India-US News and Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7883
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

India-US News and Discussion

Postby Gerard » 15 Jun 2009 16:04


arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby arun » 15 Jun 2009 21:15

Lunacy indeed. Wise words by MJ Akbar:

"If America wants a DMZ (De-Militarized Zone) in India they will first have to ensure a DTZ (De-Terrorised Zone) in Pakistan".

While that is being worked on I do hope GOI gives this US proposal what it truly deserves. The two finger salute with some choice epithets :evil: :

The US advice on Kashmir is lunacy

14 Jun, 2009 0038hrs IST [ M J Akbar ]

If you want to sell arsenic, the kindest way to do so is to disguise it as medicine heavily coated with sugar. There is nothing particularly new about the proposal of an interim balm for the wounds of Kashmir, demilitarization on both sides of the Line of Control. What is novel is the heavy Washington endorsement of this Pakistan-promoted option.

Self-interest may have blinded Washington to an obvious fallacy in this "reasonable" formulation. In all three major Kashmir conflicts — 1947, 1965 and Kargil — Pakistan has used a two-tier strategy. A surrogate force has served as a first line of offense. The Pakistani term for them has been consistent; they have come in the guise of "freedom fighters". India called them "raiders" in 1947 and 1965, and defines them as terrorists now. This surrogate force has expanded its operations far beyond Kashmir, as the terrorist attacks on Mumbai confirmed.

This is not all. Unusually for a senior diplomat of a super power that affects neutrality, US under secretary of state for political affairs, William Burns, chose Delhi as the venue for a message designed to disturb the equanimity of his hosts, when he said, "Any resolution of Kashmir has to take into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people". That must have been music to Islamabad's ears.

Demilitarization sounds so sweetly reasonable, a definitive gesture of de-escalation. The Obama administration is delighted by the prospect of collateral benefit. This would release more Pak troops for the war against Taliban. Pakistan has shifted some brigades from the Indian border, but not from the Line of Control.

DMZs (De-Militarized Zones) would guarantee the security of Pakistan and weaken India's defences, since there is no suggestion that terrorist militias are going to be "demilitarized". Should the Indian army leave the Kashmir valley to the mercy of well-organized, finely-trained, generously-financed indiscriminate organisations? India has no corresponding surrogate force, because it is a status-quo power; it makes no claims on any neighbour's territory.

If America wants a DMZ (De-Militarized Zone) in India they will first have to ensure a DTZ (De-Terrorised Zone) in Pakistan. …………………….............

Times of India

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby arun » 15 Jun 2009 21:27

What is good for the Goose is good for the Gander :wink: .

Meanwhile can we have some pugnacity from our Government or is that too much to expect? :roll: :

Why doesn’t the US hold a dialogue with Osama?

Posted: Sunday , Jun 14, 2009 at 0147 hrs IST

Am I the only one shocked by an American official daring to suggest ‘dialogue’ with Pakistan in the wake of the release of Hafiz Mohammad Saeed? Why did nobody ask Under Secretary William Burns if his country would be persuaded to have a ‘dialogue’ with Pakistan if Osama bin Laden were similarly arrested and released? Not because of the due process of the law, as some spokesmen of the Pakistani government claim, but because no charges were brought against him. So there were no grounds for further preventive detention according to the court that released him.

The vile Saeed is our Osama and if Pakistan wants to talk peace with India the very least it must do is arrest him again and close down the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba. …………….................

Indian Express

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6685
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby CRamS » 15 Jun 2009 23:02

arun wrote:Indian Express
[/quote]

Good article by Tavlee, but she seems to be day dreaming towards the end:


What are we waiting for? Another Indian city to be attacked? If this happens and the response is as hopeless as it was on November 26, 2008, the honeymoon with our new government will come to an abrupt and ugly end.



Oh really, other than "Hindu extremists" like her and me, nobody else would give a rat's behind :-). If they did, MMS wouldn't be re-elected in the first place with such a land slide margin just a few months after Pakis launched Mumbai and forced India to surrender. Everything to date, including MMS Zaradri love fest is going according to TSP gameplan. They attacked and mercilessly slaughtered, showed the middle finger in a pervese bout of celebration, dared India to fight, demanded Kashmir as powerful whites concurred, and India disposes. If this is not a victory for TSP and a shameful surrender by India, I don't know what is.

But maybe, just maybe, one of the silver linings of India crashing out of the T20 WC is that aam junta won't be deluded into believing impending super power status on the bases of a few cricket wins and BPO, and people will concentrate a bit more on mundane matters like national security and Paki/US perfidy. Am I dreaming?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 15 Jun 2009 23:44

A demilitarized Kashmir does not mean a less populated border!!!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54168
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby ramana » 16 Jun 2009 10:05

By e-mail


http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ ... the-affair

FOREIGN AFFAIRS Magazine

The End of the Affair?

Washington's Cooling Passion for New Delhi

Sumit Ganguly and S. Paul Kapur

June 15, 2009

Summary -- During its first few months in office, the Obama administration has essentially ignored India. This could be a serious strategic blunder, given India and the United States' shared interests.
SUMIT GANGULY is the Rabindranath Tagore Professor in Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University. S. PAUL KAPUR is an associate professor in the Department of National Security Affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School; the views expressed here are his own.

One of the signature features, and generally acknowledged successes, of the George W. Bush administration's foreign policy was the close relationship forged between the United States and India. For decades, due to Cold War politics and mutual antagonism over India's quest for nuclear weapons, the U.S.-Indian relationship had languished. The Bush administration, however, identified India as a potential strategic partner early on and chose to build on the goodwill the Clinton administration had garnered with New Delhi in its closing days. The capstone of Bush's efforts was the U.S.-Indian nuclear deal, which gave India access to technology and material for its civilian nuclear program in spite of its refusal to sign the Nonproliferation Treaty. By the time Bush left office, U.S. relations with India were the best they had ever been.
By contrast, during its first months in office, the Obama administration has essentially ignored India. Until this week, the only senior administration official to make a significant India-related policy speech has been Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg. In its dealings with Asia, the administration has focused instead on China, Afghanistan, and Pakistan -- going so far in its attempt to woo the latter as to float the idea of mediating the Kashmir dispute (something long sought by Islamabad but anathema to New Delhi).
This behavior has not gone unnoticed. India's strategic elites recognize that no other U.S. president is likely to match Bush's personal commitment to strengthening Indo-U.S. ties, but they worry that Barack Obama's apparent lack of interest could do real harm to the relationship and squander recent hard-won gains.

