India-US News and Discussion

Gilles · Post by **Gilles** » 22 Mar 2010 02:57

Moved over from C-17 thread

Gilles wrote:
GeorgeWelch wrote:Many of the Indians need to wake up and realize that you are a global power. The constant paranoia of seeing a conspiracy in every single action is the behaviour of tiny/weak nation. Maybe it was appropriate in the past, but India has grown greatly since then. Have more confidence in your own country!

India isn't going to let the US dictate its foreign policy no matter what deals are made.
The US is spreading its influence and imposing itself across the whole Globe. But it uses different methods according to which country it is dealing with. When they deal with a leader who is is not afraid to openly stand up to them they "demonize" the leader and the country and use brute force and blockade and sanctions: Afghanistan (Taliban era), Cuba, Grenada, Iraq (Hussein era), Iran, Libya, Nicaragua, North Korea, Pakistan (Musharraf era) Panama (Noriega era), Syria, Venezuela etc. They do this while totally overlooking other demons who walk the line : Afghanistan (today), Azerbaijan, Colombia, Egypt, Kuwait, Israel, Panama (while Noriaga helped them against Nicaragua), Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan etc.

In one word: work with us, and you can oppress your people all you want, work against us and you are in for it.

They use economic ploys to keep others in line, China being the most notable. The China owes a fortune to the US but cant afford pulling the plug since the US is such a big customer and will stop buying of they do.
For others who have money, like Saudis, the Omanis, the Kuwaitis, etc, they manufacture a large nearby threat (Iraq first and then Iran) and impose whatever they want on them in exchange for "protection" against this threat. That "protection" of course involves billions in military purchases from the US (India may fall under that scenario) South Korea does, Japan does, Taipei does, Colombia in a way...... The thinking behind it is who will buy arms unless there is a credible threat? And who is the biggest arms exporter in the World?
Against their real friend, they'll use veil threats, economic mostly. Canada, France, Japan, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom. Canada was clearly made to understand that the great relationship we have enjoyed over the years would suffer if we did not send troops to attack Iraq. They didn't in fact want our troops. They wanted the credibility our troops would give to their so-called "coalition of the willing" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_willing) France was not "willing" to be "willing" so they mauled France. Good friend Canada cowered and sent frigates to the Gulf and troops to Afghanistan. Quickly. Not because we wanted to. No. Because we feared the economic retaliation of our "good friend" next door. Our people were against. So the government of Canada told us the Canadian frigates patrolling the Gulf alongside the US ships were on "anti-terrorism" patrol. The Canadian press remained silent.

"Willing". Please pause and give the word "Willing" some thought to contemplate how cynical the US is. How many nations were actually "willing" in this Iraq affair? Each and every one was coerced into embarking in something that was clearly wrong. To obtain this, the US had high level emissaries, like the one who delivered the warning to Japan the other day, criss crossing the Globe with a stick and a carrot in their briefcases. They were the "coalition of the willing" builders. And they mostly used the threat of the stick. And instead of calling it the "US-backed coalition" or something realistic and neutral, they called it exactly what it was not: a coalition of the "willing". And the US press went along with the term, without even a hypocrite smile on the side of their faces, since they know full well that its all a big scam.

No, I don't think that India is naive. And I don't think the US can invade India or overthrow its government. But the same was that the US was able to make certain democracies take actions in Iraq while it was clearly against the wishes of its people (UK, Australia, Spain, Italy, to name but a few), they can do it with India if they find the proper leverage. Its going to be a combination of several things and much of it will be related to China, Pakistan and energy. The C-17 is just one pawn in that chess game.

Just wait and see.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 22 Mar 2010 04:01

shiv wrote: So the traitors who want to sell India to the US do not have a free hand. If we can have that much confidence in ourselves to thwart the plans of the sellers of India (whoever they may be) - is there any room left for pragmatism (realpolitik/chankianness)

Thanks heavens for that, however, at the same time, the answer is not zero or one, as Gilles pointed out, it is enough for the traitors to move India into a position where it of "use" to the US of A, at the expense of Indian interests themselves.

When that happens, will there be bunting put on Shanti path -- "We have proudly sold out"

-- of course not!! Most wont even realize it. It may by the law of unintended consequences be good for India since the world is a truly crazy place and things go in myriad directions from the planned ones.

However having said that, the question remains, can the traitors create a situation where US has a hold on India in way the state acts in ways such that would (barring unforeseen circumstances) be bad for India.

The answer is YES. So the entire assumption that India is too strong to be sold-out is flawed. India can indeed be sold-out and is indeed sold by some people in small parcels even right now hurting Indian interests -- considering that every action NEEDS to be examined for the chance and fear of even greater sell out.

Other nations are paranoid of what they have seen to happen to others, India has the most reason to be paranoid because of what actually happened to it -- yet we are told to be not paranoid? I just dont understand it.

Gilles · Post by **Gilles** » 22 Mar 2010 04:16

GeorgeWelch wrote:I'm sure YOU were against, but plenty of Canadians were for it and wished they could do more. I check-in on some Canadian forums occasionally, and suffice it to say, most there didn't agree with you either.

