India-US Strategic News and Discussion

[sum]

Shri MMS should give his Obama appeasement a break. There was no need to break protocol & go to the airport to receive him, specially after Obama looks so focused on squeezing & screwing India at every single chance he gets. What a show of servility.

Agree....bad move by a person already being seen in Desi circles as a Amriki stooge to break protocol and appear even more fawning in front of Ombaba...

[ShivaS]

http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/

[Jaspreet]

Shri MMS should give his Obama appeasement a break. There was no need to break protocol & go to the airport to receive him, specially after Obama looks so focused on squeezing & screwing India at every single chance he gets. What a show of servility.

Related news:

Dr Singh had received Obama's predecessor George W Bush at the airport when he visited India in 2006. The prime minister had also gone to the airport to personally receive Saudi Arabia King Abdullah.

Rediff

[Cosmo_R]

"Jarita"]^^^ We've had thousands of our farmers die because of US food conglom, now it is the turn for the small store owner. What a wonderful, pro aam admy government we have.

Can you please provide open source evidence of the above? Links from reputable sources please.

Please read about the most recent banana (export) spat between US and EU. To start with.

I know about that. My question was related to this: "....We've had thousands of our farmers die because of US food conglom.."

I have not heard of that specifically. Can you provide some details?

[joshvajohn]

I really appreciate MMS for his humbleness inspite of his academic and political status. I hope many political leaders will take this a role model.

Obama’s India visit shall brighten scope of winning next election
http://www.internationalreporter.com/Ne ... ction.html

US supports India's rise: Obama
http://sify.com/finance/us-supports-ind ... aagib.html

Mumbai charmed and won, Obama comes to Delhi
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Obama-arr ... 23064.aspx

President Obama arrives in Delhi, PM sets aside protocol to receive him
http://sify.com/news/president-obama-ar ... fhbch.html

Bhopal gas victims protest to seek Obama's help
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Bhopal-ga ... 23131.aspx

[brihaspati]

Lets be straight about it. US is financing a country promoting terrorism in India.

Neshant Ji, lets also be clear about one thing, India too is doing nothing about it. The US atleast is striking inside Pakistan, probing and softening them with helipcopter and SF raids inside it's territory. India is getting WKK's, hugging Gilani's at SeS's, Thimphu's and losing strategic space by delinking terror and talks and conducting Aman Ki tamasha's and mouthing cliches and platitudes like a "Stable Pakistan is blah blah". What or who are we then to have expectations how US should deal with Pakistan.

After 26-11, i had said a military action might be counterproductive at that time. But we should demand before talks that the ISI and PA be got firmly under the Civil dispensation demonstrably by the Paki Govt and the perpetrators got to justice. We should have leveraged getting that result with the US. We might in retrospect have made better progress. There is no talk today towards that. And if thats an impossibility for Pakistan to do, then whats the point of SeS or Thimphu. India has taken no stance really not even the minimal required.

Why should we have the khujli that US is doing nothing for India about Pak! "God" helps those who help themselves. If US is the "G" word then "he" is helping Pakis because after all Pakis help themselves - and do not wait for G to launch Jihad against India! It is expected that we should never hit back, never do anything that causes pain to Pak in the only way Pak understands pain to be - the same treatment as meted out to others by Pak -and we take our darbar to G and "leverage"! Leverage on what? what is the price that India has made Pak to pay - that can be leveraged against? India is trading on trade - give and take - on tech front etc. So leverages get traded and exchanged already there. No one in GOI has given any indication that they intend to trade leverage in one non-military-political arena with another political-international-military arena.

[ShivaS]

I really appreciate MMS for his humbleness inspite of his academic and political status. I hope many political leaders will take this a role model.

yes Joshua

"lot is cast into the lap, But its every (B)decision is from the LORD.

Joshua's Gospel Proverbs 16:33
Our LOrd he(a)r(e) is Ombaba



yes yes Humble eat pie, called humble pie said Simple Simon Singh..