Were this indeed to occur, it would be a major blunder. India and the United States share important interests on some of today's most pressing strategic issues, including the struggle against Islamist terrorism, the stabilization and de-Talibanization of Afghanistan, the cautious engagement of a rising China, and the pursuit of improved bilateral economic ties. To advance those common interests, however, Washington and New Delhi need to cooperate closely.
The United States fully woke to the dangers of Islamist terrorism only after September 11, 2001. India, by contrast, began battling Islamist militants in Kashmir during the late 1980s. Since 9/11, the United States has avoided further attacks on its soil, while India has suffered numerous terrorist incidents, including an assault on its parliament and a multiple, coordinated strikes in Mumbai. The response to the Mumbai attacks revealed significant shortcomings in India's anti-terrorism capabilities. Nonetheless, India can provide valuable analytical, logistical, and intelligence support to U.S. anti-terrorism efforts. What is more, India truly cares about the issue -- something that cannot always be said about other supposed U.S. allies in the war on terror, including Pakistan.
The Obama administration has made the stabilization of Afghanistan one of its top priorities, meanwhile, relying heavily on Pakistani cooperation to defeat radical Islamist militants there and across the Pakistani border. Yet Pakistani support for this project has been lukewarm, and many in the Pakistani military and intelligence services still see the militants not as enemies to be defeated but as once and future allies.
India has taken a different approach to the Afghan problem from its subcontinental neighbor's, spending approximately $750 million in recent years (and pledging $1.6 billion more) to help rebuild the country and spur development. This makes India Afghanistan's sixth largest bilateral aid donor. Projects funded by New Delhi include the rebuilding of the Afghan national airline; the construction of telecommunications, power, and transportation networks; and improved sanitation facilities. Indian policymakers believe that these efforts will help to stabilize the country, thereby lowering the odds of a Taliban resurgence, curtailing Pakistan's regional influence, and facilitating Indian ties with energy-rich Central Asia. Such goals are clearly rooted in national self-interest, but the point is that Indian and U.S. interests converge here. Washington should thus support and expand Indian involvement in Afghanistan, rather than relying exclusively or even primarily on Pakistan's help.
When it comes to the rise of China, India -- like the United States -- is watching closely. One of New Delhi's greatest concerns is its unresolved Himalayan border dispute with Beijing. This triggered a bloody war between the two countries in 1962, in which the Indians were thoroughly trounced. The two sides have made only glacial progress in resolving the disagreement since then, and it has remained a source of recurring tension. Energy issues also dog the Sino-Indian relationship, as both rising giants have begun competing actively for access to oil from Africa to Asia. India thus shares the U.S. interest in ensuring that China does not emerge as an Asia-Pacific hegemon. No Indian regime will participate in any outright American attempt to contain China, but many Indian policymakers and strategists would be prepared to work with the United States in pursuing a hedging strategy against potential Chinese revisionism.
The Congress Party's recent electoral victory, finally, should allow the Indian government to move forward on a number of long-delayed reforms designed to maintain and increase economic growth. Given growing U.S.-Indian economic ties, as well as the need to pull both the American and Indian economies out of a slump, such efforts can only benefit both nations. The United States should gently prod New Delhi to tackle reforms in such nettlesome areas as labor law, land acquisition legislation, and the power sector.
Given the two countries' numerous and important common interests, the Obama administration's neglect of India is puzzling. Perhaps senior decision-makers have worried that paying too much attention to India will derail efforts to nurture Sino-U.S. ties, or get in the way of cooperation with Pakistan. Perhaps the Obama team has been irked by India's continued refusal to join the nuclear nonproliferation regime. Or perhaps the administration has simply wanted to distinguish itself from its predecessor. Whatever the reason, a clear signal is being sent and received -- as a previous Bush might have put it, "Message: I don't care."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to give a major policy speech on India this week. She and the administration could begin to engage India by taking its concerns about Pakistan-supported terror in Kashmir and elsewhere seriously, by eschewing any temptation to mediate the Kashmir dispute, by working more closely with New Delhi on stabilizing Afghanistan, and by stepping up the pace on bilateral discussions about renewable energy technology cooperation. Progress on the last item would be particularly sensible, since it would advance two agendas simultaneously -- helping India to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (a looming source of contention) and enabling U.S. firms to develop and sell green technologies.
In recent months, some deft negotiation has eased bilateral disputes over end-user agreements on U.S. weapons sales to India. Similar pragmatism in other areas, along with some solicitous gestures from the Obama team, can make sure the relationship continues to warm rather than cooling down.


A lot of people are worrying about the slow downturn. mightbe good for India to reassess the ties.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6685
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby CRamS » 16 Jun 2009 11:17

ramana:

Sumit Ganguly doesn't cut it. I mean, even with this 'coolness' towards India, Obama & Co are getting what they want from India, namely, lowering troop strength in Kashmir and surrendering to TSP. So whats all this BS about Obama's India policy being a 'strategic blunder'? Furthermore, India is not in any position to do any harm to US interests, nor does India have any leverage. So where is the incentive for US to change its ways?

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 16 Jun 2009 11:25

CRamS wrote:ramana:

Sumit Ganguly doesn't cut it. I mean, even with this 'coolness' towards India, Obama & Co are getting what they want from India, namely, lowering troop strength in Kashmir and surrendering to TSP. So whats all this BS about Obama's India policy being a 'strategic blunder'? Furthermore, India is not in any position to do any harm to US interests, nor does India have any leverage. So where is the incentive for US to change its ways?