About Canada's support for the war in Iraq:

A poll conducted for the Toronto Star and La Presse by EKOS Research showed that a majority of Canadians, except in Alberta (the Province of our current PM), supported the Prime Minister’s decision to stay out of a war in Iraq. The study showed “71 per cent of those polled backed the decision by the Liberal government, with 27 per cent registering their disapproval”

About weapons:

The fact is GeorgeWelch, that the US exports 8 Billions dollars worth of arms every year, against only 6 Billions dollars worth of wheat. The more conflict and instability there is in the world, the more business the US gets. If Iran were nice and friendly, would other Gulf States buy Billions of weapons from the US in exchange of "protection" ?

If North Korea disbanded and joined the South (Germany style) would Japan and South Korea spend as much on weapons? If China recognized Taipei, would Taipei spend what its spending now. How about Israel? Do US arms makers really have an interest in Having Israel become good friends with all its neighbours?

Even within the US,, your population thrives on the weapons industry. Imagine a United States with no credible outside threat that no longer needed to field new Nuclear Submarine, new Aircraft carriers, new Combat aircraft and ballistic missiles and missile defence shields. What would all these high tech firms do ? You guys thrive on war and menace. You NEED an enemy, and not just any enemy, you need a credible one, preferably one with nuclear capability, like you made Iraq to be and like you are making Iran to be, and like North Korea is. When US problems with these 3 countries will be resolved, it wont be long before the US finds quarrel with another credible nuclear or WMD capable nations that will be threatening the US. Anything to maintain the US defence budget at always higher levers. Too many jobs depend on it. Too many Senators and representatives have too many voters who needs those jobs.

Nair · Post by **Nair** » 22 Mar 2010 05:31

The TOI says that Pakistan might get a nuke deal

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 709719.cms

It is going to be difficult to get such a deal for Pakistan through the Senate..the Indian one by itself barely got thro. If such a deal goes through all I can say is that the Indian lobby in Washington just had a major failure.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 Mar 2010 05:50

Sanku wrote:
So the traitors who want to sell India to the US do not have a free hand. If we can have that much confidence in ourselves to thwart the plans of the sellers of India (whoever they may be) - is there any room left for pragmatism (realpolitik/chankianness)
--
However having said that, the question remains, can the traitors create a situation where US has a hold on India in way the state acts in ways such that would (barring unforeseen circumstances) be bad for India.

Other nations are paranoid of what they have seen to happen to others, India has the most reason to be paranoid because of what actually happened to it -- yet we are told to be not paranoid? I just dont understand it.

Is it not wonderful that with few post good scenario can be made to find ways to align with US and fool many people. Just by making large totalitarian states out of PRC(with Trade) and Pakistan(with weapons and proliferation support) in the last 30 years US has made sure that many nations around this region will come to US for protection and help for next 50 years.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 Mar 2010 05:52

Nair wrote:The TOI says that Pakistan might get a nuke deal

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 709719.cms

It is going to be difficult to get such a deal for Pakistan through the Senate..the Indian one by itself barely got thro. If such a deal goes through all I can say is that the Indian lobby in Washington just had a major failure.

One must be a fool not to anticipate this with a large lobby in Pentagon, SD favoring Pakistan for the last 40 years. First they ensured that India barely got one.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 22 Mar 2010 05:55

The IAEA's ElBaradei told the BOG that there was a "net gain for non-proliferation" because a number of previously unsafeguarded Indian reactors would be placed under safeguards.
Which reactors will Pakistan be willing to place under safeguards?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 05:59

Nair wrote: It is going to be difficult to get such a deal for Pakistan through the Senate..the Indian one by itself barely got thro. If such a deal goes through all I can say is that the Indian lobby in Washington just had a major failure.

Well I guess you are entitled to your views. But as long as we tie up Indian happiness with Pakistani unhappiness and vice versa, you can guess what we are going to get and in what proportions, based on ancient Indian wisdom. To me a Pakistan without a nuclear deal is just a nation to whom we can say "nyahaha - no deal for you. deal for us. US loves us more". But what were we doing when they got nukes and more recently AWACS, AMRAAMS, refuelers and F 16s from aid money? We certainly do harbor an inner Pakistani no.

On a slightly different note the nuclear deal was bad for India by many accounts.. We had to forfeit our rights to so many things. Now why would a similar egregious deal be good for Pakistan?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 06:24

In general many of us are so ambivalent about the US. What leverage do we have with the US? H1 visas?

Low wage - hi skill workers?

Unless we can hold the US and threaten to "cut off" something for the US we have no handle whatsoever on the US's actions. What are we going to do when the US does something we don't like? Cut off supplies of spirituality?

Call back all Indian migrants to the US?

We carry around with us a blinkered Nehruvian mindset that prevents us from cutting deals with crooks that can later be used against them. We only know how to whine when Pakistan and China do that. You cannot get favors from a whore by giving her lectures on culture. You need to pay her first. We need to utilize our inner Pakistani to use the whore in the US.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 22 Mar 2010 06:47

shiv wrote:We carry around with us a blinkered Nehruvian mindset that prevents us from cutting deals with crooks that can later be used against them. We only know how to whine when Pakistan and China do that. You cannot get favors from a whore by giving her lectures on culture. You need to pay her first. We need to utilize our inner Pakistani to use the whore in the US.

Doctor sahab too much.

