India-US Strategic News and Discussion

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

See how the Brits have a secret ME intel base tapping into the undersea fibre optic cable network,in their intel JV with the Yanquis.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 81082.html

Exclusive: UK’s secret Mid-East internet surveillance base is revealed in Edward Snowden leaks
Data-gathering operation is part of a £1bn web project still being assembled by GCHQ

Duncan Campbell , Oliver Wright , James Cusick , Kim Sengupta
Friday 23 August 2013
Britain runs a secret internet-monitoring station in the Middle East to intercept and process vast quantities of emails, telephone calls and web traffic on behalf of Western intelligence agencies, The Independent has learnt.

The station is able to tap into and extract data from the underwater fibre-optic cables passing through the region.

The information is then processed for intelligence and passed to GCHQ in Cheltenham and shared with the National Security Agency (NSA) in the United States. The Government claims the station is a key element in the West’s “war on terror” and provides a vital “early warning” system for potential attacks around the world.

The Independent is not revealing the precise location of the station but information on its activities was contained in the leaked documents obtained from the NSA by Edward Snowden. The Guardian newspaper’s reporting on these documents in recent months has sparked a dispute with the Government, with GCHQ security experts overseeing the destruction of hard drives containing the data.

The Middle East installation is regarded as particularly valuable by the British and Americans because it can access submarine cables passing through the region. All of the messages and data passed back and forth on the cables is copied into giant computer storage “buffers” and then sifted for data of special interest.

Information about the project was contained in 50,000 GCHQ documents that Mr Snowden downloaded during 2012. Many of them came from an internal Wikipedia-style information site called GC-Wiki. Unlike the public Wikipedia, GCHQ’s wiki was generally classified Top Secret or above.

The disclosure comes as the Metropolitan Police announced it was launching a terrorism investigation into material found on the computer of David Miranda, the Brazilian partner of The Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald – who is at the centre of the Snowden controversy.

Edward Snowden (AFP/Getty) Edward Snowden (AFP/Getty)

Scotland Yard said material examined so far from the computer of Mr Miranda was “highly sensitive”, the disclosure of which “could put lives at risk”.

The Independent understands that The Guardian agreed to the Government’s request not to publish any material contained in the Snowden documents that could damage national security.

As well as destroying a computer containing one copy of the Snowden files, the paper’s editor, Alan Rusbridger, agreed to restrict the newspaper’s reporting of the documents.

The Government also demanded that the paper not publish details of how UK telecoms firms, including BT and Vodafone, were secretly collaborating with GCHQ to intercept the vast majority of all internet traffic entering the country. The paper had details of the highly controversial and secret programme for over a month. But it only published information on the scheme – which involved paying the companies to tap into fibre-optic cables entering Britain – after the allegations appeared in the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung. A Guardian spokeswoman refused to comment on any deal with the Government.

A senior Whitehall source said: “We agreed with The Guardian that our discussions with them would remain confidential”.

But there are fears in Government that Mr Greenwald – who still has access to the files – could attempt to release damaging information.

He said after the arrest of Mr Miranda: “I will be far more aggressive in my reporting from now. I am going to publish many more documents. I have many more documents on England’s spy system. I think they will be sorry for what they did.”

David Miranda, left, with Glenn Greenwald (AP) David Miranda, left, with Glenn Greenwald (AP)

One of the areas of concern in Whitehall is that details of the Middle East spying base which could identify its location could enter the public domain.

The data-gathering operation is part of a £1bn internet project still being assembled by GCHQ. It is part of the surveillance and monitoring system, code-named “Tempora”, whose wider aim is the global interception of digital communications, such as emails and text messages.

Across three sites, communications – including telephone calls – are tracked both by satellite dishes and by tapping into underwater fibre-optic cables.

Access to Middle East traffic has become critical to both US and UK intelligence agencies post-9/11. The Maryland headquarters of the NSA and the Defence Department in Washington have pushed for greater co-operation and technology sharing between US and UK intelligence agencies.

The Middle East station was set up under a warrant signed by the then Foreign Secretary David Miliband, authorising GCHQ to monitor and store for analysis data passing through the network of fibre-optic cables that link up the internet around the world

The certificate authorised GCHQ to collect information about the “political intentions of foreign powers”, terrorism, proliferation, mercenaries and private military companies, and serious financial fraud.

However, the certificates are reissued every six months and can be changed by ministers at will. GCHQ officials are then free to target anyone who is overseas or communicating from overseas without further checks or controls if they think they fall within the terms of a current certificate.