Good finally somebody said it openely

This Obama govt ignoring India is part of the larger understanding between the long term Indian leftist groups and the democratic setup inside US. It really does not matter if the Indian got is ignored but there is deeper connection here for a long time.
Indian govt had to show that it keeps a distance from the Obama govt after the US election. You can google it and find the news report.
http://mangalorean.com/news.php?newstyp ... sid=122035

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Sanku » 16 Jun 2009 16:26

I know its haram to say anything against the PM the head of duly elected majority govt in BRF.

US pressure on Indian Cabinet formation?
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/us-pr ... n/477377/2

In the interview, Anand Sharma has said that impasse has been broken. If this is correct, that could have happened only because India has yielded on its insistence on SSM and because India and US have so agreed, a deal to be formalised in Washington. What did India get in return? In reciprocal negotiations, quid pro quo has to exist. Otherwise, a rumour floating around gets credence. That rumour is US pressure to ensure Kamal Nath's non-continuation in Commerce.


So what exactly are we to say when some one of the stature of Bibek Debroy puts out such piece? Perhaps some explanations of how GoI is looking after Indian interests onlee and its a meeting of mind etc can be dutifully trotted out.

I believe in keeping things simple -- what started with Nuclear deal is on in full swing.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1506
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Pulikeshi » 16 Jun 2009 20:52

Acharya wrote:
CRamS wrote:ramana:
Sumit Ganguly doesn't cut it. I mean, even with this 'coolness' towards India, Obama & Co are getting what they want from India, namely, lowering troop strength in Kashmir and surrendering to TSP. So whats all this BS about Obama's India policy being a 'strategic blunder'? Furthermore, India is not in any position to do any harm to US interests, nor does India have any leverage. So where is the incentive for US to change its ways?

Good finally somebody said it openely


Why buy the cow when she gives milk for free! :mrgreen: :rotfl:
Babu-oons still need to understand the dating game - they think arrange marriage onlee! :P
When you dance - lead, follow or get out of the way!

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7883
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Gerard » 17 Jun 2009 02:41


Manny
BRFite
Posts: 846
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 22:16
Location: Texas

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Manny » 17 Jun 2009 02:49

India denies visa to US religious freedom watchdogs

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 664454.cms

GOOD! Go to China. Go to Saudi Arabia, Go to Pakistan before going to India mo fos. And this organization is part of the US Evangelical organizations that has targeted Asia for their mischief.

Religious freedom, my arse. This coming from the organization where its members are more interested in proselytizing that their God is the only true god and other gods are false god!

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4440
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby putnanja » 17 Jun 2009 03:20

STILL WEAK IN VICTORY - The UPA has to take firmer decisions regarding its US policy - Kanwal Sibal

...
India is on its own and must fend for itself. The challenges we face are uniquely complex. Two large hostile powers, both nuclear, flank us in the North and the West, with shared interest in containing and countering us. Our other smaller neighbours, barring one, feeling overwhelmed by our size and threatened in their sovereignty, resent us to different degrees. They assert their independence by wilfully disregarding our interests and concerns and allowing forces and influences inimical to us to establish themselves on their soil as a balancing act. Cross-border ethnic and other linkages, accompanied by porous borders, aggravate our internal security problems. And, of course, the epicentre of religious extremism, and the terrorism that it spawns, is located in our immediate neighbourhood.
...

...
If there was over-reliance on Musharraf’s power and personality to deliver on issues dividing India and Pakistan, there has been over-reliance, too, on the US to make Pakistan deliver on Mumbai. Finally, in the case of China, the previous government bent over backwards not to take offense at its bilateral provocations and dubious diplomacy towards us at the multilateral level, but without any return gains on the border issue.

The most complex challenges to the UPA arise from American policies. We have an interest in consolidating our improved ties with the US, but its policies in our region make the task difficult. The Americans now acknowledge that Pakistan has used billions of dollars of military aid to boost its capabilities against India rather than to bolster its capacity to fight the terrorists. Lately, they are acknowledging, too, that Pakistan has been selective in its combat against terrorists, ignoring the “good” jihadis targeting India. The ISI’s continuing linkages with Taliban elements as a hedging strategy in Afghanistan is also being recognized.

Yet, large-scale economic and military aid is being pumped into Pakistan; there is continuing unwillingness to impose exacting conditions for fear of upsetting the Pakistani establishment; the very force (the military) that is responsible for unremitting hostility towards India, for nurturing extremist groups to further Pakistan’s geo-political goals vis-à-vis India and Afghanistan and for stunting democracy at home, has become the Americans’ partner of choice in realizing their regional agenda. It would be naïve to believe that US largesse will transform the Pakistan military as well as its polity into responsible agencies for real change in the country’s policies towards India or Afghanistan.
...
...

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby SaiK » 17 Jun 2009 03:26

Manny.. luckily it is the upavasis govt.. had it been the right wings, then the lefties would have gone ballistic. Now the left only opines, having no say in these matters.

MMS finally pays attention to reality.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby arun » 17 Jun 2009 08:13

Manny wrote:India denies visa to US religious freedom watchdogs

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 664454.cms

GOOD! Go to China. Go to Saudi Arabia, Go to Pakistan before going to India mo fos. And this organization is part of the US Evangelical organizations that has targeted Asia for their mischief.

Religious freedom, my arse. This coming from the organization where its members are more interested in proselytizing that their God is the only true god and other gods are false god!


Let us wait and watch.

The denial of visa’s to the USCIRFS delegation could be nothing more than typical Governmental bureaucratic sloth rather than deliberate intent.

I say this as there were earlier press reports that the Congress led UPA had broken with the long held national consensus of denying visa’s to USCIRFS’ and other self-claimed moral high ground bodies that the US has a penchant for unleashing onto the rest of the world :

Delhi allows scrutiny of religious freedom

Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Tilak » 17 Jun 2009 08:16

arun wrote:
Manny wrote:India denies visa to US religious freedom watchdogs

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 664454.cms


Jai Ho!. If true..

As Sheikh Bin Powell said "so what if the President of US is a muslim, why does Obama have to clarify what religion he belongs", but changer went ahead and clarified to get the throne. And Americans are the chowkidaars... While A Kalamji was nominated by "Hindoo Nationalist" BJP...

