India-US relations: News and Discussions IV

[habal]

USA strategic leverage over India revolves around Kashmir & pakistan.

S400 neutralizes the sword edge of that leverage by blocking US/NATO air intervention.

Trump is signalling loss of leverage by winking at Imran.

USA got distant from pakistan, not due to India, but due to policy differences in Afghanistan.

Distancing India will not help bridge policy differences in Afghanistan, except for cosmetic handouts to USA by pakistan. This is temporary in nature.

So we come back to question ?

What did USA plan to do with its strategic leverage on kashmir & pakistan.

Apparently the plans were not noble or beneficial to India as is being made evident on potential loss of the leverage, the intention is to spite India which is a response to the lost opportunity to spite India on some pretext if options of intervention were kept open.

So the intention was not good in the first place.

So what happens.

Nothing changes, except for signalling by US that a lot will change.

India has no option but to acquire S400 and limit US mischief making capacity in the region.

[schinnas]

Here is my take on it:

Trump is a very tactical player focused primarily on economy and tangible optics. His playbook is getting to be very predictable. He is not such an incoherent idiot that he is made out to be, may be ignorant when it comes to smaller states like Nepal, Bhutan, etc., but definitely his K remark wasnt a stupid utterance but his way of arm twisting India on the wish-list US has with us.

So what Trump wants with India?

1. 5G (Dump Huawei and buy more expensive Amreki maal. This is strategic for their economy to not lose one of the long term lucrative industry to Cheen). Trump is arm twisting all allies including EU and UK and India is no exception.
2. Dump S-400 and go with expensive Amreeki solution even if it may not address all our operational needs.
3. Drop data Localization. This not only provides legal jurisdiction over Indian's data owned by US companies to GoI, it will also enable India to tax these companies based on the data generated / used in the future. Economically strategic.
4. Tarrif concessions including some optics. Most Harley riders in USA are die hard Trump supporters and that explains why Trump publicly calls out Harley even though in terms of absolute numbers, it is a small piece of the puzzle... but the optics on it for Trump are too good to ignore in the run up to the elections.
5. Purchase Amreeki maal for MMRCA, etc.

Of all these asks, Modi is unlikely to yield on S-400 and Data localization.

Modi will yield on Tarrif concessions, especially on Harley Davidons and similar low impact but high optic items. Modi may yield on 5G as India is also concerned with Huawei for security reasons. Do expect little more purchase of Amreeki mall than the apaches and drones proposed.

The bitter pill for India here is that we gain nothing in return. We are losing billions by not buying oil from Iran to adhere to unilateral Amreeki sanctions and be in Trump's good books. We gain little by buying more expensive US goods than what we really need. All for nothing tangible from US in terms of friendly trade deal or on Afghanistan.

US cannot play the H1B card any more than what they already have as their own industries are now up in arms and moving entire operations to India. IT will hurt them more if they touch H1Bs more. The only major card US has now is selective tarrifs on India (which Orange already started) and Kashmir / prop up Pakistan army.

MAD has blunted the other card US had in the past - NGOs that obstruct progress, media and US black sheeps in policy making, media, etc. They have been mostly outed and proved to be toothless now. This reduces American leverage vs India. So Trump may double down on the threat of propping up Paki army and make noises on Kashmir, which he knows India cannot ignore.

Not sure what cards Modi have to avoid this being a continuous one sided consession and make it a give and take.

[Rahulsidhu]

schinnas ji, I think yours is a good take, and I agree for the most part.

The bitter pill for India here is that we gain nothing in return. We are losing billions by not buying oil from Iran to adhere to unilateral Amreeki sanctions and be in Trump's good books. We gain little by buying more expensive US goods than what we really need. All for nothing tangible from US in terms of friendly trade deal or on Afghanistan.

This is the only part where I differ. The reality of today's world is that globalisation is coming to a screeching halt. The path to prosperity that China took (essentially riding US coattails into superpowah status) is no longer available to us. Or at least it would come at a cost.

India has a trade surplus with the US on the order of about 25 bln. Moreoever, if we are able to attract some of the manufacturing fleeing from China, this could increase further. Tariffs/geopolitical stability is one of the top factors on the decision makers' minds. If we are able to do a trade deal of some sort, it would be something to showcase to attract huge chunks of investment.

Moreover, ceding the costs you mentioned on trade would let us stand our ground firmly on cultural, diplomatic and security issues. I think a win win is possible.

[Karthik S]

Here is my take on it:

Trump is a very tactical player focused primarily on economy and tangible optics. His playbook is getting to be very predictable. He is not such an incoherent idiot that he is made out to be, may be ignorant when it comes to smaller states like Nepal, Bhutan, etc., but definitely his K remark wasnt a stupid utterance but his way of arm twisting India on the wish-list US has with us.

So what Trump wants with India?

