India-US News and Discussion

[Karan Dixit]

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.

I do not support US occupation of Iraq in any shape or form. Even in Afghanistan, I am not saying that US is doing the right thing as of today. However, what I am saying is leaving Afghanistan in the hands of terrorists organizations such as LeT, Taliban, JEM, Al Queda, etc. is a very bad idea. That is what will happen if US leaves Afghanistan today.

You may be right and sadly so in saying that US may leave Afghanistan in the worst shape than pre 911 days. But I am hoping that sanity will prevail in US and they will realize that all Islamic terrorist organizations work together, therefore they all need to be eliminated. So, it is better to stick around in Afghanistan and finish the job.

[shiv]

"Elite" should mean those who have a have an influence on political power-structures. An individual toiling to maintain the trappings of middle-class existence certainly does not fall into that category, whether in the US or in India.

Sorry sir. You are talking like a person who knows more America than India. I doubt if we are going to agree here. I am going to drop the subject here.

[Airavat]

India's leverage over United States

J. Patrick Doyle, new CEO of Domino's Pizza, opened Domino's (DPZ) 300th outlet in India and its 65th new location there this year, making India the fastest-growing market for the Ann Arbor, Mich.-based pizza-delivery chain. Even more dazzling has been the performance of Jubilant FoodWorks, Domino's master franchisee in India, which went public in January and saw its shares jump 58% on the first day.

If the Indian elite (including the middle-class) stop eating Domino's Pizza, they will be healthier*, and the prospect of job losses in the US will be better able to penetrate the thick skulls in the State Department than all the wishy-washy protests of Nirupama Rao, P Chidambram, or SM Krishna.

*daily dumping of the inner pakistani will be smooth

[Pranav]

Sorry sir. You are talking like a person who knows more America than India. I doubt if we are going to agree here. I am going to drop the subject here.

Your presumption is not necessarily correct.

But it's not a question of India or America. Whether one calls them "the super-rich" or "the elites", the people that one needs to focus on are those that have an influence on political power-structures.

[Karan Dixit]

Shiv,

Your definition of what an elite is wrong. I am not a heavyweight guru so take it with a bucket of salt.

In India we have four classes of people – rich class, middle class, poor class and ultra poor class. Because of this ultra poor class, you are calling middle class people elites. Existence of this middle class in India is an uncomfortable truth to many people (outside India) because it destroys their notion of India of two classes – rich class and poor class.

Let us take a similar example in US. There, you will never hear anyone mention the “P” word. All public debates center on rich class and middle class. They pretend as if poor do not exist. But the reality is very different. There are apartments in US where there are no toilets; it may sound bizarre but it is true. There are thousands of people who live under freeway bridges. There are thousands more who do not even have luxury of living under freeway bridges. They live around abandoned industrial places. No one talks about these people because it disrupts the normal classification Americans can relate to which is rich and middle class. They never seem to wonder where the heck middle class comes from if there is no poor class.

I disagree with your classification of rich and ultra rich. Here is why. From the perspective of a poor Indian, once you have luxurious material things then it does not matter if you are a millionaire or a billionaire. He will just think of you as a rich man, who has beautiful wife, sexy car and a palace for home.

[shiv]

If the Indian elite (including the middle-class) stop eating Domino's Pizza, they will be healthier, and the prospect of job losses in the US will be better able to penetrate the thick skulls in the State Department than all the wishy-washy protests of Nirupama Rao, P Chidambram, or SM Krishna.

Pizza Hut came before Dominos, as also KFC. And MacDonalds have cropped up in unusual places. Having observed these changes here in India, I must point out that all these entities came in with the "IT boom". The IT boom itself was headed by the US. It was young Indians earning 25% of US salaries in India who were catapulted into the ranks of the Indian elite.

If you observed the early days of the IT boom when BPOs took off in India, one phenomenon that was observed was that Indian youngsters earning fat salaries by Indian standards were trained to be "sensitive" to the US. This sensitivity training involved a change of accent to a put-on American accent. After all the customer (unkil) is always right. The American cannot be asked to adjust to an Indian accent. But accent is not enough. Young Indians had to be retrained to be culturally sensitive to the US. it does not do for the tens of thousands of BPO employees to be saying "Happy Diwali". They have to understand the sentiment in the US. And so on a hot December day in Chennai a young Indian would be saying "Merry Christmas" and learning to understand that completely unknown holidays like "Thanksgiving" and "Halloween" are important to the US. There has been a cultural retraining of Indians to appreciate American goods and services in a replay of Macaulay.

Only after the IT boom did we get shops (Nike, Reebok) where shoes sell for Rs 5000 a pair and the only people who bought them and wore them were the newly empowered young IT crowd. A parent in India with two kids has to buy new school shoes for them and typically the whole deal in India can still be done (via Bata) for Rs 250 for each kid. Dominos, MacDonald and Pizza hut are offshoots of the same phenomenon as are Coffee day and (yuck thoo!) Starbucks. (Why is that poison called coffee?).