The precise budget for this expensive covert technology is regarded as sensitive by the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Office.

However, the scale of Middle East operation, and GCHQ’s increasing use of sub-sea technology to intercept communications along high-capacity cables, suggest a substantial investment.

Intelligence sources have denied the aim is a blanket gathering of all communications, insisting the operation is targeted at security, terror and organised crime.
rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by rajanb »

No foreign power be allowed to set up military base on Indian soil: Govt
Published August 23, 2013 | By admin


http://idrw.org/
Holding that India “will not allow any foreign country to establish a military base on Indian soil,” the defence ministry on Thursday rubbished reports that New Delhi and Washington had ever discussed such a proposal.

This comes after a top American air force officer, General Herbert ‘Hawk’ Carlisle, was quoted as saying that the US would station its fighter jets in India and other countries in the future, as part of its larger pivot or re-balancing of forces towards the crucial Asia-Pacific region.

The Indian MoD, however, said no such proposal had ever been on the Indo-US bilateral agenda. “India has carefully nurtured strategic relations with many countries. There is a great deal of clarity in our policy. We are not part of any military bloc, nor will ever be,” said an official.

What created a flutter in South Block was that Gen Carlisle identified Thiruvananthapuram, in the home state of defence minister AK Antony, as the proposed base for American fighters like F-22s and F-35s.
“So, as I envision it, as I talk about expanded engagement, a lot of our re-balance is a rotational presence through the Pacific. And obviously, we will maintain our capability in northeast Asia,” said Gen Carlisle, the air force commander of the US Pacific Command at Hawaii.

“In a lot of ways, we will increasingly move south and west with the rotational presence. Darwin, Tindal, (Pilbara), Changi East in Singapore, Korat in Thailand, Trivandrum in India,” he was quoted as saying during a question-and-answer session on July 29, soon after IAF chief Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne visited the US.

Antony has already held that while India is all for further cranking up bilateral defence cooperation with countries like the US, it clearly does not want to be part of any grand design to “contain China” in the region. China is miffed with the new defence policy being enunciated by the US, which includes progressively shifting 60% of its formidable naval fleet with 11 aircraft carrier battle groups to the Asia-Pacific.
They arm Pakis and then want a base from us. What cheek!
member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by member_22872 »

What about GOI? If it indeed had such talks with US? What would you call it? US wants to have its way with any and every country, they think its Christ given right.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by svinayak »

rajanb wrote:
They arm Pakis and then want a base from us. What cheek!
And continue large trading with PRC
rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4451
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by rsingh »

rajanb wrote:No foreign power be allowed to set up military base on Indian soil: Govt
Published August 23, 2013 | By admin


http://idrw.org/
Holding that India “will not allow any foreign country to establish a military base on Indian soil,” the defence ministry on Thursday rubbished reports that New Delhi and Washington had ever discussed such a proposal.

This comes after a top American air force officer, General Herbert ‘Hawk’ Carlisle, was quoted as saying that the US would station its fighter jets in India and other countries in the future, as part of its larger pivot or re-balancing of forces towards the crucial Asia-Pacific region.

The Indian MoD, however, said no such proposal had ever been on the Indo-US bilateral agenda. “India has carefully nurtured strategic relations with many countries. There is a great deal of clarity in our policy. We are not part of any military bloc, nor will ever be,” said an official.

What created a flutter in South Block was that Gen Carlisle identified Thiruvananthapuram, in the home state of defence minister AK Antony, as the proposed base for American fighters like F-22s and F-35s.
“So, as I envision it, as I talk about expanded engagement, a lot of our re-balance is a rotational presence through the Pacific. And obviously, we will maintain our capability in northeast Asia,” said Gen Carlisle, the air force commander of the US Pacific Command at Hawaii.

“In a lot of ways, we will increasingly move south and west with the rotational presence. Darwin, Tindal, (Pilbara), Changi East in Singapore, Korat in Thailand, Trivandrum in India,” he was quoted as saying during a question-and-answer session on July 29, soon after IAF chief Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne visited the US.

