Bharat Rakshak

ramana wrote:

chetak wrote:[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FO-34h5aUAE ... =large[img]

Canyou please post the original tweet?

here you go, saar

Rohan Mukherjee@rohan_mukh·29 Mar

My article in @htTweets on the increasing polarization of an economically networked and interdependent world order, and how India's policy of strategic autonomy can still help navigate the new geopolitics


Also available here: https://msn.com/en-in/news/opinion/indi ... ar-AAVA7lM

https://twitter.com/rohan_mukh/status/1 ... e03O8pAAAA

Looks like the Xiden administration has put a functional end to the Quad alliance. Undoing the work of the two last years of Obama administration and four years of the Trump administration.

First it was the AUKUS alliance on nuclear submarines when the IN asked annually for such a pact, now it is hypersonic missiles.

Military Pact Between U.S., U.K. and Australia to Focus on Hypersonic Missiles
https://www.wsj.com/articles/military-p ... os6&page=1

SYDNEY—A military partnership between the U.S., the U.K. and Australia will be expanded to focus on developing hypersonic missiles, amid concerns that the U.S. and its allies are falling behind potential rivals including China in testing such weapons.

Hypersonic missiles fly at more than five times the speed of sound and can be maneuvered before hitting a target. They are more difficult to detect on radar than existing missiles, giving an edge to any military seeking to surprise an opponent.

Officials from the U.S., the U.K. and Australia said on Wednesday that they would focus on both hypersonic missiles and counter-hypersonic capabilities after meeting to discuss progress in implementing their new three-way alliance, called AUKUS. The pact, announced last year, is already aimed at providing nuclear-powered submarines for Australia in the coming decades and developing undersea capabilities, quantum technologies and artificial intelligence.

The AUKUS countries said Wednesday that they would look into electronic-warfare capabilities, noting that the electromagnetic spectrum is increasingly contested and that they want to enable their forces to operate in contested and degraded environments. They said they would expand information sharing and deepen cooperation on defense innovation.

“We reaffirmed our commitment to AUKUS and to a free and open Indo-Pacific,” the countries said in a joint leaders-level statement. “We reiterated our unwavering commitment to an international system that respects human rights, the rule of law, and the peaceful resolution of disputes free from coercion.”

The AUKUS pact is a key part of the U.S. strategy for the Indo-Pacific, where it is building a network of alliances that can serve as a counterweight to China. Australia is an important U.S. ally in the region and is a member of the Quad group of countries, a separate partnership that includes the U.S., Japan, India and Australia. Now the Quad is considered a separate alliance?

US is in a paroxysm of Russia hatred, and is up to some massive destruction of the world. It's friends will be the first to suffer.

Stupid Europe will pay a heavy price, because US now wants to fight Russia not to the last Ukranian but to the last European.

The father India says away from this crisis the safer we will be.

The real fights are between US and Russia and the other one is US and China. In both instances India should not get involved because the first thing the big guys will do is to waste your land and people in their tussle. We keep juggling the balls depending upon our needs without being overtly tilting to one side or the other.

Mort Walker wrote:

... Australia is an important U.S. ally in the region and is a member of the Quad group of countries, a separate partnership that includes the U.S., Japan, India and Australia. Now the Quad is considered a separate alliance?

Japan and India are not in this Hypersonic missile development nor in the Nuclear Sub deal. Since India signed an FTA w/ Australia, the UK might be hoping for one as well. That was one of the main agenda items during Secy. Liz Truss's visit to India.

Vayutuvan ji,

Welcome back.

Mort Walker wrote:Vayutuvan ji,

Welcome back.

Thank you sir.

Mischievous enemy amreeka

@Sjha1618:
As a rule of thumb, always be a little, shall we say, watchful when Washington for 'some reason or the other' (delayed confirmation etc.) fails to appoint an Ambassador for significant lengths of time. It's always interesting when the Charge D'Affaires runs the show.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/151 ... S2mEA&s=19

Another day another round of threats:

https://indianexpress.com/article/world ... s-7857844/

This time from someone with a title of director of White House National economic council.

I suspect they started with flunkeys first and are ratcheting it up gradually. Once the EU stops all oil imports from Russia the sanctions will start

wondering what MAD's plan is on these threats ...
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-ne ... 66682.html
US says ready to become India's reliable supplier, to counter Russia dependence

As predicted, this US government has set back India-US relations by 30+ years. There is no difference between the neocons and neoliberals who have the same deep state agenda. I predict it is only going to get worse after the US elections later this year and relations are going to be set back to 1982.

How US interest furthered by its actions?

That is the most important question that needs an answer.

Perhaps reduction of Russia to be a non entity in all spheres is a greater priority than any US interests served by better india - US relations.

US foreign policy has gone from the chaotic randomness of Trump regime to the hateful arrogance under Biden (or whoever is running this regime), both defy logic in their own ways. The disappointment India feels is also a "mis en grade" ie "dire warning" towards the western system. India's coming of age as a world power needs to accelerate now, the crisis in which the west is stuffing itself opens up more spaces for India to expand itself.

vijayk wrote:wondering what MAD's plan is on these threats ...
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-ne ... 66682.html
US says ready to become India's reliable supplier, to counter Russia dependence

I think that this is the ameriki deep state plan in it's entirety. To somehow reel in and shaft India while we are stampeded into falling for their carrot and stick prodding to dump our reliable supplier.

