India-US Relations : News and Discussion- II

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 02 Jun 2016 19:51

foreign born students committing violence in US universities.

Virginia Tech

UC Davis

UCLA

next?

don't make the foreign born students angry......

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 02 Jun 2016 19:59

TSJones wrote:foreign born students committing violence in US universities.

Virginia Tech

UC Davis

UCLA

next?

don't make the foreign born students angry......

wud be interesting to find out what proportion of non-terrorist shootings in US univ has been by foreign-born perpetrator...is it above or lower than the 20% odd of univ base that they comprise? In STEM PhD, foreign-borns are like 40%..

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Jun 2016 20:01

vera_k wrote:Graduate of IIT-Kharagpur (BS), Stanford (MS) and UCLA(PHd). Accused professor of stealing computer code .

UCLA gunman had accused slain professor of stealing his computer code

https://www.everipedia.com/mainak-sarkar/

This could be 'hi tech' intellectual property murder.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/06/mainak-sa ... blog-post/

See all the comments

check this

Dave Parker says:
June 2, 2016 at 11:13 am
This whole thing makes alot of sense now. Two good guys with different senses of what is right. The Professor took the students code. What the student didn’t understand is that when you work for a Professor, your work becomes his property. This is where the system failed. Sarkar’s problem is that he worked in industry before coming to UCLA to do his PhD. So, in his mind his work was his own, until someone paid him cash for the work. What he failed to grasp, is that the PhD is the reward for giving the professor your ideas. The Professor saw that another student could use Sarkar’s excellent code to help the group progress on the path of the research. It’s a group effort. This upset Sarkar, who kept thinking it was his own code. Nobody explained to Sarkar that all work done under the Professor’s guidance was the Professor’s to do with as he thought best. So, Sarkar thought the Professor was just evil. With a smile and handshake, the Professor seemed to befriend to decieve and steal. That was Sarkar’s “interpretation” of what was happening. Hence Sarkar sought justice, and executed the Professor, because only he and the Professor had proof of the work and transfer of ideas going on in the group, and who would believe the student over the more important professor? The fault is with UCLA graduate committee. They should clearly explain to every entering PhD student, the reality, that the work they do for their Professor, is automatically transfered to the research program in return for the eventual PhD they get at the end. Had UCLA done that, this would never have happened. IMHO

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 02 Jun 2016 20:09

TSJones wrote:foreign born students committing violence in US universities.

Virginia Tech

UC Davis

UCLA

next?

don't make the foreign born students angry......

/sarc ... joining the mainstream

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 02 Jun 2016 20:10

US universities bastions of free speech and bill of rights............

.......and elite globalists.......

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 02 Jun 2016 20:22

work for Apple or Microsoft and see whose name is filed for the patent or copy write.......

I worked for the state of Illinois a long time ago and created an appellate court system application and was refused by my director to file a patent or copy write.......

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 02 Jun 2016 20:48

Whenever one enters a position with an entity - for profit or not - an employment contract is drawn. This young man - as is the case with most indian students/employees - might not have read the contract in detail. The reasons are complex as to why PIOs are lax in reading contracts, IMHO. Also this man was at Stanford which is well known for encouraging startups. That culture doesn't extend to state universities where the property tax paying state residents ( through the regents of UC in this case) own the code/patents/anything developed with university equipment on univeristy's time. Usually for a small fee/royalty a for profit org can use the IP. Had he been a little patient and developed in association with the professor a business plan for a startup, he and his professor and the team would have been successful both financially and in terms of credit in academic circles. Bad judgement and probably he had been praised to high heavens in his own family.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 02 Jun 2016 20:53

Self-deleted

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 02 Jun 2016 21:34

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m ... story.html

Sarkar, a resident of Minnesota, appears also to have killed a woman in a small town in that state, officials said. The woman’s name was found on a “kill list” in Sarkar’s residence, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck said. A second UCLA professor’s name was on that list as well, along with Klug’s name.