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4343
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby sanjaykumar » 17 Jun 2009 09:49

India should send a delegation to assess cow freedom in America.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby John Snow » 17 Jun 2009 10:10

Even under the strain of food shortages and the humiliation of PL480 funded grain unfit for human consumption we never allowed these kind of intrusive garbage in the internal affairs of India. looks like NAM of India had more teeth than Shining India now. :evil:

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1390
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby ashish raval » 17 Jun 2009 13:19

^^ Amirkhans and its people should be first taught what a religion freedom means where a candidate has to first declare that he/she is a christian inorder to have a shot in election. People who represent that society which fundamentally decides and elects those on the basis of religion should have no right to enter a truely secular nation like India.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby arun » 17 Jun 2009 17:27

X Posted but different article excerpt restricted to the theme of the Pakistani Islamic terrorist group LeT, US funded armament of Pakistan and it’s impact on Indo-US relations:

The other Islamist threat in Pakistan

By Selig S. Harrison | June 17, 2009

…………….. Disarming Lashkar-e-Taiba should be the top US priority in Pakistan because it would greatly reduce the possibility of a coup by Islamist sympathizers in the armed forces. .....................

Equally important, a strong US stand on Lashkar-e-Taiba is necessary to defuse India-Pakistan tensions that could lead to another war and to sustain the improvement now taking place in US relations with India, a rising power eight times larger than Pakistan. ………………

Like Al Qaeda to Americans, Lashkar-e-Taiba is a powerful emotive symbol to the 1.2 billion people of India. Hindu nationalists use this symbolism to fan fears of another Mumbai and to step up demands for reprisals against Pakistan. Increasingly, they are criticizing the United States for giving Pakistan money and weaponry without monitoring whether they are being used to strengthen Pakistan forces on the Indian border.

Why, they ask, should the United States give another $10.5 billion in aid, on top of the $14 billion already provided since 2001, to a government in Islamabad that is unwilling or unable to disarm home-grown terrorists who threaten India?

Why, indeed.

Selig S. Harrison is author of “Pakistan, The State of the Union,’’ a report just published by the Center for International Policy, where he is director of the Asia program

Boston Globe

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7883
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Gerard » 18 Jun 2009 05:20


CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6685
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby CRamS » 18 Jun 2009 05:39

arun wrote:X Posted but different article excerpt restricted to the theme of the Pakistani Islamic terrorist group LeT, US funded armament of Pakistan and it’s impact on Indo-US relations:

The other Islamist threat in Pakistan

By Selig S. Harrison | June 17, 2009

…………….. Disarming Lashkar-e-Taiba should be the top US priority in Pakistan because it would greatly reduce the possibility of a coup by Islamist sympathizers in the armed forces. .....................

Equally important, a strong US stand on Lashkar-e-Taiba is necessary to defuse India-Pakistan tensions that could lead to another war and to sustain the improvement now taking place in US relations with India, a rising power eight times larger than Pakistan. ………………

Like Al Qaeda to Americans, Lashkar-e-Taiba is a powerful emotive symbol to the 1.2 billion people of India. Hindu nationalists use this symbolism to fan fears of another Mumbai and to step up demands for reprisals against Pakistan. Increasingly, they are criticizing the United States for giving Pakistan money and weaponry without monitoring whether they are being used to strengthen Pakistan forces on the Indian border.

Why, they ask, should the United States give another $10.5 billion in aid, on top of the $14 billion already provided since 2001, to a government in Islamabad that is unwilling or unable to disarm home-grown terrorists who threaten India?

Why, indeed.

Selig S. Harrison is author of “Pakistan, The State of the Union,’’ a report just published by the Center for International Policy, where he is director of the Asia program

Boston Globe


Boy does he quote hard facts on the LeT. I always wonder how is it that with such facts staring at their face, a@s-hole b@stards like Uneven, Krapon, Sh!tfer etc talk about TSP in glowing terms and give it equivalence with India.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 18 Jun 2009 05:49


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 18 Jun 2009 05:51


Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21122
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Prem » 18 Jun 2009 06:06



The are reading MMS and just firing "Phokee" i.e empty statements to play his ego. If they are serious , Burns would not have burned Babbus in Delhi.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby svinayak » 18 Jun 2009 10:56


US seeks 'dramatic expansion' of India ties

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... eNSJX33CMQ
By Shaun Tandon – 11 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has committed to working for a "dramatic expansion" in ties with India, calling it one of the few nations the new US administration views as a global partner.

Addressing business leaders in Washington on Wednesday, the top US diplomat confirmed she would go to India next month to build a relationship between the world's two largest democracies she dubbed "US-India 3.0."

"We see India as one of a few key partners worldwide who will help us shape the 21st century," Clinton told the US-India Business Council.

Clinton said both she and President Barack Obama sought "a dramatic expansion in our common agenda and a greater role for India in solving global challenges."

She said the United States sensed an opportunity after Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, an advocate of free markets and closer US ties, won a convincing new election mandate.

"I hope that an expanded partnership between the US and India will be one of the signature accomplishments of both new governments in both countries, and I do plan to make that a personal priority," she said.

She listed climate change, Afghanistan and science as areas for new US-India cooperation. She also said the United States hoped to start negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty with India.

Some Indian commentators had griped that Obama ignored India early in his term, despite high-profile diplomacy with fellow Asian giant China and a new focus on stabilizing India's historic adversary Pakistan.

India and the United States had uneasy relations during the Cold War when New Delhi tilted toward the Soviet Union. Relations began to warm at the end of Bill Clinton's presidency, after a row over India's nuclear tests in 1998.

Former president George W. Bush cited India as one of his key foreign-policy achievements after he negotiated a deal that provides New Delhi with civilian nuclear technology despite its refusal to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The nuclear accord was unpopular with some lawmakers in Obama's Democratic Party, who said it sent the wrong signal to nations such as Iran and North Korea.

But Clinton said the Obama administration was "fully committed" to implementing the deal, which she hailed for having "removed the final barrier to broader cooperation between us."

She voiced hope that the treaty can "also serve as the foundation of a productive partnership on non-proliferation."