Nair · Post by **Nair** » 22 Mar 2010 07:08

shiv wrote:
Nair wrote: It is going to be difficult to get such a deal for Pakistan through the Senate..the Indian one by itself barely got thro. If such a deal goes through all I can say is that the Indian lobby in Washington just had a major failure.
Well I guess you are entitled to your views. But as long as we tie up Indian happiness with Pakistani unhappiness and vice versa, you can guess what we are going to get and in what proportions, based on ancient Indian wisdom. To me a Pakistan without a nuclear deal is just a nation to whom we can say "nyahaha - no deal for you. deal for us. US loves us more". But what were we doing when they got nukes and more recently AWACS, AMRAAMS, refuelers and F 16s from aid money? We certainly do harbor an inner Pakistani no.

On a slightly different note the nuclear deal was bad for India by many accounts.. We had to forfeit our rights to so many things. Now why would a similar egregious deal be good for Pakistan?

I guess the advantage being the most obvious one..that Pakistan can use her own Uranium completely for weapons purposes(I think she does that now with very less used on power generation) while getting foreign supplies to set up plants for power generation. After all isn't this what India will do too?

And anyway what weapons has the US given Pakistan in the last 3 decades which was a major game changer against India?..the only one which comes close is the F-16 and that is certainly no game changer.America does things according to her interests nothing devious in that,all countries do that including Russia. There is just IMHO too much vilification of the US.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 07:19

Nair wrote:America does things according to her interests nothing devious in that,all countries do that including Russia. There is just IMHO too much vilification of the US.

America does things in her own interest? Now where have I heard that before?

Pakistan of course had no shortage of nukes aimed at India even before the nuclear deal which they have just signed with the US. China supplied them with bomb grade Uranium while the needlessly vilified US looked the other way.

Speaking of vilification of the US. The US is supplying our mortal enemies no? They allowed Pakistan to get nukes. They are out to check India's plans to be a global super power. And they are doing all this in their interest, as you say. So why shouldn't Indians vilify the US? Call the US "bad boy" and refuse to deal with the US? <sulk> I won't talk to you </sulk>

That would be "acting in India's interest" no?

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 22 Mar 2010 07:25

America does things according to her interests .......

Same thing can be said about Iran, Saudi Arabia, NoKo, CCP heck even Pakistan.

Nair · Post by **Nair** » 22 Mar 2010 07:32

shiv wrote:
Nair wrote:America does things according to her interests nothing devious in that,all countries do that including Russia. There is just IMHO too much vilification of the US.
America does things in her own interest? Now where have I heard that before?

Pakistan of course had no shortage of nukes aimed at India even before the nuclear deal which they have just signed with the US. China supplied them with bomb grade Uranium while the needlessly vilified US looked the other way.

Speaking of vilification of the US. The US is supplying our mortal enemies no? They allowed Pakistan to get nukes. They are out to check India's plans to be a global super power. And they are doing all this in their interest, as you say. So why shouldn't Indians vilify the US? Call the US "bad boy" and refuse to deal with the US? <sulk> I won't talk to you </sulk>

That would be "acting in India's interest" no?

What did you want the US to do when China gave her the nukes?..US needed Pakistan to kick the SU out of Afghanistan.So she turned a blind eye.They did not do this out of hatred for India but in America's interest.Does India not do things in her interest?

Again as for weapons... again none of the weapons supplied to Pakistan are game changers. As I read in some report ,all that American sales to Pakistan means is that in the next war they will lose a bit slower but lose they will.

Also how is US trying to prevent India from becoming the next global power?..if anything a strong India works in America's favor as she will automatically check China.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 22 Mar 2010 07:34

Again as for weapons... again none of the weapons supplied to Pakistan are game changers. As I read in some report ,all that American sales to Pakistan means is that in the next war they will lose a bit slower but lose they will.

You should read the MILForum on Pakistan arms sales and doctrine.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 07:43

..BREAKING NEWS

Threat of Indian Sanctions leaves US breathless

In an unprecedented new crisis - the worst faced by the US since the attack on Pearl Harbor India today threatened sanctions against the US. The news coming in the midst of what was hoped would be a US economic recovery has sent the Obama administration into a huddle as they grope for responses to this devastating news.

The Indian government, furious at arms delivery to Pakistan leapt into action at the news of Pakistan being offered a nuclear deal which will enable Pakistanis to pilfer 5000 gigawatts of power as opposed to the current pilferage levels of 300 megawatts.

Unnamed US administration officials say that a high level team from the US will soon leave for India to beg the Indian government not to impose sanctions that would bring the US, currently the worlds only superpower to its knees. Indian sanctions will cut off all supplies of spirituality to the US - a commodity that is used in every US home. In addition, access to culture and morality, of which India is the largest exporter will be restricted and available only for lifesaving situations in US psychiatric hospitals. Other measures include stopping the export of Indians to the US - an act which in isolation can cripple the US economy. Millions of Indians in BPO's across India will be asked to drop their American accents and start speaking in their usual Mallu, Punju and Oriya accents - an order that will have far reaching consequences on the lives of millions of Americans.

An Indian official today commented on this, saying "India's power over the US must not be underestimated, and that further US support to Pakistan will force India's hand to change the world order in a way that India has not done for 5000 years because we have been too busy smokin' some really good stufff"

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 07:51

Nair wrote: What did you want the US to do when China gave her the nukes?..US needed Pakistan to kick the SU out of Afghanistan.So she turned a blind eye.They did not do this out of hatred for India but in America's interest.Does India not do things in her interest?