[RamaY]

Bji

India can blacklist any nation that gives military aid to Pakistan from its defence purchases. That would be an == between US and Iran.

[joshvajohn]

Manmohan's secret list for Obama
http://www.mynews.in/News/manmohans_sec ... 07346.html

Bji
India has to become strong nation to counter the threat of Pakistan of terror and China of encroachment. India has to buy from anyone who is ready to supply reasonable arms to defend her from any encroachment. India should also use tactical pressure on US so that they will make sure Pakistan does not play terror and hurt role in India using Kashmir issue. Once we are powerful then it is easy to place threat on Pakistan on selective strikes on terror groups within Pakistan camps that promotes International terrorism against Western Countries and United States and also Chechenya and in India. This is why our alliance with US and Russia can go together along with our deep relationship with Israel to develop our defence and possible offence against International terrorism strongly paricularly in Pakistan even by allying or stationing our army in Afghanistan. India needs to be prepared a bit more at International level to hurt terrorism at its roots and also India is in a powerful position rather than any Western countries to do it as India has high respect for her own large number of Muslims who are not only unsympathetic to any terror and also work against terrorism in India. Minority terror groups are not able to get support just because of such majority Muslims in India. Same context Indian people can create across Islamic world through their involvement.

ShivaS
I hope this will reciprocally be done by Americans when Indian leaders visit. It also shows that Indians' hospitality in general in receiving the guests to their houses.

[ShivaS]

yes yes
Prful Patel was suspected terrorist,
Deputy CM of maharashtra was asked for documents that are not required and irrelavant. US amby breaks protocol and talks and visits all places with notifying his movements...

The list goes , the list goes on
lada da di ladada da
The list goes oon.

[JwalaMukhi]

Shri MMS should give his Obama appeasement a break. There was no need to break protocol & go to the airport to receive him, specially after Obama looks so focused on squeezing & screwing India at every single chance he gets. What a show of servility.

Agree....bad move by a person already being seen in Desi circles as a Amriki stooge to break protocol and appear even more fawning in front of Ombaba...

One has to appreciate the audacity to defy the protocol and arrive early (on personal time), quite possibly to obtain signatures for "audacity of hope". It is all about audacity.

[ShivaS]

Triple AAA membership

All Audacity Arrogance?

[KLNMurthy]

Irritants apart, Indo-US ties will endure
Vir Sanghvi, Hindustan Times

...

The medium-term irritant is Pakistan. Because Pakistan is, by itself, a country of no great consequence, it’s cunningly sold itself to America as a route to other more consequential places. During the Cold War, it offered America bases from which spy planes could keep a watch on the Soviet Union and became part of an anti-Communist alliance. In 1971, it became Henry Kissinger’s entry point for China. In the 80s, it became an aircraft-carrier for the Americans to use in their war against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

And now, Pakistan is trading its proximity to Afghanistan for favours from Washington. The Americans can’t fight al-Qaeda in Afghanistan without going through Pakistan. They need the ISI. They need the Pakistan Army. And Pakistan continues to exploit this dependence to its own advantage.

No matter how much we complain about Pakistan’s sponsorship of terrorism directed at India or protest that America does not share all the information it gets about Pakistani terrorists with us (i.e. the Headley affair), this is not going to change. As long as America is in Afghanistan, Pakistan is going to remain important. And in the area of terrorism, India’s interests are going to have to take a backseat to America’s partnership with the Pakistan army and the ISI for its Afghan adventure.

The good news is that this is not a long-term phenomenon. America’s Afghan mission won’t end in the next year or so. But equally, it’s unlikely to last long into this decade. And once Washington loses interest in Afghanistan, Pakistan ceases to be of any relevance.

So, let’s not get too distracted by Obama’s plummeting popularity. Let’s not confuse the short-term performance of the call-centre industry with India’s long-term interests. And let’s recognise that the American engagement with Pakistan — no matter how irritating it may seem to Indians — is necessarily time-bound.

