India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 06 Jun 2014 01:30

It would be very interesting if DK is part of Modis September UN entourage .

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 06 Jun 2014 02:32

Suraj wrote:It would be very interesting if DK is part of Modis September UN entourage .

She's not welcome. She should go where she is wecolmed. That means not the US. The US is not sending diplomats to India that are not welcomed.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 06 Jun 2014 02:41

Left libtards will be livid with SD and ombaba.
Christian fundoos will be livid with left labs for not gaming Indian elections amongst others actors.
SD and ombaba livid with all.

I c this very differently. Need to compose a detailed "THANK YOU!!!" to the above.
Consider this:

1. Due to the attack on the IDRF, today IDRF collects twice as much funds as it did before
2. "Hindu" fundraising REALLY TOOK OFF. The organization which was identified as the implementor of the "hinduization" component of IDRF's projects got its own separate 501c3 and collects funds probably an order of magnitude greater than IDRF, independently.

3. NaMO would not have won the election in such a sweeping manner if the people did not see the huge power and funding behind the dishonest attacks against him. I think the US "visa denial" was the clincher.

All this would not have been possible without the intense efforts of the above named, even at the cost of some of them going to prison (the Kashmir Forum organizer).

Give credit where credit is due. We must thank Biju Matthew, Angana Chatterji, Vijay Prashad, and the whole tribe of their guitar-strumming dumbkopfen "Scholars" for this victory of common sense.

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 06 Jun 2014 02:41

TSJones wrote:
Suraj wrote:It would be very interesting if DK is part of Modis September UN entourage .
She's not welcome. She should go where she is wecolmed. That means not the US. The US is not sending diplomats to India that are not welcomed.

That is the UN's decision, not the US's. US merely has the privilege of hosting the UN HQ. Perhaps UN HQ should move elsewhere where governments understand and respect the rules of international diplomacy instead of simply being capable of shoving more protein down Paco's throat.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 06 Jun 2014 02:42

Suraj wrote:It would be very interesting if DK is part of Modis September UN entourage .

She is an Indian diplomat on deputation to the UN after all, so should definitely be part of the UN entourage. Sit in on every meeting Modi has at the UN summit sidelines, including with Obama. Let the Americans try to pick her up from Modi's entourage with their outstanding warrant. That is something I would like to see.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 06 Jun 2014 02:52

TSJones wrote:
Suraj wrote:It would be very interesting if DK is part of Modis September UN entourage .
She's not welcome. She should go where she is wecolmed. That means not the US. The US is not sending diplomats to India that are not welcomed.

So says an irrelevant pseudo-citizen of the US who thinks his vote counts and tax dollars matter to the decision makers up there

. Other than the oligarchic elites of the US who are the real citizens, everyone else in the US are pseudo-citizens (tempted to call them second class citizens, they are not there yet but the gap is closing fast).

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 06 Jun 2014 03:40

Suraj wrote:It would be very interesting if DK is part of Modis September UN entourage .

Not prudent. Would be like having Uzra Zeya and Nancy Powell in the receiving line.

BTW is just me or does Nancy Jo look like a Randy Quaid clone?

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt ... 14&ndsp=19

Nancy:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt ... 75&ndsp=16

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 06 Jun 2014 03:43

Sorry about the above. The edit function just went dead.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 06 Jun 2014 03:45

Not a valid comparison. DK is an accredited UN diplomat. Officials engaged in bilateral foreign policy are a different track. The US just happens to host the UNGA.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 06 Jun 2014 03:51

Suraj wrote:Not a valid comparison. DK is an accredited UN diplomat. Officials engaged in bilateral foreign policy are a different track. The US just happens to host the UNGA.

Sorry if you were not responding to my aborted comment rather LokeshC's .

This is not about valid comparisons rather about the perception fallout. India is still more important than DK. Obama is trying to figure out a way out of the hole that the DoS has put him into.

You diss POTUS on something the Kerry/Clintonistas did while he's trying to take the India portfolio away from them. Not statecraft. Modi is too clever to give an ungli in this way.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 06 Jun 2014 03:53

JE Menon wrote: Why does no one see a CT in that, I wonder? Maybe because it would be Indian driven?