Clinton steered clear of mentioning Kashmir, the Himalayan territory divided between India and Pakistan. Obama soon after his election triggered a furor in India by suggesting the United States could help on Kashmir, which New Delhi considers a domestic issue.

But Clinton welcomed Singh's latest bid to reach a lasting peace with Pakistan, which has fought three full-fledged wars with India since their separation at birth in 1947.

"As Pakistan now works to take on the challenge of terrorists in its own country, I am confident that India as well as the United States will support those efforts," she said.

In a sign of continuing differences between the two independent-minded nations, the US government's watchdog on religious freedom on Wednesday voiced disappointment that India refused to grant it visas to look at communal unrest.

The Indian embassy declined comment. Religious violence is an extremely touchy issues in secular but Hindu-majority India, which has witnessed deadly riots targeting the Christian and Muslim minorities in recent years.

Separately, US Commerce Secretary Gary Locke nudged India to further liberalize its economy and to step up enforcement of copyright laws.

"US businesses need assurances that when they come to India, they'll be operating in a secure and reliable environment for intellectual property," Locke told he US-India Business Council.

But Locke hailed soaring trade between the two countries which has doubled since 2004 to more than 43 billion dollars a year.


arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby arun » 18 Jun 2009 12:03

Full text of the US Secretary of State’s speech from the US State Department's website:

Remarks at U.S.-India Business Council's 34th Anniversary "Synergies Summit"

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Washington, DC
June 17, 2009

Thank you. Thank you all so much. It is a great pleasure for me to be back here at the Chamber for such an important occasion. I want to thank David for that introduction, and I want to thank my friend, Indra, for those very kind words. It gives you an idea of how much we admire each other and her leadership of a great American company with obviously international reach.

To Ron Summers and to the U.S.-India Business Council Board, thank you so much for this important dialogue. This could not be better timed. It is early in our new Administration, and we are clearly committed to furthering and deepening our relationship with India in every way possible. I’m also pleased to welcome India’s new Minister of Commerce and Industry. Anand Sharma is here with us, and newly arrived ambassador Meera Shankar.

It is exciting to see the election results in India as well, as the Congress Party and the people of India made such a strong statement about the future that they hope to make together. And I look forward to working with Minister Sharma and the ambassador and others on our common agenda and goals.

I will be visiting India next month, which I’m looking forward to. It is exciting for me to have an opportunity to return again, and it is also a great privilege and honor to be doing so representing the United States.

I think also somewhere in this very large lunchtime audience are two members of our new team. And if they are, I’d love for them just to stand up, and you could get a look at our new U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk and Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke. Are Ron and Gary here with us? Well, they’re off working. That’s why they’re not. (Laughter.)

And I want also to just thank some of the other people who have been so instrumental in this Council whom I have worked with over the years: Sy Sternberg, the former chair and CEO of New York Life; William Cohen, a former Secretary of Defense and now chair and CEO of the Cohen Group; obviously Bal Das, who is a great friend of mine, an investor and very actively involved on behalf of India and Asia from New York; Ambassador Susan Esserman, another friend who has a lot of work through her legal career that involves the India-U.S. relationship. These are all members of the Council, and I am grateful for everyone who has committed to this work.

The broad range of talents in this room is an indicator of how important the relationship is. Now, when I first had the great delight of visiting India in 1995, I was just overwhelmed by not just the hospitality and the warmth of the people with whom I met, from the very highest to women in villages who were working for better lives for themselves and their families, but how easy it was, even back in ’95, for India’s many accomplishments to be overlooked in other places in the world. Here was a country defined by democracy, diversity, and dynamic growth, a country that had over 1.1 billion opportunities to enhance not only individual potential, but the nation’s. And when I was elected to the Senate, I co-founded and co-chaired the Senate’s India Caucus, the first time we had done that. And I have returned to India to talk about this partnership which I think is critical not only to both of our countries, but literally to the future of the world, the kind of world we want to shape together.

And it is great for me to be standing in front of this significant crowd and to say that the word about India has obviously spread. People know what kind of business and investment opportunities are there. India’s growing role in the global economy is accepted the way we accept the law of gravity. And the partnerships that are blooming at all levels of our societies are indeed exciting.

Now, I tell you this because I want you to place me and where I stand as Secretary of State. It is in a position of deep commitment to building stronger ties with India, a commitment based on mutual respect and mutual interests. And I know that President Obama feels the same way. We see India as one of a few key partners worldwide who will help us shape the 21st century. The forces of positive change versus those of destruction, the forces that move people forward rather than holding them back. We are both eager to build on this relationship, and of course, we’re not alone. We build on the past.

It is now three successive United States administrations from different parties that have identified the U.S.-India relationship as a foreign policy priority. For the United States, this is a project that transcends partnership and personalities, and I believe the same is true in India. When the U.S.-India nuclear deal passed the United States Congress, it had strong bipartisan support, including backing from two former senators named Barack Obama and Joe Biden, as well as a senator from New York.

But the agreement also received support from across the political spectrum in India. The formation of India’s new government is an opportunity to strengthen our ties and launch new initiatives. Now that the government is in place, we are moving quickly to strengthen our ties. Our senior career diplomat, Under Secretary of State Bill Burns, and his newly minted Assistant Secretary of State Bob Blake have returned from India this weekend to tell me of the enormous potential for progress in our relationship with New Delhi.

In a world where, let’s admit it, frankly, the headlines can get depressing, our relationship with India is a good news story. And I think it’s going to get even better. But it’s important to place this in history and to remember that the United States and India haven’t always had such a promising partnership. We need to acknowledge the road we have traveled together. We have already come through two distinct eras in U.S.-India relations on our way to this new beginning.

The first era opened with India’s founding and lasted through the end of the Cold War. It was colored by uncertainty about each other’s motives and ambivalence about whether to pursue closer cooperation. The relationship between our countries was never hostile. But the missed opportunities for closer partnership during this period were casualties of old conflicts between East and West, and North and South.

After the Cold War ended, President Clinton opened a new chapter of engagement with India. I love saying that, and it has the benefit of being true. (Laughter.) Talks between former Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott and his Indian counterpart helped to establish a new foundation for our relationship. And of course, my husband and daughter had an extraordinary visit toward the end of his term in office.