Let’s look, instead, to the future; to a future where America and India remain natural allies, united by the pragmatism of geo-political dependence. And, of course, by a shared belief in democracy and liberal values.

The Obama visit is not about outsourcing, about Pakistan or about the president’s own popularity. It is one more step down the road in formulating an alliance between two great countries that will endure into the future.[/b]

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Irritants ... 22844.aspx

India and the US share another trait in common--recognizing Pakistani perfidy while simultaneously underestimating Pakistan. Vir Singhvi's article above is typical of this intellectual vacuity. First, he says, "Pakistan cunningly positioned itself ... " and he ends with "american engagement with Pakistan is necessarily time-bound."

If an engagement goes on for 60+ years, each time under different pretexts, then it is not time-bound; it is very stable, with differing underlying pretexts. The fact is that it is Pakistan that aggressively marketed itself as a partner, while the pretexts kept shifting. 9/11, which we know for a fact was a Paki project, was a boon for Pakistan, whether or not US would have chosen to go to war. If the US had taken a low-key approach, then Pakis would have advanced their Mughalistan / new khilafat project by that much. As it happened, the US decided to go to war, which meant milking the US for billions for, guess what, the same Mughalistan / new khilafat project. Pakis win either way.

It is stupid to imagine that a country like Pakistan, founded on a clearly-articulated platform of mughalistan / new khilafat, which has been actively and successfully harnessing American dollars in its steady pursuit, is just going to give up and go away, just because one pretext, in Afghanistan, is temporarily diluted. The global mughalistan / new khilafat project is not going to go away, and the civilized world hasn't yet come up with a credible and coherent answer to it; all it has done is to flail about. Until the day the US and India figure out how to defend the world against this deadly infection (these are the only two countries with the potential to think this through and carry out a remedy), the threat of Pakistan will not recede.

[arjunm]

Before Praful Patel, the acting defence Minister George Fernandez was strip searched and Rahul Gandhi was arrested by the Immigration & Naturalization service with his Brazilian girl friend with $200,000 cash money. But I hope Rahulji's profile would be improved considerably, if I am correct, in the high table of the powerful whose who of PM's gala dinner, with his mummy dear Soniaji and handful of chappal bearer, including Pranab Mookherjee, were allowed to sit and rub shoulders with the Oabmas.

[svinayak]

This silly dance may seem comical but there is more than meets the eye. USA has ostensibly and repeatedly rebuffed TSP desire for US to mediate the so called "dispute". If that were so, then why does TSP keep bringng that up? I mean if I were not interested in doing something and somebody keeps pestering me, at some point I would tell him to f**k off. So what this tells me, and we all know is that there is some tacit agreement between US &TSP, and a desire on part of US to meddle in Kashmir. The second issue which we can speculate, but not very clear on is how is TSP so cock-sure that in any potential mediation, hypothetical or otherwise, US will side with them and the valley will fall in their laps? But I guess the sheer atmosphercis with India, US, TSP, and the APHC ("Kashmiri people") sitting across the same table will put India on the back foot, and thats what TSP is counting on.

Check out open statements from US about it not coming in between negotiations. This is like trying not to show its hand at all when it has been behind all the show.

[SaiK]

Stable pakistan is a nuisance for India. So all these split pakistan stuff is all puffed off now for Obama and his desi lobby clout. I guess these NRIs are not guided well by mamose ji.

[putnanja]

How business saved the Mumbai trip -K.P. NAYAR

...Last month, at the height of his war with Obama, Donohue, in an open letter, went so far as to accuse the administration and the Democratic Congress of “desperately trying to change the subject away from our stalled economy and nearly double-digit unemployment. They (Democrats) hope that by demonising those who oppose their failed policies, they can fire up their dispirited and disappointed base and silence our voice.”

Subsequently, the Chamber pumped money into Republican campaigns through anonymous front organisations and was significantly responsible for wresting the House of Representatives away from Obama’s party and dealing a serious blow to the President.