Because then the dharmics would have to come to the inescapable conclusion that whatever works or doesn't so well in India, is mostly of our own doing. Not so different from our Paki biraders are we ?

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 06 Jun 2014 03:58

The US SD still has a say in the accreditation of UN diplomats. Obama is not going to be able to do anything here, and it is by no means clear that the Modi visit will be uneventful even if India went out of its way to make things easy for the POTUS. Whether it is Modi's visa issue, or DK's legal hounding, both lead back to DoS . The DoS is an arm of the executive. POTUS is the head of the executive. A turf war between him and DoS (or just the SoS) looks bad upon for the US, and is ultimately a US problem. If a POTUS with two landslide wins cannot even rein in his own DoS, that is his own failing.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 06 Jun 2014 04:20

Helping other heads of state/government of friendly countries recover from the stupidities of their bureaucrats is the essence of statecraft. It wins a 'marker'.

DK is not India and India is not DK. Let us keep it at the level of the US diplomatic presence in India. Same rules on reciprocal basis including cavity searches.

You can't undo any horror. But you can signal consequences on a pari passu basis.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 06 Jun 2014 04:25

It must also be recognized that Obama is a weak US president with <2 years left. Modi just came to power with a very strong mandate. Obama's policy of kicking his biggest internal rivals into DoS is his own, and the consequences must also be his own. Statescraft only mandates that one should focus on one's self interest. It doesn't advocate propping up a weak party, but using their internal divisions against them.

Obama has done nothing to rein in the DoS. He has in fact sat around while it undermined his executive authority. Precisely why do we have to hand him authority he has not shown the ability to emphasize himself ? Our gains and greater leverage with him are... what ? Greater pliancy from DoS ? If Obama were two years into his first term, it makes sense to cultivate his interest. He's now less than 2 years remaining of his last.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 06 Jun 2014 04:39

"Statescraft only mandates that one should focus on one's self interest"
Exactly.

"Obama has done nothing to rein in the DoS. He has in fact sat around while it undermined his executive authority. Precisely why do we have to hand him authority he has not shown the ability to emphasize himself ?"

MMS? They still went out of their way to have him over for a 'bag lunch' last year in the final year of his humiliation by SG.

Foreign policy is not driven by pique. It's always a new day and a very long game.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 06 Jun 2014 04:48

Cosmoji,

Can you name one non-anglo nation that is not a US-vassal state with an independent foreign policy that the US deals as an equal AND a friend?

I am wagering a bet that the US itself is not mature enough to deal with friendly but independent powers. The US is a child in that area

rationality does not apply. Power has gone into their heads and as we all know, it has corrupted them to the core.

Infact the US displays all the symptoms listed here:
http://www.livestrong.com/article/25329 ... -symptoms/

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 06 Jun 2014 04:53

Cosmo_R: you deliberately attribute to pique, any action that is not demonstrably friendly. Nowhere in any of my posts on the matter do I appeal to emotions, in fact unlike you. DK being on Modi's team forces the US to make a clear stand. Obama has so far gotten away with not taking a stand, and papering over his inexperience with his glibness in front of a mike. It must be recognized that Modi isn't cut from that cloth - he talks less and does more. A weak US president is open to manipulation.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 06 Jun 2014 05:10

"Cosmo_R: you deliberately attribute to pique, any action that is not demonstrably friendly."

You would wrong to assume that. I would deliberately attribute any action to pique that could be construed as unfriendly by the targeted audience. It's optics, perceptions.

I am less interested on Obama's stand on DK than I am on his stand on strategic issues related India and the strategic space it can afford re PRC.

If we want to even the score re DK, let's screw the American School (all for that) and have a strict reciprocity rule for US diplos including DoS visitors.

Calibration and targeting is the essence of diplomacy.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 06 Jun 2014 05:16

Cosmo_R wrote:I am less interested on Obama's stand on DK than I am on his stand on strategic issues related India and the strategic space it can afford re PRC.