Skanda · Post by **Skanda** » 02 Jun 2016 22:51

The Untold History of Arduino

Hernando Barragán, a student of Massimo claims that he invented and did a lot of stuff for the Arduino. But Massimo, his Prof stole his work.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 03 Jun 2016 02:54

Skanda wrote:The Untold History of Arduino

Hernando Barragán, a student of Massimo claims that he invented and did a lot of stuff for the Arduino. But Massimo, his Prof stole his work.

this has nothing to do with the US or India..........or homicidal ego maniacs.....

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 03 Jun 2016 11:13

Gents the Sarkar story is an unfortunate incident and one must feel sad for the families of the victims.

Let's move on.

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 04 Jun 2016 02:22

With love from Mr.Modi to deep state massa dalal's, xpost from Strat Forum:

"We don't have any fighting with China today. We have a boundary dispute, but there is no tension or clashes. People-to-people contacts have increased. Trade has increased. Chinese investment in India has gone up. India's investment in China has grown," Modi said.

"Despite the border dispute, there haven't been any clashes. Not one bullet has been fired in 30 years," he said.

"So the general impression that exists, that's not the reality," Modi said on India's ties with China.

Modi appeared to be appreciative of China's Maritime Silk Road initiative.

"We feel that the world needs to hear more from China on this initiative, especially its intent and objective," he said.

With a 7,500 kilometre-long coastline, India has a natural and immediate interest in the developments in the Indo-Pacific region, he said, adding that India has excellent relationships with the littoral states of the Indian Ocean.

"India is a net security provider in the Indian Ocean region. We, therefore, watch very carefully any developments that have implications for peace and stability in this region," he noted.

Talking about India's ties with the US, Modi said many of the values between the two countries match.

"Our friendship has endured, be it a Republican government or a Democratic. It is true that Obama and I have a special friendship, a special wavelength," he said ahead of his travel to the US next month - his fourth visit to the country after becoming the Prime Minister.

"Beyond our bilateral relationship, whether it is global warming or terrorism, we have similar thoughts, so we work together.

"But India doesn't make its policies in reference to a third country. Nor should it," Modi said.

He said India and the US have enjoyed a warm relationship, regardless of whether America has a Republican or Democratic administration.

"During the last two years, President Obama and I have led the momentum; we are capturing the true strength and scale of our strategic, political and economic opportunities, and people to people ties. Our ties have gone beyond the Beltway and beyond South Block," he said.

"Our concerns and threats overlap. We have a growing partnership to address common global challenges viz. terrorism, cyber security and global warming. We also have a robust and growing defence cooperation. Our aim to go beyond a buyer-seller relationship towards a strong investment and manufacturing partnership," he added."

Jai ho

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 04 Jun 2016 07:08

exactly my thoughts.......India really has no problems with China other than minor border disputes. South China sea doesn't affect India.

In fact India is a very good customer of China and welcomes Chinese business development in the IOR.

any arrangement with US military is for business purposes only.

India has no desire for US military alliances that may cause conflict in SE Asia.

therefore, there will be no mutual assistance by either party in any potential conflict....

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 04 Jun 2016 07:55

We may not have any major dispute with China. But they have. they claim almost entire NE to themselves and a major portion of J&K. They deliberately pop up Pakis to contain us, just like US and west. As someone said, we need to look at the capabilities and not its intentions. Intentions can change any minute.

That being said there is no reason for us to be US Munna out of fear for China. We need to stand on our own, increase our capabilities.

SSundar · Post by **SSundar** » 04 Jun 2016 08:34

It is the nature of the Chinese to keep "bargaining" as long as the other side is giving. They back off at the sight of strong resistance and leadership. India never showed them that resistance all this while. For every "Art of War" move of theirs, India needs to show an Arthashastra move. Prior to Modi, we were only showing them white flags and our Mao/Nehru sweet nothing's.