Three weeks ago, the White House was in jitters as it appeared that Obama’s meetings with industrialists in Mumbai might not take place: in which case, some of his top aides were of the view that like the aborted trip to Amritsar, the Mumbai leg of the presidential visit may also have to be called off.

Obama was very keen on demonstrating that he stood shoulder-to-shoulder with India on fighting terrorism by going to Mumbai and staying at the Taj Mahal hotel.

But his senior aides said that a visit to the city without engaging Indian industrialists and US businesses with interest in India would send a wrong message. Especially in the light of actions against outsourcing and H1-B visas by Obama’s administration and a Congress controlled by his party.

Desperate, Obama’s officials working on the Mumbai visit called Indian companies in the US and their representative organisations to the White House at very short notice for an emergency meeting on October 15.

That was a Friday. Normally meetings are not called at the White House on Friday afternoons because the President leaves for Camp David for the weekend and his staff try to take a break from their dawn-to-midnight pressure-cooker schedule.

The meeting was tense. The base of the Democrats had accused and named nearly 80 Indian companies of having contributed over $800,000 to the USIBC, which in turn had allegedly siphoned part of that money into campaigns against the President. Yet, a way had to be found to facilitate Obama’s visit.

Three days after that meeting, 26 Indian companies aided by three executives of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) met the Indian ambassador , Meera Shankar, here to work out a compromise under the auspices of the CII-India Business Forum.


...
...

[arun]

Cornered in Mumbai college, Obama cautious on Pakistan

Girl poses tough Pak question, gets a ‘diplomatic answer’

[Johann]

Yes, but compared to the rest of the world, US still reigns supreme and way ahead in terms of its ability to project power. Of course, there needs to be a mid course correction; after all, one can't have a 3-car garage home and high-definition TV sets in every room just by borrowing ad nauseum. Don't tell me for a second that all its 1000s and 1000s of nukes in its basement are for doing pooja. If need be, especially with tea party Nazis in power, they will do any number of Hiroshima & Nagasakis to bring home the bacon. Lets be clear about that.

...Exactly. And in addition to what I said above, I am not yet prepared to shed tears or write a swan song for the demise of USA's global empire. Its here to stay for the foreseeable fture.[/quote]

The Soviet Union is a great example of what happens when raw military power, even combined with ideological ferocity, ample human and natural resources is not enough to hold on to superpowerdom if you * persistently* get the economics colossally wrong.

You can use power to gather wealth, but unless you are wise in your investments you will expend your power faster than you can replenish it.

America unless it is careful can certainly end up like in many ways Russia today a decade or two down the road.

The only insurance against that is the potential for democracy, whether by normal or radical means to break the choke-hold of inertia and privilege that leads to sclerosis and failure on a massive scale.

The deepest source of American strength is the sense of political entitlement that so many ordinary Americans have, that their voices *ought* to count, even if they don't.

Lets cut through the chase. There is nothing called "globalization" per se. Its about Americanization. And so long as the rest of the world, especially, Chinese, other East Asians, and increasingly Indians etc were consuming coke, eating pizza, listening to Madonna, Americans loved it because they were making money. But when the rest of the world started showing hints of making their own pizza and their own coke which competed with American versions, then of course, all notions of globalization go out of the window. And it assumes a tea party Nazisque narrative when US companies started to realize that instead of selling US made coke & pizza, its way cheaper to make Indians and Chinese make US coke and pizza locally. This naturally means that the joe-six pack in US has to work that bit harder to get his 3-car garage home, six pack, football, and weekend female company. Easier way out, or so he thinks, is to join the tea party and blame somebody else or Obama’s closet Muslim faith.

CRS, its odd that you should say such things. How would an Indian like you end up in the US except through the forces of globalisation? Surely you didn't go there for "US made coke & pizza"?