1. 5G (Dump Huawei and buy more expensive Amreki maal. This is strategic for their economy to not lose one of the long term lucrative industry to Cheen). Trump is arm twisting all allies including EU and UK and India is no exception.
2. Dump S-400 and go with expensive Amreeki solution even if it may not address all our operational needs.
3. Drop data Localization. This not only provides legal jurisdiction over Indian's data owned by US companies to GoI, it will also enable India to tax these companies based on the data generated / used in the future. Economically strategic.
4. Tarrif concessions including some optics. Most Harley riders in USA are die hard Trump supporters and that explains why Trump publicly calls out Harley even though in terms of absolute numbers, it is a small piece of the puzzle... but the optics on it for Trump are too good to ignore in the run up to the elections.
5. Purchase Amreeki maal for MMRCA, etc.

Of all these asks, Modi is unlikely to yield on S-400 and Data localization.

Modi will yield on Tarrif concessions, especially on Harley Davidons and similar low impact but high optic items. Modi may yield on 5G as India is also concerned with Huawei for security reasons. Do expect little more purchase of Amreeki mall than the apaches and drones proposed.

The bitter pill for India here is that we gain nothing in return. We are losing billions by not buying oil from Iran to adhere to unilateral Amreeki sanctions and be in Trump's good books. We gain little by buying more expensive US goods than what we really need. All for nothing tangible from US in terms of friendly trade deal or on Afghanistan.

US cannot play the H1B card any more than what they already have as their own industries are now up in arms and moving entire operations to India. IT will hurt them more if they touch H1Bs more. The only major card US has now is selective tarrifs on India (which Orange already started) and Kashmir / prop up Pakistan army.

MAD has blunted the other card US had in the past - NGOs that obstruct progress, media and US black sheeps in policy making, media, etc. They have been mostly outed and proved to be toothless now. This reduces American leverage vs India. So Trump may double down on the threat of propping up Paki army and make noises on Kashmir, which he knows India cannot ignore.

Not sure what cards Modi have to avoid this being a continuous one sided consession and make it a give and take.

Not really saar, they are really strong in TN (sterlite etc) and other flock areas. Even last week or so they got Mumbai coastal road cancelled through court, may not be US based NGO, but still NGO PILs are still going strong.

[vijayk]

All the efforts of Ashton Carter and Manohar Parrikar went out the window with DT winning.

??? what is this?

[Rakesh]

@vijayk: So what is special about Indo-US "defence" ties? Read this tweet first...

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1143851303283482624 ---->

Let us look at this 'deep' & 'broad' convergence in India-US ties. Does it extend to:

1. Climate Change - No
2. Trade issues - No
3. Pakistan - No
4. Russia - No
5. China - Not really

So what is it then?

6. US arms sales to India - Yessss! You've got it. Applause all round.

The US obviously makes cutting edge military technology. The stuff they export to the rest of the world comes under stringent - as it should be - export controls. It is their tech after all and they can do with it, as they please.

Indo-US relations have only being going up since President Clinton's visit to India in March 2000. India is peeking out of the Russian umbrella and has begun to taste what the Americans are offering. India now operates a variety of American platforms i.e. AH-64, CH-47, P-8I, C-130, C-17, M777 and possibly MH-60R, NASAMs, etc, etc, etc. All great platforms indeed and proven as well. And both sides want to take this a step further. There has also been a host of agreements that have been signed as well - COMCASA in 2018, LEMOA in 2016 and GSOMIA in 2002. Only BECA is still left to be signed. The US has also granted Major Defence Partner status to India, to sell stuff like Predator drones. American diplomacy almost always involves the American MIC, unless you are Turks & Caicos (a resort island!) and have no need for military hardware. India has security concerns and America has weapons to sell. A relationship made in heaven! Add China (a common enemy to both countries) to the mix and India is ripe to sell military hardware to.

Ashton Carter and Manohar Parrikar worked to iron out many - but not ALL - of the differences or sticking points between the two nations. This was music to the pro-US crowd on BRF. Fables and Yarns then began to be spun - on BRF and their friends in the media - on a golden era in Indo-US relations. Despite the MMRCA hiccup in 2011 (when the F-16 and F-18 lost in the technical down-select), thanks to Ashton Carter and Manohar Parrikar...the relationship was back on solid ground and moving full steam ahead. Hillary Clinton would have only further cemented that relationship and India would now be enjoying a honeymoon with the United States. There was partnership on aircraft carriers (JWGACTC), jet engines (JETJWG), drones, etc, etc, etc. Jobs were to be created in India in galore thanks to aviation industries that would spawn as a result of F-16s and F-18s being made in India. I believe the number was 200 F-16s and 100 F-18s for the Indian Air Force and a separate order of F-18s for the Indian Navy. And then there was exporting F-16s and F-18s to the world! Indian Navy aircraft carriers - operating F-18s - would be influencing policy from Alaska to the Indian Ocean and beyond! The very idea that carrier groups of the Indian and US Navies could be working together - in the South China Sea - were giving orgasmic euphoria to the pro US crowd on BRF. Make In India was being touted - on BRF and in the media - as a perfect vehicle for US tech to be gifted to India. To even mention about US sanctions on India was considered foolishness on BRF. America could do no wrong and India was a receptive vehicle for American military hardware. BRF's risk assessors had gamed out all scenarios and India - under the blessing of America's all-seeing eye - was going to win them all!