Again as for weapons... again none of the weapons supplied to Pakistan are game changers. As I read in some report ,all that American sales to Pakistan means is that in the next war they will lose a bit slower but lose they will.

Also how is US trying to prevent India from becoming the next global power?..if anything a strong India works in America's favor as she will automatically check China.

Saar - as you have serendipitously pointed out the US needed China and looked the other way when China supplied Uranium. Now times have changed. The US now needs Pakistan and wiil give Pakistan a nuclear deal. This is in the US's interest. How does it then become "failure of the Indian lobby in Washington" as you wrote earlier? Does the India lobby control US interests?

Nair wrote:If such a deal goes through all I can say is that the Indian lobby in Washington just had a major failure.

However F-16 not being a game changer is probably correct. I met some two bit whiny Indian called Unnikrishnan who claims his son was killed in some hotel in Mumbai in 2008. I mentioned to him that arming Pakistan with F 16 is not a game changer and for some reason he got mad at me. I must point him to your post and ask him to mend his attitude. The US after all, acts in its own interest.

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 22 Mar 2010 08:08

Health care latest: House passes legislation

The House passes the Senate health care bill, 219-212

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 10:04

Indians are a stuffy, upright. moralistic people. While Indian folklore is rich in its detail of human behavior - we grow up drawing simplistic black and white conclusions from that rich folklore. Our view of the world is deeply affected by our attitudes to good and bad.

A corrupt, lecherous drunkard is a bad person. We must not associate with him. We need to keep away from him and deal with the world in our own highly moralistic way. This statement of mine will not find any opposition from a large majority of Indians. We tend to view the world in a similar simplistic, village boy moralistic way.

America is bad. It does bad things. it helps Pakistan. We must therefore keep away from America. The logic is simple and attractive and fits in with the simplistic conclusions we draw from our folklore - which is actually vastly richer and more complex than many simple Indian minds are able to utilize.

Keeping America at arms length is a mistake. Not dealing with the US is a mistake. By not dealing with the US from the 1960s we are in a situation where we have no control over anything the US does. India has zero influence in the US to stop the US from doing things that are not in India's interest. But what have we done wrong? We have after all followed our age old policy of keeping away from those who are bad or unkind to us.

This is a mistake. We need to develop influence in America and that means giving America something that matters to the US. We must give them enough for it to be significant but yet not sell ourselves. We must do deals with America. The only possibility of doing that is to buy things from the US. Let the US see India as a possible (if partial) solution to economic problems. India must count as a nation that can hurt America in some way if its stops dealing with America or does not cooperate. That status cannot be achieved without engaging and dealing with the US, and giving something to the US that he US wants, which we can later toy with if the US misbehaves with us.

Hi falutin morality and a child like attitude to good and bad can only take us so far.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 22 Mar 2010 10:10

Gilles,

I think you are doing a disserice to your credibility by lumping US involvment in Iraq with US involvment in Afghanistan. I think there is a lot of good that can come out of US involvement in Afghanistan if US keeps it focus on eliminating LeT, Talibans, Al Queda and other terrorist organizations.

Ameet · Post by **Ameet** » 22 Mar 2010 10:26

Obama hails immigration overhaul plan

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/New ... 700304.cms

arun · Post by **arun** » 22 Mar 2010 12:14

X Posted. Excerpt from Karan Thapar’s “Devil’s Advocate” interview of our Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna on Sunday March 21, 2010 dealing with Pakistani origin terrorist Daood Gilani aka David Coleman Headley and the matter of the degree of US co-operation in the Daood Gilani affair:

Karan Thapar: Let us come to David Coleman Headley who is in the news. Now that he has decided to plead guilty and he is likely to get a lesser sentence, are you beginning to suspect that he could be an American double agent who turned rogue?

S M Krishna: That is what is being speculated by the media in our country.

Karan Thapar: Do you share that fear or apprehension?

S M Krishna: We are closely watching what Headley will be saying or what Headley would be committing himself to in any court of law.

Karan Thapar: And then you will make up your mind?

S M Krishna: Perhaps then only we could come to some conclusion.

Karan Thapar: Has America been upfront and transparent or do you have a feeling that they have withheld details and information about Headley because they want to either protect what he knows or protect institutions like the FBI and CIA?

S M Krishna: We are cooperating with the United States and they are reciprocating in ample measure to fight terrorism. I think terrorism is a top priority with reference to the Government of the United States.

Karan Thapar: Does that mean they are cooperating?

S M Krishna: We are in close cooperation with the United States in fighting terror.

Karan Thapar: Does that mean they are upfront and honest about Headley?

S M Krishna: I think it goes without saying.

Karan Thapar: You have no reservations about that?

S M Krishna: No, I have no reservations.

Karan Thapar: It emerges that Headley was on the FBI radar for at least a year before he was arrested, which means that for a whole month before 26/11 he was under American surveillance. Yet, just five months later in April 2009 the Americans allowed him to come to India without informing the Indian Government. Have you taken that issue up with them?

S M Krishna: We have taken up all relevant issues with reference to Headley.

