India-US Strategic News and Discussion

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 23 Jul 2010 21:25

AMBASSADOR ROEMER SIGNS U.S.-INDIA COUNTERTERROR COOPERATION AGREEMENT

http://newdelhi.usembassy.gov/pr072310.html

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 23 Jul 2010 21:29

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/07/th ... -both.html

The three agreements are the politically contentious Logistics Supply Agreement (a euphemism for the ACSA), the Communication Interoperability & Security Memorandum Agreement (CISMOA) -- without which, the US insists, India's C-130Js and P-8Is will be little more than flying hunks of metal -- and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geo-Spatial Cooperation (BECA). Status: no movement.

...

krithivas · Post by **krithivas** » 23 Jul 2010 22:53

US Tells India Arms Sales to Pakistan Will Continue

http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/us ... 15139.html

The admiral said the United States does not monitor the exact location or use of each item it sells to Pakistan, but his confidence they are being used properly is based on the increased trust between the U.S. and Pakistani governments built up in recent years.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 23 Jul 2010 23:15

That may well be true, doesn't the US include some sort of feature where they can shut down use of the weapons if they oppose it?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 23 Jul 2010 23:22

Union Defence Minister A. K. Antony with Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, U.S., Admiral Mike Mullen during a meeting in New Delhi on Friday.
Just imagine how this will work in TSP with Generals meeting.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... epage=true

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 23 Jul 2010 23:23

Carl_T wrote:That may well be true, doesn't the US include some sort of feature where they can shut down use of the weapons if they oppose it?

There is a majik button which they can turn off when it enters India. "Close Sim Sim Stop it"

amdavadi · Post by **amdavadi** » 23 Jul 2010 23:39

Yeah f-16 stops flying right when it is about to enter India. All pakis toys stops working as uncle sam sitting in
virginia enter four digit pin to kill anything flying in paqiland.

I think thats what happen with Zia too, uncle thought zia was flying to india,and boom time to press the kill switch.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 23 Jul 2010 23:51

Why not? It could happen. Maybe there is a virus included in exported computers which can be turned on. F-16 all of a sudden gets unstable...P-3 Orion radars start seeing djinns.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 24 Jul 2010 11:02

Officials Praise Growth of U.S.-India Military Partnership

“It is stunning how many things we are working on with the Indians … and how fast our partnership is growing,” said one U.S. official, speaking on background to reporters traveling with Mullen. “The chairman’s visit, obviously, is reflective of the important cooperation we have in terms of the defense side and the strategic partnership.”

The defense relationship between India and the United States is fairly mature and goes back to 1995, when then-Defense Secretary William Perry signed the first memorandum of understanding with his Indian counterpart. Today, military-to-military cooperation between India and the United States mostly involves bilateral exercises, personnel exchanges and training. "We do more with the Indians than the Indians do with any other country,” said another U.S. official. “That shows the importance of the relationship to the Indians.”

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 24 Jul 2010 11:02

India should not let US dictate how India relates to a third country. If Iran wants to be a friend of India then India should work with Iran. If Iran does not want to be a friend then that is their choice. But the way things are going, does not look good for Iran. Iran seems to be a lost cause.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 24 Jul 2010 11:50

The main thing I'm concerned about with an Indo-US alliance is that it would really be a Kaangress-US alliance, with both colluding to make sure that Kaangress stays in power for decade after decade, like Japan's LDP. Now that would be dangerous - and it's Kaangress who would most like to see such an arrangement.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 24 Jul 2010 14:26

krithivas wrote:US Tells India Arms Sales to Pakistan Will Continue

http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/us ... 15139.html
The admiral said the United States does not monitor the exact location or use of each item it sells to Pakistan, but his confidence they are being used properly is based on the increased trust between the U.S. and Pakistani governments built up in recent years.

The Hindu's report was bizarre. It says

As for the monitoring mechanism, Admiral Mullen felt that the U.S., considering the relationship and understanding it had with Pakistan, expressed a very strong desire that the weapons systems be used against terrorist threat within the country

It is only the 'desire' of the US, no strict clause or enforcement of that. I do not dismiss the above as inaccurate reporting. In earlier accords with Pakistan, there was a strict clause built-in, but this time, Pakistan has learnt its lessons well and has extracted an ambiguous clause based on which Pakistan is not bound to restrict the use of these weapons only against the terrorists. In any case, Mullen must have been asked how the US proposes Pakistan to use the frigates, F16s, AMRAAMs, Phalanxes, Harpoons etc against the Taliban and the terrorists.