Then Donald Trump aka The Stable Genius came in and messed it all up. It foiled all the plans that the pro US crowd - on BRF and in the media - had for Indo-US relations. Make America Great Again does not help. Now the new strategy is this --> desperately hope and pray that DT loses the 2020 elections. Then magically erase the previous four years of Indo-US relations (20 Jan 2017 - 19 Jan 2021) and start afresh on Indo-US relations. We should ignore the fact that the DT just sided with India's arch enemy (Pakistan) and agreed to intervene on Kashmir as a third party mediator. We should just ignore the fact that that the CAATSA waiver has yet to be given to India. Just some of the few benefits of being granted Major Defence Partner status. To even bring this up will be very close minded on the part of BRF India must always be open and receptive to America, regardless if the American Administration is working for India's interests or against it. After all, only America can save India from the Chinese Dragon. To spurn America would be invite the wrath of the Chinese Dragon and would be detrimental for India.

You better start learning Mandarin and Cantonese. Because we may get assimilated into the Chinese collective

[Cain Marko]

I fully expect jhappi chuppi and such to continue from GOI. Shornets and possibly soopa carrier purchase will be sooner than later.

Wow, abhi lafz zabaan sey nikley nahi aur lo and behold...

Sources said that the Virginia, US based Huntington Ingalls – the sole designer and builder producer of American aircraft carriers - could be roped in for a consultant for the future Indian warship plan. India and the US have an official Joint Working Group on Aircraft Carrier Technology Cooperation that has been meeting to work on the project.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economic ... 381152.cms

My guess is that India will either buy 114 MMRCA from Uncleji or Navy's next gen 50 shornets + carrier consultancy.

I'm leaning towards latter since IAF will probly get additional 36 rafale, Mig 29, and MKI until MWF comes along. Possibly more Tejas mk1a if MWF is delayed and to make up numbers .
IAF sqd strength r
15+ mki
6 jag
4 fulcrum
4 rafale
3 mirage 2k
6+ Tejas
That will take them close to the sanctioned 39.5 number. Additional sqds will be Tejas mk1a or mki as needed.

Trump will get his pound of flesh....

[Kashi]

Will wait for something substantive. News reports mean nothing till the ink dries on the contract.

[ramana]

Trump will get veggie burger.

[ramana]

RahulSidhu

Does the trade include good and services?
And when we say $25B imbalance is it in goods or services?

[Rahulsidhu]

^^ Yes, including goods and services both. From the USTR page:

The U.S. goods trade deficit with India was $21.3 billion in 2018, a 7.1% decrease ($1.6 billion) over 2017.

The United States has a services trade deficit of an estimated $3.0 billion with India in 2018, down 32.5% from 2017.

TBH i am not sure how accurate these numbers are. I think the services deficit might be actually understated by a fair bit as companies book revenues in low tax jurisdictions as much as transfer pricing agreements allow.

Anyway, this deficit is what Trump thinks gives him leverage with India. Just like China but an order of magnitude less.

The opportunity here is for India and US to trade less w China (which runs giant surpluses against both while being a strategic competitor) and trade more w each other.

[uskumar]

The opportunity here is for India and US to trade less w China (which runs giant surpluses against both while being a strategic competitor) and trade more w each other.

I dont think US wants more trade with India or for that matter with any other country as substitute for trade with China. He is targeting almost all countries including Vietnam, Mexico and even Germany(and by extension EU). Having said that, i believe trade deficit is over stated, as lot of companies book their profits in no-tax or low-tax jurisdictions. Most companies IT Product companies book their products in Ireland, Netherlands or singapore. I believe there is real need to have reset on US-India Relationship and it should be back to Mutually beneficial relationship. A review of all past agreements right from 123 agreement ,LEMOA and COMCASA. If there is no Strategic relationship why have one sided Military purchases, logistic agreements and communication protocols.

[Rahulsidhu]

The opportunity here is for India and US to trade less w China (which runs giant surpluses against both while being a strategic competitor) and trade more w each other.

I don't think US wants more trade with India or for that matter with any other country as substitute for trade with China. He is targeting almost all countries including Vietnam, Mexico and even Germany(and by extension EU).

Trump/US has no problem with more trade. They do have a problem with trade deficits, which is understandable. We should have a problem with our trade deficit with China as well, not enough attention is being paid to that.

Having said that, i believe trade deficit is over stated, as lot of companies book their profits in no-tax or low-tax jurisdictions. Most companies IT Product companies book their products in Ireland, Netherlands or singapore.

If they book their profits in other locations (I already pointed this out), how would it overstate the deficit? It would do just the reverse?

[pankajs]

I believe there is real need to have reset on US-India Relationship and it should be back to Mutually beneficial relationship. A review of all past agreements right from 123 agreement ,LEMOA and COMCASA. If there is no Strategic relationship why have one sided Military purchases, logistic agreements and communication protocols.

While I agree with the over thrust of the above, I would like to point out the following.