There is plenty of room for co-opetition with China if India's netas and babus continue to show strong leadership and stand up for our interests.

While the US deep state has many interests - BIF, EJ, NPAs, Cold War Relics, etc., China has only one interest - to become a superpower. India can play to that interest and keep our own interests too.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 04 Jun 2016 10:45

Me thinks TSJ was sarcastic!

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 04 Jun 2016 11:13

vayu tuvan wrote:Me thinks TSJ was sarcastic!

no. I'm being serious.

My government either.....

a. does not understand the historical perspective of India

or....

b. playing mind game diplomacy of false flattery and self fooling positive reinforcement....in other words keep a sunny side up and the world is your oyster so to speak.

I suspect the latter because the state department folks are way more impressive test takers than I am.

if a lowly ex grunt "gets it" concerning Indian historical perspective and the implications there of, then ivy league, perfect score grad exam, test takers leave me grasping in the dust.....

SSundar · Post by **SSundar** » 04 Jun 2016 12:41

TSJ, you bet it's the latter.

There is no single US policy on India. Goes with the territory of being a pluralistic democracy. OTOH, there is a centralized India policy in China.

The funniest thing about US policy on India and Pakistan is how Hollywood deals with Pakistan - ever seen a Pak Terror movie from Hollywood actually made in Pakistan with Pakistani actors? It's always a location in Turkey, Morocco or India with Indian actors. All the while, Foggy Bottom keeps telling us how nice Pakistan is and how wretched a place India is.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 04 Jun 2016 20:19

From Bharat Karnad

Was in Washington DC for a panel discussion on "India's Asia-Pacific Outreach and Relations with China" at the Heritage Foundation on May 25. In the three days spent in the US capital meeting a number of Beltway thinktankers, what was palpable was the disappointment in Washington on several counts with the right-of-centre Bharatiya Janata Party government. The Wall Street Journal (May 26) published a curtain-raiser to prime minister Narendra Modi's second visit in two years that highlighted his inability or unwillingness to initiate “big bang” economic liberalization measures. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was damned, if not in so many words, as a waffler and only a more bombastic version of his predecessor, Manmohan Singh.

The economic interests in the US will be pacified if Modi signs up for a gigantic and manifestly unaffordable contract for Westinghouse and General Electric light water reactors as power plants under the rubric of controlling carbon emissions and climate change. The danger to India from the deal and from the dependency on imported power plants has been detailed in my writings and those of nuclear stalwarts like the late Dr PK Iyengar, AN Prasad, and A Gopalakrishnan against the nuclear deal -- arguments that were convincing enough to fire a public campaign that all but stopped that deal with the US in its tracks in Parliament in 2008 (and available in the 2009 book comprising a voluminous compilation of these writings -- 'Strategic Sellout: Indian-US Nuclear Deal' [New Delhi: Pentagon Press]).

In the ultimate analysis though, whether India matches the economic pace of the East Asian dragons or remains the perennial laggard matters less to US security enclaves who, with the strategically assertive China in mind, increasingly define the US interest in India. One of the metrics held up to judge the success of the visit is whether Modi will sign the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement. LEMOA, a differently worded version of the standard Logistics Support Agreement (LSA) the US insists on with its treaty allies and partners, is one of the three accords considered as prerequisite for close US military cooperation with India, along with the Communications Inter-operability and Security Memorandum of Agreement and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement concerning geo-spatial information (and the sharing, for instance, of digitized target coordinates). It will allow US armed forces to repair, replenish, refuel at Indian air and naval bases, and to afford its fighting personnel rest & recreation, enabling the US military to pull sustained operations in the Indian Ocean region and to cut a more active profile landward.

Peninsular India as supply-support base perfectly fills the logistics gap in the large oceanic and air expanses between the US bases in Bahrain in the Gulf and Diego Garcia in the southwestern Indian Ocean, and Singapore on the southeastern littoral.