Somehow India seems too eager to 'understand' US compulsions and concede without extracting something in return visibly.

Shankk · Post by **Shankk** » 24 Jul 2010 20:32

Sanjay M wrote:The main thing I'm concerned about with an Indo-US alliance is that it would really be a Kaangress-US alliance, with both colluding to make sure that Kaangress stays in power for decade after decade, like Japan's LDP. Now that would be dangerous - and it's Kaangress who would most like to see such an arrangement.

Kangress is a new age avatar of tinpot dictators supported by USG worldwide. All this while due to the irritating democracy, US could not get a good handle on India due to lack of central authority but now thanks to EVMs same is achieved while keeping the facade of elections.

Quite elaborate plans. When was the time Sonia first started courting Rajiv? Anyway.

Jai Ho Bharat Maa ki.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 24 Jul 2010 20:34

I agree. We should not be handing out "understanding" for free. For every "understanding" given, we need one back.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 24 Jul 2010 20:37

If one sees the Indo-US strategic relationship in last 10 years

India
+ Nuke deal
- P8, C130, C17? deals
- $19b military/economic aid (this is equivalent to 2MMRCA contracts)
- Foreign investments in Media and education sectors

US
~ Nuke Deal
+ P8, C130, C17 > $4B?
+ Af-Pak scenario
+ Managing India w.r.t Pakistan
+ Entry into Indian Media and Edu sectors

Question: Is there a new project that came into being due to nuke-deal?

Pakistan
- Nuke Deal
+ Potential nuke-sales from PRC
+ $19B
+ Space in Af-Pak
+ JK talks
+ S-e-S

Notes: India's economic growth etc have no relationship with India's relationship with US or its international posture.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 24 Jul 2010 21:18

SSridhar wrote:
Somehow India seems too eager to 'understand' US compulsions and concede without extracting something in return visibly.

Thats the art of diplomacy, used-care salesman talk, and white charm. In my many years of living in US, and observing SDREs deal with whites, I have never seen SDREs summon an aggressive posture; it borders on abject servility. Now, I am not advocating that SDREs behave like Pakijabis stray dogs who think the world is entitled to give them what they want, but 200+ years of colonialism has dented the self confidence of SDREs so much that whites get their way with SDREs without firing a bullet. All that is required is a comnbination of subtle threats, iincentives, py-ops, and charm. Its never an interaction between equals. Since 9/11, this trick has worked in weaning away India's posture wrt TSP terror and warmongering and nuke blackmail, and India diluting its role from Afganisthan from boxing TSP to girl scouts role.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 24 Jul 2010 21:31

CRamS wrote:
SSridhar wrote:
Somehow India seems too eager to 'understand' US compulsions and concede without extracting something in return visibly.

Thats the art of diplomacy, used-care salesman talk, and white charm. In my many years of living in US, and observing SDREs deal with whites, I have never seen SDREs summon an aggressive posture; it borders on abject servility. Now, I am not advocating that SDREs behave like Pakijabis stray dogs who think the world is entitled to give them what they want, but 200+ years of colonialism has dented the self confidence of SDREs so much that whites get their way with SDREs without firing a bullet. All that is required is a comnbination of subtle threats, iincentives, py-ops, and charm. Its never an interaction between equals. Since 9/11, this trick has worked in weaning away India's posture wrt TSP terror and warmongering and nuke blackmail, and India diluting its role from Afganisthan from boxing TSP to girl scouts role.

