India-US Strategic News and Discussion

[arjunm]

*Chennai Centre for China Studies: "President Obama’s India Visit – China and Pakistan Watch With Care" by Bhaskar Roy (October 29, 2010). His points:

US President Barack Obama’s three-day visit to India may not produce some earth-shaking bilateral agreements, but it is sending seismic waves around Asia, especially in China and Pakistan. Beijing’s propaganda machinery is working overtime to divide India’s relations with USA and Russia and vice versa, and create some mistrust. The Chinese military, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has also been given the responsibility to engage in psychological warfare. Briefly, India has to work through this maze in working with the USA and China. The only interest is self interest. China is looking at India to bail it from American pressure which ranges from currency manipulation charges, to human rights abuse, minority issues and development in Asia Pacific region. India has to engage with the US, but be vigilant about China’s double speak. Click: http://www.c3sindia.org/india/1828

**Council on Foreign Relations -- Expert Roundup on "Checking China’s Territorial Moves" by Elizabeth Economy, Joshua Kurlantzick, Sheila Smith and Scott Snyder discuss "How should Washington react to increasing signs of Chinese assertiveness in its neighborhood?

Four CFR experts counsel firmness and engagement with China, and intensified ties between the United States and its allies". Click: http://www.cfr.org/publication/23196/ch ... rial+Moves

Brajesh Misra's Interview on Oabma's visit_

*Rediff News, October 28, 2010, ’I don’t think Obama’s visit will be a success’ by Brajesh Mishra, India’s former National Security Adviser. In answer to questions, he says:

If the US leaves Afghanistan and the Taliban recovers its position, then that is a danger for India.

His [Obama’s] policy towards China and his acceptance of China’s role in Pakistan tells me that his views are different from Bush.

I mean, he accepts an alliance between China and Pakistan. So in that case India’s position is weakened.

Let me put it frankly, the ’all-weather’ friendship between China and Pakistan has now become an alliance.

China has started helping Pakistan in a much bigger way than before.

China is also pushing India at the Line of Actual Control.

What the government has called ’assertiveness’, I call an aggressive posture by China. Pakistan is being helped by China and by the US.

China is acting against India not only on the Line of Actual Control, but also on the issue of Kashmir.

Sometime, it threatens India, reminding it of (the war of) 1962 and claim they want to reoccupy what they call Southern Tibet (Arunachal Pradesh).

All these issues have created an adverse security situation for India.

It weakens India’s interest in Asia and in global affairs. India’s role would be minimised if the challenge is not faced.

More important than entering the UNSC is the support that India should g**Indian Express.com, October 28, 2010 -- "Obama’s opportunity" by Karl Inderfurth, Asssistant Secretary of State for South Asia in the Clinton administration. He quotes with approval the recommendations of the Richard Armitage/Nicholas Burns report.
et while confronting the new alliance between China and Pakistan.

Reports indicate that he will talk about long-term relations and economic relations etc, etc. It is not at all clear what he thinks about the strategic partnership.

What I am looking at is what he has to say on China and Pakistan ganging up against India’s interests.

I also say at the same time that if Obama has no answer than we must do it ourselves. We must face the challenge. We must modernise the equipment needed by our defence forces. We should move very fast.

I am not sure the US will be on India’s side, so it is better we get things going.

In fact, India doesn’t know what Obama thinks of this partnership. We just don’t know. Hopefully, we will know on this visit.

Click: http://news.rediff.com/interview/2010/o ... essful.htm

[joshvajohn]

Obama will not 'knock heads together' on Kashmir
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_ob ... ir_1459054

US rebuffs Pakistan's bid to globalise Kashmir issue
http://sify.com/news/us-rebuffs-pakista ... jcfij.html

Pro Chinese and pro Pakistani folks are trying to exploit the differences between US and India and thus keep India isolated in the International arena. IT is in India's interest that India cooperates and work closely with US in countering terror. India does not need to be dictated by any one nor she does not need to depend on anyone to solve her issues. US certainly needs India's strategic help particularly in closing the gaps between developed and developing in order to address some of the international economic and ecological issues.

India under China’s threat of war, Will Obama be able to avert?
http://www.internationalreporter.com/Ne ... vert-.html

[Vikas]

You know in the end, nothing of the sort being predicted here will happen.
PoTUS will sign few agreements, sell planes and nuclear reactors, talk about outsourcing, sing praises to MG, MLK and Indian democracy, our shared fight against terrorism, promise US support for a Indian seat in UNSC and then the visit will come to an end.
It will be back to Business by Thanksgiving.

[vic]

You know in the end, nothing of the sort being predicted here will happen.
PoTUS will sign few agreements, sell planes and nuclear reactors, talk about outsourcing, sing praises to MG, MLK and Indian democracy, our shared fight against terrorism, promise US support for a Indian seat in UNSC and then the visit will come to an end.
It will be back to Business by Thanksgiving.