Washington’s perception is that in recent years India has wriggled out of committing forcefully to contain China owing to two factors of Cold War vintage: America’s inhibition about selling and transferring advanced military technology to India, and its worrisome relations with Pakistan. The US is minimizing the basis of these “excuses”. In the past fortnight, the US Congress voted an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act placing India in the same league as Japan and South Korea, and removing the legal barriers to its acquiring advanced US military technology.

Islamabad’s policy of asymmetric warfare using terrorist groups to discomfit India has boomeranged because many of these same outfits (the Haqqani Taliban faction, in particular) are fighting the Pakistan army and US forces instead upending, in the process, the peace plan for Afghanistan and raising the human and financial costs of American military intervention. So, US Congress has mandated vetting of Islamabad’s anti-terrorist stance prior to the disbursal of some $450 million in annual aid. Further, the US legislature vetoed the subsidy component in the $750 million deal for the sixteen F-16 combat aircraft on order, requiring Pakistan to ante up the full cost. The bad optics of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor that will establish a Chinese Naval presence in Gwadar in the future, haven’t helped Pakistan either.

But such de-hyphenation measures do not preclude US’s continued contributions to critically enhancing Pakistan’s military capabilities. Such as providing technical fixes for the naval Harpoon missile so it can be fired from F-16 aircraft to attack land targets – the reason why the Modi government strongly protested the sale of this fighter plane to Islamabad.

The developments at the US end are motivated by a higher geostrategic purpose, of course, but are being dressed up as uniquely India-friendly actions. The scheduled address to the Joint Houses of the Congress during his June 7-8 visit by Modi is to massage his ego in the hope this will get the Obama Administration what it wants. Lest the Prime Minister be overly impressed by this gesture, he should be alerted to the fact -- which MEA surely hasn't done -- that, considering it is election season in America, he’ll find the benches filled mostly by young Congressional pages and petty officials instructed to fill the benches rather than by US legislators who will be in their constituencies.

Because LEMOA is sort of an American litmus test, it is imperative Modi appreciates what is at stake, and the gravity of the situation that will obtain should he make the wrong decision.

The draft-LEMOA has not been made public. But its wording is unlikely to violate the existing LSA parameters, or deviate much from Section E2.1.10 of the US ‘Department of Defense, Directive number 2010.9’ which describes the “Logistics Support, Supplies, and Services” that India is expected to provide. It will formalize the US basing option in India. So, calling LSA by another name will not detract from the reality of the US gaining the right to pre-position stores and set up military base structures and mechanisms in India under its control, and requiring related jurisdictional agreements to protect American military assets and personnel. {This is a key amendment that the RM claimed is not there in the Indian LEMOA. Need the language of the treaty to verify now}

As has been detailed in previous posts on this subject, the fallout will include a grounding of the Indian conventional military forces as Russia will retaliate by slowly choking off the spares supply, and begin seriously to explore the sale of sophisticated armaments to Pakistan and, most damagingly for India, possibly consider pulling out of sensitive Indian strategic R&D programmes. And, extremist Islamic groups everywhere will gear up to attack the politically juicy US military targets in India and completely roil the already uncertain conditions of internal security.

To sum up, formally allying with the United States will result in a loss of India’s ‘Russia card’ and its room for diplomatic maneuver and policy freedom, which New Delhi has hitherto prized and jealously guarded. It will gut high-value weapons development projects, militarily strengthen Pakistan, encourage terrorist activity in the country, disturb domestic politics, spawn unmanageable internal security problems, and reduce India to the status of an American camp follower. How does this serve the national interest, especially when China can more effectively be constrained, as repeatedly argued on this blog, by India and the US acting separately but unpredictably to dilute the Chinese footprint in the Indian Ocean region and in Southeast Asia?