His record on these is demonstrably poor. He's viewed in much less regard than his immediate predecessor, or even the last Democrat POTUS before him, which is saying something. US-India ties have been characterized by apathy or outright incompetent handling by the US, in the past six years, considering the greater attention it received from the Republican government. Optics and gestures are first due from the US.

The POTUS actions are at best inexplicable. He doesn't *need* us to do anything in order to strengthen his hand to do something. He already has 2 landslide mandates to do something. He hasn't done anything. Perhaps he can't do anything because he put his main rivals in the DoS where they hurt his own foreign policy efforts, but that is his own problem. Bagged lunches are irrelevant as far as strategic interactions go. The simple conclusion is that India is not an important aspect of Obama's policy, and we owe him little by way or either optics or first moves, particularly from a leader who has comparably greater domestic standing and clout to Obama's own, today.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 06 Jun 2014 05:24

The idea that POTUS needs India to act in a certain way so that he will be strengthened with respect to some other US power center and in consequence there will be some unspecified benefits to India fits a pattern that our policy elite use to define statecraft.

Just replace POTUS by badmash and you will see what I mean.

Too chaankian for our own good, I think, though probably the real chaanakya would have pulled out his remaining hair seeing his descendants' intellects in action.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 06 Jun 2014 05:25

KLNMurthy wrote:The idea that POTUS needs India to act in a certain way so that he will be strengthened with respect to some other US power center and in consequence there will be some unspecified benefits to India fits a pattern that our policy elite use to define statecraft.

Just replace POTUS by badmash and you will see what I mean.

Too chaankian for our own good, I think, though probably the real chaanakya would have pulled out his remaining hair seeing his descendants' intellects in action.

+1

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 06 Jun 2014 05:33

Sorry guys. This is not about helping Obama. It is about focusing on our strategic agenda and not getting tripped up in extraneous details.

The DK affair can be fully avenged at the diplomatic level. There is no need to let it bleed into the strategic sphere.

It has nothing to do with Obama and everything to do with the POTUS--the office.

I'm sorry but I have no more to add to argue against counterproductive 'instant badla' regardless of collateral damage.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 06 Jun 2014 05:40

However I think Modi won't rub US's face in its poop unless it is clearly beneficial for India to do so. (It isn't, IMO). If it is neither good nor bad then he will avoid a distracting provocation. He spelled this out very clearly in the campaign: we will neither lower our eyes nor will we make others lower their eyes; and we won't allow others to glare at us.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 06 Jun 2014 06:02

Cosmo, you again talk in emotional tones. Pique. And now revenge. The reason is not avenging anything. The next Democrat challenger will likely be from the same ministry who vilified both Modi and DK. Obama himself has not used his mandate to overrule them and strengthen Indo-US ties . In fact vehemently standing up to the DoS and making him look bad is what has benefited us by compelling him to act. Therefore it is in our interest to push him into a corner.

Shanmukh · Post by **Shanmukh** » 06 Jun 2014 06:37

Cosmo_R wrote:Obama is trying to figure out a way out of the hole that the DoS has put him into.

You diss POTUS on something the Kerry/Clintonistas did while he's trying to take the India portfolio away from them. Not statecraft. Modi is too clever to give an ungli in this way.

Why do you say Obama is trying to figure a way out of the hole that State Dept. put him in? What makes you think that he does not approve of what was done to DK?

Finally, can you please cite some evidence that Obama is trying to take away the India portfolio from State Department (and its heads)?

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 06 Jun 2014 06:48

IIRC, the third largest contingent of US diplomatic personnel outside US soil is based here in India. Why, I wonder.

Would be good to press for reciprocity in the number of missions/consulates and non-native consular staff employed between the 2 countries.

far as I can see, the pattern is unmistakable - Indo-US relations in the non-govt sphere (e.g., private business, private citizens etc) is good for both countries whereas those in the G2G sphere haven't been good for India. Cut back on the overly heavy-diplomatic presence in India. Only.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 06 Jun 2014 07:12

Cosmo_R wrote:Helping other heads of state/government of friendly countries recover from the stupidities of their bureaucrats is the essence of statecraft. It wins a 'marker'.