I agree

[Altair]

You know in the end, nothing of the sort being predicted here will happen.
PoTUS will sign few agreements, sell planes and nuclear reactors, talk about outsourcing, sing praises to MG, MLK and Indian democracy, our shared fight against terrorism, promise US support for a Indian seat in UNSC and then the visit will come to an end.
It will be back to Business by Thanksgiving.

I agree

There is a talk of a proposal of Americans setting up some kind of a military base in India (probably in Kashmir or Arunachal Pradesh) or India's vicinity allegedly to counter PRC expansion.
can any gurus comment on this?
What could be its implications?

[ramana]

From Ram Narayanan e-mail list:

Here is a list of some the most insightful articles that have just been published:

1) Sadanand Dhume writes on "Likable India" in The Wall Street Journal (October 25, 2010) which says:

"China’s state-led model of winning hearts and minds is no match for India’s private effort."
"Scholars and journalists alike tend to make much of China’s vaunted "charm offensive." It turns out, however, that when it comes to winning hearts and minds—at least democratic hearts and minds—China’s top down state-led model is not much of a match for India’s decentralized private effort."

"In terms of goodwill, India bests China in both Western and Eastern democracies. For instance, according to a poll released last month by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Americans place India in the same ballpark as long-term allies South Korea and Israel. China elicits only about as much warmth as Venezuela and Mexico."

"A recent BBC World Service poll of 28 countries says more or less the same thing. On average, more than half of Americans, Britons and Canadians feel "mainly positive" about India; only about one in six feel "mainly negative." With China the numbers are reversed. Barely one in three from the Anglophone countries feel mostly positive about the Middle Kingdom; for more than four in 10 the emotions evoked are negative. Similarly, more Japanese, Indonesians and South Koreans feel positively than negatively toward India; with China it’s the opposite."

"For many people, India is probably more likeable in part because it’s not nearly as threatening as a powerful, well-organized China."

For the article, click:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj


2) Center for a New American Century(CNAS)’s 12-page report on "Natural Allies: A Blueprint for the Future of US-India Relations," (October 2010), authored by Richard Armitage, Nicholas Burns and Richard Fontaine.

The report says: "The recommendations in this report are based on the belief that the United States has an interest in working more closely with India and in assisting its further emergence as one of the world’s great powers. This will require policy changes by both the United States and India. Many of these changes will be difficult, and some differences may endure. But the potential gain is worth the effort. Now is a critical time in this partnership, a moment to transform past bilateral accomplishments into regional and global successes. We urge American and Indian leaders to seize it."

"In order to chart a more ambitious US-India strategic partnership, we believe that the United States should commit, publicly and explicitly, to work with India in support of its permanent membership in an enlarged UN Security Council; seek a broad expansion of bilateral trade and investment, beginning with a Bilateral Investment Treaty; greatly expand the security relationship and boost defense trade; support Indian membership in key export control organizations, a step toward integrating India into global non-proliferation efforts; and liberalize US export controls, including the removal of Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) subsidiaries from the US Entity List."

"These and other actions outlined in this report will require India to make a number of commitments and policy changes, including taking rapid action to fully implement the Civil Nuclear Agreement; raising its caps on foreign investment; reducing barriers to defense and other forms of trade; enhancing its rules for protecting patents and other intellectual property; further harmonizing its export control lists with multilateral regimes; and seeking closer cooperation with the United States and like-minded partners in international organizations, including the United Nations."

To read the report, log on to: http://www.usindiafriendship.net/ , scroll down to "Most recent Viewpoints on US-India Relations" and click on the second item.


3) Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Policy Outlook paper on "Obama in India -- Building a Global Partnership: Challenges, Risks, Opportunities" by Ashley Tellis (October 28, 2010).

In this 40 page paper, Ashley Tellis says:

"President Obama’s forthcoming visit to India will be historic if he succeeds in cementing a global partnership with New Delhi. Obama has consistently held that India—more than any other emerging power—has the potential to become America’s most important strategic partner. In the coming decades, a strong bilateral partnership will prove vital in managing the rise of China and promoting a balance of power in Asia that is favorable to both the United States and India and the cause of freedom. India is rapidly emerging as a major international entity and will be the third or fourth most powerful country by mid-century. India’s success as a democracy is also critical to regional stability and to broader American interests."

"Yet many observers have noted recently that bilateral ties have become listless and marked by drift. In the United States, early errors by the Obama administration and competing priorities have combined to relegate India to the back burner as Washington struggles to manage economic crises at home and ongoing wars abroad. Meanwhile, the Indian government is similarly occupied by domestic political struggles, sustaining economic growth amid growing pressures for redistribution, and nurturing the small, albeit growing, constituency that supports a rapidly transformed relationship with Washington.