The Modi regime, however, is entertaining a slightly different agenda of gaining membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to achieve which aim the PM will go, cap in hand, for support among the extant members of NSG as disparate as Switzerland and Mexico (included in this foreign trip). This is a show of unnecessary desperation that will fetch India nothing. Try as Washington might -- and there are serious doubts about how much the Barack Obama Administration will put out for India, its NSG admission depends on China's not objecting to it. Beijing has made it clear that its contrary hyphenation scheme -- India gets in only if Pakistan too is admitted. The problem for New Delhi is that it wants to rouse the bulk of the NSG states to separate India and Pakistan and contest China's position when, quite honestly, no one gives a damn whether India gets in or not. So, its will be, as usual, a futile effort.

This is what comes of decades of the Indian government raising Pakistan status as this country's primary military threat -- when it is nothing of the sort. Except it has helped, and continues to, US, China, Russia, and any other country which wants to play the game and place the two South Asian countries on the same scale.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jun 2016 20:37

i very much doubt regardless of any agreement, the usn needs or want to setup okinawa style base or even weapons depots here. a base is domestic politics wise impossible

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 04 Jun 2016 20:41

KrishnaK wrote: Such is the fear of US on this forum, that you ascribe capabilities to the US that it just does not have. China and India cannot be contained unless their behaviour puts large numbers of their neighbours and natural competitors in their enemy camp.

Not fear. Distrust.

As a nation-state, India fears no one, just like US fears no one.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 04 Jun 2016 20:50

Singha wrote:i very much doubt regardless of any agreement, the usn needs or want to setup okinawa style base or even weapons depots here. a base is domestic politics wise impossible

No, not a base. LEMOA does not enable that. This is subtle and enables very similar capabilities. It is about forward positioning of arms and wares. If that is allowed, then the next operational step is about guarding these assets, which of course the US wants to do on its own.

Okinawa is governed by Japan's bilateral security treaties with the US.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 04 Jun 2016 21:15

This entire LEMOA thing stinks to high heaven and should be junked in the deep end of the Indian ocean somewhere. Preferably near the Chagos archipelago. US shills can continue to keep propagandising, but in 10 years' time, we will have realised the folly of signing this.

To all the US bakhts: just questioning Amriki motives is not fear, but simple distrust as panduranghari saar said. I have been seeing this constant "why fear when US is here" on this thread as though India is shivering in dhotis waiting for some manna, er massa from heaven to deal with China. But such folks can't really digest the fact that there are people who simply don't trust the US for very good reasons, so just saying "trust us" and "don't fear" doesn't cut it. Trust is a quality that takes a lot of effort to build up, and very little to fritter away. Unfortunately, despite all rah-rah propaganda, the latter has been amply demonstrated by the US time and again that the former is actually laughable.

Once again, for the umpteenth time, let me pose these questions again (going by past experience, I don't expect to get any satisfactory answers):
What does the US get from this LEMOA and why are they pushing so hard for this? In what way does it add to their capabilities missing from similar agreements they have with other nearby countries?

nvishal · Post by **nvishal** » 04 Jun 2016 21:56

There are no plans to buy hard fire power from the US in the short or mid term

LEMOA and others don't arise
Although that will not stop the US from trying each time we engage. They need to be entertained.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 04 Jun 2016 22:47

ShauryaT wrote:No, not a base. LEMOA does not enable that. This is subtle and enables very similar capabilities. It is about forward positioning of arms and wares. If that is allowed, then the next operational step is about guarding these assets, which of course the US wants to do on its own.

The defence minister was quite blunt about the terms of the agreement -

"It does not involve any war exchanges, or manpower coming on our bases. This is only refueling, re-watering and food supplies.. Our agreement is for any international humanitarian assistance or normal exercises. We can take the benefit from each other's facilities. It does not involve any operational use, for that approval will be needed on case-to-case basis."

So from where are you coming up with 'forward positioning of arms and wares'?