The leadership elite is the first one which is schooled in the west and they think west is freindly to them. Some of them see western interest is the same as the Indian interest

Ameet · Post by **Ameet** » 26 Jul 2010 05:49

The Yoga Mogul - John Friend

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/magaz ... .html?_r=1

Some 16 million Americans now practice yoga, a 5,000-year-old mental, physical and spiritual discipline brought to us by Indian gurus. Nowadays there aren’t just hourly classes in major American cities but also in places like Deephaven, Minn., and Hattiesburg, Miss. “Namaste,” the traditional end-of-class blessing, has become a punch line. A school in Houston even offers “jello shots” after class. If yoga began as a meditation technique for people all too familiar with physical as well as mental suffering — with poses, or asanas, devised to assist in reaching a transcendentally blissful state — it has taken on a distinctly American cast. It has become much more about doing than being. More about happiness than meaning. It’s a weight-loss technique and a stress-management tool, a gateway to an exploding market for workout clothes and equipment. Spending on yoga classes, books, clothes, Om amulets, mats and more has increased 87 percent since 2004, to $5.7 billion a year.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Jul 2010 12:53

I don't see how US investment is a "gift" to India.They make a handsome profit out of us and out of our natural resources,which are getting to be very controversial (illegal and legal mining and rape of our forests).If they want to continue to sell Pak arms,which will be used by Pak against us,then the US cannot be called a true friend of India.The "Stunning" way in which Indo-US military cooperation is proceeding is because there are vested interests at work here and billions to be spent (by India) with many in the US and elswhere reaping huge rewards,especially when the route for these deals is though the controversial FMS,where the US calls the tune in the fine print.Now that new revelations in the US have appeared about the ISI training the Taliban to fuight the US,will the US carry on with its duplicitous policies,lying to its own people and India?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 26 Jul 2010 21:16

Possible impact of Wikileaks:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/c ... e-war.html

What does it mean to tell the truth about a war? Is it a lie, technically speaking, for the Administration to say that it has faith in Hamid Karzai’s government and regards him as a legitimate leader—or is it just absurd? Is it a lie to say that we have a plan for Afghanistan that makes any sense at all? If you put it that way, each of the WikiLeaks documents—from an account of an armed showdown between the Afghan police and the Afghan Army, to a few lines about a local interdiction official taking seventy-five-dollar bribes, to a sad exchange about an aid scam involving orphans—is a pixel in a picture that does, indeed, contradict official accounts of the war, and rather drastically so.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 27 Jul 2010 07:19

Just returned from Pakistan and my brain turned paki for a few moments

India must convince the US that its domestic constituency is against making any more concessions on Iran unless US gives something substantial. Perhaps US should use its good offices, like it did for the nuke-bill, to get India a permanent UNSC seat.

This would help India to stand strongly and firmly on USA's side in it efforts to curtail Iran's nuke ambitions. Perhaps India can throw a freebie along, North Korea

P.S: USA is a market economy and understands only issue based quid-pro-quo.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Jul 2010 21:01

Mosque at Ground Zero!

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/06/pat-c ... rised.html

Condell is a British stand-up comedian, but this video isn't comic, it's pure truth, and utterly brilliant.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Jul 2010 23:15

I was listening to NPR All things Considered and heard this:

Futurist 40 Years later

about Alvin Toeffler and his book Future Shock.

July 26, 2010
Forty years ago, America was gripped by Future Shock. It was a book, published in July of 1970 — but it was also an idea.

It was the notion that life was changing faster and faster — in everything from technology to family structure to politics. People were moving more, throwing away their belongings sooner and having to adapt more often to new kinds of work.

The result was a kind of culture shock of the future — future shock.

The book was, in the publishing industry phrase of the time, a "runaway best-seller." It sold more than 5 million copies in the U.S., and untold more millions overseas, especially in Asia. The author, Alvin Toffler, was a reporter-turned-futurist from New York. He says the scale of his book's success came as a shock to him and his wife and collaborator, Heidi Toffler.

"We didn't grow up assuming that we would live well, necessarily," says Toffler. "We came from a working class family, and here we are, sitting in the sunshine, enjoy a not-cheap meal."

The success of Future Shock and their subsequent books, such as the The Third Wave, allowed the Tofflers to buy a house in a swanky neighborhood in Los Angeles, where they live to this day.

The house is mid-century modern: lots of floor-to-ceiling windows and white, wall-to-wall carpeting. The Tofflers built a boxy, light-filled addition containing a two-story library and matching, his-and-hers offices. It's all very up-to-date, although the brand-new iPads that they received as a 60th wedding anniversary gift remain in their boxes. Heidi Toffler is reluctant to embrace the new device.