Karan Thapar: Including the fact that he visited India and they did not inform you he was doing so even though he was under their surveillance?

S M Krishna: Whatever has come to the knowledge of Government of India through our media or through what we hear from others, we have conveyed to the United States.

Karan Thapar: And have you got responses that satisfy you? Or are you still in need of greater information?

S M Krishna: I have said it earlier that the United States is fighting terror. We are on the same page as far as fighting terror is concerned.

Karan Thapar: Has India asked the United States for access to Headley?

S M Krishna: We have asked for certain reports after they finish with their interrogation, after they finish investigating into Headley because it is the United States Government which has moved against him.

Karan Thapar: That I understand but those are reports after they finish.

S M Krishna: We are awaiting the report.

Karan Thapar: But you have sought access to Headley himself as yet?

S M Krishna: It all depends upon the kind of report that we get.

Karan Thapar: So, you are awaiting the reports before you make up your mind?

S M Krishna: Yes.

The interview also touches upon Pakistan’s involvement in terrorism targeting India in Afghanistan and the involvement of Pakistani “State Actors” in the 26/11 terrorist attack on Mumbai. The transcript of the complete interview is here:

Devil's Advocate: SM Krishna on India and Af-Pak

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 22 Mar 2010 12:36

shiv wrote:America is bad. It does bad things. it helps Pakistan. We must therefore keep away from America. The logic is simple and attractive and fits in with the simplistic conclusions we draw from our folklore - which is actually vastly richer and more complex than many simple Indian minds are able to utilize.

Another strawman, the care and caution that must be displayed while dealing with America has nothing to do with Indian morality.

Indians are not very moral people anyway, that statement is best reserved for the Anglo-Saxon.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 22 Mar 2010 13:30

America is bad. It does bad things. it helps Pakistan. We must therefore keep away from America. The logic is simple and attractive and fits in with the simplistic conclusions we draw from our folklore - which is actually vastly richer and more complex than many simple Indian minds are able to utilize.

Keeping America at arms length is a mistake. Not dealing with the US is a mistake. By not dealing with the US from the 1960s we are in a situation where we have no control over anything the US does. India has zero influence in the US to stop the US from doing things that are not in India's interest. But what have we done wrong? We have after all followed our age old policy of keeping away from those who are bad or unkind to us.

This is a mistake. We need to develop influence in America and that means giving America something that matters to the US. We must give them enough for it to be significant but yet not sell ourselves. We must do deals with America. The only possibility of doing that is to buy things from the US. Let the US see India as a possible (if partial) solution to economic problems. India must count as a nation that can hurt America in some way if its stops dealing with America or does not cooperate. That status cannot be achieved without engaging and dealing with the US, and giving something to the US that he US wants, which we can later toy with if the US misbehaves with us.

I disagree Shiv, US is never friend of anyone. It is friend of its own interests and not even its neighbours like mexico or Brazil. Check how many countries are friends of US in its own backyard. See how it manipulated t&c's when they found that european Airbus was going to win more than 50b$ tanker contract. It wants and it will check any rising superpower anywhere in the world to uphold its own status and that is fact, be it Russia, China or India (in future). It creates hostile situations in the neighbourhoods of these countries. E.g Georgia, chechnya, Uzbek etc or supporting Uighurs/tibet/taiwan/mongolia or supporting pakistan.
There is no holistic approach to deal with USA. You can see how it behaves with China even though China has amassed a trillion $ american debt ! I am sure USA is definately going down the drain with lousy democrats at helm. Pakistan is 51st state of USA. India should never forget this in dealing with them. So whatever India will do with USA will not stop USA sleeping tight with their pakistani cousins because taliban is pakistani stratetic interest and pakistan is american strategic interest. We would have been had we got whole J&K within Indian control which would help Russians access to Indian ocean but it is not.

No amount of developing influence within US will ever help Indian stratetic interest because america is not here to help other countries solve their problems, it is here to keep them in tango so they can themselves be superpower forever. India-US honeymoon is over and its time to divorce.
1) No contracts to American firms in Nuke industry citing they were late.
2) MRCA going to euro/russia.
3) Backtracking on Iran.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 16:45

ashish raval wrote:
No amount of developing influence within US will ever help Indian stratetic interest because america is not here to help other countries solve their problems, it is here to keep them in tango so they can themselves be superpower forever. India-US honeymoon is over and its time to divorce.
1) No contracts to American firms in Nuke industry citing they were late.
2) MRCA going to euro/russia.
3) Backtracking on Iran.

Fair enough.

Be that as it may I see no alternative to developing some kind of leverage to use with/against America. By virtue of its power the US exerts leverage against India whether or not we have any leverage. Currently India has no leverage with the US. Zilch. We may have a lobby - but that lobby does not amount to the same thing as some leverage that IMO we must develop. Other people on this forum have indicated how even Pakistan and China have some leverage with the US. The price they have paid is an interesting question. We have spoken on here of the price that Pakistan is allegedly paying for the US's embrace. I believe China too has paid some price - but I have not applied my mind to parsing the details of that.

The other alternative is to go our own lonely route and eventually gain the strength it takes to impose our will on the US's interference in our neighborhood. I believe that we have done very poorly in this field. The US can play games with us for so long that our development suffers - keeping 300 or 400 million poor in India for the next 100 years. The world situation is such that the US has a "natural advantage" here. Countries smaller than India have paid or might still pay a heavy price for opposing the US.

