the other hand prefers being a white nation's catamite.Our MEA in recent times has displayed grand servitude.We are showing right now that we want to wrest the title of being Asia's "rent boy" from Pakistan! How our ambitions have fallen.Perhaps Churchill was right in the end.At this rste we will be perfect White House butlers,willing servants to yet another fading empire!

That is the real tragedy.Mr.Modi and his MEA midget-minds cannot observe America's global decline.Trump can! The nation that is affecting the global pecking order massively is China.It is almost unstoppable.Tata Steel have bitten the dust in the UK becos of China.Running to Uncle Sam is a fatal mistake.His global track record shows his betrayal of his bum-chums.Contrast that with Putin and Russia's support for Assad and Syria.I would place my money on Russia anyday (remember its support in 1971) than the "sanctioning" Yanquis sfter P-2.

[SaiK]

Let us say, chip and pig does a joint strategy.

hypothetically: they create kargil-2 and aruna-1 on their joint LSA understanding.

what I am pointing here is that it would be grossly wrong to underestimate our inner desires and live under some heavy weight paper signatures losing the sight of our own vikas and action plan.

remember, we have better history for not harmfully influencing any nation on the planet. so, what is the problem in accepting a plan that we will change that view? IOW, instead of them controlling and measuring us, let's do it. IOW, let us change world to view from our PoV/. enough is enough on the K word. they must be tamed by quelling the backing forces.

- focus on pakistan splitting into 2 or 4.
- get china off tibet

.. stop there for now. q: how will the LSA look?
can I borrow about 6 squadrons of F22 raptors and their pilots under our command?

sorry, I don't know the details. hence, taking a worm out of one can here now.

[ramana]

SaiK, Don't bomb with your Syche attacks?

Write in clear language what you want to say.
Am tired and won't decode for you.