1. Reset or readjustment need not be an event driven one time activity rather a reappraisal & readjustment should be continuous process. The relationship should constantly adjust to account for the power differential BUT more importantly the needs of the parties.

2. With regards to 123, LEMOA and COMCASA it is important to note that both BJP and CON seem to be in agreement. While BJP did make a lot of noise on 123 initially this GOI has quietly taken it forward. While LEMOA and COMCASA was signed by the Modi led BJP the CON party did not register any significant opposition. What we can note for all of it ...

2a. Both major parties seems to agree that the agreements are in India's interest.
2b. Both parties seem to agree that the US relationship, with all its ups and downs, is important and therefore agreements are neither signed nor junked casually.
2c. The military purchases till date have had merit on their own. It will be tested going forward when the MMRCA 2.0 gets rolling.
2d. IF at some point any of the agreements start costing more that its benefit, I am sure GOI would suitably "alter" is compliance and make the agreement irrelevant. It can be done without much fanfare. Agreements between big countries like India and the US is as good their sincerity.

BTW, the latest defense deal in the news ...
https://www.deccanherald.com/national/d ... 49666.html
Deal to buy 24 choppers from USA by 2019 end

India is likely to sign a mega defence deal with the USA to buy 24 multi-role helicopters for the Navy at a cost of nearly Rs 17,000 crore ($ 2.6 billion), Navy Chief Admiral Karambir Singh said here on Thursday.

“In the multi-role helicopter project, the procedure for Letter of Request and Letter of Acceptance is on. We should be able to sign it by the end of this year,” Admiral Singh told reporters on the sideline of a FICCI seminar here.

In April, the Donald Trump administration issued an official notification to sell 24 MH-60R multi-mission helicopters through the Foreign Military Sales route. As per the US law, the proposal has to be formally approved by the Congress before the actual sale can take place.

This was the first Indo-US defense deal approved after the two countries in September signed the Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA) – one of the foundation agreements that Washington wanted New Delhi to sign in order to set the ground for transfer of high-tech US military equipment.

Now that Trump has needled India on Kashmir and seems to be on a patch up with Bakistan, what should the Modi do? How many folks feel the deal should be cancelled to register our disapproval of the whole nautanki in DC?

[nandakumar]

I don't think US wants more trade with India or for that matter with any other country as substitute for trade with China. He is targeting almost all countries including Vietnam, Mexico and even Germany(and by extension EU).

Trump/US has no problem with more trade. They do have a problem with trade deficits, which is understandable. We should have a problem with our trade deficit with China as well, not enough attention is being paid to that.

Having said that, i believe trade deficit is over stated, as lot of companies book their profits in no-tax or low-tax jurisdictions. Most companies IT Product companies book their products in Ireland, Netherlands or singapore.

If they book their profits in other locations (I already pointed this out), how would it overstate the deficit? It would do just the reverse?

Well, theoretically, deficits can be over stated if US companies underreported exports to India, from the US. Let us say there is a Microsoft development centre in India. This centre has to absorb let us say $ 100 as its share of head office (Redmond in Washington State) overheads in its operations. Had the full $100 was accounted as import of services from the US it would be narrowing the trade deficit that US shows in its statistics. But if it is broken up as $ 90 from US and $10 from a tax haven such as Luxeomburg naturally the deficit as far as Indo-US trade is concerned would widen. Now if you argue that the Luxembourg office of Microsoft is rendering some bonafide service then of course I have no answer. But I think that is what the postor is contending.

[Rahulsidhu]

Well, theoretically, deficits can be over stated if US companies underreported exports to India, from the US. Let us say there is a Microsoft development centre in India. This centre has to absorb let us say $ 100 as its share of head office (Redmond in Washington State) overheads in its operations. Had the full $100 was accounted as import of services from the US it would be narrowing the trade deficit that US shows in its statistics. But if it is broken up as $ 90 from US and $10 from a tax haven such as Luxeomburg naturally the deficit as far as Indo-US trade is concerned would widen. Now if you argue that the Luxembourg office of Microsoft is rendering some bonafide service then of course I have no answer. But I think that is what the postor is contending.

No, the Luxembourg office is clearly just for the tax benefits, however my point is that the MSFT center is obviously a net creator of services otherwise it won't be there? Allocation of overheads etc would be more than offset by the services rendered by the center for offshore offices.

I don't think you would argue that India is a net IT services importer from the US?

[nandakumar]

Rahulsidhu
No I wont argue that India is a net importer of Services from the US. The opposite is certainly the case. That said, I was only pointing out that the deficit that the US is complaining about could certainly be made to look worse than what the reality is by artificial tax structures of MNCs.

[Rahulsidhu]

^^ my simple point was that if India is a net exporter of services, then profit shifting would lead to understatement of the services deficit, not overstatement. Anyway, let's move on, its getting OT.

[Suraj]

India runs an approximately $8-10 billon MONTHLY surplus in services trade, with exports being around $19 billion and imports of $9-12 billion.
Here's the latest RBI press release reporting May 2019 data.