In my (private) hospital canteen a cup of coffee costs Rs 5. Starbucks or Coffee Day - you are paying Rs 75. But in this way the US is only making up the money it spent on giving business to India in the first place. And Indian businessmen too take home a little bit on the side.

But ultimately I believe it was Friedman who said it right - behind the MacDonald's is the McDonnell (Douglas). By taking only the former we ignore the fact that the latter are selling to our enemies. The US earns either way - like the Pathan in my story. What do we do with McDonnell-Douglas? Cooperate or oppose? Catch 22 because if we don't cooperate, the opposition is ready and waiting. The US has us by the proverbials.

[Gilles]

You may be right and sadly so in saying that US may leave Afghanistan in the worst shape than pre 911 days. But I am hoping that sanity will prevail in US and they will realize that all Islamic terrorist organizations work together, therefore they all need to be eliminated. So, it is better to stick around in Afghanistan and finish the job.

Would you agree that in Afghanistan, poverty, unemployment, corruption, ignorance, injustice and despair, are the main recruiters to all those terrorist groups, much more than any "ideology".

One does not fight fight poverty, unemployment, corruption, ignorance, injustice and despair with bombs, missiles and bullets.

How many billions are spent in Afghanistan on :
1) Job creation
2) the economy
3) agriculture
4) small industry
6) justice
7) education
8 ) good governance?

Peanuts compared to what is spent on military hardware, bombs and missiles.

There are only 31 million people in Afghanistan. So far the US has spent about 300 Billion in Afghanistan. The British have spent about 15 Billion pounds. Canada spent about 8 Billion dollars. France and Germany probably spent about the same.....lets call the whole thing 350 billion. It comes out to about $11,000 for every Afghan, man, woman, elderly and child.

And what to they have to show for it after 9 years?

Insecurity, violence, rapes, looting, homelessness, poverty, unemployment, corruption, ignorance, injustice and despair. 350 billion dollars worth.

[Airavat]

I must point out that all these entities came in with the "IT boom".

They actually came in with liberalisation. Decisions taken by GOI to open specific sectors of the Indian Economy. Walmart could only come in as late as 2009 with a joint venture, because the real estate sector has not been opened up by the GOI.

In recent news The U.S. has called upon India to open up its markets and further liberalise trade policies in order to strengthen bilateral ties:

“Just as Americans benefit from our open economy, Indians will benefit from a renewed commitment to make their markets more accessible for outside investors.” Open markets through lowering of “self-imposed” trade barriers would also strengthen India's strategic partnerships, make it a more “relevant” player and help it achieve its “rightful place” in the global order.

The U.S. official singled out the Bharti-Walmart joint venture Best Price to illustrate how “a company and the [Indian] community are being held back” by the existing laws.

The US has us by the proverbials.

Then how is India standing up to industrialized countries in the WTO and Climate Change talks?

[shiv]

Your definition of what an elite is wrong.

Karan - you are entitled to your view on this. I see a desperate urge to brand the Indian "elite" as a set of people to be hated. who are not part of the rakshaks of this forum or of India.

I believe this attitude is wrong and reflects in our reaching faulty conclusions about India. The distance between middle class and poorest is as large as the distance between the middle class and the super rich. This sounds like madrassa math, for you can ask how can the difference between Rs 10 and Rs 10 lakh be greater than the difference between Rs 10 lakh and Rs 100 crores?

As you rightly point out "if you are a millionaire or a billionaire. He will just think of you as a rich man,". But never mind what he thinks of you. the real problem in India is that it is easier to stay in the 10 lakh position in India if you are already there than to rise from Rs 10 to 10 lakh. And if you are in the Rs 10 class - you can never rise to the crore plus class. But if you are in the 10 lakh class - you can reach the 1 crore plus class.

We have 700 million of "poor" class of whom 300 million are desperately poor. If the super rich ("elite" in forum parlance) are responsible for this it somehow absolves the responsibility of those who are merely wealthy and middle class. The latter groups are equally guilty (albeit inadvertently) of helping to maintain disparity. How this pans out in India has been discussed in many other threads.The wealthier classes of India are part of an ancient social conspiracy that is accepted without murmur and blamed on someone else.

As long as we take the attitude "Oh we are not elite. We are not the guilty party" we are merely hiding from what is happening in India. This is my objection to the narrow definition of elite on this forum. It is an excuse for "Oh elite? Not me. I am mango man"

[svinayak]

In India we have four classes of people – rich class, middle class, poor class and ultra poor class. Because of this ultra poor class, you are calling middle class people elites. Existence of this middle class in India is an uncomfortable truth to many people (outside India) because it destroys their notion of India of two classes – rich class and poor class.