"Ultimately, a strong U.S.-Indian partnership is in the strategic interest of both nations and Obama’s upcoming visit provides a great opportunity for both sides to reinvigorate a critical relationship. Accordingly, Obama should reaffirm American support for India’s rise, its democratic achievements, and its struggle for security. The United States should endorse India’s quest for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, accelerate India’s assimilation into the global nonproliferation regime, and enhance bilateral cooperation in multiple areas of high and low politics."

"Although there will be many differences between Washington and New Delhi, Obama should resist the urge to approach the bilateral relationship purely in transactional terms. Rather, he should seek to strengthen India’s national capacity so that it can productively partner with the United States as a friendly democratic power. India, for its part, ought to be looking for ways to encourage Obama’s interest in this endeavor."

Some specific points in Ashley’s analysis:

"A strong, democratic, and independent India will never fundamentally threaten America’s core security."

"The United States supports the rise of Indian power because the growth of India’s national capabilities advances vital American interests."

"The need to affirm America’s strong support for India against the attacks by religious extremists and their state supporters in Pakistan is especially urgent."

"The transformation of bilateral relations will be unsustainable if the United States and India cannot cooperate more fully in the arena of high politics."

To read Ashley Tellis’s article, log on to: http://www.usindiafriendship.net/ , scroll down to "Most recent Viewpoints on US-India Relations" and click on the first item.


4) Carnegie Endowment for International Peace -- Carnegie Report, October 2010 by George Perkovich on "Toward Realistic U.S.–India Relations."

George Perkovich argues that expectations for a partnership between the two countries in the near term are unrealistically high and overlook how their interests, policies, and diplomatic style will often diverge. U.S. policy cannot do much to help India’s rise, but it can inflict major damage on global problem-solving efforts if it defers too readily to the narrow, often mercantile demands of the current relationship.

Key Conclusions

Interests are divergent. Careful analysis of U.S. and Indian interests does not show a close convergence in some key areas, and in cases such as China, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, they differ in how to pursue shared interests even when both states benefit from each other’s successes.

Democracy can divide. Shared democracy is said to make the United States and India “natural allies,” but domestic politics and economics often keep each state from adopting policies that would befit a partnership.

Bilateral relations should not be used to contain China. Emphasizing military competition with China, as some do, is counterproductive. For the foreseeable future, the United States, India, and China will operate in a triangular relationship that mixes cooperation with competition and pressure and none will be close partners of the others. Economic development and effective governance are the keys to countering China’s rising strength.

Nuclear energy cannot transform the relationship. The civil nuclear cooperation agreement between the two countries has not turned the relationship into a partnership, as envisioned. But it has undermined U.S. leadership credibility in trying to strengthen the global nonproliferation regime.

Global problem solving is the priority. The United States can contribute only marginally to India’s success or failure. Washington should focus on global issues—such as trade, nuclear security, peace in Asia, and climate change—that will also affect India’s longer-term interests.

“Rather than maintaining the pretense of partnership, a truly pro-India policy would acknowledge that India has different near-term needs and interests as a developing country than does the United States, even as it recognizes that each will benefit in the long run from the success of the other,” writes Perkovich. “Most of what the U.S. government can do for India lies in the broader global arena, and most of what India needs at home it must do for itself.”

To read this 51 page report, click: http://carnegieendowment.org/files/real ... ations.pdf


Please also read the following interesting pieces:

**Chennai Centre for China Studies: "President Obama’s India Visit – China and Pakistan Watch With Care" by Bhaskar Roy (October 29, 2010). His points:

US President Barack Obama’s three-day visit to India may not produce some earth-shaking bilateral agreements, but it is sending seismic waves around Asia, especially in China and Pakistan. Beijing’s propaganda machinery is working overtime to divide India’s relations with USA and Russia and vice versa, and create some mistrust. The Chinese military, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has also been given the responsibility to engage in psychological warfare. Briefly, India has to work through this maze in working with the USA and China. The only interest is self interest. China is looking at India to bail it from American pressure which ranges from currency manipulation charges, to human rights abuse, minority issues and development in Asia Pacific region. India has to engage with the US, but be vigilant about China’s double speak. Click: http://www.c3sindia.org/india/1828

**Council on Foreign Relations -- Expert Roundup on "Checking China’s Territorial Moves" by Elizabeth Economy, Joshua Kurlantzick, Sheila Smith and Scott Snyder discuss "How should Washington react to increasing signs of Chinese assertiveness in its neighborhood?

Four CFR experts counsel firmness and engagement with China, and intensified ties between the United States and its allies". Click: http://www.cfr.org/publication/23196/ch ... rial+Moves

**The Tribune, October 27, 2010 -- "Pak designs in Afghanistan:What President Obama needs to be told" by G Parthasarathy. His conclusion:

"It is now evident is that while the US will help in upgrading our intelligence capabilities in technical and professional terms, it will not share any intelligence with us which implicates the ISI for its involvement in terrorist activities against India. Those who argue that as a “victim of terrorism” Pakistan will act against terrorist groups waging war against India will hopefully realise that they are living in a fools’ paradise."