[V_Raman]

I have believed this for many years now. India will get the Shornets due to below factors
Engine commonality with LCA/MWF
Navy fighter - F18 is a battle proven carrier fighter
We might be able to acquire many lightly used airframes from other NATO countries as they move to F35
We need to give some fighter jet order to USA - there is no escaping this - I think there is some agreement here due to 123, MTCR, etc.

If we get the KittyHawk - as it is being suggested here - I will be shocked!

[Vidur]

I believe there is real need to have reset on US-India Relationship and it should be back to Mutually beneficial relationship. A review of all past agreements right from 123 agreement ,LEMOA and COMCASA. If there is no Strategic relationship why have one sided Military purchases, logistic agreements and communication protocols.

While I agree with the over thrust of the above, I would like to point out the following.

1. Reset or readjustment need not be an event driven one time activity rather a reappraisal & readjustment should be continuous process. The relationship should constantly adjust to account for the power differential BUT more importantly the needs of the parties.

2. With regards to 123, LEMOA and COMCASA it is important to note that both BJP and CON seem to be in agreement. While BJP did make a lot of noise on 123 initially this GOI has quietly taken it forward. While LEMOA and COMCASA was signed by the Modi led BJP the CON party did not register any significant opposition. What we can note for all of it ...

2a. Both major parties seems to agree that the agreements are in India's interest.
2b. Both parties seem to agree that the US relationship, with all its ups and downs, is important and therefore agreements are neither signed nor junked casually.
2c. The military purchases till date have had merit on their own. It will be tested going forward when the MMRCA 2.0 gets rolling.
2d. IF at some point any of the agreements start costing more that its benefit, I am sure GOI would suitably "alter" is compliance and make the agreement irrelevant. It can be done without much fanfare. Agreements between big countries like India and the US is as good their sincerity.

BTW, the latest defense deal in the news ...
https://www.deccanherald.com/national/d ... 49666.html
Deal to buy 24 choppers from USA by 2019 end

India is likely to sign a mega defence deal with the USA to buy 24 multi-role helicopters for the Navy at a cost of nearly Rs 17,000 crore ($ 2.6 billion), Navy Chief Admiral Karambir Singh said here on Thursday.

“In the multi-role helicopter project, the procedure for Letter of Request and Letter of Acceptance is on. We should be able to sign it by the end of this year,” Admiral Singh told reporters on the sideline of a FICCI seminar here.

In April, the Donald Trump administration issued an official notification to sell 24 MH-60R multi-mission helicopters through the Foreign Military Sales route. As per the US law, the proposal has to be formally approved by the Congress before the actual sale can take place.

This was the first Indo-US defense deal approved after the two countries in September signed the Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA) – one of the foundation agreements that Washington wanted New Delhi to sign in order to set the ground for transfer of high-tech US military equipment.

Now that Trump has needled India on Kashmir and seems to be on a patch up with Bakistan, what should the Modi do? How many folks feel the deal should be cancelled to register our disapproval of the whole nautanki in DC?

I would have expected that after all the analysis here people would know that the MOST Critical need of the Navy is Anti Submarine helicopters. If all military equipment needs across all services were taken and classified into Extremely Critical, Critical, Urgent, Important, Good to have , Not Needed. Then these helicopters would be in Extremely Critical. Would be act of petulant self harm.

The statement by POTUS was wrong and It will certainly impact relations but foolhardy to cancel this procurement that we have been trying to do for 14 years. Response is neither to buckle under pressure nor to act petulantly. It is to follow national interests with a clear eye. US is important but not critical. They cannot do much to India and we know that.

[UlanBatori]

Navy is coming out strongly citing rizald encirclement. Indian ocean is on the verge of being taken over. Look for some serious shopping.

[kit]

Navy is coming out strongly citing rizald encirclement. Indian ocean is on the verge of being taken over. Look for some serious shopping.

I expect another batch of Russian/French subs in addition to those on shopping list., it does look like China is diverting resources from its airforce and army to Navy, idea seems to make it a peer to US Navy, already tested anti-ship ICBMs, they do look set to seriously challenge the USN in India pacific and beyond, this strategy involves the Russian Navy as well. For the first time in recent history, the american navy looks set to have equal competition. Trump doesn't look like he gets the idea of geopolitics, i dare say Xi has a plan for trumping Trump.

[Hari Nair]

Some excellent and sharp analyses by the members here!

Here is a link to an article analysing US moves as seen in the context of Iran and the Middle East:
https://thewire.in/world/trump-kashmir- ... iran-india
The article presents a slightly different perspective and is worth a quick read. However, I can't really agtree with the author that our present dispensation was caught by surprise by these moves - there were enough indicators in the wind and I very much doubt that Jaishanker or Modi did not see it coming. Some of our recent tariffs and other moves indicate that we are very much playing the game as well. Our calibrated response by way of the MEA tweet effectively tagged DT and politely pointed out that he had lied. The reason why DT made the statement is not really hard to see. I sometimes wonder at the condescending tones of journos and analysts - who always assume that our MEA staff are dumb, which is really not the case. I have deliberately left out the unnecessary and inaccurate critique of our establishment, which the Wire being what it is, is perhaps compelled to do.