Total population of IT working class in India is not more than 3million to 5 million at the higher range.

In a population of 1.2B this is not that big but as you have already said the "political elite" is the most important in the power structure.

[shiv]

They actually came in with liberalisation.

Quite true - but the IT boom added to the ability to consume.

The liberalization was 1993. Until 1996 the only cars available in India were Fiat, Ambassador, 118 NE, Contessa, Maruti 800 and Maruti Esteem. Until 1995 they were asking for Dollar payment for immediate delivery of Esteem.

But the country turned upside down after 1998-99 when the Y2K paranoia started.

The US has us by the proverbials.

Then how is India standing up to industrialized countries in the WTO and Climate Change talks?

Can you tell me how this India that is able to "stand up" to industrialised nations fro WTO and Climate Change talks suddenly capitulates and sells itself to the US? Maybe India is standing up only so its "bride price' while selling itself to the US is higher no?

But certainly there seems to be "forum consensus" that India is selling out to the US. I was only pointing out that the US will defeat India even if India does not sell out. "India being sold out" is a convenient bogey to put the blame of India's inherent weakness on some political scapegoat.

India has some strengths. The US is stronger. How far is India going to get by opposing the US? How much opposition to the US is good for India? How much cooperation is good? When does cooperation become selling out? When does poverty and deprivation become pride and patriotism (other than in Manoj Kumar movies)

[Karan Dixit]

You may be right and sadly so in saying that US may leave Afghanistan in the worst shape than pre 911 days. But I am hoping that sanity will prevail in US and they will realize that all Islamic terrorist organizations work together, therefore they all need to be eliminated. So, it is better to stick around in Afghanistan and finish the job.

Would you agree that in Afghanistan, poverty, unemployment, corruption, ignorance, injustice and despair, are the main recruiters to all those terrorist groups, much more than any "ideology".

One does not fight fight poverty, unemployment, corruption, ignorance, injustice and despair with bombs, missiles and bullets.

How many billions are spent in Afghanistan on :
1) Job creation
2) the economy
3) agriculture
4) small industry
6) justice
7) education
8 ) good governance?

Peanuts compared to what is spent on military hardware, bombs and missiles.

There are only 31 million people in Afghanistan. So far the US has spent about 300 Billion in Afghanistan. The British have spent about 15 Billion pounds. Canada spent about 8 Billion dollars. France and Germany probably spent about the same.....lets call the whole thing 350 billion. It comes out to about $11,000 for every Afghan, man, woman, elderly and child.

And what to they have to show for it after 9 years?

Insecurity, violence, rapes, looting, homelessness, poverty, unemployment, corruption, ignorance, injustice and despair. 350 billion dollars worth.

This argument that people turn to Jihad due to poverty is an old one. I have heard it from Indian communists as well when they justify violence against what they call bourgeoisie class. I have to disgree with you on this one. Poverty is not a justification for Jihad or violence against innocent human beings. I am qualified to say this because I have been what Shiv calls a mango man for a major portion of my life. I have seen people lifting themselves up from poverty. They do this without killing or maiming anyone. So, it is the ideology which gives birth to Jihad not the poverty.

[Karan Dixit]

In India we have four classes of people – rich class, middle class, poor class and ultra poor class. Because of this ultra poor class, you are calling middle class people elites. Existence of this middle class in India is an uncomfortable truth to many people (outside India) because it destroys their notion of India of two classes – rich class and poor class.

Total population of IT working class in India is not more than 3million to 5 million at the higher range.

In a population of 1.2B this is not that big but as you have already said the "political elite" is the most important in the power structure.

Excellent point. Any wealth worth mentioning in India has nothing to do with IT. I have seen people in my own friend circle rising to become filthy rich without doing anything even remotely like IT.

[shiv]

Would you agree that in Afghanistan, poverty, unemployment, corruption, ignorance, injustice and despair, are the main recruiters to all those terrorist groups, much more than any "ideology".

Minus an ideology, the poor tend to remain poor and do not revolt.

Afghanistan was a fairly liberal and progressive country before the Soviets came in. After that it became a cold war battleground where a hot war was fought by proxy. The US proxy - the Taliban won.

Poverty preceded the Taliban, but the Taliban were needed for 9-11 to occur. Pakistan was needed to create the Taliban, using US and Saudi money.

[Karan Dixit]

Would you agree that in Afghanistan, poverty, unemployment, corruption, ignorance, injustice and despair, are the main recruiters to all those terrorist groups, much more than any "ideology".

Minus an ideology, the poor tend to remain poor and do not revolt.

Afghanistan was a fairly liberal and progressive country before the Soviets came in. After that it became a cold war battleground where a hot war was fought by proxy. The US proxy - the Taliban won.

Poverty preceded the Taliban, but the Taliban were needed for 9-11 to occur. Pakistan was needed to create the Taliban, using US and Saudi money.