The Tofflers have led extraordinary lives, since the publication of Future Shock. They've been invited to lecture around the world — they're treated like "rock stars" in South Korea, says Alvin Toffler. They recall a drop-in visit from Steve Jobs in the early days of Apple, and a private conference with Mikhail Gorbachev in the mid-1980s.

But what about their book's main prediction — the idea that change is speeding up, and that it threatens to overwhelm us? Alvin Toffler says he sees it happening, and that others do now, too.

"In the past, you made a decision and that was it. Now, you make a decision and you say, 'What happens next?' There's always a next," he says.

Still, the accelerating change doesn't seem to be driving people crazy, as was predicted by Future Shock. Alvin Toffler says it may be that younger generations have simply become more adapted to change, that it is their culture.

Academic futurist Stuart Candy says the Tofflers were wrong to predict widespread "future shock," as a form of societal illness or breakdown. Candy, who has a Ph.D in the field of "futures studies," and who bought his first copy of Future Shock at a yard sale when he was 15, says the book did make an important contribution.

"What Future Shock got right was that it made a compelling argument for taking the acceleration of change seriously," Candy says. And he says the value of the book was to teach people that the best defense against the future is to think about it, to imagine different scenarios, and try to avoid being taken by surprise.

That's what the Tofflers are still doing, even into their 80s.

"I'm curious! I want to know what's going to be out there — just for the heck of it," Alvin Toffler says.

Heidi Toffler says a career in futurism has taught them that no one can predict the future.

"Anybody that tells you they know what's going to happen, don't believe a word they say!" she says.

So why be a futurist?

"Because it makes you think," says Alvin Toffler. "It opens up the questions of what's possible. Not necessarily what will be, but what's possible."

He also said he was working on the idea of going beyond nation states

KASTE: These days, Alvin Toffler is thinking about the future of nations.

Mr. TOFFLER: Is it possible that the more advanced we are technologically, the less we need to depend on uniformity and that, in fact, instead of seeing fewer nations, we may see more and more diversity?

KASTE: But what's he most curious about when it comes to the future that's still to come? He says he'd like to find out if medicine will find a way to extend the human lifespan by an extra 50 or 100 years.

Mr. TOFFLER: Because if you have lived a long time in the face of radical changes taking place all around you, you see the world differently.

KASTE: Whether it would be good or bad for a future society to have people that old hanging around is something Toffler says is impossible to predict, but it's certainly something he'd like to find out.

I think it will lead to the opposite ie. states with nations instead of nations with states. Watch out for this bombshell for it will overturn the idea of Westhphalian states and create new large states with nations. Sort of modern millats.

And the idea of long life giving prespective can be realised by passing on or hand-off of the experiences that tradtional societies inculcate in their populations. IOW the change to the ipremise of modernity.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 27 Jul 2010 23:51

ramana wrote:
He also said he was working on the idea of going beyond nation states

KASTE: These days, Alvin Toffler is thinking about the future of nations.

Mr. TOFFLER: Is it possible that the more advanced we are technologically, the less we need to depend on uniformity and that, in fact, instead of seeing fewer nations, we may see more and more diversity?

I think it will lead to the opposite ie. states with nations instead of nations with states. Watch out for this bombshell for it will overturn the idea of Westhphalian states and create new large states with nations. Sort of modern millats.

And the idea of long life giving prespective can be realised by passing on or hand-off of the experiences that tradtional societies inculcate in their populations. IOW the change to the ipremise of modernity.

Idea is always good when it happens to other people and they control it and make money out of it.
They want others to change and disrupt other lives.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 28 Jul 2010 06:50

US is an interesting society. They have two factions. One faction is pro war. Another faction is against war. Each faction does not care about the nature of the war, except for a negligible minority in them. For this reason, those who support wars, they support both Afghanistan and Iraq wars and those who oppose wars, they oppose both Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Right now Deomcrats are in power in US. So, it is needless to say that there is an equal pressure on the administration to pull out from Iraq and Afghanistan both.

Once US pulls out of Afghanistan, what will happen to India's allies? What will we do to support our allies in Afghanistan? I hope our policy makers are preparing for post US scenario in Afghanistan.