Antony has already held that while India is all for further cranking up bilateral defence cooperation with countries like the US, it clearly does not want to be part of any grand design to “contain China” in the region. China is miffed with the new defence policy being enunciated by the US, which includes progressively shifting 60% of its formidable naval fleet with 11 aircraft carrier battle groups to the Asia-Pacific.
They arm Pakis and then want a base from us. What cheek!
Hold it here. We must not get carried away by this. GOI should not rush to confirm or deny this. Keep it as an option in case Chinese bring their Nuclear Sub in international water in Bay of Bengal. Forcing GOI to deny such option is nonsense and we know very well for which team Karat&Co bats for.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16271
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by SwamyG »

Will support from Indian Americans help Narendra Modi get the ‘elusive’ visa?

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 034180.cms

Can American citizens openly support politics and elections of other countries?
Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Cosmo_R »

SwamyG wrote:Will support from Indian Americans help Narendra Modi get the ‘elusive’ visa?

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 034180.cms

Can American citizens openly support politics and elections of other countries?
Yes. Except of course, terrorists and other bad guys. Those are the preserve of the CIA :)
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16271
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by SwamyG »

Cosmo_R wrote:
SwamyG wrote:Will support from Indian Americans help Narendra Modi get the ‘elusive’ visa?

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 034180.cms

Can American citizens openly support politics and elections of other countries?
Yes. Except of course, terrorists and other bad guys. Those are the preserve of the CIA :)
I thought otherwise, I tried googling could not find any thing on it. I remember reading that American government prevented its citizens from actively lobbying, campaigning or providing monetary support to foreign elections. Any links? thanks.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36427
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by SaiK »

it is better for India-US having a joint base in India than US base in the neighborhood - like BD, SL or other places nearby. A joint strategy should also mean India's ops maturity model sharpening up, and engage the super power in a plug-n-play relationship.

some gov-gov exchange program can enable API sharing of platform codes, and DRDO can engage to keep home grown hardware to integrate with khan-gizmos. an oppty here.

people only think about negatives, with a slave mentality, rather seek equal-equal relationship. there is nothing wrong an anti-dawood ops from desh with khan equipments and khan men engagement under indic mission. think about the possibilities. anti-china is the prime.

firstly, come off this slave mentality.
Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4080
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Lilo »

During the cold war, American foreign policy “was all about how we affect the external behavior of states,” said Michael Mandelbaum, the Johns Hopkins University foreign affairs expert. We were ready to overlook the internal behavior of states, both because we needed them as allies in the cold war and because, with the Russians poised on the other side, any intervention could escalate into a superpower confrontation.

Post-cold-war foreign policy today is largely about “affecting the internal composition and governance of states,”
added Mandelbaum,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/25/opini ... wanted=all
kuldipchager
BRFite
Posts: 117
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:35
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by kuldipchager »

SaiK

Post subject: Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

PostPosted: 25 Aug 2013 21:37



Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 19623
Location: NowHere

it is better for India-US having a joint base in India than US base in the neighborhood - like BD, SL or other places nearby. A joint strategy should also mean India's ops maturity model sharpening up, and engage the super power in a plug-n-play relationship.

some gov-gov exchange program can enable API sharing of platform codes, and DRDO can engage to keep home grown hardware to integrate with khan-gizmos. an oppty here.

people only think about negatives, with a slave mentality, rather seek equal-equal relationship. there is nothing wrong an anti-dawood ops from desh with khan equipments and khan men engagement under indic mission. think about the possibilities. anti-china is the prime.

firstly, come off this slave mentality.



This is like AAH Bael mujhe maar.

Do we have any kind of pride when we think crop like this. We have all the weapon system and we have treaty with Russia. As the treaty go India/Russia to be together if any threat come to them. China buying the weapon from Russia. Do you think Russia will let china bully India?


KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 964
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by KrishnaK »

Acharya wrote:
rajanb wrote:
They arm Pakis and then want a base from us. What cheek!
And continue large trading with PRC
And conduct decades long sophisticated and subtle psyops to ensure that Indians will never want to conduct reforms so as to match China.
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by CRamS »

SaiK,

I would have agreed with you, but I prefer no US based anywhere in the n'hood. More than 20+ years living in US, and observing at close quarters how whites look at non-whites at a govt level that is, has shown me that whites are not prepared to accept us as equals, and there may be sound reasons for this from their PoV. They don't have to. At this stage in history, it is not in India's interest to offer US bases on Indian territory. Now, granted, India needs US more than US needs India, so other ways must be devised to cooperate, but offering US a base in India is too risky IMO. For that to happen, US must clearly break away from India TSP equal equal for a start.
Last edited by CRamS on 26 Aug 2013 08:34, edited 1 time in total.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

With this servile, slavish,mentality,we are not fit to be an Independent nation.Let's call the white man back to rule us and call him "massa".This kind of talk coming from pseudo-patriots and Quislings must be looked at in context with our current crop of leaders who bow and scrape to the white man in an even more shameful manner when we were under British rule.One recollects the famous post-Emergency Q asked of the regime's collaborators,that "when you were asked merely to bow,why did you choose to kneel?"