"New Delhi has necessarily to adopt punitive and retributive policies for raising the costs for Pakistan when it sponsors terrorism against India. We are not going to be bailed out by the Americans. Moreover, New Delhi and Washington will not necessarily see eye to eye on India’s security concerns on China and Pakistan. The India-US bilateral relationship, however, has to be nurtured because of its intrinsic importance and value to both sides, transcending the differences we may have on the American approach to some of our national security concerns."
Click: http://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20101028/edit.htm#4


**Express Buzz, October 26, 2010 -- "Obama’s visit, India’s hopes" by Kanwal Sibal: An Excerpt:

"Many US decision-makers want India to have a clearer idea about how it sees its ‘strategic’ ties with the US and how far it is willing to go with the US in this direction. This assumes that the US is ready but India is reticent. It is also said that India asks for a lot from the US but offers little in return. Both propositions are debatable. In reality the US is unable to adjust its policies in our region to conform to our strategic interests. It needs to support India’s territorial integrity in the way it does China’s. It squeezes our strategic options in Iran despite our energy security concerns. The change in Indian thinking towards the US is enormous, with the value of closer ties with the US being recognised by large sections of Indian society. India has begun to buy US defence equipment despite reliability of supply concerns. In the last seven years India and the US have conducted 50 military exercises. Despite intolerable provocations from Pakistan, India has stayed its hand not the least because of sensitivity to US regional concerns because of Afghanistan."

"Much has been achieved already in forging close India-US ties. More can be done by way of a US course correction in the region and progress on some outstanding political and technology-related strategic issues. Obama’s visit provides the opportunity to achieve the objectives both sides have set for themselves."

Click: http://expressbuzz.com/opinion/columnis ... 18292.html


**Rediff News, October 29, 2010 -- "Obama’s visit will be less strategic, more economic" by T P Sreenivasan. Excerpts:

The expectations on the two sides are so divergent that disappointment is inevitable for both.

The official and scholarly pronouncements from Washington the same week seem to suggest that the visit may be rich in symbolism, but poor in substance.

The motive [of the american side] is not to strengthen the strategic partnership, but to increase exports, seek investments and to create jobs to bolster the US economy.

While the United States is seeking a level playing field in India for its exports, including nuclear, it is quite willing to maintain controls on export of technology and use the tax system to discourage outsourcing.

Any deal that the US is willing to make on these issues is tied to job creation in the United States and not to the strategic partnership or creation of goodwill.

President Obama would very much like the nuclear deal to be seen more as a measure for bilateral cooperation rather than a step towards legitimising India’s nuclear weapons capability or a way to sidestep the NPT.

For him the deal was meant to remove a major irritant in bilateral relations so that business could flourish.

The counter-terrorism partnership would continue with both the countries and no weightage would be given to the evidence of Pakistan’s complicity in terrorism against India.

Intelligence would be shared, but anything that would reveal the ISI hand would remain out of bounds for India.

Click: http://news.rediff.com/column/2010/oct/ ... ategic.htm


**Rediff News, October 28, 2010, ’I don’t think Obama’s visit will be a success’ by Brajesh Mishra, India’s former National Security Adviser. In answer to questions, he says:

If the US leaves Afghanistan and the Taliban recovers its position, then that is a danger for India.

His [Obama’s] policy towards China and his acceptance of China’s role in Pakistan tells me that his views are different from Bush.

I mean, he accepts an alliance between China and Pakistan. So in that case India’s position is weakened.

Let me put it frankly, the ’all-weather’ friendship between China and Pakistan has now become an alliance.

China has started helping Pakistan in a much bigger way than before.

China is also pushing India at the Line of Actual Control.

What the government has called ’assertiveness’, I call an aggressive posture by China. Pakistan is being helped by China and by the US.

China is acting against India not only on the Line of Actual Control, but also on the issue of Kashmir.

Sometime, it threatens India, reminding it of (the war of) 1962 and claim they want to reoccupy what they call Southern Tibet (Arunachal Pradesh).

All these issues have created an adverse security situation for India.

It weakens India’s interest in Asia and in global affairs. India’s role would be minimised if the challenge is not faced.

More important than entering the UNSC is the support that India should get while confronting the new alliance between China and Pakistan.

Reports indicate that he will talk about long-term relations and economic relations etc, etc. It is not at all clear what he thinks about the strategic partnership.

What I am looking at is what he has to say on China and Pakistan ganging up against India’s interests.

I also say at the same time that if Obama has no answer than we must do it ourselves. We must face the challenge. We must modernise the equipment needed by our defence forces. We should move very fast.