Also, on a separate note, I noticed something very strange about CNN's reporting pattern on India. There are two important news worth reporting about India - one is Cameron's visit and another is visit from Myanmar leadership. But guess what news CNN is giving importance to - visit of Myanmar leadership to India. The news itself is not sinister but CNN has given it a very sinister tone by liberal use of derogative words like rogue, junta, etc. I found it very odd. I wonder why do they do this?

naren · Post by **naren** » 28 Jul 2010 07:12

^^^ may be CNN is pro-PRC ?

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 28 Jul 2010 08:38

Nobody is really pro PRC in the US. Some policymakers may see tactical gains from appeasing PRC, but that's different. If they were they certainly wouldn't refer to Myanmar as "rogue, junta".

I think it is more interesting to report on rogue military dictatorships rather than British overtures to India.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 28 Jul 2010 12:17

Indian, Pak army officers should attend joint classes in US: Mattis

A top US General has said that senior military officers from India and Pakistan should jointly attend military classes in the United States and study American civil war together.

Such a move, General James Mattis said, would create the much needed trust between the military leaders of the two countries, which is required in addition to the diplomatic efforts between the leaders of India and Pakistan.

"As we all know, they (India and Pakistan) have fought several wars over a number of issues. There's the Kashmir issue. There's any number of terrorist attacks," Gen James Mattis said in his confirmation hearing before the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee.

"But I think the most important thing we can do in support of the diplomatic efforts which will fundamentally be how we change something like this, is to help bring the officer corps of both militaries together and create trust between them, allow them to perhaps attend our school together," Mattis said.

...
...

India should propose that US, Iran and Cuban officers should come together to study in India. Maybe that will reduce tension in the middle-east?

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 28 Jul 2010 12:25

Military assistance to Pak not a threat to India: U.S.

Strongly recommending the case of continued peace talks between India and Pakistan, the Obama Administration has said that a stable Indo-Pak relationship would benefit the world and the U.S. in particular and reiterated that Islamabad should address New Delhi’s concern with regard to 26/11.

“It is important for Pakistan and India to have a stable relationship. They, likewise, will have to have a relationship going forward, and if it is stable, then the world, including the U.S., benefits,” State Department spokesman, P. J. Crowley, told reporters at his daily news briefing.

“So we are very, very conscious of the complexity that involves these overlapping relationships, and we’ve worked hard in our dialogue with each country to try to make this a more regional approach to a common challenge,” he said noting there is communication going on across these countries that it thinks is very important, very valuable not just to the U.S., but also it is important for Afghanistan and Pakistan to have a stable relationship.

“We have important national and global interests with each of these countries. Our support for Afghanistan is not taken from Pakistan. Our support for Pakistan does not mean a negative for India,” he said.

“It is vitally important that these countries develop reinforcing relationships; that’s what we’re trying to do.

That’s why one of the fundamental changes in the strategy that the President approved last year was to make sure that we are looking at this in a regional rather than just an isolated issue.

So part of the solution to Afghanistan does, in fact, fall within the borders of Pakistan,” he said.

Mr. Crowley argued that a stable Pakistan is not a threat to India and a stable India does not need to be a threat to Pakistan.

“In giving military assistance to Pakistan, we have systems of accountability to be sure that it is being employed in accordance with the agreements that we have with Pakistan,” he said.

“Where we have questions about the nature of Pakistani employment of U.S. assistance, we raise those questions directly with the Pakistani Government. We have in the past and we will continue to do that,” he said.

“So building up the capability of Pakistan to deal with the threat within its own borders should not be seen as a threat to India,” Mr. Crowley said.

Responding to a question, Mr. Crowley said there are concerns about making sure that Pakistan bring to justice those responsible for the Mumbai attack.

“We’ve had that conversation with Pakistan and India many, many times. Our concerns about elements within Pakistan and connections that those elements have with the Pakistani Government, we’ve had that conversation with Pakistan many times,” he said.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 28 Jul 2010 12:39

Karan Dixit wrote:Once US pulls out of Afghanistan, what will happen to India's allies? What will we do to support our allies in Afghanistan? I hope our policy makers are preparing for post US scenario in Afghanistan.