Also, for the record there is a purpose to forward positioning equipment and that is to operationalise a fighting force by simply flying in the troops thus avoiding the time consumed by a regular expeditionary effort. Which makes sense in Japan, South Korea, Philippines, Poland or the Baltics but serves absolutely no purpose in India.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Jun 2016 23:41

Ahead of Modi’s visit, India and US to discuss new cooperation on defence

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Jun 2016 23:43

India And US Discuss 'Networked Security Architecture', Says Pentagon

disha · Post by **disha** » 05 Jun 2016 04:33

There is a major distrust among the formites on Modi Sarkaar as well. This is the faultline that is being exploited and wedged to cause further divisions IMHO. Calling a group which looks at deeper partnership as 'American Bhakts' itself is name calling and stereotyping.

Changing tracks, the BK article is dripping in sarcasm., several of which is unwarranted and actually unnecessary and paints BK as severely out of touch with reality.

At the same time BK does explain the issues with LEMOA and CISMOA fluently. I would rather have BK spend some thoughts and words on explaining how the LEMOA/CISMOA constrains India and is a back-door way of getting a western power into India., its implications thereof and its alternatives.

In this statement., BK basically calls Modi a beggar:

The Modi regime, however, is entertaining a slightly different agenda of gaining membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) to achieve which aim the PM will go, cap in hand, for support among the extant members of NSG as disparate as Switzerland and Mexico (included in this foreign trip). This is a show of unnecessary desperation that will fetch India nothing

Is our self-esteem so low that we cannot see beyond our noses and think that Mexico might be an excellent gateway to LatAm based on a growing trade? And the visit to switzerland might as well be giving them a "gentle" dressing down. For all the black money deals?

Again the above is an observation., what makes me wonder about all the rona-dhona on Modi Sarkaar will sign LEMOA/CISMOA etc is this statement from BK:

.. One of the metrics held up to judge the success of the visit is whether Modi will sign the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement. LEMOA, a differently worded version of the standard Logistics Support Agreement (LSA) the US insists on with its treaty allies and partners, is one of the three accords considered as prerequisite for close US military cooperation with India, along with the Communications Inter-operability and Security Memorandum of Agreement and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement concerning geo-spatial information (and the sharing, for instance, of digitized target coordinates).

So basically the americans are telling the indians that "hey, your visit is useless and only for optics unless you sign on the dotted line".

Can we not read it from the Indian POV and entertain the possibility - "hey., our visit is mainly for the optics and nothing to do with the dotted line - also can we have more samosas please - oh BTW the joint address to the US congress by Modi - the chaiwallah you just so rejected yesterday makes for an excellent optics"

It does not matter whether the US Congress is attended by the underlings during the election season. The fact is those underlings will have seen Modi and what will go down the history is that Modi address Joint US Congress.

And my reading of this statement from BK:

...a number of Beltway thinktankers, what was palpable was the disappointment in Washington on several counts with the right-of-centre Bharatiya Janata Party government. The Wall Street Journal (May 26) published a curtain-raiser to prime minister Narendra Modi's second visit in two years that highlighted his inability or unwillingness to initiate “big bang” economic liberalization measures. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was damned, if not in so many words, as a waffler and only a more bombastic version of his predecessor, Manmohan Singh.

is., that the Americans have either gone tone deaf (when do they not?) OR - Modi Sarkar has not given them what they were asking for - like complete access to Indian Markets for American goods and services in the guise of 'big bang reforms'. This is the american grouse.

---

I do not think a country which can pull off a difficult project in Afghanistan or pull its (and other countries) citizens from Yemen while the war is ongoing is so daft to barter away its independence for LEMOA/CISMOA/BECA.
---

So my question is if say India signs LEMOA., can India use Diego Garcia?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 05 Jun 2016 04:41

^^^"So my question is if say India signs LEMOA., can India use Diego Garcia?"

Yes for the same purposes for which the USN can use Indian facilities, unless explicitly excluded just like Indian facilities.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Jun 2016 04:52

Disha ji,

We all, including BK (I bet he has no clue what is in it), need to wait for the text if the agreement to come out.