I am not sure the US will be on India’s side, so it is better we get things going.

In fact, India doesn’t know what Obama thinks of this partnership. We just don’t know. Hopefully, we will know on this visit.

Click: http://news.rediff.com/interview/2010/o ... essful.htm


**Indian Express.com, October 28, 2010 -- "Obama’s opportunity" by Karl Inderfurth, Asssistant Secretary of State for South Asia in the Clinton administration. He quotes with approval the recommendations of the Richard Armitage/Nicholas Burns report.

Click: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/obama ... y/703659/0


**The Wall Street Journal, October 26, 2010 -- "Obama to Focus on Economic Ties on India Trip" by Amol Sharma and Tom Wright, An Excerpt:

U.S. President Barack Obama’s visit to India is expected to focus on economic relations between the countries, highlighting big commercial deals for U.S. companies and promoting areas in which India could offer greater access to American companies and, in turn, boost U.S. employment.

Click: http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB1 ... DgyWj.html


**The Wall Street Journal, October 28, 2010 -- "How Obama Will Address Outsourcing in India" by Amol Sharma.

Click: http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010 ... st_id=7142


**Financial Times, October 28, 2010 -- "Obama to talk up jobs on India trip" by Edward Luce and James Lamont.

Click: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/21a64bd0-e2b7 ... abdc0.html


What does one infer after reading the 14 articles and reports listed above? What the US wants from India is pretty clear, but what the US will offer India, especially on the vital security side, is unclear. However, one hopes that the Obama-Singh summit will belie the pessimists and satisfy the aspirations of both the US and India.

Cheers,

[SwamyG]

You know in the end, nothing of the sort being predicted here will happen.
PoTUS will sign few agreements, sell planes and nuclear reactors, talk about outsourcing, sing praises to MG, MLK and Indian democracy, our shared fight against terrorism, promise US support for a Indian seat in UNSC and then the visit will come to an end.
It will be back to Business by Thanksgiving.

Then why the visit now? US needs just some good sales people with some arm twisting to sell planes and ityadi. Why send POTUS? So why now? Is India just a pit-stop before going to Indonesia?

[shiv]

There is a talk of

Where is this "talk"?

[ShivaS]

Never forget what this ombaba did as Senator along with Kerry and Henry Hide during the Nuke bill. Also never forget his WH staff who played hard ball after Ombaba election due to our proximity to Bush team...

Pay hime back in the same coin...

[ShivaS]

Yes i too heard that India has granted US permission to set up base in the down town Lahasa in Tibet, that is why PRC PM is here to ask forgiveness..

[Prem]

http://twocircles.net/2010oct29/will_in ... obama.html
Will Indian Muslims welcome Obama?

By Abu Zafar Adil Azmi,
Will Muslim community in India welcome US President Barack Obama on his visit to the country next month? The US policies for and the situation in Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan have not changed even after the White House changed its occupant. So, for Indian Muslims, is there any difference between Bush and Obama? Let’s read the mind of the community – their clerics, leaders and youth.Qari Muhammad Usman Mansoorpuri, president of India’s largest and oldest Muslim organization, Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, and vice rector of Islamic seminary Darul Uloom Deoband, says, “There is no difference between (former President George) Bush and Obama. Obama is following the Bush path in Palestine, Afghanistan and Iraq…He should fulfill his promise on Palestine."Maulana Ataur Rahman Wajdi, President of the organization Wahdat-e-Islami, says the only difference between the policies of Bush and Obama is technique and approach.

( Phir bolounga to bolo ge ki bolta hai. Did any one find India interests mentioned here?)

[svinayak]

THey are commenting as if IMs are the representative of the Middle East. They can go to ME and make such statements

[Vikas]

You know in the end, nothing of the sort being predicted here will happen.
PoTUS will sign few agreements, sell planes and nuclear reactors, talk about outsourcing, sing praises to MG, MLK and Indian democracy, our shared fight against terrorism, promise US support for a Indian seat in UNSC and then the visit will come to an end.
It will be back to Business by Thanksgiving.

Then why the visit now? US needs just some good sales people with some arm twisting to sell planes and ityadi. Why send POTUS? So why now? Is India just a pit-stop before going to Indonesia?

India of today can be ignored only at their own peril. We will be among top 3 from any statisticians calculations by 2050.

SwamyG, a Prez or a PM has to do what he has to do and that involves visiting countries, understanding leadership, forming personal relationships and of course selling.The primary agenda is not to sell stuff to create jobs in USA but that is one of the byproduct of any POTUS visiting a country with deep pockets.
Who other than POTUS to charm Indians else see few more Billion dollars going to Russians and French.
This is as good a time to visit India as it would be since Ombaba-deux most likely ain't happening.
Why think of Americans as Mr. Kelda trying to solve all problems in the world. I doubt if they give a damn about Kashmir or any other place except to keep their whore(s) in good humor.
How hard it is for anyone to understand that giving Kashmir to Pakis would cause unprecedented wave of Jehadism throught the Muslim world whose repercussions would be impossible to handle.