Can I wonder whether chances of follow-on purchases of Rafales appear to be looking brighter, whereas MD's Shornet (as our members prefer to call it) and follow-on Apaches appear to be dimming?

Let’s get one thing straight: the US doesn’t care two hoots about Kashmir.
Nor is it bothered much about relations between Pakistan and India. Since 1948, Kashmir has been an issue for global powers to gain leverage over both. That priority will continue as long as the two countries remain high-spend buyers of arms.
But even that objective is secondary for the moment. The current US administration – which is to say Jared Kushner and his friends – see south Asia as an adjunct to west Asia, and see the entire region through the prism of Iran.
Donald Trump is only using Kashmir as leverage to gain Pakistan’s cooperation with regard to Iran.

Trump, who has taken post-truth to bizarre levels, is evidently trying to blindside India......series of recent danger signals: the rise and rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan, the tactical space the US’s recent moves against Iran give Pakistan, CPEC, and reports on human rights abuses in Kashmir from two UN bodies. Something was brewing. That should have been obvious.

Trump’s priorities
For all his apparent bumbling, and his oddball comments, Trump knows what he wants, and he goes unashamedly for it. He is a shrewd operator, good at that game of poker within chess within monopoly –of course, that real estate game!
Given its duplicity over the past couple of decades, US policymakers would actually be quite happy for Pakistan to go to hell. But they need Pakistan again, just as they needed the land route through Pakistan when they invaded Afghanistan in 2002.

This time, Trump’s priority is to contain Iran. Israel has for decades been paranoid over Iranian rhetoric about wiping Israel off the face of the Earth. That fixation increased manifold when the US opened a clear land route from Iran to Israel. Pared to the bone, the strategic bottom-line of what the US’s failed 2003 invasion of Iraq achieved was to open that land route. A pro-Tehran government took power in Baghdad while pro-Tehran forces already held sway in Damascus and Beirut.
For Israel, that open land route was a nightmare.
It so happened that anti-Shia Wahabism spread widely over the past 15 years, and became the driving force of hugely successful terror groups.

Af-Pak connection
If the most vital strategic outcome of the Iraq invasion was to increase Iran’s influence over Iraq, the US is absolutely determined to ensure that Iran does not gain any strategic elbow-room in Pakistan to its east or in Afghanistan to its northeast.
While George W. Bush was still in office, it was already clear that the US would re-instal the Taliban in Afghanistan. The objective was to ensure that there was no chance that Kabul might be well-disposed toward Iran.
The US was too weak in Afghanistan to be able to shape a new anti-Shia force. So, since the Taliban was gaining ground in any case, the US negotiated with it through Doha-based interlocutors. That’s been happening for a decade now. It was in a slow lane under Obama. With Trump, it’s on the fast track.
Now that the Taliban is rapidly regaining ground-level power in Afghanistan, the Trump administration has gone hell for leather against Iran.
His effort is not just to stop Iran’s nuclear programme, which Obama and other world leaders had managed, but to crush Iran as a power in the region.
For that to work, the US must ensure that Iran is blockaded. That’s where Pakistan comes in.

Key Iran-Pak border
One of the most significant things Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan said during his Washington visit (in a speech to the US Institute of Peace) was that Pakistan has a decent relationship with Iran. “Not warm,” he added, “but a decent relationship.” He said Pakistan would love to help with transit. It was a sheathed warning.
In fact, whenever he was asked a question about Iran in Washington DC, Khan visibly tensed and pulled himself together. He argued strongly against a US-Iran war.

Pakistan’s generals have talked so much and so long of wanting ‘strategic depth’ against India through influence over Afghanistan that we tend to ignore the fact that Pakistan has long borders with not just India and Afghanistan, but with Iran too. Pakistan could well give Iran strategic depth.
On the other hand, getting Pakistan to play its strategic chess game in the region would be a two-in-one for the US’s efforts in the region – blocking putative covert Pakistani assistance to Iran and, through Pakistan, control over important Taliban factions in Afghanistan.
If Pakistan’s quid pro quo for that is Kashmir, it’s a price the US’s actual policymakers would happily negotiate.

[Bart S]

^The article assigns way too much power and influence to the US. Reality is that they couldn't even make the Taliban, let alone a failed state like Pakistan do their bidding. Even at the Indian military and economy at it's nadir from independence up until the 90s, despite backing Pakistan to the hilt and providing all possible assistance to them, funding and supporting separatism in Punjab and Kashmir etc, they could do diddly squat to India and India hasn't budged an inch through all that. No reason to panic, though it is disappointing that the US is back to where it was in the Musharraf era seemingly. Trump can talk all he wants about mediation but if push comes to shove, the GOI will politely make it clear to him about which orifice of his he can shove it in.

[CRamS]

Date article, but explains the genesis of India TSP equal equal

https://www.deccanherald.com/content/53 ... power.html

[pankajs]

Date article, but explains the genesis of India TSP equal equal

https://www.deccanherald.com/content/53 ... power.html

Yeh ... Indian TSP equal equal as much as China India equal equal per US.