US gaining the right to pre-position stores and set up military base structures and mechanisms in India under its control, and requiring related jurisdictional agreements to protect American military assets and personnel.

Fear.

Pre-position for what exactly. To take away the Russian card. BK has taken the words from the communist s in India. Which is his prerogative.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 05 Jun 2016 05:02

^^^ BK is is now reduced to eructations. The Subramaniam Swamy of the 'strategic' community. He was on a tear about k4 tests being delayed due to Modi's US visit.

"Two nuclear submarines carried out their first critical tests on the island recently-the SSBN Arihant fired a K-4 ballistic missile and the nuclear-powered attack submarine INS Chakra fired a land-attack version of the Klub cruise missile. The icing on the cake: both tests were successful."

BK has an agenda or directive that is no longer fathomable

http://m.indiatoday.in/story/glasshouse ... 82904.html

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Jun 2016 05:02

So my question is if say India signs LEMOA., can India use Diego Garcia?

For resupply, repairs and rest.

Again, most - 95% + - will be peace time.

Besides, India is availing of all US facilities today. Even under UPA.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Jun 2016 06:06

Hmmmm......

Carter in Singapore (with Parrikar):

He added: “On our side, another thing the US is working very hard on is in changing India’s status in US’s export control system which is somewhat outdated and belongs to the previous era. We are working on a host of research projects of military importance. The point is Prime Minister Modi’s Make In India policy and our technology policy should come together.” - See more at: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... uFd5o.dpuf

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 05 Jun 2016 06:44

i very much doubt regardless of any agreement, the usn needs or want to setup okinawa style base or even weapons depots here. a base is domestic politics wise impossible

Yes, and the first step would be to get the Indic population in confidence and, given level of distrust, the best way is to start with a very basic form of agreements that gets you a foot in the door. Then spend few years accessing each others bases, photo ops, orchestrated media events, fancy landings on each other's naval carriers, lots of coverage of UndiTV, NoTimesNow, SheNN/18 etc, convince people that see "as promised" you are using ours, we are using yours, no harm. Like in Camel's Nose story, it all started on a happy note for the Arab.

Wonder if the security agreement include one free stay-out-of-jail pass for a rape once a year? Poor Japanese. Everytime they bring out the topic of ending the bases, someone makes a phone call to NoKo, which results in some mijjle tests, suggesting how much Japanese are under threat, and then the discussion of moving the bases ends.

US Sailor Indicted in Okinawa Rape Case: Reports

Okinawa Rape Suspect's Lawyer Gives Dark Account : Japan: Attorney of accused Marine says co-defendant admitted assaulting 12-year-old girl 'just for fun.'

U.S. Marine convicted of killing transgender Filipina

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 05 Jun 2016 08:52

No Exceptions for a Nuclear India

No Exceptions for a Nuclear India

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD

JUNE 4, 2016

America’s relationship with India has blossomed under President Obama, who will meet with Prime Minister Narendra Modi this week. Ideally, Mr. Obama could take advantage of the ties he has built and press for India to adhere to the standards on nuclear proliferation to which other nuclear weapons states adhere.

The problem, however, is that the relationship with India rests on a dangerous bargain. For years, the United States has sought to bend the rules for India’s nuclear program to maintain India’s cooperation on trade and to counter China’s growing influence. In 2008, President George W. Bush signed a civilian nuclear deal with India that allowed it to trade in nuclear materials. This has encouraged Pakistan to keep expanding a nuclear weapons program that is already the fastest growing in the world.