[svinayak]

Then why the visit now? US needs just some good sales people with some arm twisting to sell planes and ityadi. Why send POTUS? So why now? Is India just a pit-stop before going to Indonesia?

http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&c ... rM&topic=h

China's Fast Rise Leads Neighbors to Join Forces
New York Times - Mark Landler, Jim Yardley - ‎11 minutes ago‎
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China, left, with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India on Friday in Hanoi, Vietnam. India is promoting itself in the region as a counterweight to China. ..



http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69S0N720101029

[Altair]

There is a talk of

Where is this "talk"?

There is this author called Robert Kaplan. He was speaking to a group of people about his newly launched book in Cambridge. He speaks of connecting dots of POTUS visit of Asia and how strategically important it is to have more presence for US in IOR and IOR countries including India to counter PRC expansion else US will loose its might. He spoke of Prez visit to these countries to ask them for bases in return for cooperation.
Simply asking,Why Indonesia,South Korea,Japan and India?

[svinayak]

Pro Chinese and pro Pakistani folks are trying to exploit the differences between US and India and thus keep India isolated in the International arena. IT is in India's interest that India cooperates and work closely with US in countering terror. India does not need to be dictated by any one nor she does not need to depend on anyone to solve her issues. US certainly needs India's strategic help particularly in closing the gaps between developed and developing in order to address some of the international economic and ecological issues.

India under China’s threat of war, Will Obama be able to avert?
http://www.internationalreporter.com/Ne ... vert-.html

US has created this monster of PRC over the last 30 years. They have all the power to change the behavior of PRC towards its neighbors by changing the terms of trade with US.

[ramana]

Might be OT but important to know.

Borders book store had a family tree poster chart of the US Presidents to date. Till now the family tree experts had traced patrilineal generations of the Presidents and only 22 of them were fully traceable. One person hit on the idea of tracing the matrilineal side of the Presidents.

The amazing thing is they were able to trace all but one of them, including Obama to one common ancestor: King John the Magna Carta guy! The only odd one Van Buren was however traced to the Roosevelts.

[Cosmo_R]

PIndia under China’s threat of war, Will Obama be able to avert?
http://www.internationalreporter.com/Ne ... vert-.html

US has created this monster of PRC over the last 30 years. They have all the power to change the behavior of PRC towards its neighbors by changing the terms of trade with US.

What we have to do is let the US create India as the next 'monster'.

http://books.google.com/books?id=b_HYz1 ... ry&f=false

Demographics are on our side starting 2015...

[ramana]

Why do you think Obama said he wants town hall meeting with 30 year olds while on his India visit. India suffered due to the DIE generation being subverted to think they are global citizens living in India unfortunately. Think of the damage if he demographic dividend is turned elsewhere.

[SaiK]

There can never be a monster with a weak meek governance. I don't think this has anything to do with the age-sage stuff of politicians, but a whole lot to do with our setup loopholes. Coming out stronger, and advancing in the areas where we want to to project for the future, does take a lot of efforts and leadership, that is very hard to find. Cultural change is the way to go to create a new history, where we feel we are the source of prosperity and freedom rather a source of monsters.

[Cosmo_R]

^^^ Agreed. Monster is in quotes. IOW, an 800 pound economic gorilla with the ability to fund the carrying of a proportionately big stick. If the US wants to help us become that why would we demur?

[joshvajohn]

India cannot be created into a Monster as India does not have an interest to expand her borders into another country except defending herself from the terror sponsoring countries who keep interfereing into Indian affairs. If one country does not promote terrorism in the name of religion and export into another country India will not be interfereing into their business except positively. We have Naxalites and religious terror religious groups (though they are a tiny minority) which are exported into our country from different directions. Indian politicians do not have a universal mission ideology to spread and thus create another group in other countries to fight their armies or like Chinese and others create Tribal based warrior groups in Africa and so created conflicts there. Even the gurus who spread their faiths do not seem to encourage any violence against any other countries. In this sense US cannot create a monster out of India though at times within India some vested groups attack minority communities in the name of language or religion. At times India gets involved in small countries such as in Sri lanka for her own interests but at the cost of many Lankan Tamils lives but not with an interest to spread her ideologies. She also try to correct her own mistakes through a positive engagement with different critical voices within. Secondly India also has diversity within and does often not stand with one voice (politically, culturally and in many ways) which is also a strength and forward looking in manyways. Even when India comes together to support her cricket team there are various ways and styles in which they support. Though India will become a friend of United States, India will not behave like Australia or any other countries offering unquestionable or unconditional support to a war against terrorism. She will support where it is right and question where it is wrong. This is the trust worthy relationship rather than simply become another ally without an independent thinking. This strategy will help US in long term cooperation rather than short times goals. Even in terms of short time goals cooperation and coorinated work is possible but these can be blocked by emotional blackmails are possible by Pakistan such in Afghanistan India's involvement was discussed along with Pakistan's cooperation in the talks between US and Pakistan leaders. Democracy in China can be spread but not through violence. We are missing Budhist version of Gandhi in China. Even Tibet's freedom can be earned through dialogue and peace negotiation which the red army in China kills off using guns. In this sense India will not become a monster but a powerful democratic subconinent with decentralised powers to people.
One more thing we should never forget that is we are culturally and religiously democratic even before democracy was introduced to us during British Raj times.