Good point Doctor. It is worth noting that Atta was an Engineer. Osama is a multi millionaire. Khalid Seikh was son of a millionaire. David Coleman is son of a textbook class Pakistani RAPE. The list is long and the point is there is no connection between poverty and Jihad.

[Philip]

We had the East India Co.John Company was far more honest than the current robber baroins of the international gang of MNCs,who employ in their ranks retired politicos like John Major,Tony Blair etc. and officially pass them massive payments for favours done while they were in office.After the mutiny,John Co. was usurped by the British Raj.We now have the entire country for sale if the opposition is not watchful,where the majority shares of Indian PSUs will and up in the hands of foreign entities.Coke ,Pepsi,the fast food giants and now the defence giants are all making full use of the weakest ever PM who has no spine when it comes to dealing with the US (does he have some skeleton in the closet ,or is he just spineless ,or is he simply unable to say NO to Uncle Sam being a former IMF babu?).If we are not watchful,before we know it the country will have been sold off to corporate America.

Look at Pak,it has debased itself utterly,with not an ounce of self-respect left,totally beholden to Uncle Sam,but still wreaking terror in India! The manner in which the US has been manipulating Pak's terror against India is unforgivable.

The problem with India is that our leadership is stuck in the colonial era where the "white massa" is seen as semi-divine and cannot be refused.Our current leadership at the helm of affairs ,the good Dr.Singh being the prime example,are too beholden to their demi-gods of the west too bat for India.Until a new generation of leaders of India arrive,who breathed their first breath of the air of freedom,our servility to Uncle Sam,etc. will continue unless we protest to the hilt.Here,even the opposition is guilty for not attacking the govt. hard enough as even in their camps vested interests hide.

[Airavat]

Can you tell me how this India that is able to "stand up" to industrialised nations fro WTO and Climate Change talks suddenly capitulates and sells itself to the US?

There is no Pakistani terrorism in WTO and Climate Change; hence unkil has no leverage there.

This GOI is selling out on the question of terror; claiming Pakis as fellow victims of terror, taking a (diplomatic) hardline after the Mumbia attack, then offering talks out of the blue. The feeling is that this GOI has outsourced the task of tackling Pakistani terror to the unreliable hands of the US State Dept and White House.

A former NSA had this to say on America's offer of a strategic dialogue to Pakistan: "I don't know if the Americans are being naive or devious?"

Afghanistan was a fairly liberal and progressive country before the Soviets came in.

Before the Pakistani interference and sponsorship of Islamists; that preceded and actually provoked the Soviet intervention.

[Sanku]

I know TONS, literally TONS of people, who have moved from Rs 10 class to Cr (for I know tons who have not); I know Bihari Chowkidars who are now running their own Security Agency.

I know TONS, and literally TONS, of RICH ELITES (by all any definition here so far) whose children in one generation are forced to fend for themselves in a two room city slum.

Shiv has been propagating extreme simplification, unreal binary choices, and total straw men about India and nature of its power on the thread.

I have no idea why Shiv is repeatedly pushing "Slum dog Millionare Onlee" view. This is a totally different Shiv from before; to generate debate in a forum which had settled into a comfort zone?

[rkirankr]

Shivji,

I agree at the moment we might not be in a position to do equal equal with US. There is still too much gap. But are we so helpless that
1. We are ready to compromise on JK
2. Ready to compromise on developmental goals for the sake of stopping global warming
3. Ready to compromise our independent foreign policy.

Shift in stand is required , but did we extract atleast some price for that. What did we get for going against Iran. Zilch. Iam not saying we should be idealists and stick with Iran through storm or snow. Only important thing is national interest.
It requires some smart guys who have Indian interests only at the top of their minds in the establishment. If Pakis can take US for a ride, then any one can.
Iam not comparing India with Pakistan. I do not think India is as helpless as the couple you mentioned in the Pathan story. Ofcourse again it is individual perception onlee.
We opposed climate deals for so long, there is nothing much US could do. Why compromise now? A US which cannot win in Afghan , do you expect they will invade India.? Why the compromise on Nuclear liability bill? Why no price is extracted?
Though Iam not skillful with words as some of the people here are to give anecdotes, piskological exercises, I will reply to Shiv's pathan story with my own from my own Yindoo fundamentalist culture. Remember Bheema , Draupadi and Keechaka episode. Keechaka was fooled into coming into a room where he thought he saw Draupadi sitting. Next he become keechaka to keechadi. Our bending only will have to be to make believe that we have Draupadi in the room and get them when they are vulnerable.

[rkirankr]

No decision on US access to headley Now not even the crumbs. Long live India US strategic partnership . Jai Ho

[Philip]

Ha!Ha! Poor PC,who was jubilant about "getting access to Headley",rather than being able to "Get" Headley to India.Now even darshan of Headley-Gilani,the relative of the Paki PM is in doubt.Our entire foreign policy,internal security and defence strategy based upon a lovey-dovey affair with the US has come crashing down to nought.India has been ditched by the US who merely wanted to seduce us and make us pay for the compliment with fat contracts, while deepening its relationship with rent-boy Pak.

