India-US News and Discussion

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 22 Nov 2009 02:33

Zakaria is the master of doublespeak.
All these pro India articles are to mollify India.
Let us not climb the makhan ka tree

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Nov 2009 05:33

Zakaria did not make Man Booker Prize?

Man, what is this world coming to?

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 22 Nov 2009 06:42

Jarita wrote:Zakaria is the master of doublespeak.
All these pro India articles are to mollify India.
Let us not climb the makhan ka tree

On one had US has this great democratic system where leaders are elected to govern according to the wishes of the people. So the people in US may get sick of the old-boy's club (cheney/bush) and their "new American century" ideals of world domination by hook, crook, or warfare and vote in a complete outsider who promises hope and sweeping changes expecting that sweeping changes will actually happen. This definitely is the much talked about and discussed view of US.

However that view completely discounts the other side of the US power equation where large rich and powerful vested interests go to great lengths with bankrolled elections and well paid lobbyists to ensure that any policies that come out of the democratic process will always keep the interests of rich-and-powerful in mind first. This is a view that one seldom hears in mainstream press.

Anyone who considers US to be a democratic and only a democratic country is missing out on half the picture. If one is to understand, deal, and negotiate with US, it is import to understand both the relative contribution of both these power centers (democratic people centric and rich-and-powerful centric) to US policies. Each vote in US is only worth 50% because the other 50% of the vote is cast by the rich and powerful vested interests with their money, connections, and political pull.

India is favored by the democratic people-centric power center in US, but has zero resoures and ability to appease the rich-and-powerful power-center in the US. On the other hand China is favored by the rich-and-powerful power center of the US, but has zero credibility in the democratic people-center power center in the US.

To befriend US is to befriend both the power centers in US. There is a lot of good will that will come out of befriending the democratic people-centric power center in the US. At the same time India may have to pay a price and sacrifice some of its independence and sovereignity to befriend the rich-and-powerful power center of the US and this is certainly detestable. When push comes to shove, we in India will always choose the first power-center over the second or will end up loosing our own independence and sovereignity to rich-and-power interests; while as, China will do the opposite. China would rather like to co-opt the rich-powerful power center in US rather than be co-opted by this center. Coopting or getting co-opted by the US democratic people-centric power center is an anathema to established Chinese power centers.

This dharmic good-vs-evil geo-political drama between India-US-China is just beginning and it will be interesting to see how this drama unfolds over the next 20 to 50 years. This drama is just starting and there are bound to be more interesting times ahead hopefully without disturbing peace too much

P.S: sometimes even I am impressed by my own geo-political analytical skills

:

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 22 Nov 2009 07:29

so Dhiman why are Republicans better for India than Democrats ?

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 22 Nov 2009 08:18

PM ‘stoops’ to conquer N-detractors - K.P.NAYAR

..
...
His presence at the CFR is actually a few notches below his stature as the head of India’s government. According to the practice hitherto, only India’s cabinet ministers went to venues like this, usually the external affairs minister or the finance minister.

But Indian officials here and in New Delhi explained that the Prime Minister’s decision to personally reach out to the council and the Wilson Center was meant to decisively put down a campaign of attrition by the likes of Strobe Talbott, president of the Brookings Institution, that is chipping away at India’s long-held positions on disarmament and non-proliferation.

Talbott and several others of similar standing in Washington’s strategic community, many of them with Democratic Party credentials, have been vigorously campaigning for ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) by the US, now that the Democrats control the White House and both chambers of the US Congress.

The wisdom in South Block is that if the US Senate ratifies the CTBT, intense pressure will then follow on India, not only from the US, but the international community, to sign and ratify the treaty, which will close India’s nuclear options for ever.

...
...

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 22 Nov 2009 08:46

India, US set to sort out spent fuel issue

...

India and the US have inched closer to concluding an agreement on arrangements and procedures for reprocessing US-origin spent fuel with the Indian camp exuding confidence that an understanding on this crucial remaining step of the nuclear deal will be reached before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh meets US President Barack Obama on Tuesday.

According to reliable sources, India has also given the P-810 assurances which is a pre-requisite for US nuclear power companies to conduct business abroad. These assurances relate reaffirming commitments on peaceful uses and non-proliferation as enshrined in the 123 agreement. Also, the government has cleared nuclear Liabilities Bill that will be tabled in this session of Parliament, another pre-requisite for US companies as it clarifies the compensation rules in case of an accident in nuclear facilities.

With these two steps having been taken, the only remaining element from the nuclear deal was the agreement on reprocessing arrangements. An extra push was given to the talks after an inconclusive third round earlier this month. A fourth round was hurriedly arranged in Washington from Friday. Though these talks are still underway, sources said differences had been whittled down to one or two resolvable issues.
...
...
To some extent, sources said, this will also help narrow the trust deficit due to the Tarapur deal in which India was not allowed to reprocess spent fuel even though there were no legal obstacles to it.

Under this agreement, India will set up a dedicated and fully safeguarded reprocessing facility for foreign-origin fuel. The agreement will spell out the arrangements and procedures so that there is enough assurance against proliferation.

The progress on this front, sources said, will also help improve confidence levels among both sides, particularly after the outburst in New Delhi on the reference to Indo-Pak talks in the US-China joint statement. While China is said to have officially clarified to India that it respects the Indian position, top sources made it clear that India will not accept “guardianship” on this from any third country.
...

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 22 Nov 2009 09:48

Sumeet wrote: so Dhiman why are Republicans better for India than Democrats ?

It is ridiculous to assume that all the interests of all the people in the US can either be represented by Democrats or by the Republicans. No third political party of any worth has been able to come up because a system with just two political parties lends itself to easy manipulation (or shall I say "management") by the rich-and-powerful forces. A system with multiple political parties would be more friendly and be better able to represent diverse public interest, but would not lend itself to easy management by the rich-and-the-powerful. The two party political system that you see in US today is itself a balance between the people-centric power center and the rich-and-powerful power centers of the US. The problem is not that a third-political party would not have any one to represent, the problem is that emergence of a third party would disturb the overall balance of power between the rich-and-powerful interests and the people-centric power center.

Having said that, it is true that republicans are closer to the rich-and-powerful power center and Democrats are closer to people-centric power center. However, the assumption that Republicans are better for India as compared to Democrats is a pure illusion as both are equally good or bad. The fact is that Republicans are more eager and willing to maintain a world dominated by the US because this ensures the continued growth and development of the rich-and-powerful interests that are primarily represented by the Republicans. Republicans see China as a threat to US world dominance and hence need something to balance China. This something to balance China is India. So the republicans, in order to preserve the interests of the rich-and-powerful are more willing to prop up India in order to neutralize the Chinese threat to US world dominance. If US looses its dominance over world affairs, the rich-and-powerful interests in US have the most to loose. On the other hand if China gains world dominance the current oligarchy in China as represented by CCP has the most to gain. In either case, the common people (whether Chinese or Americans) will find a way to live and survive and be happy with the television and car.

Whether it is the US rich-and-powerful that will co-opt the Chinese rich-and-powerful or vice versa remains to be seen. India only figures favorably in the equation of Republicans as long as India helps US (and hence its rich-and-powerful) to maintain their global dominance (and hence their richness and power) in face of the Chinese threat to their richness and power.

It doesn't matter whether it was a democrat (Clinton) under whose administration, India-US relations started to improve or it was a Republican (Bush) under whom there was some perceived tilt towards India as compared to China. And it also doesn't matter how much Obama and his people-centric power backers have been muzzled by the rich-and-powerful interests in complete contradiction of his campaign theme of "hope" and "change". If India is to ever effectively deal with China without US meddling in the middle, India will have to deal with the rich-and-powerful interests in US who in-turn would definitely need a pound of Indian heart-blood-and-soul in their grip.

One approach is for India is to wait on the sidelines (like India did so effectively during the days of US-USSR cold war unlike Pakistan which picked sides for short-term gains and got royally screwed partly due to its own stupidity) and let either the US rich-and-powerful co-opt the Chinese rich-and-powerful or vice versa before stepping into the front-lines. Maybe its not our time yet, so let's not try to force anything or be greedy. Off course this would take another 30 to 40 years and we can forget about becoming a world-power during that time (but we would naturally emerge as a major side power given that internal economic growth keeps pace and as long as we send a strong message that we are not to be screwed around with things will be fine. No body wants to have 1 billion people on their bad side).

Ideally, India must find a way to reject both the Chinese oligarchy and the rich-and-powerful power-center of the US and side with the well developed people-centric democratic interests in the US and the fledgling people-centric democratic interests in China (no matter how difficult they may be to find). This is clearly where Indian role is in future geo-political role as things emerge and the future course of the world might very well depend upon this.

The country (India) that can play a balancing role wins and if all countries (India, US, China) play balancing role our age old ideals and age old morals will win naturally although it will take time. But keep the US rich-and-powerful interests in mind as much as you keep CCP in mind.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Nov 2009 12:28

The trip of MMS to see Uncle Obama,is a very significant one,as ties between the countries are at the crossroads of history.While the US wants in simple terms,an India,acquiscient and docile,ever ready to do its dirty work for it,it also salivates at the huge economic opportunities that it can vacuum up thanks to an easily influenced Indian babudom.What is most attractive to the US thoiugh is the integration of India's military machine into the US's strategic gameplan,especially in the Asian context.

What India needs from the US is an equal partnership and the end to mollycoddling Pak and ranking China as the suzerain power of Asia.That is totally unacceptable tp India as well as many other nations of the Asian forum.There is a alrge gap between the two sides,especially India's take on US foreign policy and let's see how this can be bridged to the mututal benefit of both sides.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Nov 2009 12:29

The trip of MMS to see Uncle Obama,is a very significant one,as ties between the countries are at the crossroads of history.While the US wants in simple terms,an India,acquiscient and docile,ever ready to do its dirty work for it,it also salivates at the huge economic opportunities that it can vacuum up thanks to an easily influenced Indian babudom.What is most attractive to the US thoiugh is the integration of India's military machine into the US's strategic gameplan,especially in the Asian context.

What India needs from the US is an equal partnership and the end to mollycoddling Pak and ranking China as the suzerain power of Asia.That is totally unacceptable tp India as well as many other nations of the Asian forum.There is a large gap between the two sides,especially India's take on US foreign policy and let's see how this can be bridged to the mututal benefit of both sides.

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNew ... 57671.html

US rolls out red carpet for India

WASHINGTON - INDIAN Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was due on Sunday to start the first US state visit under President Barack Obama, who hopes to show his dedication to the emerging power even as his attention lies elsewhere.

The prime minister was scheduled to fly into Andrews Air Force Base near Washington, two days before Obama rolls out the red carpet and toasts Singh at his White House's first black-tie dinner.

The state visit is a sign of the rapidly warming relationship between the world's two largest democracies, which had uneasy ties during the Cold War but which Mr Obama has vowed to treat as a first-rate partner.

'India is a rising global power,' said Robert Blake, the assistant secretary of state for South Asia. 'We think that India has an increasingly significant role to play on virtually all of the major challenges that we face in this century.'

While issues from counter-terrorism to trade to climate change were expected on the agenda, experts said the state visit likely had a broader intention - for Mr Obama to show India he did not take it for granted.

Mr Obama invited Mr Singh to come just days after the US leader returned from a trip to boost cooperation with China, another emerging power whose relations with both the United States and India have seen sharp ups and downs. Mr Obama has also put a top priority on rooting out extremism in Pakistan, India's historic rival. -- AFP

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 22 Nov 2009 13:32

I'll be more than Happy if MMS and the band of babu's accompanying him do not give away too much on this state visit. It can be in terms of Climate Change, military aquisitions, opening up economic avenues etc.

sum · Post by **sum** » 22 Nov 2009 13:53

And while New Delhi is trying to gain influence with the Kabul government, U.S. officials tell me that Indian intelligence has limited operations in Afghanistan.

Dammit

There go all my wet dreams about SDRE spooks running riot in A'tan and targeting TSP.

sum · Post by **sum** » 22 Nov 2009 13:58

Shortly after Obama’s election as President, India had privately made it plain to his transition team that any special envoy for India, Pakistan and Afghanistan appointed by an incoming Obama administration would not get a visa to visit New Delhi.

In the last few days, Holbrooke visited Berlin, Paris, Moscow, Munich, Islamabad and Kabul. India has been a singular omision from his itinerary among coutries which have a stake in Afghanistan.

India rebuffed Holbrooke to express its irritation with the Obama administration’s positions on Pakistan and Afghanistan, which New Delhi views as contrary to Indian interests and to send a clear message to Washington prior to Singh’s arrival here that the prime minister is no pushover on Pakistan or Afghanistan.

Asked about this, the US assistant secretary of state for South Asia, Robert Blake, took the diplomatic way out at a media briefing here on Singh’s visit.

Bake said “it has just been a question of many of the (Indian) interlocutors not being available (for Holbrooke) because they themselves are travelling in other parts of the world... There is a very deep desire on the part of ambassador Holbrooke to coordinate very closely with India. And we — I’m sure that Afghanistan and Pakistan will be a very important part of our discussions” during the prime minister's visit.

Yesterday, a very senior Indian official in the US, too said at a briefing on Singh’s visit that Holbrooke did not go to India because the two sides could not agree on dates for his visit.

In the practice of diplomacy, the inability to find convenient dates for meetings is a standard ploy when one side wants to snub the other or not have meetings.

New Delhi’s caution and the crafting of a strategy to protect its positions on issues of concern has not come a day soon.

Only days before the Prime Minister was to arrive here, influential elements in Washington which want to put India in its place nearly foisted as a senior official in the state department to deal with India the very peron who has been providing fodder to Islamabad to campaign against New Delhi's alleged intereference in Balochistan.Christine Fair, a former Rand Corporation expert on South Asia who is now an assistant professor in security studies at Georgetown University, was almost appointed by the Obama administration as deputy assistant secretary of state with specific charge of India.

But wisely, anticipating an uproar from the Indian American community and friends of India on Capitol Hill and elsewhere, she is on record as having turned down the appointment almost on the eve of the Prime Minister’s arrival here.
Top

For once , i say "great job" to MMS and team.

KaranR · Post by **KaranR** » 22 Nov 2009 16:19

Jarita wrote:Zakaria is the master of doublespeak.
All these pro India articles are to mollify India.
Let us not climb the makhan ka tree

Very correct.

James B · Post by **James B** » 22 Nov 2009 16:49

KaranR wrote:
Jarita wrote:Zakaria is the master of doublespeak.
All these pro India articles are to mollify India.
Let us not climb the makhan ka tree
Very correct.

He is an american citizen and so he will speak in the interests of US, so we might see a streak of double speak wrt to Indian interests. I've been watching his GPS episodes on CNN and he has been showing pro-India stance at least for a while now. His articles also reflect this. I think he should be nurtured by Indian establishment to speak and proivde Indian POV wrt Afpak to the Americans.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Nov 2009 18:01

India should have responded to the sino-us statement by first saying as per deep cultural and business ties from old, India has a vital role to play in the taiwan and spratly islands disputes.

when the chinese responded that India has no role to play there, then tell them crudely to f*** off from our backyard.

the situation with PRC is they claim something in your backyard, instead of repudiating that , its better to claim something in their backyard.

but over the years India has foolishly conceded a lot of ground

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Nov 2009 18:15

Philip, can you please contact me at raptorss A T G M AI L etc. ?

Raju · Post by **Raju** » 22 Nov 2009 18:52

You need to understand that a lot many bigwigs shifted a/c's from swiss banks to Macau where they wouldn't come under unkil's control.

Indian politicians will not adopt an openly hostile stand against the Chinese for this very reason.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 22 Nov 2009 20:12

I think we need to be very careful with FZ as he'll say whatever to get ratings/readers and make sure he's relevant to fulfill his paycheck. He was was very critical of India during the NDA years and now he's pro-India, and yes he is a US citizen, but I don't know what his objectives are other than making money with TV appearances and articles.

Here's his view in May 1998 condeming POK-II:
http://www.fareedzakaria.com/articles/n ... 52598.html

Another in Oct. 2003 claiming the Iraq war was the right thing to do:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/61854

I think for the time being we should see what he has to say about the MMS visit this week since he's on CNN, but be very careful about it since he's proven to be not credible when he's been on the Dubya bandwagon and now Ombaba's.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 22 Nov 2009 20:26

MMS to be traveling to the US using the brand new Air India One 747-437B aircraft:
http://www.littleabout.com/news/45828,m ... -agra.html

kasthuri · Post by **kasthuri** » 22 Nov 2009 22:03

No big-ticket item; PM-Obama meet to pack a punch

But many contentious issues are likely to remain unresolved including:

US hopes of Indian participation in Afghan peacekeeping operations

Does that mean US expects India to participate militarily in A'stan to maintain peace?

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 22 Nov 2009 22:28

To me, it's the opposite - US doesn't want Indian peacekeepers in Afghanistan, while India does.

India wants to shore up the current govt even to the extent of providing troops, while US defers to Pakistan's sensitivities by opposing Indian peacekeepers on the ground in Afghanistan.

If India could be allowed to send in troops, then it would also alleviate the US troop deployment burden. I feel that India should simply provide troops to train Afghans. Anything we provide should be in exchange for stepping up operations in Balochistan.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 23 Nov 2009 00:41

The IBN-CNN story brings up some good points:

1. Trade - US will push for the Doha Development Agenda WTO talks and insist India drop safeguards for its poor farmers. Talks broke down in July 2008 and even Dubya tried to work this on MMS; hopefully Ombaba can be told stop corn subsidies that contribute to US deficit spending and then borrowing which sucks up world capital.

2. Defence Purchases - Tell Ombaba to drop the myriad of sanction related laws toward India, and India will move faster on purchases. Until then, India cannot afford white elephants and has to to think it through, but would love to make more US weapon system purchases. This should be easy since Ombaba and his party have a majority in the US Congress.

3. Co-operation on counter terrorism - This is lip service, both sides know that the US is protecting and covering up TSP's shenanigans. Maybe something on training and so forth.

4. Clean technology - This is called nuclear power. Ombaba and his motley crew will insist on FMCT and other treaty commitments. MMS will say no nicely and not much will happen here. Well, maybe Steven Chu can push solar panels, photovoltaics and battery chemistry. These will be like the Coke machines purchased by the Indian Railways in the 1990s that didn't work and were on the platform of several big stations. It would be much better if India imported in 100,000s of diesel generators from Kohler or Mitsubishi instead - a lot more reliable. Ombaba's administration is anti-nuclear power, so don't expect much.

5. Afghanistan - India will be told to reduce presence, but provide more cash. Deference will be given to TSP.

6. Education - This may be an area where we can see some agreements and perhaps a US university can have a campus in some major metro area.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 23 Nov 2009 00:45

MMS certainly seems to have learnt his lessons well after the S-e-S disaster joint summit. Today, speaking on GPS (Zakaria) , he did not utter a single wrongly worded statement, while managing not to sound sheepish in the least. Saying all the right things starting from "Pak's dirty agenda in Afg" , harboring terror , army calling the shots, no redrawing of Kashmir borders etc.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 23 Nov 2009 01:25

Mort Walker wrote:I think we need to be very careful with FZ as he'll say whatever to get ratings/readers and make sure he's relevant to fulfill his paycheck. He was was very critical of India during the NDA years and now he's pro-India, and yes he is a US citizen, but I don't know what his objectives are other than making money with TV appearances and articles.

From what I've read on these boards and FZ's articles, he can be bracketed as -

1. US citizen
2. INC man

Critical of NDA can be explained by his being an INC man, although it may also be due to #1. Toeing the US/Pak line immediately following 26/11 as he does here can be explained by #1.

darshan · Post by **darshan** » 23 Nov 2009 01:29

vera_k wrote: 2. INC man

I think he is not INC man directly but his islamicness leads him there.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 23 Nov 2009 01:44

darshan wrote:I think he is not INC man directly but his islamicness leads him there.

What does this even mean? His father was an INC MP, so his family would have been part of the INC elite.

Zakaria was born in Mumbai, Maharashtra, India to a Muslim family. His father, Rafiq Zakaria, was a politician associated with the Indian National Congress and an Islamic scholar. His mother, Fatima Zakaria, was for a time the editor of the Sunday Times of India.

Masaru · Post by **Masaru** » 23 Nov 2009 01:51

vera_k wrote:
darshan wrote:I think he is not INC man directly but his islamicness leads him there.

White raisins

darshan · Post by **darshan** » 23 Nov 2009 02:12

vera_k, I do know his family's affiliations with INC. Zakaria family is islamic apologist and naturally would be drawn to INC in my opinion.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 23 Nov 2009 02:16

darshan wrote:vera_k, I do know his family's affiliations with INC. Zakaria family is islamic apologist and naturally would be drawn to INC in my opinion.

But how come they chose to stay with India in 1947, if they were primarily islamic? Or are you saying the son has more radical views than his moderate father?

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 23 Nov 2009 02:38

I am little amused, (though not too surprised, as I have seen here that a few names will evoke lot of replies) to see deluge of conspiracy theory, if not outright hateful, and clearly OT messages wrt to Zakaria.

A quick look at wiki and one notices BA from Yale, PhD from Harvard, respectable career ...sure may not be too relevant but then so are " father/mother being "islamic scholars" etc..It is not just one or two side comments... its like obsession..

Folks - can we get back on topic? And PLEASE don't start attacking me for being apologist for any one as we all know it will be easiest thing which can be done.

In any case, the article from Newsweek, IMO is excellent and well articulated. I have actually sent it to my congresswoman for her education.

If it is online I recommend watching todays GPS (as mentioned in a post above). IMO nice interview with MMS, nice editorial view point about Afghanistan/Pakistan problem and nice story about TED (?) interesting innovations in India (or Indian students). I believe it will be interesting to many.

Meanwhile while watching US Senate when important health care reform bill was being voted, (and that was making all the news here in US), another resolution (S360) , introduced by Dodd (with 18 cosponsors) passed unanimously .
(Similar worded resolution in US House was passed (also unanimously) a week or so ago).
Link: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D ... ~bssR1ok::
Title/Text

Honoring the Prime Minister of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh, for his service to the people of India and to the world, and welcoming the Prime Minister to the United States.
...believes that together, the governments of India and the US can bring immense benefits to their people and make enormous contributions to addressing the global challenges of the 21st century."

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 23 Nov 2009 03:03

Amber G:

I completely agree with you.

The mods have permitted a tendency to paint anyone belonging to a particular group in the questionable category. This shoot first, ask questions later destroys the credibility of nationalists.

The nationalists have to fight an uphill battle anyway trying to overcome the generations of white-washing by the leftists historians. However, hard to believe aspersions, which are not backed by factual evidence makes the task harder. This is more relevant when it comes to fence-sitters, the target group for nationalists to win over.

Every time statements are made without being substantiated by rational thought process or relevant evidence, the credibility of the entire board goes down. If one of the purpose of the board is to bring forth alternative view points which strengthen the nationalists case, then posts which cast unsubstantiated aspersions need to be nipped in the bud or transferred to the whine thread.

Fareed Z has a very strong pedigree. You may or may not agree with his viewpoints; those are shaped by many things including the country he currently lives in and those who employee him. Blanket aspersions on him and his family without reference to anything specific do not serve any positive purpose.

Read about his father http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafiq_Zakaria

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 23 Nov 2009 03:30

AmberG,

Your link doesn't open to a valid location, please correct. Thank you.

FZ is a political partisan and is partial to the INC; at this time he will give favorable reviews of India and present MMS in good light. We should look past FZ and focus on the substance, and sure its nice when he talks about MMS and India, but don't lose focus of the issues. If there is a different govt. in Delhi, he'll go back to the nastiness, but will sing paeans for any administration in Washington. Got to give him credit for knowing which side butters his bread and his PhD from Harvard certainly did teach him something about it.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 23 Nov 2009 03:34

India linking climate change commitments to energy security ---- Chindu.

Washington: With Indian negotiators working overtime with their American counterparts to have an agreement on arrangements for fuel reprocessing, ready for signing by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and U.S. President Barack Obama on Tuesday, India is linking the issue of climate change commitments to the case for greater American cooperation on the supply of nuclear power.

Implicit in the offering of this new rationale for the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal is the expectation that by linking the issue of climate change, a subject that is of increasing concern to American policy makers, India was in fact strengthening Mr. Obama’s hand against the nay-sayers who include die-hard anti-nuclear proliferation evangelists in the State Department and the Congress.

Dr. Singh has already in Parliament and other interlocutions linked the nuclear deals with the U.S. and other countries to the need to augment energy security and to make a strategic shift from carbon-based energy sources to newer ones including nuclear energy. This argument has now been incorporated into Indian negotiating strategy with Indian officials here claiming that both India and the U.S. were clear that the issue of climate change and the challenge of energy security were closely related, two sides of the same coin.

In other words, by suggesting to the United States that if India is expected to fulfill expectations that it will have to speedily take steps to reduce carbon emissions, its energy security needs would have to be addressed, to enable it to make the shift from carbon-based sources.

India is expecting this Prime Ministerial visit to yield greater momentum in setting up practical collaborative efforts in the transfer of technology described as climate-friendly and transformational that will help in India’s efforts to comply with climate change commitments.

The discussions on these issues are being led by the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, on the Indian side and Steven Chu, Energy Secretary, on the American side.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 23 Nov 2009 04:06

IMHO, a friendly nation/strategist of India is someone

- Who supports India’s case on J&K (including POK and Aksai-chin)
- who supported India during 1971 episode
- who supported India with technology transfers
- who supported India during 1998 nuclear tests
- who supported India’s case for a UNSC permanent seat
- who offered civil nuclear technology without strings such as NPT/CTBT and have not asked for exception from liability incase of an accident
- who supports India’s influence in IOR and Afghanistan
- who helped India in extraditing terrorists

These events/issues are political party agnostic and truly represent a friend of the nation instead of someone who is in favor of a certain ideological/political rule

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 23 Nov 2009 04:16

^^^

Try this link (or just go to state.gov main site to look up Saturday's resolution S360):
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bssQuery? ... 1=20091121
(Click on the link which describes MMS etc - There is temporary "file error" at present when you click the site)
(Added later: No file error now: this is the direct link:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D ... L&summ2=m&
(looks suspicious with "/temp/" so it may not work on other pc)
Also from google gives this PTI report:
India, US can make 'enormous contributions': US senate

Washington: Welcoming the State Visit of prime minister Manmohan Singh, the US Senate today passed a unanimous resolution saying that India and the United States can together make "enormous contributions" in addressing the challenges of the 21st century...
....
..."believes that together, the governments of India and the US can bring immense benefits to their people and make enormous contributions to addressing the global challenges of the 21st century."

A similar resolution was unanimously passed by the House of Representatives last week. The senate resolution is considered to be significant as it was passed during the course of a rare weekend meeting of the US senate which discussed the issue of health insurance reform.

"We warmly welcome prime minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh, on his official state visit," the Senate said, adding it looks forward to the continuing progress in relations between India and the United States.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Nov 2009 05:05

RamaY wrote:IMHO, a friendly nation/strategist of India is someone

- Who supports India’s case on J&K (including POK and Aksai-chin)
- who supported India during 1971 episode
- who supported India with technology transfers
- who supported India during 1998 nuclear tests
- who supported India’s case for a UNSC permanent seat
- who offered civil nuclear technology without strings such as NPT/CTBT and have not asked for exception from liability incase of an accident
- who supports India’s influence in IOR and Afghanistan
- who helped India in extraditing terrorists

These events/issues are political party agnostic and truly represent a friend of the nation instead of someone who is in favor of a certain ideological/political rule

Is there a nation that will do all that?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 23 Nov 2009 05:07

Indian nation

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 23 Nov 2009 06:28

Amber G. wrote: Meanwhile while watching US Senate when important health care reform bill was being voted, (and that was making all the news here in US), another resolution (S360) , introduced by Dodd (with 18 cosponsors) passed unanimously .
(Similar worded resolution in US House was passed (also unanimously) a week or so ago).
Link: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D ... ~bssR1ok::
Title/Text
Honoring the Prime Minister of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh, for his service to the people of India and to the world, and welcoming the Prime Minister to the United States.
...believes that together, the governments of India and the US can bring immense benefits to their people and make enormous contributions to addressing the global challenges of the 21st century."

LOL, sounds like Indian lobby at work

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 23 Nov 2009 07:17

Acharya wrote:
Is there a nation that will do all that?

Indian nation

Hear, hear!

arun · Post by **arun** » 23 Nov 2009 08:04

X Posted.

Put space at the heart of US-India relations

By Karl Inderfurth and Raja Mohan

Published: November 22 2009 18:32 | Last updated: November 22 2009 18:32

.................... Today, the conventional wisdom is that the two leaders will not match the scale of the nuclear bargain and should limit themselves to consolidating recent gains. We disagree. They should aim higher and focus on strategic co-operation in outer space. They can bring lasting benefits to national space programmes and lay out the framework for an international code of conduct in outer space. ........................

Four broad areas of bilateral space co-operation present themselves. First, advanced launch technologies. The greatest limitation on space-ventures is the cost of launching objects into space. The two countries should partner in basic scientific research, such as advanced materials and combustion science that could enable a new generation of spacecraft, while avoiding the proliferation of dangerous ballistic missile capabilities.

Second, lunar exploration and beyond. With interest in both countries for exploring the moon and its resources, the US and India should exploit synergies between their moon programmes and consult on an ambitious human exploration of the moon and inter-planetary space. Lunar resources could be used to lower the costs of sustaining human and robotic outposts beyond the earth.

Third, climate change. The two countries should use the massive American and growing Indian space assets for earth observation to provide comprehensive and credible assessments of climate change.

Fourth, space governance. The US and India should work to forge a consensus on limiting space debris, improving “space situational awareness” for avoiding hazards, and ensuring unhindered operation of the space assets of all nations. Creating a new voluntary code of conduct in outer space could mark the start of an effort to bring order to the global commons.

An Obama-Singh space initiative could become the defining feature of an expansive US-India collaboration, especially in science and technology. It could also create the basis for securing our global commons and offer incentives to other major powers to join this vital undertaking.

Karl Inderfurth is a professor at George Washington University and a former assistant secretary of state for south Asia affairs, 1997-2001. Raja Mohan is Henry Kissinger chair in foreign policy at the Library of Congress and a contributing editor of The Indian Express, New Delhi

FT.Com