There is a whole batallion of paid hirelings and Quislings in the nation today serving the Yanqui interests.We are to be kept servile and insecure and poor.Just look at the $-Re. rate when the good doctor and his fellow travellers took over 5 years ago and now? It has almost halved in value.We have to be ever vigilant and counter these insidious rent-boys ,who wish to emulate and replace the Pakis as the "public convenience" of S.Asia!
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13752
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Vayutuvan »

Philip wrote:With this servile, slavish,mentality,we are not fit to be an Independent nation.Let's call the white man back to rule us and call him "massa".
Philip saab, it is already happening, no? Instead of calling "him" "massa" some are calling "her" "mem sahib". A passing fad in 7500+ year history. "sapta mAtrikAs" change course several time - some sand banks (seemingly very tall) appear momentarily and disappear the next second.
darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2937
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by darshhan »

SaiK wrote:it is better for India-US having a joint base in India than US base in the neighborhood - like BD, SL or other places nearby. A joint strategy should also mean India's ops maturity model sharpening up, and engage the super power in a plug-n-play relationship.
The day this happens, India will end up as America's bitch.
firstly, come off this slave mentality.
Heights of irony in the above statement in light of what was proposed earlier by you in the same post.

Wake up man. America is an enemy country. Sure we need to cooperate and collaborate with them on some issues but that is about it. One does not go around offering bases to enemy nations like US/China.
Garooda
BRFite
Posts: 580
Joined: 13 Jul 2011 00:00

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Garooda »

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by arun »

The Washington Post citing documents leaked by Edward Snowden is reporting that there was (is?) a US effort to spy on India’s Nuclear weapons:
The budget documents indicate that U.S. intelligence agencies are also focused on the security of the nuclear program in India, ¬Pakistan’s arch-rival.
From here:

Top-secret U.S. intelligence files show new levels of distrust of Pakistan
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

Trinco has one of the world's most spectacular natural harbours,images here.

(https://www.google.co.in/?gws_rd=cr&ei= ... s+pictures)

There are so many coves and separate bays within the great expanse of water.As a former CNS said,you could anchor the entire USN and the RUN and still have room for more.There is an airbase at China Bay.The WW2 oil tank farms is Trinco's great asset,where the IOC ,who operate some of the tanks,is under pressure to modify the agreement with the GOSL,supposedly due to Chinese pressure,who want the tank farm for themselves.The US had long lusted after Trinco and the GOSL's closeness to the PRC is the main reason why it is trying to squeeze the GOSL,worried about a Chinese naval presence operating out of Lankan ports,esp. Trinco.China has already "captured" Hambantota,has grabbed hold of the new Colombo container port and the future Port City,to be leased to it for 99 years,and if it gets a foothold in Trinco will have sewn up the southern IOR dramatically affecting the IN's capabilities in the IOR and defending the Indian coastline.The report that there were 22 sub contacts last year in Indian waters ,how many went undetected isn't known obviously,is indicateive of how serious the situ is.The GOI meanwhile continues to drift on every score,esp. diplomatic and military.
sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6591
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by sanjaykumar »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... print.html


Thank you America.


What is India doing?
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by RamaY »

sanjaykumar wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... print.html
Thank you America.
What is India doing?
High levels of distrust for Pakistan in US circles doesn't mean Pakistan can be used to harass India.

India need not do anything w.r.t US's perceptions of/about Pakistan, because the moment India enters into the picture, USA becomes constipated.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by arun »

sanjaykumar wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... print.html


Thank you America.


What is India doing?
India is fending off equal-equal US spying on India and it would be expected that no Indian is expected to be thanking America:
arun wrote:The Washington Post citing documents leaked by Edward Snowden is reporting that there was (is?) a US effort to spy on India’s Nuclear weapons:
The budget documents indicate that U.S. intelligence agencies are also focused on the security of the nuclear program in India, ¬Pakistan’s arch-rival.
From here:

Top-secret U.S. intelligence files show new levels of distrust of Pakistan
Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Cosmo_R »

SwamyG wrote: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 034180.cms

Can American citizens openly support politics and elections of other countries?