[Hari Seldon]

Yup, saw splashed wide on news channels today - US not yet decided to give India access to Headley.

How chweet.

Am very elated at this turn of events.

The more such things happen, the less effectively MUTUs within our elites, GoI and establishment will be able to sell the Indo-US partnership pipedream.

The more wary India as a state becomes of unkil's or any other great power's overarching embrace, the better it is.

Also, better to realize now than later, besides.

[nachiket]

Headley has already got his plea bargain. Even if we do get a chance to interrogate him, why would he tell our agencies anything?

[rkirankr]

Headley has already got his plea bargain. Even if we do get a chance to interrogate him, why would he tell our agencies anything?

The only way we can get the truth out of him is bring him to India and give him the treatment which usually our policemen do. Other wise in massa our guys can only have a teleconference with him with chai biskoot

[nachiket]

Headley has already got his plea bargain. Even if we do get a chance to interrogate him, why would he tell our agencies anything?

The only way we can get the truth out of him is bring him to India and give him the treatment which usually our policemen do. Other wise in massa our guys can only have a teleconference with him with chai biskoot

The only way that can happen is if he is extradited. But he has already escaped extradition with his plea bargain.

[rkirankr]

This is slightly OT should have been in the Indo Russian thread. However just for comparison of our relationships with US and Russia and the also the mindset of our folks in the establishment , here goes
India reluctant to accept russia's bear hug

[Hari Seldon]

America's India Envoy Needs to Run a Permanent Campaign

As the U.S.'s relations improve with Pakistan, its relationship with India, if not very delicately handled and consistently nurtured, will inevitably suffer fallout.

Strategically, India and the U.S. have very different goals from Pakistan and the U.S. And there is a danger in assuming that just because something is good for Pakistan and the U.S., it is automatically bad for India. But the U.S.'s closer cooperation with Pakistan will inevitably provoke a visceral reaction in India that U.S. officials cannot ignore.

Mr. Roemer is left to make the most of softer options that are all worthy if rather dull: clean energy, education, agriculture.

It is a task he clearly relishes, nonetheless. Last Friday, he delivered a 2,350 word speech on educational ties between the U.S. and India full of the kinds of phrases that only a seasoned politician could deliver with conviction. Consider: "We share many common characteristics and bonds between our two countries – family bonds – dynamic business communities – yap yap - a drive for education – the words 'we the people' in our constitutions – blah blah - and the dream that our children will do better – have the opportunity to do better – than us.

The khan launches a charm offensive or what? Makes it too obvious, sadly.

Actions speak louder than words, with good reason. And US actions w.r.t. Pak leave little doubt, even in the minds of ardent US fans in Yindia, that khan looks after its own interests which seem to align better with TSP than with Dilli.

[shiv]

We opposed climate deals for so long, there is nothing much US could do..

India did whatever it could. The US did whatever it could.

What did the US do?

• Supplied arms and money to Pakistan (AMRAAM, F16,, AWACS, Tankers)
  Refused to give India information about Mumbai attacks before they occurred
  Refused to tell India about Agent Headley
  Refused to give India advance information of the Afghanistan blast
  Left India out of any future Afghanistan settlement
  Will not give us access to Headley
  Wants Pakistan to promise" to control Afghanistan for the US
  Will consider nuclear deal for Pakistan

What is India going to be able to do to the US? Sanctions? Whine? Appeal to the US's "good sense". The bottom line is India has zero influence with the US. The US has plenty of ways of screwing India. Our echandee about how we barked at the US in climate talks and stopped wagging our tails on the Iran issue are just straws we must clutch at to imagine that we have some capability to give the US a run for its money. We do not.

Now are you asking me "Why did India not do X, Y or Z to oppose the US? I think you can answer that and I note that you answered your own question in the very next post.

I am not trying to give explanations for all the things India did not do. I am only pointing out that India is a toothless old hag, and blaming it on Italian Mafia or an effeminate Sardar may give some happiness that the "cause is found" it will not make a whit of a difference to India's "international clout" vis a vis the US.

And why is India such a toothless old hag - because it is a fundamentally weak nation. India's statistics are only marginally better than Pakistans and even where they are much better the numbers of people that India has that require upliftment is far higher than Pakistan in absolute terms. We go misty eyed at India's education and technical manpower but we import most of our arms from states smaller than Pakistan - UK, France and Israel. Some from Russia of course. Still - the US is able to fund one compact but large army in Pakistan and keep India on its toes. It is easier and cheaper for the US to fund its Paki whore than look after India's problems. India's feeble opposition counts for very little - given its track record. What is it exactly that India is supposed to do? The US keeps India in check using a condom. We knock ourselves silly fighting that condom, and are you asking why we can't oppose the US?