This second stage in our history continued through the last U.S. and Indian administrations and culminated in completion of the Indo-U.S. civilian nuclear agreement this past October under the Bush Administration. This landmark accord, which the Obama Administration is fully committed to implementing, provides a framework for economic and technical cooperation between our two countries and allows us to move beyond our concerns about the status of India’s nuclear program, an issue that dominated our relationship for much of the last decade.

The nuclear deal, which was completed through the efforts of former President Bush, removed the final barrier to broader cooperation between us. And that brings us to today. We find ourselves at the beginning of a third era. I’ll call it U.S.-India 3.0. The new governments in Washington and New Delhi will build this future together, and we will be discussing the details of that partnership when I visit India next month.

But today, I can tell you my hope and President Obama’s hope that the next stage in our country’s relationship will see a dramatic expansion in our common agenda, and a greater role for India in solving global challenges. We recognize the extraordinary progress that India has made already, and we know that many of these advances have not come easily, and we don’t take them for granted. As we pursue an enhanced bilateral partnership, we should recognize that compared to other metrics of our cooperation, our official ties are past due for an upgrade.

You see, a funny thing happened on the way to this third era of U.S.-India relations. Our scientists and business people, our universities and movie studios, and vibrant Indian-American personal familial connections accepted the truth that cooperation between our countries can be a driver of progress long before our policymakers did.

Today our trade between our nations has doubled since 2004 and now exceeds $43 billion; there are over 90,000 Indian students studying in the United States; and the new Fulbright-Nehru program strengthens educational exchanges between India and the United States with both countries acting as full partners in governance and funding.

We find ourselves in an unusual position. We need the bilateral cooperation between our governments to catch up with our people-to-people and economic ties. We need to make sure that the partnership between Washington and New Delhi, our capitals, will be as advanced and fruitful as the linkages that already exist between Manhattan and Mumbai, or Boston and Bangalore.

Now, that’s not to say that our governments have not made significant progress in our cooperation over the past several years. Top officials see each other more often, and I think we speak more candidly with each other, which is a true sign of friendship. And we have found more common ground of late. But this is a relationship that has largely grown from the ground up. And I think our governments are ready to start following the examples of partnership established by our citizens, our companies, and our colleges.

I hope that an expanded partnership between the U.S. and India will be one of the signature accomplishments of both new governments in both countries, and I do plan to make that a personal priority. To achieve the goal of stronger ties between our countries, we will have to confront and transcend the mistrust that has hampered our cooperation in the past, and address the lingering uncertainties in our relationship still today.

Each of us have our own perspectives, as you would expect, about the challenges we face as individual countries and as partners in the world. Some Americans fear that greater prosperity and partnership with India will mean lost jobs or falling wages here in the United States. Some Indians believe that closer cooperation with us runs counter to their nation’s very strong tradition of independence.

But as friendly democracies, in fact, as the oldest and largest democracies in the world, we should work through any issues in our relationship and differences in our perspective by focusing on shared objectives and concrete results. I want to put us into the solutions business.

In order to achieve that and realize the benefits of this 3.0 relationship, we need to build on several natural platforms. The first is global security. India and the United States share an overriding interest in making the world more secure. The tragic attacks of 26/11 were a global event. They played out in slow motion on television screens across India, the United States, and the world. The violence inflicted on the people of Mumbai, and the loss of six American citizens in those attacks, was a reminder that terrorism represents a common threat to our nations and our people, and we must meet it with a common strategy.

As part of that strategy, we should expand our broader security relationship and increase cooperation on counterterrorism and intelligence sharing. As you know, America faced an extraordinary challenge ourselves after 9/11 – how to organize as a government and a people to better prevent and prepare for future attacks. India faces that same terrible challenge. And the President and I are committed to working with India in whatever way is appropriate to enhance India’s ability to protect itself.

Our own post-9/11 process had its strengths and its faults. And I think we can learn from India, too, as it develops new mechanisms for cooperation between federal and state security forces.

We should also work to realize a vision articulated by generations of Indians, Americans, and recently by President Obama, of a nuclear-free world. The Civil Nuclear Agreement helped us get over our defining disagreement, and I believe it can and should also serve as the foundation of a productive partnership on nonproliferation.

We have a common interest in creating a stable, peaceful Afghanistan, where India is already providing $1.2 billion in assistance to facilitate reconstruction efforts. The United States is committed to the task ahead in Afghanistan, and I hope India will continue its efforts there as well. And of course, we believe that India and Pakistan actually face a number of common challenges, and we welcome a dialogue between them.

As we have said before, the pace, scope, and character of that dialogue is something that Indian and Pakistani leaders will decide on their own terms and in their own time. But as Pakistan now works to take on the challenge of terrorists in its own country, I am confident that India, as well as the United States, will support those efforts.

As India and other nations play an expanded role in resolving international security challenges, we should be prepared to adapt the architecture of international institutions to reflect their new responsibilities. India’s moral stature and its long tradition of leadership among developing countries means that it is particularly well-suited to take on the challenges that multinational institutions face. I have always believed states should be awarded enhanced roles in international bodies not only on the basis of their power, but whether they use that power constructively to advance the common good and address global problems. India already is a major player on the world stage, and we will look to cooperate with New Delhi as it shoulders the responsibilities that accompany its new position of global leadership.

Human development – particularly in the fields of education, women’s empowerment, and health – is another platform for cooperation. In both India and the United States, the most important national asset we possess is the energy and creativity of our citizens. In Prime Minister Singh, we have a partner who is determined to leverage India’s progress to improve the lives of his people. We need to work together to ensure that every child, girl or boy, born in our countries can live up to their God-given potential.

As part of that commitment, we should build on the goals articulated by India’s leadership to boost literacy, expand vocational training, and improve access to higher education. I hope we can partner with India to improve outcomes at all levels of education. Our countries should continue the tradition of intellectual exchange by increasing opportunities for interaction by American institutions of higher learning and their Indian counterparts as well.