Yes. Except of course, terrorists and other bad guys. Those are the preserve of the CIA :)
I thought otherwise, I tried googling could not find any thing on it. I remember reading that American government prevented its citizens from actively lobbying, campaigning or providing monetary support to foreign elections. Any links? thanks.
Googling returns results on inbound money (into the US). Shows you the limitations of the Page Rank System they use.

There are no links that specifically cover your question. What you may have been thinking about is the FCPA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Co ... ctices_Act

FCPA on the face of it seems to apply to bribery of foreign politicians. It says nothing about contributions intended to help run a campaign. OTOH, if the target is a terrorist organization or person, then it is against the law but under a different statute.

One case may illustrate: Shauquat Aziz who was PM under NS/Mush? is an American Citizen. He obviously donated, obtained monies from abroad and campaigned actively in Pakistan. So, it would seem to suggest that it is legal. Same goes for the Chindu editor. He is an American and obviously intervenes in Indian elections.
Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3513
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Rony »

Pretty long but Read it full for the American anti-Indian "realist" perspective. No talk of the concessions which MMS and co gave to US on various issues. its always "we want more".

Double Trouble: A Realist View of Chinese and Indian Power
Washington sees Indian power as part of the solution to the challenges posed by the rise of China. But an objective assessment of Chinese and Indian national interests and international actions suggests it is far more likely that each will pose significant challenges to U.S. interests, albeit of different kinds. India will be no less likely than China to pursue vigorously its own interests, many of which run counter to those of the United States, simply because it is a democracy.
We recommend a new approach to U.S. —India policy, however, one that
rebalances a relationship that is currently heavily skewed toward security cooperation and lacks sufficient reciprocity or political-economic ballast.
In 1998 and 1999 Indian officials (including Defense Minister George Fernandes) cited the U.S. military presence at Diego Garcia as one potential threat requiring India to develop a longer-range nuclear deterrent.

Even though direct U.S—India conflict is highly unlikely, the fact that Indian leaders feel at pains to develop and debate these ideas is evidence of serious domestic political constraints on India’s ability to work closely with the United States in diplomatic, let alone military, affairs. Further questions about ‘‘all azimuths’’ doctrines may arise as India develops and deploys weapons systems with interregional and intercontinental ranges
U.S. military support for India may narrow the gap between India and China, but it will simultaneously widen gaps between India and Pakistan. Pakistani responses, whether they include intensified nuclear arms racing or strengthening ties to terror groups, could undermine regional and global stability. At the same time, U.S. military support to India may also invigorate China’s interest in providing strategic support to Pakistan.

To the extent that New Delhi does work to balance Beijing, the consequences for the United States will prove mixed. Indian diplomatic and military outreach to Southeast Asia and energy investments there could provide Southeast Asian states with new options in the face of Chinese pressure, an outcome Washington might welcome. But these ties might also encourage risk-taking by India’s Southeast Asian partners, increasing the odds of a clash in which India would likely take on little military responsibility. This might then leave the United States with difficult choices about its own involvement.
Washington may come to view developments in Indian nuclear doctrine in a new light once India develops ballistic missile submarines and intercontinental missiles with the range to reach the United States.
Now the demands,
For a start, in the security field, India should commit to granting U.S. forces regular base access for logistical and specified contingency purposes, and make mutual commitments on interoperability.
The most important economic agenda item should be improving reciprocal market access for trade and investment in both countries.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by svinayak »

Rony wrote: To the extent that New Delhi does work to balance Beijing, the consequences for the United States will prove mixed. Indian diplomatic and military outreach to Southeast Asia and energy investments there could provide Southeast Asian states with new options in the face of Chinese pressure, an outcome Washington might welcome. But these ties might also encourage risk-taking by India’s Southeast Asian partners, increasing the odds of a clash in which India would likely take on little military responsibility. This might then leave the United States with difficult choices about its own involvement.


This is the key point.
India may not have to take any responsibility and may not need to take any action.
Garooda
BRFite
Posts: 580
Joined: 13 Jul 2011 00:00

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Garooda »

What a waste of life and youth on both sides even though it was an accident and they were friends.