There is no use opposing the US blindly for sleeping with the Paki whore. We have to mollify the US in some way. We have to bow to the master. What is wrong in bowing to the master and accepting his suzerainty like everyone else? What sort of echandee can a turd world nation like India have working against a US that acts in its own interests? Every sensible Indian will give an arm and a leg to go to the US and stay there. Why should the beggars in the mother country aspire for less? Unless we suck up to the US we can hardly expect favors. No? We have not even started a proper suck, and people are already worried about Indian echandee. What echandee?

[munna]

Shivji your logic about Khan logic does seem seductive but at the end of the day it suffers from one serious flaw. The flaw is that if India is truly a de-fanged garden snake (forget cobra) then any which way US has no incentive to do any business with India. Why will not US simply walk away and stop all outsourcing, hand over Kashmir to Pakistan and stymie India in more ways than one, to get a face saver deal in Af-Pak or any other xx saver in the future.

The logic that you or others may provide against such a thing is that US is a master puppeteer and will keep everyone on a leash without letting go. In that case I would argue why to care about political independence or some kind of self rule only? Surely we cannot expect to out do US by playing a game framed by it and hence why not as well sing and dance? US can appoint a viceroy to us and it will be back to raibahadurs and all!

Countries like China and Pakistan have had overt and covert conflicts with Khan to make it respect them. We can continue believing that being "accha bacha" (good boy) will get us somewhere, it won't. Even under a game as per your specification of players and rules, India is bound to get a lower "price" if we adopt a stupid "co-operate always" strategy. India will have to credibly demonstrate a punishment or negative pay off strategy otherwise the game might be made to go in a loop. Worse still 20 years from now we may find ourselves shafted geopolitically and stunted economy wise because the master gamer thinks so!

Sweet will of other nations is not something I will base our national development on, other nations need to be made to see reason and hence we need to be a big PITA time to time. I agree with your diagnosis of our national problems but their prognosis......... I am not very confident of that. JMTP

[shiv]

Munna - you have rightly sussed out that I can keep arguing about India's weaknesses forever. The arguments are attractive because they are a counter to any similar sweeping generalization about India and India's actions.

Ultimately, my personal view is that for any given action that India is seen to take in public - we have (on this forum) zero information of the inside knowledge that is available to decision makers in taking a particular action or making a particular statement. Sometimes it is posturing, sometimes it indicates seriousness. We just don't know.

Under the circumstances it is easy to attribute one particular motive to every action and build up a sort of frenzy that makes all analysis bullsh1t but is a lot of fun to post. But bullsh1t analysis that is fun to post as "serious views" is a game that can be played in various different ways. I have merely played the same game in one particular way. I am playing a disruptive game aimed at asking if there is a different set of conclusions one can reach from the same initial data. Conclusions different from the same ones we tend to see on these fora.

As you can see it definitely is possible reach a general conclusion about India's impotence and the US's omnipotence using the same data available to everyone. In the absence of inside knowledge it is impossible to tell which conclusions anybody reaches is right, but that does not stop anyone from reaching conclusions. My real intent is to point out that when we express views of what appears to be the truth given the data we see, those views are not necessarily the only views. There can be other explanations. The idea that every action by the government is a sellout appears attractive in some quarters, but the alternative explanation of India's utter helplessness can be made equally attractive. Which one is more hot air is a matter of opinion. The real facts may be quite different. But we will never be ready to see anything new or different when we sit back thinking that the answers are already there. And that we already know them.

[svinayak]

The logic that you or others may provide against such a thing is that US is a master puppeteer and will keep everyone on a leash without letting go.

Countries like China and Pakistan have had overt and covert conflicts with Khan to make it respect them.

US had a steady policy set by Kissinger from 1972. Support PRC in geopolitics and trade. Support Pakistan in freedom movement in Af-Pak and dismiss all small bites such as terrorism. Ignore the leadership of India completely and put trade barriers on India. They have done this consistently without much deviation.

So there was a steady support to PRC and Pakistan for the last 40 years. It was not the overt conflict of these nations which pushed them this far.

Sweet will of other nations is not something I will base our national development on, other nations need to be made to see reason and hence we need to be a big PITA time to time.

Indian elite has to create India own relationship with other major trading nations of the world. India cannot depend on another power to take help on this.