Globalisation is the accelerating and ever complexifying flow of goods, services, labour and capital from everywhere to everywhere. Its ridiculous to talk as if this was about MTV and Domino's. It is about SAP, Nokia, Google, Toyota, where you buy coal and cotton from, and where your employees and stockholders and bond-buyers come from.

America's elite does very well out of globalisation, as does India's and China's. American factory workers, Indian farmers and Chinese coal miners, not so well at all. Marx is going to do very well in the 21st century, even if no one cares about Lenin and the killers that followed him.

. There is no such thing as an Omni-potent global Jihad out to get US. US is at war with certain sections of Muslims on account of their policies. Principle among them is the installation of the neo colonial state of Israel driving out the original inhabitants, the Palestinians, from their home land, to atone for the sins of Europeans. If any country faces jihad, it is India through jihad sponsored by TSP. The very existential danger that India faces from a relentless TSP cannot be compared to random acts of Islamic terror that US faces.

CRS,

Firstly, I'm not sure why you seem to think its necessary to treat the PA's conflict with India with the Global Jihad's war on America as some sort of moral competition. This is like people whose reaction to suffering from racism is to embrace racial thinking themselves and end up mirroring the diseased ideology they claim to reject.

Secondly, I'd suggest you carefully think about the dates in question before you make hypotheses, or reject things without being quite sure what is being said.

Israel was formed in 1948. Jerusalem and the West Bank and Gaza were captured in 1967. American support was crucial in both cases.

The Sunni Global Jihad, which began to emerge in the 1970s did not chose America to be its greatest enemy until 1990. This is not an accident.

When the US intervened against Iraq it was the very first time in the 20th century the US intervened directly against a Sunni Muslim state, and that triggered a profound enmity that built on many factors, including support to Israel.

The Deobandis, the Wahabbis, etc, the movements at the heart of the Global Jihad are all Sunni revivalists and Sunni chauvinists. The Global Jihad is NOT first and foremost concerned with killing Americans - its greatest desire is to turn their homelands in to 'pure' Sunni states, with all minorities defeated, and proper *Sunni* sharia enforced, and all the colonial-era secular law torn down.

The biggest issue the Global Jihad has with America is that it believes that it stands in the way of the renaissance of Sunni Muslim power - that it will destroy any Islamist movement, and any non-Islamist Sunni leader that dares to challenge its interests. This is why Al Qaeda and the rest of the Global Jihad is far more concerned with fighting America than Israel.

Its madness, and it will not succeed, but it externalises all of the rage and frustration within the Sunni world over dysfunctional governance, stagnation, the absence of rights, and the bigger spiritual crisis over how to handle modernity.

In any case the global jihad faction of the Salafi jihadi movement has waged an escalatory war with America since 1990 designed to force it to withdraw from ME politics. Will they win? The US will change strategy - after all what is the point if your policy to keep gas prices at the station low actually ends up raising them? They wont go anywhere as long as Middle East states determine the market price of American energy.

On the other hand the Global Jihad has demonstrated that it is VERY good at killing and humiliating Americans on a in ever more innovative and spectacular ways. That is not something that American voters accept - it is an infinitely more sensitive issue than Pakistani terrorism is with Indian voters unfortunately.

Bin Laden has said many times is that his ultimate goal is to get the Americans to provoke the Americans (like the Soviets) to overreach, exhaust themselves, ruin their economy and fracture their political system.

By that measure, one might argue they are winning. How does one prevent attacks without falling in to over-reach? Is the Indian approach better? None of these are simple questions with simple answers.

[Juggi G]

Dancing Queen Michelle Rocks India

[Philip]

Johann has a point about US sensitivities to Islamic terror.In one of the TV discussions abbout O's visit,a US talking head went hyper about the "1000" US troops killed in Afghanistan.We are far more stoic,but the "loose change" in Indian pockets to "pay the ferryman" every time an Indian soldier or civvie is killed, is fast depleting.However,I do differ somewhat about the ability of the Islamic street to influence matters in the ME region.It has actually grown immeasurably.See how Hamas and the Hiz have taken over from the moderates threatening Israel.Whether Sunni or Shiite,the street is on the march,especially in Iraq,where the influence of Iran is escalating.