We simply must develop leverage with the US. One way is to give a limited percentage of the arms market to the US, gaining as much tech as we can. There may be other methods - I will hear them out if anyone has any ideas.

Just a viewpoint - subject to change.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Mar 2010 17:38

We cannot and should not take extreme positions. We need not antagonize the US to show our displeasure, and displeasures there will surely be many as years go by and conflicts of interests develop. I am not one of those who believes either that India totally lacks any sort of leverage at all with the US, even tactically. As we grow economically and militarily, our leverages with the US will also grow. However, the point is whether India is willing or courageous enough to make its displeasure known to the US and associate a certain cost when the situation really, really warrants it. My scepticism comes from the fact that we have not done anything like that even with our implacable enemy who has inflicted worst kinds of pain on us and that too repeatedly and brazenly. Why should GoI do that with a foe-turned-friend with whom we certainly want to have an excellent relationship ?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Mar 2010 17:47

I feel sorry for PC,when he said that we would be "getting to talk" to Headley.The stark truth is that we might get access to Headley, but we will never GET Headley!
That too despite his confession of guilt.It is atrocious that the US denies democratic India a key plotter of 26/11,while fonicating galore with rent-boy Pak over kidnappings,disappearances and rendition of suspects,who they want.
Headley is a "sacrred cow" to the US intel community.He knows too much and the US do not want us to know the depths of their deparavity with Pak and the ISI.A Headley getting the third degree in India from those most anxious to meet him,would squeal like the pig he is revealing all.In the sanitised prison palace that Uncle Sam has provided from him,it would be a joke for us to "interrogate" him.He would reveal bu**er all,in fact deliberately mislead us and let the complicity of the US in 26/11 lie buried forever.

Let us acknowledge the harsh truth.The US's love for Pak is a relationship steeped in evil ,where Indai must be kept permanently at Uncle Sam's heel.The game the US has been playing is to screw us on the side and make us believe that we were to "live happily ever after"! Unfortunately,our good spin-doctor's "love" for the US has not been requited and it has been one-way traffic.The sooner our aging "jilted lover " realises that he has been dumped for a more dashing uniformed Gen.Kill-any",realisation will dawn on how much damage he has done to Indian interests.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 22 Mar 2010 18:20

x-post from TSP thread:

shiv wrote:We cannot punish the US in any way unless we have a handle on them and some way to manipulate them.

Correct.

Consider Russia, 15% of Indian population, and a GDP about the same as ours. How do Russia and India compare in terms of ability to modify US behavior? Is Russia better-off? If so, why?

Consider China, whose economy in 2001 was the same size as the Indian economy is now. How does the India of today compare with the China of 2001 in terms of ability to modify US behavior? Was China better off than we are now? If so, why?

shiv wrote: Why not throw some crumbs at the US? Buy Helicopters, Transport aircraft and fighters. Make wage earners in the US earn wages from Indian money. Make a few US politicians dependent on the votes of people who are earning their wages in money from India. Work India into a position where we can dictate to the US what they can give to Pakistan. We currently have our heads buried in the sand. And despite that we are still not immune to US actions in Pakistan. Why not change that? A conditional bandwagoning with the US is desirable.

We are doing the buying and helping keep US factories running but the only result of that is that the US has more money to give to the Paks.

Gilles · Post by **Gilles** » 22 Mar 2010 18:45

Karan Dixit wrote:Gilles,

I think you are doing a disserice to your credibility by lumping US involvment in Iraq with US involvment in Afghanistan. I think there is a lot of good that can come out of US involvement in Afghanistan if US keeps it focus on eliminating LeT, Talibans, Al Queda and other terrorist organizations.

Maybe, but it is my firm conviction that the US did a disservice to its own credibility when it attacked Iraq under false pretences by associating Iraq and Saddam Hussein to 9/11 and then claiming that they had WMD that they could possibly pass on to their terrorist friends.

Do you think that I lose credibility by denouncing the ploy or by claiming that the US has a track record of going as far as lying to justify an attack and an invasion of another country.

Was the invasion of Panama by the US justified? I'm old enough to remember.
Was the invasion of Grenada by the US justified? I'm also old enough to remember.
How about when the armed and financed the terrorist "Contras" in Nicaragua against the Sandinist Regime. Was that justified?

When a country has such a track record, one tends to become cynic when they claim to have altruist motives elsewhere, like in Afghanistan, especially when I am convinced that they will leave Afghanistan the same way it was before, only after having killed many people there.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 22 Mar 2010 19:03

The Obama Administration has been repeatedly kicking us in the back.It did so in respect of Afghanistan. It has done so in respect of Headley. Instead of having the courage and intellectual honesty to admit to our people that we have been let down nastily by the US, we are indulging in more spins to project the kicks as, in fact, boquets from Obama with love.

http://ramanstrategicanalysis.blogspot. ... -love.html

The issue is not the kicks from the US. There have been many such kicks over the past six decades.