India Inc’s historic date with Obama
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/India ... ama/705055

Obama’s India visit will feed Pakistan’s sense of insecurity
http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report_ob ... ty_1460040

PM looks forward to Obama visit
http://www.indiablooms.com/NewsDetailsP ... 01010x.php

China is edgy about India’s rise as an East Asian power
http://www.dnaindia.com/world/column_ch ... er_1460036

Obama visit: India and US have entered a new phase in bilateral ties, says PM
http://news.oneindia.in/2010/10/30/obam ... bilat.html

US likely to ease curbs on technology transfer
Issue to be discussed during Obama’s India visit
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20101031/main6.htm

[Cosmo_R]

^^^ Sigh...

[Altair]

^^

[abhishek_sharma]

Musings in Mumbai

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Musings-i ... 20085.aspx

President Barack Obama will address a "town hall-type" meet at St Xavier's College during his Mumbai visit. Express News Service, October 27

Dear students of India,
I stand here today, humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. Ooops, sorry that was my inaugural address, someone must have swiped the notes for my Mumbai speech. Who did you say? The ISI? Oh no, I don't think they did it, this is the handiwork of none other than Sarah Palin.
So…ummm……this speech will have to do, I guess. Let me improvise. Why am I humbled? I say to you, anyone who has to sell billions of dollars of fighter jets in the face of cut-throat competition from the Europeans and the Russians will be humbled by the sheer magnitude of the task. That job is rendered doubly difficult because I have to sell arms both to you and to Pakistan and to preach world peace at the same time. Yet I have not only done this but have also managed to bag a Nobel Peace Prize.

The challenges we face in selling these fighter planes are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, India — they will be met.

Why am I grateful for the trust that you have bestowed? Because you trust us in spite of our arms for Pakistan, in spite of all that happened during the Bhopal gas tragedy, in spite of our hobnobbing with the Taliban, in spite of David Headley. On this day, we gather here because you have chosen hope over fear, listening to a crappy speech over enjoying your Diwali holidays. In return, I too give you my trust, a trust backed by my aircraft carrier and seven of our frigates anchored in the seas off Mumbai.

As for the sacrifices borne by your ancestors, I am, as you know, a great admirer of Gandhi, waging wars in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, always keeping his principles in mind. That is why I visited the Gandhi museum in this great city and had goat's milk there instead of my usual cheeseburger.

To the people of poor nations like ours, you must pledge to work alongside us to make our banks flourish and let our exports flow. You must help us in putting an end to the scourge of outsourcing. You can no longer remain indifferent to the sufferings of the poor American people. In return we offer you our friendship and, who knows, if you buy our stuff, the promise of a permanent seat in the Security Council.

That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. We are at war, against a far-reaching network of Republicans. Elections have been lost; seats shed. My popularity rankings have reached their nadir. Yet here in India, a recent poll has found that seven in ten of you have confidence in me. I am tempted to stay back among you amazing people, here in your city of Mumbai.

As I consider the road that unfolds before me, I say to you, in the words of the Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm the strength of my tummy; to have that precious gift, that noble thing, passed on from generation to generation: the time has come to eat a vada pav in Mumbai.

Manas Chakravarty is Consulting Editor, Mint. The views expressed by the author are personal.

[abhishek_sharma]

India’s beef on entry of US dairy products: The cow ingredient

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/India ... ent/704985

[ShivaS]

Robert kaplan is the editor in chiefof The Atlantic magazine

[abhishek_sharma]

http://www.hindu.com/2010/10/31/stories ... 691100.htm

Later, National Security Adviser Shiv Shankar Menon said the U.S. was positive on easing its restrictions on high-tech trade with India. However, there was no likelihood of signing three long-pending military pacts during Mr. Obama's visit.

[Thomas Kolarek]

More and More quarter and financial results of US firms, points one thing - their market in India keeping them afloat during this recession - Coke, Pepsi, Insurance,Boeing, IT Services, etc., as an example.
Can't India use this leverage and get unprecedented access to US markets (purely economics), it seems one way traffic right now. Because of weak puppet at helm, US and West keeps K- & N- issue as a boiling point and keeps India at check. Shouldn't it be reverse ?