India will have to go back to its partnership with Iran - even though US is saying that it wants India to support measures to isolate Iran because of its nuclear program. Sorry, but what can we do if Pak is trying to terrorize us with Taliban? Notice that Brzezinski is making the rounds, loudly saying that India's partner in collusion is Iran. He knows how to drive a wedge where he needs it.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 28 Jul 2010 13:13

putnanja wrote:India should propose that US, Iran and Cuban officers should come together to study in India. Maybe that will reduce tension in the middle-east?

good one mate...

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 28 Jul 2010 13:30

[quote="putnanja"]Indian, Pak army officers should attend joint classes in US: Mattis

Why not start earlier?

We already have foreign military cadets at the NDA.

Surely we should, in a spirit of co operation, offer a good number of seats to our paki "friends"

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Jul 2010 14:39

In a paper this morning,scorn was heaped upon our MEA saying that in the aftermath of the fiasco of the recent talks with Pak and other failures,it was not serving the country's interests whatsoever. The debacle in Islamabad is yet another instance of the utter bankruptcy of the MEA,which is now firmly ensconced under the turban of none other than peddlar of snake-oil,good Dr.Singh.The designated Min. of EA,Mr.Krishna,steeped in somnolence,appears completely adrift of the sub-continental plot and the ongoing Great Game Part 3 in this century.The mendicant of snake-oil has no other vision but the appeasement of the US and thereby appeasement of Pak.Like Neville Chamberlain,he ploughs on regardless of the minefield into which he has wilfully strayed,to the glee of the Islamo-Nazi,Gen.Kill-any and his gang of uniformed vultures.With the connivance of the US,Pak is attempting to gain across the table what it has never won on the battlefield.

This is the crucial point.It is an undisputable fact that Pak has been repeatedly saved from total disaster after warring with India by the west and in our great magnanimity,upholding the values of our ancient civilisation,India has never rubbed the salt into Pak's wounds.Twice it has betrayed promises made to us in '65 and '71 by a wily Butto and now with the assistance of a sugar-daddy stuck in an Afghan quagnire which has lasted longer than the Vietnam War,the two bedmates are trying to dupe India into signing away effectively our sovereignity over Kashmir in a pact diabolicus.

Despite the revelations in the Wikleak documents ,the US is still insisting that nothing has changed in its immoral ,illicit affair with Pak.Both countries by their singular understanding are guilty of promoting terrorism against India.The US has all along known what Pak was upto but chose to turn a blind eye to it,lying to India and its own people.A plague upon all the sleazeballs and scumbags of the US establishment guilty of such chicanery and duplicity.What is however most despicable is that our very own PM by his lust after a "peace in our time" with Pak,and through his mouthpiece For.Min,.who criticised our Home Sec. for speaking the truth,has been part of this duplicity preferring to defend Paki interests rather than that of his own country! If this is not treason then what is?

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 28 Jul 2010 16:54

putnanja wrote:India should propose that US, Iran and Cuban officers should come together to study in India. Maybe that will reduce tension in the middle-east?

Why are North Korea , Venezuela & Syria missing ?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 28 Jul 2010 17:37

chetak wrote:
putnanja wrote:Indian, Pak army officers should attend joint classes in US: Mattis

Why not start earlier?

We already have foreign military cadets at the NDA.

Surely we should, in a spirit of co operation, offer a good number of seats to our paki "friends"

Also will help in asssimilating TSP subsequent to its collapse.

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 28 Jul 2010 19:21

I have a question for guru's on the forum. This is Unkils attitude towards pakis in light of the wikileak gate

In any country there is always intra department rivalry and finally the equilibrium between all the opposing forces is what the country pursues. So in case of Unkil the various forces are

1) Petagon & Defence Contractors
2) State Department
3) Administration (President)
4) Think Tanks & Retired Sec of States

Other than these there are following fringe players

1) Senators and Congressmen
2) Media
3) Judiciary
4) Treasury

Now according to leaks the ground intel (which comes under DOD) is clear that ISI is sabtaging the lives of service men. So I would reasonably argue that since DOD is directly affected by morale and war strategy they would be the biggest opponent of the S cell in ISI. This is what I would feel would be the pulse of the ground level commanders and their bosses. But of course there will be high level superior babus who will be working with contractors who want to milk the war to make money. Now since pentagon is a big time supporter of TSPA which indicates that babus want to brush all these war casulties under carpet and maintain the status quo in terms of strategy in AfPak. In other words continue more of same that is happening since 2001 - 2010 as long as treasury can finance it.