The novelty in the situation is that we now have a government that takes pride in such kicks in the teeth, tries to fool its own people by presenting the kicks as boquets

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 19:04

Pranav I see it as follows - let me use a rude analogy. If you want unusual favors from a whore you are more likely to make progress if you have been a regular customer than a one off who came last night and is asking her today to discriminate against other regular customers of hers in your favor. India has hardly bought anything from the US yet. We have no long term engagement. Yet. We are too suspicious of the US

Despite Russia's shrunken economy it is more of a military technological competitor to the US than India. China has "cooperated and helped" the US from the 1970s. But China really took off by creating sweatshops where her people worked for low wages in factories shipped to China to feed US consumers. China did not allow herself to be wracked by guilt and feelings of uselessness when the US still did not give a damn abut Chinese sentiment about Taiwan. But China built up capital with the US by swallowing the insults thrown at it by the US but still faithfully making Chinese workers work to keep American consumers happy with cheap manufactured goods. Even now Chinese technology is more hot air than substance in comparison to the US, but China has worked itself (over decades) into a position where it matters.

I am not sure if you have acknowledged the depth to which Pakistani leaders have sold themselves out to the US. They are essentially Satraps to the US Sultan.

India will never ever (IMO) sell itself to the US like Pakistan because the Indian political system itself does not allow any single entity to sell the whole nation. But India will not even swallow insults the way China has swallowed insults to insert itself into US consciousness. And with India being out of the orbit - the US can still insult and hurt India via Pakistan and China. At will. The US has no real reason to care for an India that is so paranoid of its own people that they consider anyone who deals with the US as a person who is selling the country. The US does not need India. India needs the US. When beggars act like choosers, it is laughable And laughing is what a nation like Pakistan does at our discomfiture and false pride. They know they are begars. They know that we too must beg and laugh at our stupidity. But the US is their friend, their customer. They can afford to laugh.

One squadron of C-17s do not a long term relationship make. If we engage the US with some respect and caution, we may have much closer relationship with the US after 20 years. Only premature ejaculations can happen faster.

Gilles · Post by **Gilles** » 22 Mar 2010 19:14

shiv wrote:Keeping America at arms length is a mistake. Not dealing with the US is a mistake. By not dealing with the US from the 1960s we are in a situation where we have no control over anything the US does.

And in exchange, the US has very little influence over India, which is not the case of very many countries. You want India to embark in a chess game with the grand master of chess, the US government. While they will let you take a pawn here and there and you may even get a knight, you can rest assured that in the end, they will win.

But I think you are wrong that India has no influence. India has something the US wants and needs. You represent a market of several hundred million middle class consumers, only behind the European Union and China. This is a bigger maker than even exists in the US. The US wants to tap into that India market very much. Its a huge market. You will buy all sorts of US made products. That is the main reason they are interested in India. That, and of course your huge potential for weapons purchases.......

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 22 Mar 2010 19:27

shiv wrote:Pranav I see it as follows - let me use a rude analogy. If you want unusual favors from a whore you are more likely to make progress if you have been a regular customer than a one off who came last light and is asking her today to discriminate against other regular customers of hers in your favor. India has hardly bought anything from the US yet. We have no long term engagement. Yet. We are too suspicious of the US

OK, but asking for unusual favours from a whore is not a sustainable long-term strategy.

Despite Russia's shrunken economy it is more of a military technological competitor to the US than India.

True. It is Russia's ability to put the fear of god into the US that makes the US more circumspect about treading on Russian toes.

Even now Chinese technology is more hot air than substance in comparison to the US, but China has worked itself (over decades) into a position where it matters.

Yes, but Chinese technology is also quite sufficient to put the fear of god into western elites. And that is what really matters.

Both Russia and China cannot be intimidated beyond a point because they can wipe any adversary off the map in an extreme situation.

One squadron of C-17s do not a long term relationship make. If we engage the US with some respect and caution, we may have much closer relationship with the US after 20 years. Only premature ejaculations can happen faster.

Such military equipment would likely be infested with hardware and software trojans, so its utility is debatable.

To only way to deal with a thug is to be able to impose unacceptable costs. That is where Indian capabilities are lacking. While access to the Indian market can be a negotiating tool, that in itself will not stop western elites from sustaining a state whose raison-de-etre is the destruction of India.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Mar 2010 19:42

we need to be friendly but also develop and deploy strategic nuclear weapons and delivery mechanisms.

so far I havent seen a major world power in history who didnt have the ability and resources
to take the war into the enemy's heartland and burn everything down should the need arise- mauryas, guptas, persians (xerxes, darius, khosrau...), greeks, romans, mongols, shi huangdi....

SSBNs, mobile TELs on land and M-51 style weapons are today's equivalent of ancient horse
cavalry and expeditionary armies.

munna · Post by **munna** » 22 Mar 2010 19:48

Shivji to use a rather crude example, in Punjabi they say "Rabb Nede ki Ghusunn" (Is God closer to you or the fist)! The rational policy of "oh we have so many poor onlee and hence we shall remain timid" can get us only this far. There has to be a hint of irrationality to our policy making too. Believe me when you talk to some of the US tea sellers they do not ask for the benefits of allying with India rather they argue that India is incapable of spreading trouble in the first place and hence there is no point in engaging India. India cannot sustainably engage US in a manner you suggest-a la Pakistan or China because of 3 reasons

1) Systemic composition and nature of our polity
2) Our enemies are US partners and they have served US well
3) The inward looking model of growth and development

To put it in a nutshell Indian establishment has discovered the limits to which it can waltz with US. For better or for worse, even if we remain poor and backward India is not heading towards a strategic bear hug with US anymore. Personally I do not know what is right? However one thing is for sure one of the best ways to get the US to talk is to be a known brat and trouble monger. Let the winds of 1971 and 1998 roll in through N Delhi once again, we'll see who stands where?