Now, India has Mr. Obama’s strong support in its bid to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a 48-nation body that governs trade in nuclear-related exports and aims to ensure that civilian trade in nuclear materials is not diverted for military uses. Membership would enhance India’s standing as a nuclear weapons state, but it is not merited until the country meets the group’s standards.
Photo
President Obama and Prime Minister Modi meeting last November. Credit Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

All group members have signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, either as nuclear weapons states (the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China) or as non-nuclear weapons states (everybody else). India has refused, which means it has not accepted legally binding commitments to pursue disarmament negotiations, halt the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons and not test nuclear weapons.

President Bush squandered an opportunity to demand more of India when he signed the 2008 deal, which opened the door to American trade in nuclear technology for civilian energy, something India had insisted was a prerequisite to more cooperation and lucrative business deals.

As part of the 2008 deal, the Indians promised they would be “ready to assume the same responsibilities and practices” as other nations with advanced nuclear technology. But they have fallen far short by continuing to produce fissile material and to expand their nuclear arsenal.

The Nuclear Suppliers Group is to discuss India’s application later this month. Mr. Obama is lobbying for India to win membership through a special exception. If he succeeds, India would be in a position to keep Pakistan, which has also applied for membership, from gaining membership because group decisions must be unanimous. That could give Pakistan, which at one time provided nuclear technology to North Korea and Iran, new incentives to misbehave.

Opposition from China, which is close to Pakistan and views India as a rival, could doom India’s bid for now. But the issue will not go away. India is growing in importance and seeking greater integration into organizations that govern international affairs. If it wants recognition as a nuclear weapons state, it should be required to meet the nuclear group’s standards, including opening negotiations with Pakistan and China on curbing nuclear weapons and halting the production of nuclear fuel for bombs.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

A version of this editorial appears in print on June 5, 2016, on page SR8 of the New York edition with the headline: No Exceptions for a Nuclear India. Today's Paper|

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Jun 2016 12:17

Singha wrote:i very much doubt regardless of any agreement, the usn needs or want to setup okinawa style base or even weapons depots here. a base is domestic politics wise impossible

Since 2013 or so, the US has been in talks with Malaysia for a regular base.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Jun 2016 13:46

H-1B Visa Fraud: Two Indian-American Brothers Jailed For 7 Years

http://profit.ndtv.com/news/corporates/ ... rs-1415658

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Jun 2016 17:07

Data point.

Modi Visit Underlines Changed India-US Relationship

Ashley Tellis, a former State Department official now with the Carnegie Endowment, calls the Modi visit “a culmination of what Obama has tried to do since he came into office, adding that “executive branch to executive branch — that is a dramatic transformation where the US today sees India as a security partner of choice in the broader Indo-Pacific region.”

Frank Wisner, an ambassador to India under President Clinton, said for all these reasons, the barriers to the relationship are no longer political, but based only on bureaucracy for the US and defense budgets for India. {note}

"This is one of the biggest, fastest moving defense relationships in the world, period," said Wisner, now with the international law firm Squire Patton Boggs, adding later: "We have an interest in an India that is robustly armed. India is not a predatory power, and she is big enough and important enough that she helps anchor the balance of power in Asia. A good relationship with India is part of a good relationship with China."

India is seeking help from the US in two major areas: engine technology for its proposed homegrown advanced medium combat aircraft (AMCA), and an electro-magnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) for the proposed indigenous aircraft carrier INS Vishal.

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 06 Jun 2016 06:02

U.S. military WANTS India to counterbalance China’s rise as a sea power (WaPo)

NEW DELHI — In a recent speech in New Delhi, the outspoken commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, Adm. Harry B. Harris Jr., was nearly poetic when he discussed the growing relationship between India and the United States, saying he was a “bit moonstruck” about the possibilities.

“In the not too distant future, American and Indian Navy vessels steaming together will become a common and welcome sight throughout Indo-Asia-Pacific waters,” he said, “as we work together to maintain freedom of the seas for all nations.”

The comments struck a chord — though, perhaps, not the note Harris wanted. Just a few days later, India’s defense minister, Manohar Parrikar, publicly rebuked him, saying India does not participate in joint patrols.
.....