Unless the US can round up a "posse" as Bush Sr. brilliantly did (hats off to him),to kick Saddam out of Kuwait,using the legitimacy of the issue to wage war,US adventurism abroad will now see an inevitable contraction because of war weariness (the Afghan War is now older than the Vietnam War!) and the economic cost of the same.This Obama has just learnt bitterly.The Mess-iah is going to leave Afghanistan in a right royal mess before election day and might suffer the same fate as Jimmy Carter if his retreat with dignity collapses.

[joshvajohn]

I think people in US are beginning to realise this. Though War on Terror was something of a wrong decision, the threat that US can invade if a particular country poses a terror threat to the international community and also large scale human right abuses is weakened by a few countries playing dual role - for pakistan it support US on war against terror and also supports Taliban to fight against US and coalition and thus keep its own suvival. Even other Muslim countries do the same not like Pakistan supplying arms but provide money to these groups. I agree that there should be a middle ground between Bush and Obama. Otherwise United States weakness will be taken advantage by small countries such as Myanmar and other countries where they will eliminate all the ethnic minorities as International countries would be merely spectators and there will not be any fear about international interference into those countries. China will use them as they would do in the name of development and keeping those countries into one. Obama has made United States a weak international contry by not criticising openly the terror sponsoring countries which is also against his own counsciousness. If people are fighting along with allies rather than fighting terror then we return back to cold war where warriors will be trained one against the other. If US is not taking a conscious decision we are going back to that situation! India will pushed to help Iran nuclear programme and so on.

Why Indians are angry with Obama's stand on Pakistan
November 08, 2010 11:12 IST
http://news.rediff.com/special/2010/nov ... kistan.htm

Pakistan 'happy' about Obama's India visit: Qureshi
2010-11-08 14:50:00
http://sify.com/news/pakistan-happy-abo ... cdagg.html

India's Strong Ties to Iran Enable Regime
http://newsblaze.com/story/201011051100 ... story.html

China plans fifth nuclear reactor for Pakistan
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/087cce10-eada ... z14gPiEZ6w

[Pratyush]

The publication of july 2011 was the gravest error made in the history of counter insurgency. If the Insurgent wins by simply not losing. Then Ombaba gave them a timline for how long they must not lose. Stupid.

[Lalmohan]

yes but ombaba also said 'draw-down' not withdrawal
a lot of commentators think that US troops will be in afghanistan for a long time to come

[Pratyush]

But how effective will they be. If they have not won the COIN war. That is some thing which is not addressed by most people. The Taliban is getting stronger. The TSP has been emboldned all becaues the POTUS has made that stupid remark.

[Lalmohan]

the POTUS had no option, for domestic political compulsions onlee

[Pratyush]

Then the domestic constituency has cost them this war.

[chaanakya]

The list of MOA/MOU signed between Unkil and GOI

- India-US agreement to set up a joint Clean Energy Research and Development Centre. It will be backed by 50 million dollars by both sides over five years and work to complete joint research in solar, biofuels and energy efficiency.

- Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for a Global Centre for Nuclear Energy Partnership. US will cooperate in India's plans for a nuclear centre, to promote nuclear security and address threats of nuclear terrorism.

- MOU to establish an India-US Energy Cooperation Programme. It will mobilise private sector expertise and resources to address clean energy-related issues in India and the US.

- Agreement on technical cooperation to study India's annual monsoon rains. Cooperation on weather forecasting for India's crucial annual monsoon.

- MOU between India and the US on shale gas resources which will see US technology used to assess shale gas resources in India.

- MOU on establishing and operating a Global Disease Detection Centre in India, which will set up a laboratory in New Delhi designed to prevent the spread of infectious diseases.