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 22 Mar 2010 19:57

The interesting thing about Russia and China is that they are authoritarian states whose leaders understand how to exercise power. Their leaders are not paragons of virtue, but they are certainly not personally beholden to foreign interests. Perhaps the fact they don't have to worry about domestic opposition helps.

India is ostensibly a democracy but our elites lack clarity of vision, and moral fiber. They have looted their poverty-stricken countrymen, have stashed wealth in foreign banks, are avaricious for power and pelf, and fear skeletons in closets.

That is why India is hobbled in its pursuit of national interests.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 20:29

munna wrote:Shivji to use a rather crude example, in Punjabi they say "Rabb Nede ki Ghusunn" (Is God closer to you or the fist)! The rational policy of "oh we have so many poor onlee and hence we shall remain timid" can get us only this far. There has to be a hint of irrationality to our policy making too. Believe me when you talk to some of the US tea sellers they do not ask for the benefits of allying with India rather they argue that India is incapable of spreading trouble in the first place and hence there is no point in engaging India. India cannot sustainably engage US in a manner you suggest-a la Pakistan or China because of 3 reasons

1) Systemic composition and nature of our polity
2) Our enemies are US partners and they have served US well
3) The inward looking model of growth and development

To put it in a nutshell Indian establishment has discovered the limits to which it can waltz with US. For better or for worse, even if we remain poor and backward India is not heading towards a strategic bear hug with US anymore. Personally I do not know what is right? However one thing is for sure one of the best ways to get the US to talk is to be a known brat and trouble monger. Let the winds of 1971 and 1998 roll in through N Delhi once again, we'll see who stands where?

Munna you have raised a very difficult question. Some countries just got lucky historically. India is not one of them.

The scientific and tech revolution that caused populations to expand came to the West at a time when they were able to accelerate their own development and economy to outpace the population explosion. But later that has turned out to be a population decline as people look for prosperity over civilizational survival.

India (and many other turd world nations) started their population explosion as colonies when economic upkeep of mango man was not a priority for colonizers. Now it has gone out of hand. The poor are multiplying rapidly.

I believe that if India says "OK balls to population and poor - we will look for military strength now" we can become a military power that is Pakistan X 20 and literally threaten everyone - including the US. But I promise you.. (and I say this from the bottom of my heart with deepest love and anguish for my nation).. I promise you that India will split again as richer states will not want to have anything to do with the Bihars and UPs and failing subsections of India and the latter go into revolt. Greedy Indians who were looking for world power and world respect before giving power and respect to other Indians will amputate off parts of India and secede - for their nation will be richer and more powerful without the incessantly proliferating bimari BIMARUs.

By behaving like "the Conquering Mughals" Pakistani RAPE, Indians will do a Pakistan on India, looking for military glory and "respect" - ignoring the reality of Indians at large.

On the other hand - I promise you (this is my belief) that an intact India will be a world dominator if we pay adequate attention now and for the next 20 years to population control and development of "failed states" of India.

munna · Post by **munna** » 22 Mar 2010 20:38

Pranav wrote:The interesting thing about Russia and China is that they are authoritarian states whose leaders understand how to exercise power. Their leaders are not paragons of virtue, but they are certainly not personally beholden to foreign interests. Perhaps the fact they don't have to worry about domestic opposition helps

Don't know about this.

India is ostensibly a democracy but our elites lack clarity of vision, and moral fiber. They have looted their poverty-stricken countrymen, have stashed wealth in foreign banks, are avaricious for power and pelf, and fear skeletons in closets.

That is why India is hobbled in its pursuit of national interests

Not true for most of our leaders, infact if this was true we would have been the biggest US allies. Who can provide more dollahs in Swiss banks than unkil? The fact is that we Indians are a vain and egoistic bunch who cannot be subservient to other powers while other nations are known to be a little more pragmatic than us (read China, Pakistan and South Korea). I know I am making enemies on this forum by saying the truth but it is what it is. India and Indians cannot be sell outs and that is something I am reconciling myself to, especially when a pro-US MMS who in all probability is an honest man is called a sell out for trying to ally with US!
I feel happy for our system but at the same time fear that post-colonial policy hsyteresis will lead to quite a few losses while delivering some unqualified gains. Like they say "dekhi jayegi" (We'll see).

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 Mar 2010 20:40

munna wrote: Let the winds of 1971 and 1998 roll in through N Delhi once again, we'll see who stands where?

Indian nation should be ready for 25 years war. The new generation will be fighting for next 25 years. After that India will be different and also India will be able to deal with the rest of the world.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2010 20:40

India consists of 28 states. Some of those states are failing states. They survive because of the life blood they get from the successful states of India. Arresting the failure of the failed states of India is a national priority. If it is not a national priority the richer states can become even more wealthy (as is actually happening in the cities). If we fail to read the "instrument readings" and believe our gut feeling that India is getting there - we can still head for a large scale subcontinental disaster.