Like it did whole lot of good to Putin on Ukraine even after he "helped" Obama in not getting into, what may have turned a very high stake game in, Syria?
US is at best suspiciously indifferent and at worst downright enemy nation as far as India is concerned.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 06 Jun 2014 07:57

Obama has been very good for us,imho.He blew the cover about the real nature of Indo-US relations which are tense and difficult.That has little to do with personalities but because we are different nations with different pasts,different understanding of the present and different visions for the future.

For twenty years since the end of cold war,India had to pay 'obeisance' and lip-service to shared values,etc to mask our fundamental divergences about politics in the region and also also to keep US in good humour given changed reality in post cold war world.

India sighed a sigh of relief,when US bared its fangs in the most clumsy way possible,completely blowing away all the 'extra' leverages they had generated for over two decades using its enormous influence.More importantly they exposed what they really thought of India and what they had in mind for her.Not that,Indian observers were unaware of US interests in Indian sub-continent,but India had to play ball given her weak political leadership under UPA.The US SD exposed its cards before the Modi takeover.Obama 'deserves' appreciation for allowing US SD to go amok and as an African American he can hardly challenge the white establishments world view and this gave unrestrained freedom for the SD to make a fool of themselves.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 06 Jun 2014 08:07

Satya_anveshi wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:Helping other heads of state/government of friendly countries recover from the stupidities of their bureaucrats is the essence of statecraft. It wins a 'marker'.
Like it did whole lot of good to Putin on Ukraine even after he "helped" Obama in not getting into, what may have turned a very high stake game in, Syria?
US is at best suspiciously indifferent and at worst downright enemy nation as far as India is concerned.

The terminology friend/enemy is probably better avoided in state relations. China is no friend of the US, yet benefits immensely despite its south china sea shenanigans. Looking to Russia/US/UN as a protector/friend/partner/benefector is the usual sign of impotence show by US "allies".

Using friend/enemy in statecraft is also a sign of diplomatic immaturity. Look out for your interests, take actions when it suits your interests, and not at the behest of someone else. The business relationship is beneficial, and if India can avoid the trap of buying weapons for oil (read slave labor for India) then it can actually help India prosper.
Otherwise, the benefits of the sweat will go back to US. You bought weapons for bread from Russia, that is superior bartering than buying them for sweat.

Friend/enemy also ends up propagating to people, when in most cases (yes bakistan is an exception), the people are usually ignorant. they may well have chosen the same way as the government, but until now they havent had the chance to act collectively against india. Let that pass before applying the broader designation. For now, ignorant is the right proven term. It is accepted and not questioned.

JM2RC - just my two revised cents.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 06 Jun 2014 08:52

Behind almost every misery that is thrown at us we can see US being on the wrong side

1. Support to Pukis right from 1947 with single aim of keeping Indian growth stunted
2. Actively working with DIE to dislodge India of its civilizational heritage. Its top most institutions are f'king up history and trying to digest sanskrit
3. questionable stand during 1962
4. downright enemy action during 1971
5. relentless support and funding of EJs across India
6. role in Khalistan and LTTE
7. India being the top most snooped nation for the PRISM
8. MMS and his day-to-day status reporting to US Prez
9. all sorts of US NGOs trying their level best to screw India
10. AAP funding

What kind of benign or even neutral relation will result in these type of actions?

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 06 Jun 2014 09:04

Satya_anveshi wrote:Behind almost every misery that is thrown at us we can see US being on the wrong side

1. Support to Pukis right from 1947 with single aim of keeping Indian growth stunted
2. Actively working with DIE to dislodge India of its civilizational heritage. Its top most institutions are f'king up history and trying to digest sanskrit
3. questionable stand during 1962
4. downright enemy action during 1971
5. relentless support and funding of EJs across India
6. role in Khalistan and LTTE
7. India being the top most snooped nation for the PRISM
8. MMS and his day-to-day status reporting to US Prez
9. all sorts of US NGOs trying their level best to screw India
10. AAP funding

What kind of benign or even neutral relation will result in these type of actions?