[putnanja]

As already reported in major media, this visit is all about economics with no strategic value. Even on the economic side, India is giving away increased access in agriculture, defence etc, and there doesn't appear to be much that we are getting in return.

This is all about Obama proudly stating he got more market access. India will get nothing out of his visit. With a weak opposition, there isn't much for the MMS govt to fear.

[abhishek_sharma]

http://public.dawn.com/2010/10/31/symbo ... istan.html

One cannot discount President Obama himself telling Pakistan`s delegation for the strategic dialogue in Washington that there couldn`t be more pro-Pakistan American president than himself. This is highly reassuring for the Pakistani leadership.

[vic]

Trying to coin New BRF Motto for Obama:-


Stable Pakistan partitioned in Ten parts is definitely in Indian & US Interest.

[Pulikeshi]

^ Such an end goal is in the interest of US as well. It is India's job to articulate it!
A couple of parts will do to keep the operating costs low.

[arjunm]

The owner of the online encyclopaedia, Wikipedia, plans to open an office in India.This is will be the first office outside US.

Indian enthusiasm

Europe and Africa had been considered as possible locations. But Europe was already highly developed and there were concerns about the technical capabilities in Africa, he said.

"India was in the middle of the two extremes," said Mr Wales. "It is a growth region and I also like the enthusiasm in the country."

Wikipedia has more than 91,000 active contributors working in more than 270 languages, according to the Wikipedia website.

Barry Newstead, the chief global development officer, said there was "a general commitment to free knowledge in India".

"We hope to support Indians to realise the vision of a world in which every single person can freely share in the sum of all knowledge," he said in e-mailed comments.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11653349

[ShivaS]

More and More quarter and financial results of US firms, points one thing - their market in India keeping them afloat during this recession - Coke, Pepsi, Insurance,Boeing, IT Services, etc., as an example.
Can't India use this leverage and get unprecedented access to US markets (purely economics), it seems one way traffic right now. Because of weak puppet at helm, US and West keeps K- & N- issue as a boiling point and keeps India at check. Shouldn't it be reverse ?

In contrast to china, wher not a real dime has been made by US MNC selling in China so far..

[CRamS]

http://public.dawn.com/2010/10/31/symbo ... istan.html

Look at the fear that Obama might demand that their beloved LET be taken on. It also confirms that USA hasn't been pushing TSP on LET. WTF is India-US relations about if a US president can't even mention LET for fear of offending TSP. What did David Camron say that was so undiplomatic. TSP sense of entitlement in general, but in particlar its belief in its right to use terror as instrument of state policy against India and must not be taken to task for it is breathtakingly mind boggling.

Senior officials in background interviews with confirmed that they had been reassured by the Americans that, unlike the British prime minister`s allegations of terror export from Pakistan during his visit to India, there would be no brazen anti-Pakistan remarks.

Nonetheless, they are worried that President Obama will try to ratchet up pressure on Pakistan to act against leaders of the banned Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and its reincarnations; and certainly to speed up the trial of suspects in the Mumbai attack.

[SwamyG]

VikasRaina: I know all the things you mention, why now is the question. US Presidents don't visit countries without rhyme and reason.

BTW, anybody watch Stewart/Colbert rally. Wow, except for the music, it was a great show. Pity that all the sensible talk will not reach the public ears. With Corporations controlling the elections, people are left to just hope and pray. Little doubt Socrates and Plato thought very little about democracy. Now Faux News will commence its usual spin; reading FreeRepublic today was hilarious and sad.

[CRamS]

SwamyG:

I did in spurts. It won't make a ball of a difference. Tea party Nazis will romp home on Tuesday. I will be really sad if senator Harry Reid looses in Nevada to that Nazi b$%^&ch Sharon Engle. He is a decent guy. Ditto Senator Barbara Boxer in CA to that pompous ex HP CEO who was booted out, Carly Fiorina. And above all, it would be the ultimate disgracing of US democracy of that tea party bbimbo dim-wit Christine O'Donnell pulls it off in Delaware. Thoo.

[abhishek_sharma]

Barbara Boxer is not a fan of India due to our relations with Iran.

[CRamS]

Barbara Boxer is not a fan of India due to our relations with Iran.

Indeed, but as I mentioned many a times, when it comes to India & TSP, or foreign affairs in general, dems == reps. But my affinity to her is a person in general. She is not going to fight the system in which the military-industrial complex rules the root, especially in the preservation of the supremacy of US empire. Thats how USA works. Every system has it modus operendi. I wouldn't go and genereously donate to her even if I have the $s, thats for sure. But compared to the tea party Nazis and republican bigots, she is a decent woman.