[ashish raval]

^^ I dont believe any proud sovereign nation bows to US pressure. Few of them which I can think are 1) China 2) Russia 3) France 4) Iran 5) Germany and Israel (to an extent). Why do you think US is a master in the region. They are not. It is a myth that US has an ability to damage India or Indian economy. It is not, if they had they would have done after 1998 explosions. It is not possible to hurt Indian economy by any nation because we are not coupled or dependent on a single nation let alone US for export, import or services. India-US trade is very less to hurt India in any manner whatsoever. Service sector is coupled just in a way chinese manufacturing is coupled to US. It is a two-way street. If they dont outsource, their companies will be massively less competant. In return, India can buy the US value added products(eg. jetliners) from Europe which in turn hurts US $ and further strengthen's Euro hurting US economy.
A country which can send craft to moon can definately be self-reliant in every god-damn thing just like France in a few years time.

[SwamyG]

Let me try. If there is universal health care it will led to more people being treated in hospitals, which means more documents. And everyone knows that will lead to more outsourcing the health care records. And that means Indians in India. Add to that more generics from India get imported for treating all those newly insured.

That is why you are a guru. Guru - a person who has the knack of seeing what others don't see.

Polls are really a farce. Even the Congressmen/women both for and against have probably not read the bill. It is highly unlikely that aam jane and joe would have read it to come to a reasonable conclusion. Yesterday, in a class of what appeared to be very well-do do managers and accountants they all appeared livid and mad (including the professor) - I was waiting for some good reasons - well they thought if it was the 60s buildings would be burning itiyadi. It looked like they were almost quoting radio talk show hosts.

Only time will tell (or a guru with a good vision)

[CRamS]

Headley has already got his plea bargain. Even if we do get a chance to interrogate him, why would he tell our agencies anything?

This is what I was cautioning against. All the hot air about Headely in India is to cover its impotence in taking on the real culprits: TSP/ISI/LeT/Locals. I think TSP's brilliant maneuver to also get access to Headley put US on the dock. Furthermore, Headley being the RAPE of highest order will spin webs arond Indian officials. Bottom line: the whole Headley affair will turn out to be a damp squib, and in a few months, the whole thing will be forgotten.

[CRamS]

US Health Bill: read all the liberal pundits across the spectrum.....and not a single person even decides to talk about the fact that more than 55% oppose the bill. the arrogance and elitism is astonishing.

What has this got to do with India-US relations? I hope you are not one of those "argumentative Indians" who get worked up with passion talking about Dems Vs Reps even more than Amercians themselves.

For what its worth, here is some education for you. The reason why so many ostensibly oppose health case plan is because the tea party Nazis and insecure whites are so damn scared that blacks and browns like you will have access to US health care. Its a xenephopbic reaction. Thats all there is to it.

No back to regularly scheduled programming.

[shiv]

I don't live in America. I am not an American citizen - but I see America though my eyes which are presumably colored in a way that reflects my experiences and beliefs. America has "sort of" been with me all my life in various ways - and access to American ishtyle goods and services have never been far away - at least to my jaundiced eye.

The US - apart from being an economic, military and technological leader in the world through my lifetime has some peculiarities that seem uniquely American to me. One is this "President" business. Every 4 years - to my increasing boredom (with the media hype) the US goes through this paroxysm of electing a president. The US president is called the most powerful man in the world. This is, in my view, not merely because the US is the most powerful country. It is because the US president actually gets powers to do things by himself,with some help from a coterie that he selects. This is a far cry from India's parliamentary democracy where no man can make far reaching changes or policy decisions and get away with it easily if the decision is unpopular. The only man who tried that in India was Indira Gandhi during the emergency. The US president is given the leeway to do oddball things and the country is supposed to trust him. For 4 years.

The US system trusts the US president to do some things as a loyal American. This has a bearing on some agreements that the US has with various nations. Many agreements, including the nuclear deal with India are subject to the condition that the "US President must certify that India is doing blah blah blah.." In other words, whether the US president tells a lie or tells the truth, his word will be taken as final. A classic example of this is nuclear proliferation to Pakistan. At one stage the US President (was it Reagan) had clear information that clandestine nuclear proliferation was taking place. but he chose to lie and certify that all was well. So the US president is allowed to lie through his teeth but as long as it is the president who is lying and it all turns out to be in the interests of the US that lie passes off as the truth.

The need for the US president (or some other US entity) to "certify" something as part of any agreement - such as a EULA is a deliberate mechanism to allow the US entity to tell the truth or tell a lie depending on what is in the interests of the US at that time. It is like Damocles sword hanging over the person who signs the agreements. the US can choose to ignore any violations, or the US can choose to nitpick. Of course the US has time and again chosen to ignore Paki violations of EULA. But then again - we all sign EULAs with US entities every time we have clicked "Yes" to the use of some US software. Many of us have misused that software and are technically liable for being sued and punished. But for whatever reason - many of us, like Pakistan. have escaped censure and punishment for violating EULA. I write this to say that while all such EULA's with the US are essential, the person who signs the agreement, uses the stuff at his own risk. This is a given and it is stated clearly at the beginning. But the fact that the EULA is not imposed in some instances clearly speak of a "wink and nod approach" that the US has towards such agreements. They are agreements on paper only that can be flouted if the US certifying agent can be bought for a price or if the certifying agent is helpless to do anything about it. Figuring out how to do that is left to the user.