This sort of shows the futility of friend/foe. Remember, a lot of what is wrong now is due to the nukular weapons and ballistic missiles. Or the US would have taken out bskistan on the way to afghanistan. See, iraq, syria,libya,..

The former came from europe/china, the latter from china/NK.

Does India have "sanctions" against either entity? Does India hold them in any different regard?

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 06 Jun 2014 09:16

Shreeman wrote:This sort of shows the futility of friend/foe. Remember, a lot of what is wrong now is due to the nukular weapons and ballistic missiles. Or the US would have taken out bskistan on the way to afghanistan. See, iraq, syria,libya,..

The former came from europe/china, the latter from china/NK.

Does India have "sanctions" against either entity? Does India hold them in any different regard?

Sorry..I don't follow. Some (in fact most) of the actions mentioned earlier have nothing to do with nukular and BMD. They are the result of strategic and institutional unison in ensuring Indian growth is stunted, the nation riles in passive civil war state that does not challenge US and its allies in any sphere.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 06 Jun 2014 09:24

Satya_anveshi wrote:
Shreeman wrote:This sort of shows the futility of friend/foe. Remember, a lot of what is wrong now is due to the nukular weapons and ballistic missiles. Or the US would have taken out bskistan on the way to afghanistan. See, iraq, syria,libya,..

The former came from europe/china, the latter from china/NK.

Does India have "sanctions" against either entity? Does India hold them in any different regard?
Sorry..I don't follow. Some (in fact most) of the actions mentioned earlier have nothing to do with nukular and BMD. They are the result of strategic and institutional unison in ensuring Indian growth is stunted, the nation riles in passive civil war state that does not challenge US and its allies in any sphere.

They are all negative impact actions. The list had limited time negative impact actions -- these are ongoing. Treat US/china/europe at par. None is dofferent or sees you differently.

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 06 Jun 2014 10:43

Gentle Rakshaks,

I urge you to think a little differently. Let us see some of the more important ground realities

1. The US is going to get out of the South Asian region militarily some time next year.
2. The presence of the US is getting increasingly challenged from the Malacca straights right unto the sea of Japan. China wants to fill this gap. The region wants a power balance. US is getting stretched, yet it is by far the most powerful presence.
3. The US needs to have a string of strong economic partners across the World, their old partnerships alone will not suffice to keep its own economy going. They need markets, they need to source manufactured goods, they need access to invest into growth engines so that they can remain in control of the direction of world economy.
4. The US continues to by a long mile the leader when it comes to technology, economy, military power and controller of geo-political levers
5. The US is determined to box India as a regional economic power that can be aligned by and large to US National Interests.

From an Indian perspective these are some of the ground realities
1. Indian economy is stalled as a consequence of drift in policy making, nepotism, external powers backed activism and other factors. The need is to get the stalled engine moving and creating an atmosphere where decision making happens first.
2. A same level of inertia and direction less going with the flow has characterized Indian foreign policy as a consequence of the all pervasive inertia of 10 years. There has been no game plan or set objectives that has been actively pursued as a reaction to events in the region. There are opportunities, if not taken, will become challenges and adversities in the near term.
3. Operational readiness, technology capabilities necessary to secure or pursue National Security objectives in the near term have been severely impaired in our defence forces across the board.
4. Deep penetration and well entrenched fifth column through a wide network of NGOs and other Socio-cultural forays have been made by foreign inimical powers into India. This has created new bases, fault lines and security breaches that have very significant near and long term impact. It has to be arrested and rolled back.
5. Access to capital and technology needs to be improved to bring in the next level of growth that is sustainable. Especially in critical areas of energy, defense and infrastructure. These are long gestation, capital intensive and technology intensive.
6. Major internal security challenge have to be addressed in terms of Maoists and other secessionist activities. To top it new ones are being created and old dormant ones are sought to be reactivated.
7. Indian electorate has pinned a lot of expectations in terms of governance and addressal of issues that require a stable region, secure nation, growing economy and improved faster, cleaner governance

A cool head at the top would objectively have to take these into account first. Modi and his team have a clear plan in terms of vision what needs to be achieved in the near term (5-7 years) and long term (10-20 years). They must have already established clear markers and goals to measure the progress to this vision.