Now in light of the famus logical deduction, where A==B and B==C implies A==C, does it also mean that China TSP equal equal? Not ilon blather .. that we already know but equal equal.

[sanjaykumar]

^The article assigns way too much power and influence to the US. Reality is that they couldn't even make the Taliban, let alone a failed state like Pakistan do their bidding. Even at the Indian military and economy at it's nadir from independence up until the 90s, despite backing Pakistan to the hilt and providing all possible assistance to them, funding and supporting separatism in Punjab and Kashmir etc, they could do diddly squat to India and India hasn't budged an inch through all that. No reason to panic, though it is disappointing that the US is back to where it was in the Musharraf era seemingly. Trump can talk all he wants about mediation but if push comes to shove, the GOI will politely make it clear to him about which orifice of his he can shove it in.

There is no doubt about it. Skim the front pages of the Paki press-who is in jail, who has been shaheeded in Baluchistan (the deaths are censored anyway), how much begging needs to be done in the next year, tainted meat, tainted pharmaceuticals, polio workers murdered,and of course what you don't read-the bone grinding poverty in rural Panjab, Sindh, etc. disjunction between their military, political and religious elites, zero on industrialisation or improving education, utilities, social justice.

Skim the Indian press-transparent elections, giant battery manufacture proposed, rural electrification, aim for $5 trillion economy, moon lander mission, business process outsourcing industry and its re-invention, renewable power schemes.



These are not the same people or if they were they have evolved into two species, like South and North Korea. My only concern is that Indian planners are so bored with Paakistaan that they neglect to plug all crevices against their entry into Indian plans for their future.

[sanjaykumar]

The US gov and Trump are not so unsophisticated to mean what the muse about Kashmir. It's a sop for Niazi to offer his adoring people so they can resume their dreams of Kashmir and the fair skinned women to be had by the pious. Modi's probably had a good chuckle.

[Bart S]

These are not the same people or if they were they have evolved into two species, like South and North Korea. My only concern is that Indian planners are so bored with Paakistaan that they neglect to plug all crevices against their entry into Indian plans for their future.

The analogy that I think fits best is Hobbits/Shirefolk vs Gollum. Smeaegol was once a hobbit but after finding the one ring (Pakis have several such), blind and insane obsession turned him slowly but irreversibly into Gollum.

[schinnas]

https://m.hindustantimes.com/india-news ... 9bsqJ.html

India rethinks buying US armed drones. This is not an official source..just a planted article by babus to indicate that relationship isn't a one way street. Any missteps by Trump or over aggressive posturing will cost US more than it gains. Modi isn't like other world leaders to roll over and die at the first instance of aggression from Orange.

[ramana]

Hari Nair, Good observations of the procurement. However all purchases will be only in Indian interests. More Apaches would fit that bill.

schinnas, the unarmed drones look like a lot of money for just surveillance. Why not buy some real combat planes for the money. Same money can go to Rafale which the IAF needs.

[hgupta]

Ramana,

I disagree. Forgive me for going off tangent but I want to say this: Information is the number one force multiplier in any modern warfare especially on the seas. Those drones may be unharmed but if they can provide real time 24/7 365 days a year surveillance of enemy forces out on the ocean, India would have nearly unparalleled targeting capabilities in the IOR. India has the ability to mass produce cruise missiles but those cruise missiles are for naught if you have no targeting info. Even more so when you cannot send updates in mid flight. But when those drones can provide targeting info and mid flight updates, suddenly India is the most dominant player in the IOR besides the USN and not even China with its Belt and Road initiatives and String of Pearls strategy can't overcome that huge advantage.

Satellites can do a lot but not everything and that's where the P-8I and drones come in. Therefore, I have consistently viewed the P-8I and the long endurance drones as to be a more strategic buy for India's security needs, even more than the Rafales or even the S-400s. P-8Is and the drones can meet and answer a lot of the requirements necessary to set up a 24/7 365 C4SIR capability for India.

So get those Tritons by all means.

[kit]

Tritons complete with the Poseidon's seems to be the in-thing for wide ocean surveillance, comes at a cost though... more than the armed predators, armed Israeli drones look more likely buy for IAF, if not already done.

[ramana]

These are about the Predator drones.
Not the Triton sea drones.
Please read the article.

[krishna_krishna]

Straight from horse’s mouth, us and nato forces to leave Afghanistan by November 2020:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rferl. ... 82047.html

I still believe it is good development as far as India is concerned

[ramana]

Before 2020 elections?

That could explain the new found love for Immy the Dimmy.

[Rudradev]

Straight from horse’s mouth, us and nato forces to leave Afghanistan by November 2020:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rferl. ... 82047.html

I still believe it is good development as far as India is concerned

I do not agree with this assessment.

First of all, the article still speaks in terms of "reducing" rather than leaving the number of American forces in Afghanistan by November 2020.