Pakistanis of course have figured out just how far the US can be pushed. And it can be pushed. India has been too stuffy and proud to do that.

[munna]

Shivji I agree with the fact that your scenario is definitely one of the possibilities that our policy makers face. However the key here-as with any other grounded analysis is to realize the fact that those boffins in foggy bottom may have gamed India several times over gazillion iterations and complexity levels. The cockyness of khan in the recent past does indicate some kind of leverage during the 2000s. Our policy makers may have done their bit too, but my gut feel is that India is often viewed as a "rational" player. Rational players are easy to game and control-since rationality by default implies certain degree of predictability in response to various stimuli. Irrational players and strategies (as discovered by ze super duper finance sector) are not only difficult to calibrate but also difficult to control. The Chinese may have swallowed some pride but they do not give up that hint of irrationality/eccentricity to their policy making.
Even as we post who knows in which directions are winds of policies blowing? Dekhi Jayegee (We'll see)

[shiv]

^^ I dont believe any proud sovereign nation bows to US pressure. Few of them which I can think are 1) China 2) Russia 3) France 4) Iran 5) Germany and Israel (to an extent).

Ashish I can point out examples where it can be shown that every nation bows to foreign pressure. "Proud" and "sovereign" go only so far - even for the US. We can pressurise the US much more - but India has to play the game and not keep out of it.

Indira Gandhi played a nasty double game (nasty for Nixon) and made him angry - she tied his hands and made him look impotent. So it is possible to do it to the US - is it is done right. But what is "right" in a given situation is very difficult for us to tell without intel inputs that the GoI has.

Even the Headley question - which looks so bleak may be something different. "Extradition" is a word that reminds me of what Clinton did to that intern. He did everything except the dictionary definition of intercourse. The gap between extradition and no information is so vast and we have no idea what is being shared and what is not. Call me biased. I have met and spoken to Pillai the foreign secretary and he has stated clearly (on TV) that the Americans have been helpful. Pillai is career diplomat - and his background does not suggest that he is a traitor waiting to sell the country. To me there is more than meets the eye. There are alternative explanations even to the un-named X and Y in Headley's media reported testimony.

But similarly, the Pakis too have a huge apparatus set up to manipulate the US. For some reason I suspect that the online WSJ article posted by jrjrao in this thread (or was it the Paqui thread?) has a Pakistan hand in its wording. We reach all our conclusions from the media for which we normally have healthy contempt. Under the circumstances "trusting the media" is an oxymoron. But if we can't trust the media we have no clue what is going on. We then come up against a brick wall. After that every person has an opinion and every article on the subject is an opinion that's all.

[Gilles]

Minus an ideology, the poor tend to remain poor and do not revolt.

Afghanistan was a fairly liberal and progressive country before the Soviets came in. After that it became a cold war battleground where a hot war was fought by proxy. The US proxy - the Taliban won.

Poverty preceded the Taliban, but the Taliban were needed for 9-11 to occur. Pakistan was needed to create the Taliban, using US and Saudi money.

Good point Doctor. It is worth noting that Atta was an Engineer. Osama is a multi millionaire. Khalid Seikh was son of a millionaire. David Coleman is son of a textbook class Pakistani RAPE. The list is long and the point is there is no connection between poverty and Jihad.

Yes these leaders are those that provide the ideology. These people always come from the higher educated classes. Gandhi, Che, Castro, Ho Chi Min, Marks, all were educated and well off.

What I was talking about are the common foot soldiers, the illiterate farmers who join the Taliban for lack of anything better. They are poor, they have no hope, they are at the bottom of the totem pole, and someone comes along and offers them a job that involved carrying an AK-47 and having authority, becoming someone. Ideology is fed to that person. He falls for it.

If that same person had a successful farm which which he was able to sustain his family with dignity, there are less chances he would give the Taliban a second look.....

[joshvajohn]

I hope the last hurdles in bringing the Nuclear agreement into reality is sorted out. Both countries have to take people's interests into account in protecting their lives and also doing good business so that both sides benefit.

I also hope that the terror links are brought to justice together.May be India and US judges sit together to bring in the evidence and cases against the Mumbai related terror groups. AT the end of the day justice should be done for all those Americans, Jewish, Indian and other nationals who were killed in the Mumbai attack. India needs to initiate a more constitutional coordination with other democratic countries in this regard.

Both Countries need to take each other seriously and particularly in protecting each other's interests - political, economic and cultural as they both share common values such as democracy and so on.


India hopes US will keep Pakistan's track record in mind
http://www.hindustantimes.com/newdelhi/ ... 21961.aspx

US makes India wait for grilling Headley
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/us-makes-ind ... 898-3.html