[shukla]

Obama talks the talk in Indian Parliament address..

FULL TEXT OF U.S. President Barack Obama’s Parliament address
The Hindu

- Endorses India's bid for A UNSC seat as a permanent member
- India's role for rehabilitation in Afghanistan
- Export control reform and India's access to high tech US equipment
- Pakistan's role in harboring terrorists and perpetrating cross border terrorism

Obama endorses India's bid for permanent seat in UNSC
TOI

End terrorist safe havens, Obama tells Pakistan
TOI

[Philip]

He can do more by telling the Pakis that military aiod will stop if it exports terror.That will be the swiftest message that will get into the pants of the Paki military and make them understand realities.But will he?Judging from Hillary's gushing love for Pak in her recent statements,Pak will continue to milk the "cow"
and throw tantrums whenever it wants to be "stroked"

[shukla]

He can do more by telling the Pakis that military aiod will stop if it exports terror.That will be the swiftest message that will get into the pants of the Paki military and make them understand realities.But will he?Judging from Hillary's gushing love for Pak in her recent statements,Pak will continue to milk the "cow"
and throw tantrums whenever it wants to be "stroked"

Sure he needs to do more, we need to wait and see if he walks the walk but he sure has talked the talk..

[joshvajohn]

I think Obama's parliament speech is a well balanced talk. While supporting and appreciating India to be part of UN, he also balances by not taking Pakistan on the way too much. India needs to do the same, learn to ignore Pakistan at times. Play wider role with a lot of powerful cooperation in Afghanistan and also in other places so that high tech cooperation and exchange become easy for both countries - India and United States.

'Bahut dhanyawad' says Obama to India
2010-11-08 18:10:00
http://sify.com/news/bahut-dhanyawad-sa ... geejh.html

[arjunm]

is this loonie tune Washington Post owned by that South Korean Evangelist Rev. Moon" The article suggesting to reduce india's influence in Afghanistran to please Pakistan to solve US's Afghan Problem.

What are those interests? First and foremost, to minimize the presence and influence in Afghanistan of Pakistan's own archrival, India. Yet somehow this point is absent from most American debates about these issues, probably because of our narrow focus on terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism. In fact, the United States has stoked Pakistani paranoia by encouraging India to become the region's major economic player in Afghanistan, to train Afghan officials, and exercise other influence on the Afghan government and people.

To Pakistani perceptions, this raises the threat of foreign influence in Afghanistan, and increases Pakistani determination to hang on to the Taliban, the Haqqani group and other insurgent networks to both counter Indian influence and protect Pakistani interests in Afghanistan. This in turn makes it impossible for the United States to succeed in its declared goals of stabilizing Afghanistan and securing it against violent extremism while safely reducing the American military presence.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03904.html

[Victor]

Tim Geithner in 1972 @ American International School, New Delhi where he spent several years while his Dad was with Ford Foundation.

[ramana]

Wonder what the young Venkat Chandrasekhar turned out to be? The one standing in the back.

[ramana]

X-post with highlights

Origianl by Acharya in Food thread.....

The Rise of the Power Vegans
Steve Wynn, Russell Simmons, Bill Clinton and a comparable cast of heavies are now using tempeh to assert their superiority. A look at what gives

By Joel Stein
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/co ... 862097.htm
It used to be easy for moguls to flaunt their power. All they had to do was renovate the chalet in St. Moritz, buy the latest Gulfstream (GD) jet, lay off 5,000 employees, or marry a much younger Asian woman. By now, though, they've used up all the easy ways to distinguish themselves from the rest of us—which may be why a growing number of America's most powerful bosses have become vegan. Steve Wynn, Mort Zuckerman, Russell Simmons, and Bill Clinton are now using tempeh to assert their superiority. As are Ford Executive Chairman of the Board Bill Ford (F), Twitter co-founder Biz Stone, venture capitalist Joi Ito, Whole Foods Market (WFMI) Chief Executive Officer John Mackey, and Mike Tyson. Yes, Mike Tyson, a man who once chewed on human ear, is now vegan. His dietary habit isn't nearly as impressive as that of Alec Baldwin, though, who has found a way to be both vegan and fat at the same time.

It shouldn't be surprising that so many CEOs are shunning meat, dairy, and eggs: It's an exclusive club. Only 1 percent of the U.S. population is vegan, partly because veganism isn't cheap: The cost comes from the value of specialty products made by speciality companies with cloying names (tofurkey, anyone?). Vegans also have to be powerful enough to even know what veganism is.

"CEOs are smart. There just hadn't been enough exposure for people to glom onto this trend," says Ingrid E. Newkirk, president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. "The information is everywhere now. Instead of 'Better buy this blue chip,' it's 'Better eat vegan.' " When Newkirk learned Wynn had become a vegan, she didn't think the news was crazy. "Having dolphins in a small tank outside a casino is crazy," she says. "Ordering vegetables is not."

Wynn agrees. The self-described "animal nut," who included the Humane Society of the U.S. in his will, sold the Mirage Hotel—and its dolphin tank—in 2000, and gave up meat and dairy this June. Wynn was converted when his friend—telecom mogul and recent vegan Gulu Lalvani—made him watch Eating, a documentary in which director Mike Anderson explains his strict meat- and oil-free diet. "I watched it, and I changed the next morning," says Wynn. "Bang! Just like that." The transition was eased by the fact that Wynn happened to be on a yacht with a personal chef. As soon as he got home, he began spreading the gospel as only a mogul can—like buying 10,000 copies of Eating, one for each of his employees. "I'm providing the ass for the insurance. If they're sick, we're picking up the tab," says Wynn. "If I can keep them healthier, I'm acting like a smart businessman."

[Cosmo_R]

^^^This is the same Joel Stein of Time/Edison NJ who wrote bitterly about Indians taking over his hometown.

[putnanja]

WELCOME TO THE CLUB, BUT PAY ENTRY FEE, INDIA - Wrapped in praise, Myanmar punch

..
...
Having waited for the thunder to subside on his smartly open-ended nod to India’s P-5 ambitions — “In the years ahead, I look forward to a reformed UN Security Council that includes India as a permanent member” — Obama immediately turned to remind his gleeful hosts there will be a price to pay.

“Now let me suggest,” he said to an audience already quite lured to Obama’s easy hypnotism of words, “that with increased power comes increased responsibility. The United Nations exists to fulfil its founding ideals of preserving peace and security and advancing human rights.” Bluntly put: The permanent seat is some way off, meantime start proving to us you fit the bill.

Before anyone had had a chance to divine what he was leading up to, he had clipped on the caveats — the nuclear brinkmanship of Iran and the suffocation of democracy in Myanmar.

On both counts, Obama appeared to suggest, India had been remiss.


...
..
“When peaceful democratic movements are suppressed — as in Burma —then the democracies of the world cannot remain silent. For it is unacceptable to gun down peaceful protesters and incarcerate political prisoners decade after decade. It is the responsibility of the international community — especially leaders like the United States and India — to condemn it.

“If I can be frank, in international fora, India has often avoided these issues.”

To many, the US President’s exhort on supporting democracy — probably made with an eye on his domestic constituency that has vocal views on Myanmar — rang a bit hollow.

Successive American governments having underwritten dictatorships across the world in the name of US national interest: a slew of Latin American states, Saudi Arabia and sundry repressive princedoms in West Asia, and nearer home, military regimes in Pakistan and, of course, the Hamid Karzai regime in Afghanistan which is widely alleged to have “stolen” the recent election.

...
...

[abhishek_sharma]

Obama's almost empty promise to India

http://bosco.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20 ... e_to_india

[abhishek_sharma]

Obama's diplomatic masterstroke in India

http://rothkopf.foreignpolicy.com/posts ... e_in_india