Desi_Teen_Shot_Accidentally_In_Colorado

Image

Image
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Prem »

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commen ... -chellaney
America’s Islamist Allies of Convenience
NEW DELHI – In just one decade, the United States has intervened militarily in three Muslim-majority countries and overthrown their governments. Now the same coalition of American liberal interventionists and neoconservatives that promoted those wars is pushing for punitive airstrikes in Syria without reflecting on how US policy has ended up strengthening Islamists and fostering anti-Americanism. Indeed, the last “humanitarian intervention” has clearly backfired, turning Libya into a breeding ground for transnational militants.
As the intense US debate about President Barack Obama’s proposed use of military force highlights, the attack-Syria push is not about upholding America’s national interest. Rather, the desire to protect US “credibility” has become the last refuge of those seeking yet another war in the wider Middle East.
f “credibility” were purged from the debate and the focus placed squarely on advancing long-term US interests, it would become apparent that an attack on Syria might not yield even temporary geopolitical gains. Beyond the short term, it would unleash major unintended consequences, potentially including an Iraq-style “soft” partition of Syria and the creation of a haven for extremists stretching across much of Islamist-controlled northern Syria and into the Sunni areas of Iraq.
Indeed, an attack would most likely increase America’s reliance on unsavory Islamist rulers in countries ranging from Saudi Arabia and Qatar to Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. Some Arab monarchs have pledged to bankroll the US attack – an investment that they would easily recover, given that the war talk has already increased oil prices. hAl Qaeda-type groups already have gained ground in the Middle East and North Africa as an unintended byproduct of US policies, creating fertile conditions for stepped-up international terrorism in the coming years. The US invasion and occupation of Iraq, for example, created a major opening for Al Qaeda, whose affiliates now represent the Sunni struggle against the Shia-dominated government.Likewise, regime change in Libya aided the rise of Al Qaeda-linked militants, leading to the killing in Benghazi of the US ambassador. A system based on sharia (Islamic law) has been imposed, human-rights abuses are legion, and cross-border movement of weapons and militants has undermined the security of Libya’s neighbors.meanwhile, America’s support for the regimes in Yemen and Saudi Arabia has contributed to the rise of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. In parts of southern Yemen, an Al Qaeda affiliate, Ansar al-Sharia, functions as a de facto government.
hIn Syria, where sizable chunks of territory are already under Islamist control and the pro-Al Qaeda Al Nusra Front overshadows the US-backed Free Syrian Army, the Obama administration is staring at the bitter harvest of its previous policy choices. Airstrikes now would merely make matters worse by undercutting the FSA’s grassroots legitimacy and aiding Islamist forces.Farther east, the US wants an “honorable” exit from Afghanistan – the longest war in its history – through a peace deal with the Taliban, its main battlefield opponent. In seeking to co-opt the Taliban – an effort that has resulted in the Taliban establishing what amounts to a diplomatic mission in Doha, Qatar – the US is bestowing legitimacy on a thuggish militia that enforces medieval practices in the areas under its control.
hAmerica’s dalliances with Islamist-leaning political forces – and governments – have been guided by the notion that the cloak of Islam helps to protect the credibility of leaders who might otherwise be seen as foreign puppets. That simply will not work, even in the short term. On the contrary, until the Egyptian army removed him from the presidency, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohamed Morsi was coming to be seen by many as America’s man in Cairo.
In the long term, the US will gain nothing – and risk much – by continuing to back oil sheikhdoms that fund Muslim extremist groups and madrasas from the Philippines and India to South Africa and Venezuela. By supporting Islamist rulers, the US is contributing to a trend evident from the Maghreb to the badlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan – Muslims killing Muslims.American policy has also contributed to a growing conflict between Islamist and secular forces in Muslim countries. This is best illustrated by Turkey, where Obama has ignored Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s heavy-handed efforts to annul free speech and turn himself into a twenty-first-century Sultan.
the US, motivated by the larger geopolitical goal of containing Shia Iran and its regional allies, has embraced Sunni rulers steeped in religious and political bigotry, even though they pose a transnational threat to the values of freedom and secularism. Moreover, the clash within Islam is likely to be destabilizing regionally and counterproductive to the interests of the free world. Obama should heed the doctrine proposed in 1991 by General Colin Powell. The Powell doctrine stipulates that the US should use military force only when a vital national-security interest is at stake; the strategic objective is clear and attainable; the benefits are likely to outweigh the costs; adverse consequences can be limited; broad international and domestic support has been obtained; and a plausible exit strategy is in place.
pushkar.bhat
BRFite
Posts: 458
Joined: 29 Mar 2008 19:27
Location: prêt à monter dans le Arihant
Contact:

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by pushkar.bhat »

ramana wrote:Maybe its Trincomalee? Does it have an airfield at all?
Yes, Trinco has a nice little airfield called China Bay :). I just love the place..
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Vipul »

Payback time: N-deal for US firm.