India’s women have made great strides. The country has a woman president, a woman leader of the nation’s largest political party, more women in parliament than ever before. In many areas, the United States can learn from India. (Applause.) But there is more work to be done in both of our countries. (Laughter.) We should continue working together to promote initiatives like micro-lending and provide training programs for rural women as tools to help lift them and their families out of poverty.

We can also work together to address health challenges including nutrition, maternal and child health, HIV/AIDS, and other infectious diseases, as well as the growing problem of chronic disease in both of our nations. We need to share knowledge and best practices to improve human development at home and around the world. And I appreciate all that is being done by this group and certainly this Council to promote economic and trade cooperation. We should begin negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty soon. And I’m confident that our Trade Representative and Minister Sharma will bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to help move the Doha Round negotiations to a successful conclusion.

President Obama has been clear that the United States has learned the lessons of the past. We will not use the global financial crisis as an excuse to fall back on protectionism. We hope India will work with us to create a more open, equitable set of opportunities for trade between our nations.

Encouraging greater agricultural cooperation should be a major focus of our economic agenda. India is ripe for a second green revolution. A significant expansion of India’s agricultural sector would have dramatic benefits for Indians, but also could help to spur agricultural revolutions in Africa and other parts of the globe where food security remains a persistent problem.

All of you in this room will be critical partners as we work to expand economic cooperation. Our commitment to work with the business community means that in September we will re-launch the CEO Forum on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly. We hope that effort, along with other initiatives, will channel the power of the private sector and entrepreneurs to build and improve the lives of both Indians and Americans.

Finally, we should bring together the best of our technological and scientific brains to encourage breakthroughs in both science and technology. This is particularly important on issues related to energy and climate. We are committed to working with India to see India’s economy continue to prosper, to create more economic opportunity, rising incomes. We want Indians to have a higher standard of living. And we hope our countries can work together to achieve that overriding goal, while avoiding the mistakes that were made by everyone in creating the climate crisis we face today. We think there is great promise in a clean energy cooperation strategy focused on adopting low carbon technologies, improving energy efficiency, forestation, and water management. And these efforts should be supported by new and existing high-level dialogues between representatives of our governments.

We can also learn from Indian doctors and companies that are pioneering low-cost solutions to many of the health challenges we face today. The Serum Institute’s groundbreaking work to reduce the cost of vaccine manufacturing is one example of this phenomenon. There are many others. Applying their discoveries to global health initiatives will help us save resources and lives.

Public-private partnerships between governments, industry, civil society will be vital to everyone of these platforms. Yes, we can use all of you to help us drive economic cooperation, but also to improve human development and technological advances as well. And I think that the security cooperation is not just government-to-government, but can operate much more broadly and deeply.

So four platforms of cooperation – global security, human development, economic activity, science and technology – can support us in launching this third phase of the U.S.-India relationship. I think our successes and our futures are intertwined. Obviously, we want India to do well on its own for its own sake, but we also have a stake in that outcome, because we want India to succeed as a model of democratic development. We want India to succeed as an anchor for regional and global security. And we want India to succeed so that the world’s two largest democracies can work together as strong partners.

This is a relationship with deep roots. Both of our countries emerged from struggles against colonialism to become proud, independent democracies. And both are living proof that people espousing espoused different faiths, speaking different languages, and travelling different paths can unite and form nations that are greater than the sum of their parts.

Sixty years ago this October, then-Prime Minister Nehru told a joint session of the United States Congress that, quote, “Progress cannot go far or last long unless it has its foundations in moral principles and high ideals.” The United States and India share an allegiance to what Nehru called the “fundamental human rights to which all [those] who love liberty, equality and progress aspire.”

So let us build on those timeless principles, and let us create a new era in our relationship that will produce so much progress for our people, so much more peace for the world, and live up to those high ideals that both of our nations and our peoples represent and aspire to.

Thank you very much. (Applause.)

State Department

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23787
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby SSridhar » 18 Jun 2009 12:14

India-US to coordinate on global counter-terrorism efforts

No comments needed when the US talks with a straight-face like that.

csharma
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby csharma » 18 Jun 2009 12:26

So India finally gets a speech after five months. Instead of getting carried away India will have to judge by their actions. The recent interview by India's FM showed that not everything is hunky dory and India will wait and watch.



Experts are saying that the speech should ease India's concerns. I am sure Indians must be an easy bunch to please.
Or is this part of India thinning troops in Kashmir for Pakistan.

Interestingly, Hillary Clinton did not visit India during her first trip to Asia inspite of SD policy staff recommending her to go.

Clinton's speech should ease India's concerns, says experts

http://www.rediff.com/news/interview/20 ... perts1.htm

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Jun 2009 14:13

AFP - its all india's fault :rotfl: :((

Back to Google News
Unclear if Pakistan offensive serves US interests

By Daphne Benoit – 2 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) — Pakistan's offensive against Taliban militants has won praise from Washington but may bring little benefit to US forces in neighboring Afghanistan, experts and US officials say.

Having pressed Pakistan to take on Islamist militants on its soil, Washington has hailed Islamabad for its anti-Taliban military campaign launched in April.

But Islamabad has not targeted Washington's main enemies -- Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda leaders on the Pakistani border -- and instead has directed its assault on Pakistani Taliban, officials and analysts say.

Pakistan's interests "don't necessarily align 100 percent with the US as well as allies' interests," said a US defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Pakistani forces are focusing on the Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud and his network, blamed for a wave of attacks that have killed nearly 2,000 in the nuclear-armed nation in the past two years.

"It appears as though Pakistan still has the same policy as before and continues to differentiate between the 'good Taliban,' being the ones who attack US and NATO forces, ... and the 'bad Taliban,' like Baitullah Meshud, being the ones who attack the Pakistani government," said Malou Innocent of the CATO Institute.
:rotfl:

The problem is that "at a strategic level Pakistan and the US are not on the same page," Innocent said. "Until US lawmakers recognize that, we are going to be in Afghanistan in perpetuity."

Islamabad remains reluctant to move against Afghan Taliban, such as militants led by Mullah Omar or the Haqqani network, as it views them as useful in countering the influence of its arch-enemy India in Afghanistan, analysts said.