This is actually a lame statement compared to many that former presidents, the current president, and aspiring presidential candidates have been making for seven years now... public declarations of intent to get out of Afghanistan completely.

“By the end of 2014, the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country.” —Barack Obama, 2012

“We should leave Afghanistan immediately. No more wasted lives.” —Donald Trump (via Twitter), 2013.

“I would like to just get out. The problem is [Afghanistan] just seems to be a lab for terrorists.” —Donald Trump, to Tucker Carlson, 2019.

“We will withdraw. We have to.” —Pete Buttigieg, 2019.

Here's my take on this.

The US will never get out of Afghanistan. Never, not for any reason. Two presidents have had the chance (one of them actually did pull out of Iraq completely before sending troops back in with the rise of ISIS.)

Reasoning:

1) We talk about Mackinder and Caroe and yet ignore the obvious. The US presence in Afghanistan has been an accepted status-quo, a fait accompli of American imperialism for two decades now. Afghanistan was invaded at a time when China was still seen in DC as primarily a trading partner, and Russia was still recovering from the Yeltsin era. Today, with the SCO dominating all of the World Island's interior, and an increasingly US-hostile EU finding common ground with Moscow in the Heartland, a presence in Afghanistan is indispensable to the US.

If the US leaves Afghanistan now it will never regain that foothold. Ever. And it is more critical to US geopolitical security than it has ever been. Why else would two Presidents of the US, supposedly the men in charge of US policy, turn out to have been speaking 100% empty words about withdrawing from there over the last decade? Answer: clearly, there was never any intention to leave.

2) Trump may be partially telling the truth when he talks about "reducing" official US military presence in Afghanistan by 2020. He does need to sell the *appearance* of ending the Afghan war as an electoral issue. But that is very easily achieved while retaining force levels there.

This is an era of "fake news" unlike any the US public has experienced before. Americans on both sides of the political divide believe exclusively in ideologically-driven narratives to the extent that they've actually become averse to verifying facts... even facts about what actually happened in some nearby town or state. Combine this with the prevailing level of ignorance about world affairs among the US electorate, and do you think Trump's base voters will have either the inclination or the ability to figure out what is really going on in Afghanistan? Not a chance. They will believe what Fox News and OAN tell them.

To provide some supporting TV bytes and photo-ops, some troops will almost surely be rotated back from Afgh with high fanfare. In fact, even redeployment of official US military units to Afgh may be frozen.

In their place will go thousands of US military contractors. The proposal to privatize the US military presence in Afghanistan, from Erik Prince of Xe (formerly Blackwater) has been under discussion since Trump first took office. Prince, by the way, is the brother of another Trump crony... Education Secretary Betsy de Vos. The whole thing fits perfectly into the Kangressi-Khandaani scheme of patronage which seems to be the primary driver of US policy under the Trump administration.

So basically the US will continue to stay in Afghanistan, replacing official military personnel with equal (and perhaps ultimately, greater) numbers of contractors. With no Congressional oversight, no ROE, no Geneva convention to follow, they will mimic the 4GW template established by Putin's "little green men" in Crimea. As such they may end up being far more effective than the actual US military was.

And of course, these contractor units will be fully equipped with the same kinds of armour, artillery, naval/air support, intelligence support etc. as their US military predecessors were. Including the maintenance of the same logistical supply chain that goes, inevitably, through Pakistan.

This brings me to my third and most compelling reason for believing that the US has no intention of leaving Afghanistan, which is:

3) WHY, if the US was actually planning to get OUT of Afghanistan, would it have any need whatsoever to engage comprehensively with Pakistan?

I mean, if you're going to get out, just get out, no? Like the US did from Saigon in 1975. Sure, to manage the optics you might need to throw a one-time bone to Islamabad-- even approving a single IMF loan tranche would cost the US very little while temporarily alleviating economic pressure on a desperate Pakistan.

But comprehensive engagement? Flirting with the idea of "arbitrating Kashmir dispute", which NO American President has had the ba11$ to even suggest in public after the Pokhran II tests? Renewing military aid and servicing F-solahs? These are the hallmarks of a long-term client-state relationship. Yeh sab kyaa hai bhai?

The answer is clear. The US wants to continue its post 9/11 relationship with Pakistan, because it intends to sustain indefinitely its post 9/11 presence in Afghanistan (with the option to ramp up even further if required). The Krrachi route must remain open.

[ramana]

Agree with your thesis. And Point 1 is the biggest support for it.
They can't be there in Pak. And they are already in Afghanistan.
Would be stupid of them to evacuate for that will collapse the Mackinder-Caroe thesis that Anglo-Saxon West has to prevent the Russian quest for warm water port to ensure the world island from re-emerging.

[ramana]

OBL attack on 9/11 was a great opportunity for US to insert into the Af-Pak area to be there to prevent the historical morphing of the Central Asia and Indian sub-continent.
Not gone give up as TSP will collapse. Matter of when not if.

Hence the NaMo move to tightly couple Kashmir by three step process of delimitation, get rid of 35A and repeal 370.
Could be parallel or sequential based on Rajya Sabha.