India will put its money where its mouth is. Battling widespread criticism in Washington that it pocketed a game-changing nuclear deal for free, India will sign a "commercial contract" for a small works agreement with Westinghouse, the only US nuclear company with any declared plan to set up nuclear power plants in India.

The nuclear contract, for a modest sum of under $100 million, is expected to be signed between NPCIL and Westinghouse during the visit of PM Manmohan Singh to Washington later this month. While the deal is largely symbolic, it's a sign from India that it will try to walk the talk on welcoming nuclear reactors by US companies. They have refused to invest in the Indian nuclear sector because of concerns about India's nuclear liability law.

The Indian government has so far maintained the law should not be a deterrent, but there are no takers in US or other countries for that argument. To that extent, this agreement would be seen as a statement of intent by India, certainly a PM who considers the nuclear deal to be his greatest legacy.

Quite apart from the nuclear issue, it's clear the Barack Obama administration has taken India off the radar. During the initial discussions on Singh's visit, the White House, said sources, did not even offer a lunch meeting between Singh and Obama. Instead, a lunch with vice-president Joe Biden was put on the table. India refused. It was only later that the US side agreed to a meal to be shared by the two leaders.

Last week's appointment of Rakesh Sood, an acknowledged expert nuclear negotiator, as PM's special envoy on nuclear matters is also seen as an effort to roll back the damage. According to PMO insiders, the appointment was made directly by the PM completely bypassing the MEA, which holds the nuclear policy account.

The PM's visit will also be in the background of military strikes on Syria, which could have happened by the time he's there or about to happen. Whatever it is, Syria will be top of mind for everyone in DC, not to speak for Obama himself.

The visit is important for Singh, who is looking at securing his legacy on the nuclear front. After he pushed the deal through Parliament in 2008, Singh has allowed the nuclear dossier to be preyed on by the atomic energy bureaucracy, effectively killing the deal. In the last year, the India-US relationship has been about bureaucrats on both sides blaming each other, while the relationship ran aground.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Sanku »

Man mohan is truly a shameless character, does not even bother changing his modus operandi, trust him to go all out during the last year of govt to help out his friends.

India be damned.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by ramana »

Westinghouse power reactors are owned by a Japanese company?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghou ... ic_Company

Westinghouse Electric Company LLC is a nuclear power company, offering nuclear products and services to utilities internationally, including nuclear fuel, service and maintenance, instrumentation and control and design of nuclear plants. Owned and operated by the Toshiba Group, Westinghouse's world headquarters is located in Cranberry Township, Butler County, Pennsylvania, United States.
AP 1000 reactor is their main product.

BTW the Trombay GE reactor was an experimental one unlike this AP1000 which is already operated in many countries.
Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3513
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Rony »

Obama nominates Indian-American to Asst. Sec. of Political-Military Affairs
Puneet Talwar, who was Obama's top advisor on the Middle East region for over four years, is the second Indian-American to be nominated as the Assistant Secretary position in the State Department.

In July, Nisha Desai Biswal was nominated as the Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia.

Both the positions need to be confirmed by the Senate.

If confirmed by the Congress, Talwar, in his capacity as the Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs, will provide policy direction in the areas of international security, security assistance, military operations, defence strategy and plans, and defence trade.

The Bureau of Political-Military Affairs (PM), is the Department of State's principal link to the Department of Defence.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Philip »

Indians are excellent second-in-command stock serving firang masters! They in general obey the rules scrupulously and are loyal.The best kind of immigrants to have along with the Jewish community,unlike many other species.I do believe that despite our reserve of getting involved in US mil-spats around the globe,and we have just stood on the Russian side of the line on the Syrian issue-"no non-UN sanctioned attacks",there is huge scope .An equitable economic and cultural relationship would bring peoples together instead off governments,which is far more meaningful.However,over-zealous fundoo Christian entities and over-greedy corporates cam muddy the waters.The attempts to flood the nation with GM crops,alien to our millenia-old rural traditions of farming is unacceptable.Shoving down US junk-food products and suchlike have to be resisted to the utmost as it would destroy the structure and foundation of Indian culture which is fundamentally based upon the traditions held sacred by the Indian peasant.Let us city folk also remember that "we and our forefathers also came out of the villages long ago"! The protection of the Indian peasant from the rapacious greed of MNCs who wish to enslave him yet again is the biggest challenge to any govt. in the era of globalisation.We have to be very choosy what we want from such relationships,where a fistful of dollars can buy political clout.