It is this kind of assessment that one expects Modi and his team would have made and they have signaled this by their first set of actions with regard to foreign policy.

Gentle Rakshaks who have benefited greatly from the combined wisdom and power of thinking that is articulated in these forums, must reflect wisely and think ahead.

This is just a suggestion from an old and infrequent rambler in these forums. Take it for what it is worth.

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 06 Jun 2014 13:30

Hari Seldon wrote:IIRC, the third largest contingent of US diplomatic personnel outside US soil is based here in India. Why, I wonder.

Because of the number of visas processed.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 06 Jun 2014 14:07

Equal & Transactional

NVS weighs in.

Has it been put to rest?

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 06 Jun 2014 14:46

Nandu wrote:
Hari Seldon wrote:IIRC, the third largest contingent of US diplomatic personnel outside US soil is based here in India. Why, I wonder.
Because of the number of visas processed.

Iraq -- 16000

India -- 3000

who are the others?

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 06 Jun 2014 15:52

"Remember, a lot of what is wrong now is due to the nukular weapons and ballistic missiles. Or the US would have taken out bskistan on the way to afghanistan. See, iraq, syria,libya,.."

that's hypothetical. Is it because of paki nukes that Americans can't take out pakis? Fact is pakis are their own munnas and c0nd0m for decades. Bangla war, ethnic cleansing of Kashmir Pandits shows how middle east and amrika combine during genocides. We have to develop our strengths primarily and chattering at chaotic UN is meaningless. Russia knows this well too. We can talk about contribution to world too on our own strengths.

schinnas · Post by **schinnas** » 06 Jun 2014 16:56

Satya_anveshi wrote:Behind almost every misery that is thrown at us we can see US being on the wrong side
<snip>
3. questionable stand during 1962
<snip>
What kind of benign or even neutral relation will result in these type of actions?

That's not correct. Had not for US help, our position in 1962 would have been worser and we might not have got Chinese to vacate occupied territory. Kennedy was one US President who was genuine in wanting friendship with India that Nehru didnt reciprocate.

US - India relations became worse with advent of Nixon and Kissinger. Before Kennedy it was hit / miss as well.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 06 Jun 2014 18:11

merlin wrote:Equal & Transactional

NVS weighs in.

Has it been put to rest?

Decent analysis, but I strongly and respectfully disagree with NVS on the following

He perhaps understands the difference between American power and the American people. He knows that as the head of the government, he has to deal with both aspects of America. On one hand, he must encourage without intervention the strong natural bonds between Indians and Americans as themselves and as citizens of the world. He will know not to expect anything to accrue to India that is extraordinary out of their natural bonding.

Many make this mistake of separating a govt from its people. Its true only to some extent. By and large a govt, whether democracy or dictatorship or theocracy, is indicative of the people's culture, mores, civilization, dominant religion etc. The odious characteristics of US govt that NVS refers to, stems from the self-centered nature of the people at large. I hate to quote Adhothi of all people, but one point she articulated very well and much better than I can is that the difference between US exploitation and say other countries' excesses is that US translates the greed of its people into enslaving somebody else, while in the latter case, its exploitation of its own people.

And what is this BS that NVS is trotting out about Indians and Americans sharing "natural bonds" as "citizens of the world"? Pick an average white American (who are the only ones who count as they reflect US govt) and an average Indian, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim etc, and one has to use a microscope to see what "natural bonds" they share other than the fact that they all bleed red. And Americans view themselves as "citizens of the world"? Don't make me laugh. NVS needs to watch more of CNN, Fox, and read NYT, WP etc.

That said, the most of NVS's analysis makes sense. With US, one must forget all the bogus shibboleths of the past, "natural allies", "shared values" rubbish. Just transactional, and when viewed through that angle opportunities open up and relationship will be at an optimal level. And of course, transactional relationship with external powers like US must be augmented with a strong sense of Indian nationalism. Then it will be "our interests" Vs "your interests" and mutual give and take. Or else, you will have large swathes of Indians who as "citizens of the world" will collude with US to further their interests at the expense of India's.