DOS: decides the foreigh policy and they work on both short term and long term. Short term they want to win the war based on revised goals. Long term want to use the Af Pak region to run their future Asia strategy. Now They understand that Pak is the problem as well as solution. Its a reliable rentier state that can be used to cause great takleef to the countries in region as well as further arms sales. TSPA is a great merecenary army always ready to take battle at cost of the country and its development so wants to lose such an ally.

Administration is all about next elections they will think long term only when they have the luxory to do so. Right now they dont have that. So they want to somehow buy victory from TSPA so we see KL bill and coalition funds.

Think Tanks are also players talking about long term strategy so they will try to see how TSPA can be reigned in for future use.

Now the only ally I see here is low level pentagon who think the way we do but alas they are as poweless as we are. So we need to somehow target this myth that TSPA is a strategic asset.

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 28 Jul 2010 19:41

This article sums up the answers to my question

Pakistan's India obsession behind its double game: US experts

The head of the private global intelligence agency, as Stratfor calls itself, goes to the extent of saying the US itself has created a situation for Pakistan to play the double game 'of overt opposition to the Taliban and covert support for the Taliban' as it does not want to see the emergence of India as the sole regional power if Pakistan collapses.

'This is duplicitous only if you close your eyes to the Pakistani reality, which the Americans never did,' Friedman said. 'There was ample evidence, as the WikiLeaks show, of covert ISI ties to the Taliban. The Americans knew they couldn't break those ties.'

'They settled for what support Pakistan could give them while constantly pressing them harder and harder until genuine fears in Washington emerged that Pakistan could destabilise altogether,' he said.

'Since a stable Pakistan is more important to the United States than a victory in Afghanistan - which it wasn't going to get anyway - the United States released pressure and increased aid. If Pakistan collapsed, then India would be the sole regional power, not something the United States wants,' Friedman said.

'Given that the United States is powerful and is Pakistan's only lever against India, the Pakistanis will not make this their public policy, however,' he said.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 28 Jul 2010 19:58

Interesting that the US expert now openly admit, what BRF has always said, that "'Since a stable Pakistan is more important to the United States than a victory in Afghanistan ... If Pakistan collapsed, then India would be the sole regional power, not something the United States wants,' Friedman said."

Khan accepts TSP behaviour because it keeps India in check. This is just about as simple as it gets and as close to truth as any statement can be. This is, incidently, version 2.0 of the Balance of Power theory used quite effectively by British.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 28 Jul 2010 20:10

^^^ OK. So what will Dilli do about it? But US jets for MRCA? Shower reactor contracts by the dozen? When its so plain even our netas, what to say of babus, can figure out that our money to unkil goes directly to sustaining TSP?

Unkil is trying the cheapest option - stab 'em SDREs mid-bazaar all the while claiming its a life-saving surgical operation onlee. Takes a certain chootzpah to think that will fly. If our netaship buys it, we'll know its game over. Game-set-and-match only.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 28 Jul 2010 20:21

surinder wrote:
Khan accepts TSP behaviour because it keeps India in check. This is just about as simple as it gets and as close to truth as any statement can be. This is, incidently, version 2.0 of the Balance of Power theory used quite effectively by British.

Certainly, the US has an obligation to impede or maim any future rising power that can be a threat to global US hegemony using any and all means. That policy has primarily focused on Russia and China, but India will be joining that club. When it comes to Russia the US has a responsibility to inflict as many cuts as it can all over Russia to make it bleed, and with China it has to surround it with hostile states, preferably nuclear powers (hasn't done so though).

Emerging powers that deviate from the US line are a threat to US interests (or so they think). Note Brazil and Turkey recently.

Granted, although I think the US's interests are better served in the long term by a stronger India, as it will itself check China and cool relations with Russia.