"Indians do have an influence in Afghanistan and Karzai has a friendly relationship with India," said Caroline Wadhams, national security analyst at the Center for American Progress.

"They are scared that the US will get out of Afghanistan and that Afghanistan becomes more and more of an Indian satellite.

"So they keep these groups of Afghan Taliban around that are attacking into Afghanistan to stem the growing influence of India in Afghanistan," she said.
:rotfl:

President Barack Obama's administration insists the Pakistan offensive serves US interests, though not necessarily delivering a direct benefit in Afghanistan, where 56,000 US troops are serving along with about 34,000 allied foreign troops.

"The Pakistani extremist threat was a very urgent threat, very close to Islamabad and extending in geography," said a senior US defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Islamabad's army operations have put pressure on members of the Al-Qaeda network allied with Pakistani Taliban and cut off a potential safe haven in the Swat Valley, the official said.

"There are some groups that we'd like the Pakistanis to take more action against, for example the Afghan Taliban, but we share a common interest against the Pakistan Taliban," he said.

US officials acknowledge the army assault in the Swat Valley has had no effect on the movement of militants across the border into Afghanistan from bases in Pakistan.

While Washington has welcomed plans by the Pakistan army to open up a second front in South Wazirstan, some analysts say the move in the lawless tribal belt could push militants over the border to neighboring Afghanistan.

Chinmayanand
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2585
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 16:01
Location: Mansarovar
Contact:

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Chinmayanand » 18 Jun 2009 14:14

India denies visa to US religious freedom watchdogs

These watchdogs should visit Saudi Arabia.And see how much power do they and their senate and congress and president have? :mrgreen:

Stan_Savljevic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3522
Joined: 21 Apr 2006 15:40

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Stan_Savljevic » 18 Jun 2009 16:02

Just like USFIRC wanted to visit India to check for religious freedom, we want an Indian team to visit US to check for freedom against racism, direct or indirect....
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/17/pen ... index.html

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 18 Jun 2009 16:06

But Islamabad has not targeted Washington's main enemies -- Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda leaders on the Pakistani border -- and instead has directed its assault on Pakistani Taliban, officials and analysts say.


The official should read BR more often.

Islamabad remains reluctant to move against Afghan Taliban, such as militants led by Mullah Omar or the Haqqani network, as it views them as useful in countering the influence of its arch-enemy India in Afghanistan, analysts said.

"Indians do have an influence in Afghanistan and Karzai has a friendly relationship with India," said Caroline Wadhams, national security analyst at the Center for American Progress.

"They are scared that the US will get out of Afghanistan and that Afghanistan becomes more and more of an Indian satellite.

"So they keep these groups of Afghan Taliban around that are attacking into Afghanistan to stem the growing influence of India in Afghanistan," she said.


Then clearly the US is in the wrong place at the wrong time, not surprisingly making the wrong decisions.

Akshut
BRFite
Posts: 353
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 15:06

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Akshut » 18 Jun 2009 17:34

India blocked airspace for N Korean plane: US lawmaker
http://www.ndtv.com/news/world/india_bl ... wmaker.php

India at the request of the United States had blocked its air space to a North Korean plane allegedly delivering illicit cargo to Iran last year forcing it to turn back, a US lawmaker said on Thursday.

"Last August, India responded to a US request and blocked its airspace to a North Korean plane delivering illicit cargo to Iran. That plane had to turn back," Congressman Ed Royce said during a Congressional hearing on North Korea.

Akshut
BRFite
Posts: 353
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 15:06

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Akshut » 18 Jun 2009 17:36

Back Pak's anti-terror efforts: US to India :evil: MoFos...
http://www.ndtv.com/news/world/back_pak ... _india.php

As Pakistan military is poised to roll on a major offensive to smash Taliban and Al-Qaida stronghold in the country's restive northwest, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has hoped that India and US will support Islamabad's effort to take on terrorists on its own soil.

"As Pakistan now works to take on the challenge of terrorists in its own country, I'm confident that India as well as US will support those efforts," Clinton said while welcoming a dialogue between the two neighbours.

While declaring that it was for India and Pakistan to decide the pace, scope and character of the dialogue, Clinton said, "Of course, we believe that India and Pakistan actually face a number of common challenges."

Saying the shape of the dialogue is something that Indian and Pakistani leaders will decide on their own terms and in their own time, she said, "We welcome a dialogue between them".


Somebody please tell Unkil that he is not our Uncle.

Omar
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 30 Aug 2005 07:03
Location: cavernous sinus

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Omar » 18 Jun 2009 19:01

US seeks 'dramatic expansion' of India ties
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... eNSJX33CMQ
By Shaun Tandon – 11 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has committed to working for a "dramatic expansion" in ties with India, calling it one of the few nations the new US administration views as a global partner.


Talk is cheap. Consider the following:

Obama administration has put up more barriers to defense related exports from US, spoken out more against offshoring, andappointed more NPAs to advisory positions. Now Obama administration has the nerve to ask India to back Islamabad's terror policy despite the fact it hasn't declared Al-Queda a terrorist organization, 8 years after 9/11? And Hillary Clinton is looking to "dramatically expand" US-India relations? Things are returning to status quo before Bush.

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1390
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby ashish raval » 18 Jun 2009 19:14



Somebody please tell Unkil that he is not our Uncle.



:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby NRao » 18 Jun 2009 19:28

wonder what type of a welcome will Mrs. Clinton get in ND.

My guess would be a rather cool one ...... not even a luke warm one.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby RajeshA » 18 Jun 2009 19:32

NRao wrote:wonder what type of a welcome will Mrs. Clinton get in ND.

My guess would be a rather cool one ...... not even a luke warm one.


Important is that no joint press conferences are given.

Dawood Mulli-in-Bund has abused our hospitality. William Burns has abused our hospitality. Pakistanis do it all the time during joint conferences in India. So no joint conferences, please!

Akshut
BRFite
Posts: 353
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 15:06

Re: India-US News and Discussion

Postby Akshut » 18 Jun 2009 20:03

RajeshA wrote:
Dawood Mulli-in-Bund


OMFG!! :rotfl: :rotfl:

Didn't see it coming!! :rotfl:


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests