India-US News and Discussion

[amdavadi]

CIO & CTO??

I know someone from monterey school visits BRF.

[Philip]

The entire Indo-US "strategic relationship" is now under scrutiny by experts such as retd.admiral Raja Menon,former ambassador G.Parathasarathy and others ,writing in the media.This relationship has not stopped Paki-sponsored terror being used against India and also the illegal nuclear proliferation between China and Pak.China has cared a fig about its international obligations while providing Pak with N-tech,wahead designs,etc., and missiles beyond 300km.The US has been impotent at protecting India from both sides.Neither has it sold/provided India with cutting edge tech.W are still getting our key defence weaponry from Russia,ATV nuclear tech,Akula SSGNs and Sukhoi and 5th-gen stealth aircraft in the future.

In adition,the US simply keeps on supplying Pak with advanced weaponry like F-16s and P-3 Orion LRMPs,which it merrily misuses against India,happily acknowledged by Gen.Musharrat. Add to this the latest statement from Robert Gates who has just visited India,and the double-speak of Uncle Sam is totally exposed.Gates is now offering the Pakis Shadow/Predator drones,which it will no doubt use on the Indo-Pak border!

http://www.baltimoresun.com/health/dc-g ... 0347.story

Gates offers Pakistan U.S. drones
Wars and Interventions Julian E. Barnes, Reporting from Islamabad
Washington DC Bureau

7:55 p.m. EST, January 21, 2010

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration has agreed to provide Pakistan with unmanned spy drones, granting a longstanding request as it seeks new ways to persuade a key ally to do more to fight militant groups within its borders

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, on a visit to Pakistan, stopped short Thursday of providing Islamabad with U.S. Predators, the armed drones used to carry out air strikes inside Pakistan that have been denounced by the government, even as it has requested the technology for its own use.

Instead, Defense officials said Washington would provide Pakistan with 12 unarmed Shadow aircraft. While the Shadow drones do not have missile capabilities to strike the targets they observe, they nonetheless represent an advancement in the growing U.S. military relationship with Pakistan.

The step follows efforts by U.S. military officials last year to give Pakistan a feel for the surveillance capabilities of unmanned drones under American supervision.

Shadows, with a 14 foot wingspan, are smaller than Predators. But they have a longer "loiter" time and greater range than the drones Pakistan currently operates.

The question of providing U.S. drone technology is a delicate one for American officials, involving their most successful new military capability in years. While they have shared drone technology with close allies, they have tightly controlled its spread in volatile parts of the world, and have ruled out the possibility of providing Predators to Pakistan in the past.

Gates extended the offer as the Obama administration tries to convince Islamabad to expand a military offensive to extremist groups that most concern U.S. officials.

A top Pakistani military official said it would be six months to a year before the country's military is able to expand its campaign. But senior Defense officials said Thursday it was clear that Pakistani officials "have the will" to take on the country's militants, and did not quarrel with the suggested timelines.

In the first day of a two-day visit, Gates also sought to reassure a skeptical Pakistani public about American aims, which he said would not end with a reduction in the threat posed by militants.

It was Gates' first trip to Pakistan since 2007, but comes amid a flurry of Obama administration visits, including one late last year by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, during which she was pressed by Pakistani officials to share drone technology.

Gates' visit has featured the usual meetings with senior political and military leaders. But the Defense secretary engaged in significant amounts of public outreach, including television interviews and a newspaper op-ed, trying to improve America's battered American reputation in Pakistan.

In televised interviews, Gates bluntly dismissed suggestions that India posed a significant threat to Pakistan, saying extremists represent an imminent danger.

"That is the more immediate threat," Gates said. "That is the threat where suicide bombers have struck Pakistani cities, have killed Pakistani military officers in their family. This is the threat that faces Pakistan more immediately."

Gates is treading carefully in pressuring Islamabad, a recognition that neither the Pakistani public nor the government reacts well to demands from Washington. One Pakistani government spokesman scolded Gates for comments in India in which he said Islamabad should do more about extremists.

U.S. officials also would like to expand military training, but Gates said Thursday any increase is up to Islamabad.

"We have quite an array" of resources and equipment to offer, Gates said. "But it is the Pakistanis who have their foot on the accelerator, not us, and so we have to do that in a way that's comfortable for them."

[email protected]

[vera_k]

Sure, so derive whatever marginal benefit you can, and get on with the program. After reading about all those former foreign secretaries who spoke out against what happened in the IPL auction, one can only conclude that India is hobbled by internal confusion about what it is trying to achieve.

[shyamd]

X Post

DNW:
Burgeoning Indian-Israeli Military Ties
There Comes a Point When Washington May Set a Limit

One of the world's biggest powers and one of its smallest countries have discovered enough in common to forge a thriving friendly relationship based largely on mutual defense interests.

This week, Israel's chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, spent three days in Delhi, less than a month after his opposite number, the Indian chief of staff Gen. Deepak Kapoor visited Israel.

It was the first time any Israeli chief of staff had ever visited New Delhi.

The frequency of these visits denotes the burgeoning relationship between the two armies on several levels.

First, Israel has become India's No. 1 supplier of arms and ammunition, overtaking Russia. India accounts for roughly half of Israel's exports of defense items and about one-third of India's import list.

Second, after purchasing the Israeli Arrow anti-missile missile's Green Pine radar, Gen. Kapoor has said his government also wants to buy the missile itself, though not the Arrow 2 which is in service with Israel's Defense Forces, but Arrow 3 and Arrow 4, the Super Arrow which is still in development.

The Indian army chief's purpose in visiting Israel in November was for a rundown on the joint US-Israeli Juniper Cobra 10 exercise for testing defenses against ballistic missiles. This war game was watched avidly by the world's generals and strategists as the most comprehensive and advanced maneuver ever conducted by any army on this subject.

Gen. Kapoor was tireless in his requests for briefings on the lessons drawn from the unique two-week exercise.


US components in an Israeli military item limit its sale


Some of India's most pressing requests pose Israel with dilemmas, DEBKA-Net-Weekly's military sources note. On the one hand, New Delhi appears to be winding down its military procurements from Russia and turning increasingly to Israel. On the other, Israel is bound by overriding commitments to its senior ally, the United States.

When Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh visited Moscow on Dec. 7, he ended a spat over India's purchase of a retired Soviet aircraft carrier, the Admiral Gorshkov - undelivered because of delays and cost overruns for its refurbishment. Even if Singh agreed to hand over the extra $1.2 billion demanded by Moscow to cover the costs, it was clear to both sides that this was India's last arms purchase from Moscow for the time being.

But although Israel's defense industry stands to gain from this cutoff, the more sophisticated the arms on India's shopping list, the more American components and technologies they contain. This means that their transfer to a third country is subject to Washington's veto and both Jerusalem and New Delhi will become increasingly dependent on US permission in the pursuit of their arms transactions.

The case of the Super Arrow is a good example. The United Sates has invested advanced technology in the development of the system as well as covering 60 percent of the costs of research, construction and operational testing of this advanced missile interceptor.


Israel has strong strategic ties with Singapore


Rather than approving an Israeli sale, Washington might decide to supply India with the Super Arrow itself, although thus far, the United States defense industry has never shown interest in entering the Indian arms market. So Israel might be given the go-ahead for Arrow 4 on certain conditions. The US and Israel too might ask India to carry part of the cost of development on behalf of one of the two parties or as an extra.

Furthermore, at some point, Israel and India will have to decide whether their expanding arms trade makes them strategic allies or merely trading partners.

In the past, Israel supplied highly sophisticated hardware in the Super Arrow class only to strategic partners. In recently years, a strategic partnership has been established between Israel and Singapore whereby Israel's military industries supply most of the island's electronic defense systems and are now developing a fleet of unmanned warships.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly's military sources report that a similar strategic alliance is evolving between Israel and South Korea. Lt. Gen. Ashkenazi has dropped in on Seoul in the course of his current Asian tour.

Washington may object to a specific transaction, but has no real trouble with Israel's military ties with Singapore and South Korea.

India's case is in a different category; its standing in Washington is still undecided. A decision on this by the Obama administration will determine the extent to which Israel-Indian defense ties can develop.

[joshvajohn]

If United States wanted to play a fair and positive role in Asia they need to be careful in playing with Pakistan. Pakistan has been hijacking US by letting terror to be an agent of destruction both in Afganistan and in Pakistan. Pakistan intelligences provide order to kill as many Europeans as possible and as many Indian as possible and as many Jews as possible. United States funding and supply of arms to Pakistan means it allows Pakistan to continue to encourage terror to operate and work in its own soil and destroy those 'infidel' nations including US, Israel, Europe and India. It is essential to be fair and transparent in this political game. On the one hand US has played into the hands of Pakistan when they provided arms and skill to AFgans to fight against Russians and also such links continue to exist and so the trade and supply of arms. On the other Pakistan supplies (at times with the neutral knowledge of US), the arms to the terror to attack in India. This is not correct. Those who are trained against Russians in Checheniya and Indians in Kashmir and Chinese in one of their states by Pakistan ISI can also use such skills to attack the US or West. One cannot play dual role in terrorism.

Ofcourse one needs to look into some of the issues such as Kashmir and address them through dialogue and engagement. But Pakistan talks at the point of gun by creating fear in Indian mindset all the time. This is true of Terrorism in West and Israel too. If US wants to play a honest role in bringing peace, it is essential to say to these rogue countries such as Pakistan it is better to stop and control your folks if not there will be joint operations to eliminate once for all.

I assume that President Obama wants to do thing genuinely though many are trying to put constraints on him and restricting him not to do more. But I think he has got the charima with him to bring about peace in the middle east and also in South Asia by telling these terror nations to close down all their terror activities within their countries and thus engage with their neighbours in dialogue to address all the issues.

India and US should get involved in terms of terror elimination strategies and work together in a way when terror strikes they strike the heart of the terror so that it will not think of it anymore. Some times I think Obama has to think like Bush but not with too generalisation and also with the threat of attacks and not necessarily attack itself. But if needed the top ranks within Pakistan has to be held accountable particularly ISI for their support, training, supply of arms to the terrorists who are prepared to kill first Isrealis, second Americans and third Indians and fourth Pakistanis themselves.

[SwamyG]

In a totally unrelated development, US Supreme Court reversed a 100 year trend by allowing unlimited corporate contributions to political parties. Shri Obama was dismayed at this development as powerful corporations can literally drown the voices of dissenting politicians. Newt Gingrich proudly claimed that this new ruling is a major victory for middle-class americans to fight against powerful corporation. .

Corporations as a legal person is a mockery of human existence. It came about in the 1800s. Corporations have been trying it for ages and succeeded because of one clerk's entry (or mistake). Once the precedence was established they have been enjoying a field day. This weekend, I plan to write up a paragraph or two about it in the "perspective" dhaaga.


Added: Maybe for folks who just want it right now, without 2-bit opinions from me, here is a handy-dandy link:
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/rea ... d-a-person

[Mort Walker]

Swamy,

This may not be a bad thing at all. Indian companies are world class corporations and its a level playing field, if not better, when comparing to the Chicoms. If these companies have operations or wholly owned subsidiaries in the US, they may be able to contribute to candidates in the US that will be favorable towards India and Indians. Its a win-win situation where the cliched phrase of "sister democracies with shared interests" can actually mean something. Think about it this way, at the height of the British Raj there were a few hundred thousand goras in India, but it was the brown people who actually kept the empire going. This time around, the tables are turned and Indian companies, who operate in the US, can influence politicians who will promote democracy, truth, justice and the Indian-American way. In 40 years a lot can change, and India may be able to send about 100 million skilled scientists, engineers and doctors, plus a few dozen Bollwood babes/hunks, to keep America influential through the end of this century and relevant in the next.

[AnimeshP]

Swamy,

This may not be a bad thing at all. Indian companies are world class corporations and its a level playing field, if not better, when comparing to the Chicoms. If these companies have operations or wholly owned subsidiaries in the US, they may be able to contribute to candidates in the US that will be favorable towards India and Indians. Its a win-win situation where the cliched phrase of "sister democracies with shared interests" can actually mean something. Think about it this way, at the height of the British Raj there were a few hundred thousand goras in India, but it was the brown people who actually kept the empire going. This time around, the tables are turned and Indian companies, who operate in the US, can influence politicians who will promote democracy, truth, justice and the Indian-American way. In 40 years a lot can change, and India may be able to send about 100 million skilled scientists, engineers and doctors to keep America influential through the end of this century.

I'm sorry .. maybe I'm not able to understand what you are trying to say here ... but I would assume that our goal in the next 40 years should be to keep India influential ... why should we care whether America remains "influential through the end of the this century" ...

[Mort Walker]

Yaar its sarcasm man.

[AnimeshP]

Yaar its sarcasm man.

My bad ...

[Masaru]

Where are the checks and balances in the system to correct these obviously political decisions which would be harmful in the long run? May be WKKism of democracies is the new reigning ideology!

China no longer top priority!

The White House National Security Council recently directed U.S. spy agencies to lower the priority placed on intelligence collection for China, amid opposition to the policy change from senior intelligence leaders who feared it would hamper efforts to obtain secrets about Beijing's military and its cyber-attacks.

The decision downgrades China from "Priority 1" status, alongside Iran and North Korea, to "Priority 2," which covers specific events such as the humanitarian crisis after the Haitian earthquake or tensions between India and Pakistan.


But administration officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the new policy is part of the Obama administration's larger effort to develop a more cooperative relationship with Beijing.

One new area that has been given a higher intelligence priority under the Obama administration is intelligence collection on climate change, a nontraditional mission marginally linked to national security. The CIA recently announced that it had set up a center to study the impact of climate change.

One U.S. official said the NSC intelligence policy change followed protests from China's government about the publication in September of the National Intelligence Strategy, produced by Mr. Blair's DNI office. The strategy report identified China as one of four main threats to U.S. interests, along with Russia, Iran and North Korea.


The Chinese government reacted harshly to the strategy report, both in public and in diplomatic channels, the official said.
A Chinese government spokesman in September stated that "we urge the United States to discard its Cold War mindset and prejudice, correct the mistakes in the [National Intelligence Strategy] report and stop publishing wrong opinions about China which may mislead the American people and undermine the mutual trust between China and the United States."

The NSC downgrading of China from so-called "Pri-1" to "Pri-2" was a political decision by the Obama administration that was designed to assuage Chinese concerns that intelligence agencies were exaggerating the threat from Beijing, the official said.

John Tkacik, a former State Department intelligence official, said the demotion of China to a second-tier priority reflects bias within the NSC staff. "It means that the Obama administration doesn't understand the profound challenge that China has become or, even more disturbing, it cannot understand that China's challenges to America's policies are becoming even more threatening with each passing week," he said.

Adm. Robert Willard, the new commander of U.S. Pacific Command, indirectly criticized U.S. intelligence estimates on China last fall, telling reporters in November that during the past decade "China has exceeded most of our intelligence estimates of their military capability and capacity every year. They've grown at an unprecedented rate in those capabilities."

[abhishek_sharma]

This is about US diplomacy after India-China war for solving Kashmir "issue".

From Schaffer's book: page 85

Ambassador Galbraith contended that if the proposal to partition the Valley were put to Nehru, he would reject it out of hand. (when the ambassador raised the idea with the prime minister, he reported that Nehru was willing to talk about it "though his face did not brighten perceptibly." But Galbraith also acknowledged that reasonable Indians did not exclude a settlement similar to the department's proposal. Although he was not sanguine about the possibility of selling partition to the Indian government, he thought it worthwhile to develop a conversation along these lines. he warned, however, that "unleashing" the map could have great and probably adverse consequences.

Ambassador McConaughy held that partition was totally unacceptable to Pakistan at that point.

...

As forecast, the third round of negotiations, held February 8-10 in Karachi, proved critical. Urged on by Kennedy, who wrote
to Nehru and Ayub on the eve of talks to promote a settlement that included drawing an international boundary through the Valley, the two sides finally grappled with the details of the partition. Their opening positions indicated that the gap between them was almost certainly unbridgeable. Neither was willing to offer the other any territory within the Valley. The Indians suggested partition along the cease-fire line, with some mutual swapping of real estate. The Pakistanis demanded the whole state excluding only a small corner in southeast that was overwhelmingly Hindu. They even wanted Ladakh and the responsibility for depending it against the Chinese. Both sides were shocked by the other's proposal, which seemed to offer no possibility for an acceptable compromise. (Galbraith, who called the proposals outrageous, wryly recalled predictions that the Indian line would run through Damascus and the Pakistani line just short of Tokyo.) Despite the enormous differences, the delegates agreed to hold a fourth round.

....

The State department found the Pakistanis more to blame for the deadlock and told them so.

...

As the fourth round approached, President Kennedy again became directly involved. At a February 21 White House meeting, he authorized greater American engagement in the negotiations. This meant exerting more muscle on India and Pakistan to agree to the Valley's partitioning and the setting up of special joint arrangements there. As Secretary Rusk quipped, we would now get in from "up to our ankles" to "up to our knees"

Following this presidential decisions, the administration pressed India to show a greater willingness to give Pakistan a "position" in the Valley and to be responsive if Pakistan made a new offer. ... Despite their continuing preference for internationalizing the Valley, the British accepted the U.S. partition approach, and American and British diplomats in India and Pakistan closely coordinated their efforts to promote it.

From notes on page 238

Plans for internationalization of the Valley were also drawn up as a fallback. Galbraith consistently opposed this approach and was convinced that India would never accept it. Following the failure of Calcutta round, he told Washington: "We can't ask the Indians to fight in Ladakh to defend a Valley which is under the UN or a consortium consisting of Ghana, Ceylon, and the Congo...."

[rohitvats]

This is about US diplomacy after India-China war for solving Kashmir "issue".

From Schaffer's book: page 85..............<snip>...

Can you please tell me the name of the book?Thanx.

[abhishek_sharma]

This is about US diplomacy after India-China war for solving Kashmir "issue".

From Schaffer's book: page 85..............<snip>...

Can you please tell me the name of the book?Thanx.

The Limits of Influence: America's Role in Kashmir

Howard B. Schaffer
Brookings Institution Press (2009)

[rohitvats]

Can you please tell me the name of the book?Thanx.

The Limits of Influence: America's Role in Kashmir

Howard B. Schaffer
Brookings Institution Press (2009)[/quote]

Thank you.

[Chinmayanand]

Democrats lose Massachusets seat. Obama's popularity going downhill. Guess , who comes to the rescue ? dear old good Osama After all , amriki administration and OBL are long time friends ....A friend in need is ...

[svinayak]

http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles ... ing_flash/

First a blinding flash
Then the mushrooming authority of the president, unbalancing separation of powers in national defense

By Glenn C. Altschuler
Globe Correspondent / January 24, 2010


And yet, as Garry Wills, the provocative, prolific, and polymath professor of history emeritus at Northwestern University, reminds us, the bomb proved to be “a fatal miracle.’’ Fatal as a weapon - and fatal to the delicate system of checks and balances over the power of the presidency. In “Bomb Power,’’ Wills argues that the Manhattan Project, which proceeded without authorization, funding, or oversight by Congress, planted the seeds of a massive shift of power to the executive branch. From World War II to the Cold War and later the War on Terror, “the permanent emergency’’ initially claimed by Truman was used to justify a monopoly by the executive branch on the use of nuclear weapons, the establishment of military bases around the world, the formation of intelligence agencies, the launching of covert operations, and a vast expansion of state secrets. For seven decades, he concludes, what Wills refers to as the National Security State “has made the abnormal normal and constitutional diminishment the settled order.’’

Although it breaks no new ground, “Bomb Power’’ is a powerful - and sobering - account of the step-by-step creation of government structures, unaccountable to Congress or the people, to conduct “permanent war in peace.’’ The culprits, Wills points out, were Democratic as well as Republican presidents, who engineered a quiet coup against the Constitution, making the commander-in-chief of the armed forces the commander-in-chief of the nation. And the post-Vietnam, post-Watergate reining in of “the imperials presidency,’’ through the War Powers Resolution (1973), the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (1978), and the Presidential Records Act (1978), never really happened.


Wills, it appears, has already given up hope that Barack Obama will make substantive changes to the National Security State. Administration officials, he observes, have already indicated that they reserve the right to use “extraordinary renditions,’’ subject terrorists captured anywhere to “battlefield law,’’ and invoke the Reynolds case to abort trial proceedings that involve “state secrets.’’ Obama said the government would not prosecute any officials of the Bush administration or empanel a “truth commission.’’ “Most important,’’ the president is committed to “a long-term nation-building effort in Afghanistan, a drug-culture government not susceptible to our remolding.’’ The self-professed change agent, Wills concludes, has “grabbed at the powers, the secrecy, the unaccountability’’ of the “imperial system.’’

Dismantling the National Security State is, indeed, “a hard, perhaps impossible task.’’ But it’s worth remembering that even if, to some extent, Obama is the prisoner of his own power, he isn’t George W. Bush. By the time he’s done, many things millions of Americans care passionately about - torture, indefinite detention, the denial of habeas corpus and legal representation, the unilateral abrogation of treaties, defiance of Congress, distortions of the Constitution, and the rewriting of statutes through signing statements - may no longer be acceptable practices of the federal government. In the end, Wills suggests, principled reformers should continue the fight despite the odds, invoking the spirit of Cyrano de Bergerac who said: “One fights not only in the hope of winning.’’

[SwamyG]

Here is a post in the 'perspective' dhaaga that summarizes the birth, evolution and effects of Corporation & gives perspective from one side. Please post comments in that thread.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 85#p811785

[putnanja]

April date in America with peace of mind- PM to visit third time in seven months -K.P. NAYAR

...
The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) took the final decision this weekend on accepting an invitation from President Barack Obama to attend the Global Nuclear Security Summit to be hosted by the White House on April 12 and 13.
...
A severe political setback to Obama last week with the loss of Edward Kennedy’s Senate seat from Massachusetts will now force the President to put some of his pet proposals such as ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), on the backburner.

India has been concerned ever since Obama’s victory in the 2008 presidential election that a US ratification of the CTBT will result in international pressure on New Delhi to sign and ratify the treaty.

...
...
For ratifying treaties, 67 votes — not just 60 — are needed in the 100-member Senate. There is no way Obama can muster that number during the rest of his presidential term, unless he turns into Midas and pulls Americans out of the economic mess they are in, a miracle that would send the President’s popularity soaring.

...
The PMO appears to have been persuaded to agree to a third US visit by Singh in seven months after it received crucial inputs on the composition of the April summit.

India’s present surmise is that China’s President Hu Jintao will boycott the Global Nuclear Security Summit in protest against a planned meeting between Obama and the Dalai Lama in the White House in the coming weeks. Such a meeting and a package of arms sales to Taiwan that is said to be on the cards are part of the Obama administration’s efforts to deflect criticism of weakness in its foreign policy which has contributed to the President’s recent political setbacks.

...
A Chinese absence will make India the most important emerging power, a star, at the summit.

[Neshant]

The bloated, over-paid and over-pensioned public sector is the next bubble to implode. More and more claims are being made by the public sector unions on the paychecks of private sector workers to fund their salaries, lavish retirement and gold plated pension plans.

-----

As Slump Hits Home, Cities Downsize Their Ambitions

In the decade through 2008, municipal tax revenues grew at a rate of 6.5% a year, faster than the overall economy's 5.1%, unadjusted for inflation.

Those revenues have started to slip. A national tally isn't yet available, but state tax collections fell 11% across 44 states in the third quarter of 2009, from the same period a year ago... In a recent survey by the National League of Cities, 88% of city budget officers said they were less able to meet their financial needs than they were a year ago.

The specter of lean budgets for years ahead has some of the nation's 89,000 local governments rethinking what services to provide and how to pay for them. From Mesa to Philadelphia, this means some combination of higher taxes and fewer services.

These cuts matter greatly to the economy at large. Local government spending accounts for 8.8% of the nation's total output, including everything from employee salaries to snowplows. The sector employs one in nine workers -- 14.5 million in all, or about 8 million in education and 6.5 million elsewhere. More Americans work for cities, counties and school boards than in all of manufacturing.

More likely to be union members, government workers tend to be better paid and have greater job security than many of the taxpayers who pay their salaries. Benefits are often better, too. Virtually all full-time state and local workers have access to retirement benefits; in the private sector, about 76% of full-time employees had retirement benefits. Employment in local government peaked in August 2008 and has fallen by 117,000 since then, or less than 1%, compared with a 6.3% fall in private employment from its December 2007 peak.

About one third of the federal $787 billion fiscal stimulus was aimed at state and local government. The money has helped some local governments keep police and school teachers on the job, and has gone toward building new firehouses and police stations. Another stimulus program subsidizes municipal borrowing by paying 35% of local government's interest cost on borrowing for infrastructure. But some cities have complained that too much of the stimulus was absorbed at the state level. President Barack Obama is promising to do more, calling in a recent speech for more "relief to states and localities to prevent layoffs."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1261789 ... TWhatsNews

[Malayappan]

How to Squander the Presidency in One Year by David Michael Green. He is a professor of political science at Hofstra University in New York.
A scathing assessment. Some of the lessons he draws are quite interesting for politicians, even in India. Worth a read!

[Kati]

US surprise

Calcutta, Jan. 23: US consul- general Beth A. Payne was seen at the RSS’s Shahid Minar rally today.

The rally was Mohanrao Bhagwat’s first in Calcutta after he became the Sangh chief.

Payne was seen taking photographs for about 10 minutes but left before Bhagwat started speaking.

Ranendralal Bandopadhyay, the Sangh’s chief in the eastern zone, said: “We did not invite the US consul-general. It was a surprise for us.”

A US public affairs department official said Payne was an outgoing person who loved to meet people. “She (Payne) has also visited many Muslim institutions and met Muslim clerics. There is no need to read too much into her presence at the rally,” he added..

[AnimeshP]

X-Posting from Military forum

Apologies if posted earlier ...
Pentagon chief defends arms sales to India, Pakistan

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates leaned on India and Pakistan during his trip to South Asia this week to set aside a simmering rivalry and confront militant extremists. At the same time, Gates and other U.S. officials pushed arms sales that could fuel the antagonism between the two countries.

Gates' trip was framed by that apparent contradiction in U.S. policy. On his arrival in Pakistan, a television news interviewer put the question bluntly: "Why re-arm both countries?" The Pentagon chief sidestepped the question.

But Gates and other officials explained afterward that Washington hopes the military cooperation will help the U.S. win the trust it needs to advance its goals in the region. And, besides, they said, the two countries could get weapons elsewhere, so why not from us?

Expanding the conventional military power of two sometimes bitter adversaries may not seem like the best strategy for distracting the nations from their rivalry. But U.S. officials see signs that both countries may be starting to trust Washington's counsel.

After the 2008 terrorist attack in Mumbai, India took U.S. advice against ratcheting up tensions with Pakistan, despite its impatience with the response to the Pakistani-based militant group believed responsible for the strike.

Military officials said the Pentagon was being careful to not alter the balance of power in South Asia, even when providing F-16s to Pakistan.

"Another squadron of F-16s means they [Pakistan] will lose the next war with India a little slower," said a U.S. military official in Islamabad, speaking of the arms sales on condition of anonymity. "They are not going to defeat India because we gave them a squadron of F-16s. The military overmatch India enjoys is just too great."

Washington is sensitive to the risk of dramatically increasing one country's military prowess beyond the other's, which would change the calculus and potentially trigger the very war the United States wants to avert.

For example, the United States wants Pakistan to expand its surveillance capability, but it does not want to deliver long-range or heavily armed drones that Pakistani engineers could re-engineer into a platform for nuclear weapons.

Similarly, India covets high-tech fighters, but the United States does not want to offer it stealth jets that could penetrate Pakistani airspace without challenge.

[pgbhat]

US surprise

Calcutta, Jan. 23: US consul- general Beth A. Payne was seen at the RSS’s Shahid Minar rally today.

The rally was Mohanrao Bhagwat’s first in Calcutta after he became the Sangh chief.

Payne was seen taking photographs for about 10 minutes but left before Bhagwat started speaking.

Ranendralal Bandopadhyay, the Sangh’s chief in the eastern zone, said: “We did not invite the US consul-general. It was a surprise for us.”

A US public affairs department official said Payne was an outgoing person who loved to meet people. “She (Payne) has also visited many Muslim institutions and met Muslim clerics. There is no need to read too much into her presence at the rally,” he added..

LINK?
Public rally, fair enough.

[Kati]

^^^^^

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100124/j ... 022751.jsp

[abhishek_sharma]

Funny: Why Holbrooke should get a Nobel Prize:

http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20 ... 5/big_dick

[VinodTK]

US woos India back to the Bush era

Delhi's comfort level with the Obama administration has been rapidly rising since Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to the US last November. Following up on Washington's repeated assurances that it had no intention to "mediate" India-Pakistan differences, Gates went one step further and took note that if there was another terrorist attack on India by Pakistan-based groups, it was entirely conceivable that India might not exercise restraint, as in the past, and may retaliate. "But no country, including the United States, is going to stand idly by if it's being attacked by somebody," he point-blank told a Pakistani interviewer.

[Hari Seldon]

H-1B visa-holders being deported from port of landing

Several Indians who arrived with an H-1B visa at Newark and John F Kennedy airports were deported based on a new rule, immigration attorneys and activists have reported.

The new rule stipulates that those who arrive on a work visa should 'arrive at the place of work'.

The rule could seal the fate of thousands of Indians who have applied for Green Card too.

It could bring an end to consultation, termed by some as 'body-shopping'. Airport deportations have frightened those on work visas and many have canceled their travel plans, too.

"The airport deportations," Morley Nair, an immigration attorney based in Philadelphia, "have sent shockwaves through the H-1B community. H-1B employers, employees and their attorneys alike are flabbergasted by this brazen act of official highhandedness where individuals arriving on H-1B visas were singled out even before their primary immigration inspection, put through sham questioning, forced into making coercive statements, issued expedited removal orders, and sent back."

So it begins. Or what?

[Singha]

par for the course. the top predators always feed first. 'guests' will have to wait.

welcome to the US.
makes for dull reading:
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/Open ... 4731073781

--
New York attorney Cyrus Mehta explained what happened in Newark in his column. 'On one fateful day, January 11, when Continental Airlines Flight 49 landed in Newark from Mumbai, we know that CBP officer Matt McGirr and his colleagues, hunted through the lines for Indian H-1B workers even before they showed up for primary inspection. Their minds were made up. No detailed questions were asked.'

'The moment they found Indian H-1B workers who uttered that they were working at a client site in the IT field, their fates were sealed. They were subjected to expedited removal (ER) orders and sent back to India. Some were luckier and escaped the ER order, but still had to withdraw their applications for admission to the US. Nevertheless, they were all coerced into making statements under threat of being detained. Officials also made remarks as to why the H-1B workers, earned more than US workers and (said) should not be paid so much.'

When one is sent back by an ER order, he cannot come back for another five years. Those who withdraw their application to enter the United States and go back with their money can come back soon with a new visa stamp or for a new employer. Attorneys have decided to take up the issue with the authorities.

[SwamyG]

Nukkadwasis were discussing ABCD, FOB, NRI itiyadi last nite....so I posted the following there.

Okay some of you might find Chapter 11 interesting: India Arriving

It talks about NRI, ABCD itiyadi. Rafiq Dossani traces 5 waves of Indian immigrants into USA. Quite relevant to the talk here. Read the chapter, few pages are omitted in the Google books, but my library has the book; so I can get to it. You are not missing much, as you will get the gist and the trend the author is painting.

I highlight some points here:

1. First Wave - 1899-1920: Background: Predominantly Sikhs and Muslims from Punjab. In USA worked in farms, loggers and as steelworkers. Braved discrimination. Established farming enclaves in California.* Their descendants form 15% of the total NRI population.
2. Second Wave - 1960s: Doctors. Wanted to be rooted in America.
3. Third Wave - 1970s: Engineers. Motive: Economic opportunity. Background: Diverse. Attitude: We don't care about India. Liberal in politics. Ready to embrace America totally.
4. Fourth Wave - Background: From Gujarat in particular - less educated, under-privileged. Motive: search of decent living. Aspirations were simpler than the 60s and 70s immigrants. Work hard at a restaurant, store or security company earn a good living send money to parents and finally become shop openers. Rubbed shoulders with the Southern Conservatives.
5. Fifth Wave - Training Engineers - The last wave from 80s and later. Lots of IT folks. Unlike the first 4, these immigrants share connection to both America and India & support India. They have spearheaded several projects in India. Sponsored influential associations like America India Foundation and US India Political Action Committee. The Indo-US nuclear energy supply is an example of their clout.

Mainstreaming & Impact.
1. Influence in the national politics is because of the 5th wave immigrants.
2. In 1970s and 80s Indian media and politicians looked down upon NRIs. Now things have changed.
3. Till 1990s, Indian Americans were either highly educated and liberal or poorly educated and conservatives. Aging conservatives lived in the South and voted Republican. Younger educated ones lived in the East,Midwest and West and voted Democrat.
4. The trend is to have transnational identity - demainstreaming. Unlike the Indian origin people in UK.
5. Second generation Japanese and Koreans see themselves as primarily and increasingly American. Indians and Chinese feel proud of their native country's achievements, want to help and participate in the success.

* - Elsewhere I have read the term Mexican Sikhs. These Sikhs married Mexicans (& other hispanics)

My note: I am sure we will be able to find individuals from each of the wave who do not fit the above descriptions. Rafiq seems to have a handle on this subject.

[Mort Walker]

The harassment of H1-B workers has been going on for several months now and I've heard of several anecdotal cases. This started happening once the Obama administration took an assessment of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) operations and decided to tighten the screws. The administration is deliberately targeting Indian companies with operations in the US. This is the harassment of current H-1B visa holders and new visas issued by US consulates in India. The administration cannot pass a regulation or law that openly discriminates against Indians, but can harass them once they enter the US. The GoI should take up this matter since it adversely affects the operations of companies and is a trade barrier. It may even be a violation of the WTO. The Bush administration only reduced the number of H1-B visas issued, but did NOT harass Indians.

The people on this forum who support Obama are very mistaken. There all sorts of nice words, proclamations and lighting of diyas, which is only symbolic, but the administration's actions are very negative. I'm afraid this will continue until January 2013, which in my opinion can't come soon enough, until a new administration is elected.

[vera_k]

^^

I'm a bit skeptical about these reports. The Indian companies like Infosys have enough clout with the government that we'd have heard about it if there was any impact on their operations.

[yvijay]

The new memo doesn't effect the Indian outsourcing companies(like Infosys).This effects the Indian consulting companies in
USA. USCIS in the memo redefined the 'Employer-Employee' relationship saying that the consulting company should have some control over the employee at the Client company. This puts in danger lot of desi consulting companies which effectively are staffing compaines working through multiple vendors. It also effects the US companies and they may outsource more work to the Indian companies, as all these days they could hire these consultants at will and fire them at will. Now they have to hire the worker permanently which would cost them more.

[Philip]

Truth is stranger than fiction.I posted a few titbits about this a few years ago,enjoy the details in full in the link.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/se ... ndworldwar

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power

Rumours of a link between the US first family and the Nazi war machine have circulated for decades. Now the Guardian can reveal how repercussions of events that culminated in action under the Trading with the Enemy Act are still being felt by today's president

Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington
The Guardian, Saturday 25 September 2004

[negi]

US needs to gear up, India's not waiting: Obama
BO to be honest is indeed the president Unkil needs at this hour , I don't know how good his reign will be for India in fact I have serious issues with the way GOTUS has approached the issues in Indian sub continent but he aint our President , his heart is at the right place when it comes to his country . If a leader's speech is any indicator of his/her policy formulations then BO at least has right priorities lined up for his country . We need a similar statesman who talks about core issues and not some religious and socialist nonsense which has been the case with most of our leaders .

[RamaY]

The new memo doesn't effect the Indian outsourcing companies(like Infosys).This effects the Indian consulting companies in
USA. USCIS in the memo redefined the 'Employer-Employee' relationship saying that the consulting company should have some control over the employee at the Client company. This puts in danger lot of desi consulting companies which effectively are staffing compaines working through multiple vendors. It also effects the US companies and they may outsource more work to the Indian companies, as all these days they could hire these consultants at will and fire them at will. Now they have to hire the worker permanently which would cost them more.

AFAIK, the rule says that the H1B-holding company must have a "stake" in the project that H1B holder is working on. Thus it impacts the business model of body-shopping and professional contracting.

To be fair, the very basis of H1B is to fill the gap in demand/supply with foreign workers. Since the demand fell down one cannot expect Massaland to encourage this. Indian IT employers and agents must educate indian public about this. I still see lot of young-professionals (have few relatives) taking significant professional risks to come to Massaland.

It is sad that the window of opportunity is narrowing/closing down. The "Perspectives on Economic ding dong" thread gives some honest insight into this dynamic.

[Mort Walker]

RamaY,

The US has every right to restrict how an H1B visa holder works, and if was transparent, then it should simply stop issuing new visas, but it can't. Similarly, they can approach US companies within the US. But why can't ICE do that instead of harassment at the port of entry? There is a need for H1B workers in some companies, either directly or indirectly, but the purpose of selectively enforcing a particular rule is aimed at Indian companies who provide temporary s/w engineers to work on the client's site in the US.

Indians are easy targets, be it for skin heads in Russia, or hooligans in Austraila or the Islamofascists regimes of the Gulf.

[Mort Walker]

US needs to gear up, India's not waiting: Obama
BO to be honest is indeed the president Unkil needs at this hour , I don't know how good his reign will be for India in fact I have serious issues with the way GOTUS has approached the issues in Indian sub continent but he aint our President , his heart is at the right place when it comes to his country . If a leader's speech is any indicator of his/her policy formulations then BO at least has right priorities lined up for his country . We need a similar statesman who talks about core issues and not some religious and socialist nonsense which has been the case with most of our leaders .

Indian leaders have always spoken extemporaneously without a teleprompter. Their speaking style is lousy, but the brain is working. Obama, nor any other recent US president, could stand up during a debate in the Lok Sabha during question hour.

[arun]

X Posted:

US okays howitzers worth $647 million for India

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 506969.cms

[AnimeshP]

US needs to gear up, India's not waiting: Obama
BO to be honest is indeed the president Unkil needs at this hour , I don't know how good his reign will be for India in fact I have serious issues with the way GOTUS has approached the issues in Indian sub continent but he aint our President , his heart is at the right place when it comes to his country . If a leader's speech is any indicator of his/her policy formulations then BO at least has right priorities lined up for his country . We need a similar statesman who talks about core issues and not some religious and socialist nonsense which has been the case with most of our leaders .

Obama is very good at delivering speeches when reading from a teleprompter ... he is not that great an impromptu speaker ... and when I heard that statement from Obama yesterday my first thought was "OK .. here we go again ... Indian english media will go ga-ga because the great one mentioned India in his speech" .... are we really that insecure as a nation that we need constant approval & affirmation from the west that we are on the right track as a nation ???