As for fears of Indian ICBMs,frankly I can't see an Indian govt. of the future sabre-rattling against the US.As with its large population of ethnic Indians who are getting into the higher levels of the US administration each day,relations can only get better.Secondly,the US is a "land too far" even if we possess ICBMs.The US has no territorial designs on India,its interests are mainly economic,a huge market for US goods.Possessing ICBMs will give India's strategic deterrent greater uncertainty in Chinese minds about an attack against India,as we would be able to deploy our SSBNs farther from the PRC in the vast reaches of the IOR,safe from PLAN SSNs.The larger sized missiles would also allow us to deploy more MIRVs and decoys on the missile.India's strategic policy is firmly rooted against the PRC and Pak JV. There are some within the Indian establishment who are apologists for China and Pak. They would prefer India to adopt a more hostile attitude against the US and west and jump onto the Dragon's bandwagon. If our defence planners thus use the bogey of the superpowers for strategic weapons development,it is a certainty that we will be able to deal with the Chinese with such weapons,a devious method of acquiring PRC/Pak specific weaponry in strong measure and number!
rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by rajanb »

It is high time, in view of the kick in the US' H&D, which is going to be kicked even more in 2014 with the withdrawal in Afghanistan, that we mend bridges with Russia.

The Syrian crisis and Putin's handling of it have definitely assisted in lowering the Khan's image.

MMS has pocketed the nuclear deal and not given much in return. By accident, I suppose. We should keep it that way.

We should recalibrate our relationship with the Russians to reflect our interests (for a change), thumb our noses at the US to the extent we can get away with it in terms of sourcing oil from Iran and take a very strong NAM stand as far as US' continuous appetite for "teaching" others lessons and surprising being oblivious to the collateral damage to their own people in terms of lost and maimed lives.
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by CRamS »

rajanb,

I agree, there must be some hard-nosed diplomacy with US without actually turning into some kind of "axis of evil". Remember, if US wants, they can do a Syria on India too given all the negatives India has and the number of 5th columnists that India has.

The corner stone of US policy is to groom both India & TSP as its munnas, and in this process, TSP terror against India suits US just fine as long as is it doesn't get out of hand. US carefully manages this India TSP equal equal equation. That has got to stop or else I see no hope, none whatsoever for India to be any kind of power, let alone regional or global power to reckon with.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Sagar G »

"Syria on India" !!!!!!! Experiencing weekly dhoti shibering moments saar ???
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by CRamS »

Sagar G, mockery apart, need I remember you of the TSP nuke scare that pervades Delhi decision makers? Just witness India's response to the TSP's myriad terrorist provocations, US position on those, and Indian response. If it doesn't make for a shameful pathetic sight, I don't know what is. There was the 9/11 hoopla all over again in US yesterday, but 26/11 which was as heinous if not more as 9/11 in its motive and execution, its TSP state perpetrators, and the support those perpetrators enjoy from the very victims of 9/11, US, is not even a foot note in history anymore. Enough said.

Tell me why US can't do a Syria on India? I don't want to deviate from the thread, but does India not have negatives that US cherry pick from to demonize India?

My point being that hard-nosed diplomacy is good but care must be taken to not piss US off too much. And there is no need to. US & India have a love hate relationship, also mostly mature. Thats all I am saying. Indias diplomacy is quite capable of deftly balancing relations between both US and Russia. But first, we need to get rid of MMS and his like-minded coterie out of the way.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Sagar G »

CRamS saar I agree on most of your points but US having the ability to do a "Syria on India" is taking it far too much. USA has been drained by it's soap opera named "war on terror" by fighting in countries which are not even half the size of India and I won't even compare the military and economic capabilities. If I am not wrong then USA was pretty pissed with India back in 1971 and what was it able to do to us ??? FF to 2013 India being a nuke power an economic power a claimant of permanent seat in UN SC and you think USA can do a "Syria on India" !!!!!

I personally want India to piss US off too much, I want to see what it can do other than passing hot air, killing children's and women's, picking up war with small nations with weak military and hence indulging in chest thumping about being a "superpower".
Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Post by Vikas »

India has no oil nor it sits in the middle of Oil-kingdoms nor we have any beef with Israel. On top we have far too many people to subjugate.
There is no chance in hell that US would ever go to direct war with India.
Post Reply