They want to replace the russkis as a "reliable" weapons supplier. All well and good, until some half assed, redneck senator or whatever, bucking for re election, gets up and along with his vengeful chaddi dosts, votes in some pressler amendment sort of a law against India, blocking off all weapon sales because some khalistani punjab farmer alleges "human rights violations"

the sad sack administration is left sucking it's thumb, as are the Indians

then the BLM and other "rainbow" wokes will be dancing in the streets, celebrating their "democracy" and the righteousness of their actions.

just stick with the russkis, while trying, in the meantime, to build up a local MIC.

The amerikis, britshits and many europeans, including the pakis and the cheenis are all looking for a regime change in India.

They want us exactly where SL is right now, politically, economically and socially, with an unpopular and failed leadership, aggressive blowback from the citizenry demonstrating on the streets, and the country virtually ringfenced financially by offshore entities.

Have they activated their Rakhi Sawant brigade against India already ?

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/us-la ... ia/2557129

I think given our history, gullibility of the population, tight social media grip, a large Shantidoot population ready to be violent at the drop of a hat, we should be the easiest large country in the world to engineer such regime changes.

chetak wrote:

vijayk wrote:wondering what MAD's plan is on these threats ...
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-ne ... 66682.html
US says ready to become India's reliable supplier, to counter Russia dependence

I think that this is the ameriki deep state plan in it's entirety. To somehow reel in and shaft India while we are stampeded into falling for their carrot and stick prodding to dump our reliable supplier.

They want to replace the russkis as a "reliable" weapons supplier. All well and good, until some half assed, redneck senator or whatever, bucking for re election, gets up and along with his vengeful chaddi dosts, votes in some pressler amendment sort of a law against India, blocking off all weapon sales because some khalistani punjab farmer alleges "human rights violations"

the sad sack administration is left sucking it's thumb, as are the Indians

then the BLM and other "rainbow" wokes will be dancing in the streets, celebrating their "democracy" and the righteousness of their actions.

just stick with the russkis, while trying, in the meantime, to build up a local MIC.

The amerikis, britshits and many europeans, including the pakis and the cheenis are all looking for a regime change in India.

They want us exactly where SL is right now, politically, economically and socially, with an unpopular and failed leadership, aggressive blowback from the citizenry demonstrating on the streets, and the country virtually ringfenced financially by offshore entities.

should we set up a committee to go over this offer and hold chai biskoot sessions for next 2 years while building our platforms

A new "Tournament of Shadows" is going on.
This time between the US and India.
Every move India makes US is making a countermove!

India signs FTA with Australia, USA chases with FTA with ASEAN.
ASEAN is mostly rebranded Chinese goods!
Indian left media is discredited, US switches on Republic and ZeeTV to support Ukraine.
Judiciary activated to grant travel ban waivers to usual suspects.
It's like the US thinks India is an enemy, not a distant ally.
Unlike last time, the US is also playing inside India and has willing collaborators.
The race is for the US empire in the world, not just Central Asia.

Note the 58 absentatioms in UN vote on human rights.

Biden Admin ignore China and Russia to target India.
This defies logic of strategy.
What are we missing?
Is it just bullying an India that won't say no?

ramana wrote: ...

Biden Admin ignore China and Russia to target India.
This defies logic of strategy.
What are we missing?
Is it just bullying an India that won't say no?

is it like the drunk searching for his keys under the light?

India is seen as a soft & vulnerable state, so the US thinks it is easy to chalk up a win here.

Looks like ISI was able to infiltrate First Lady’s SS detail. Haidar Ali impersonating DHS employee and providing expensive gifts to Dr. Jill’s protective unit.

It is actually a good sign that US is openly trying to bully India - else it was always a whisper campaign saying you'll face consequences/we'll increase your costs unbearably, as everyone knows the value of a threat drops to zero when actually carried out. This way now we will be forced to look for alternatives which may not be bad for us in the next 5-10 years when there may be an unavoidable worldwide conflict.

Across South Asia, U.S. and India Push Back Against China
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/04/06/us ... opolitics/

Beijing’s strategic initiatives on the subcontinent are sputtering.

Tuan wrote:Across South Asia, U.S. and India Push Back Against China
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/04/06/us ... opolitics/

Beijing’s strategic initiatives on the subcontinent are sputtering.

In the next few days, India and the United States are likely to announce a number of new initiatives, including on defense cooperation, outer space, and maritime intelligence sharing. The four officials can also pat themselves on the back for the little-noticed but growing strategic coordination to limit Chinese advances in South Asia.

Just a couple of years ago, it looked like China was an irresistible force in the subcontinent. Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative—which has sent a flood of Chinese cash to countries in the region—was widely hailed as a game-changer. But the United States and India are now pushing back. Although Beijing will remain a powerful actor in the subcontinent, New Delhi and Washington have been regaining ground.

Exhibit A is Sri Lanka, which has been a particular focus of Chinese political attention and infrastructure investments as Beijing seeks to gain a foothold in the Indian Ocean. But with Sri Lanka in the grips of an intensifying economic and balance-of-payments crisis—accompanied by mass protests and the collapse of the governing parliamentary coalition this week—Colombo will be struggling to stitch back a functioning government and stabilize its economy. Sri Lanka must turn to the international community and multilateral economic institutions. Until recently, the nationalist government of Sri Lankan Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa was reluctant to engage with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and sought homegrown solutions coupled with support from India and China.

KLNMurthy wrote:

ramana wrote: ...

Biden Admin ignore China and Russia to target India.
This defies logic of strategy.
What are we missing?
Is it just bullying an India that won't say no?

is it like the drunk searching for his keys under the light?

India is seen as a soft & vulnerable state, so the US thinks it is easy to chalk up a win here.

Not so simple. We are missing some thing.
Ok per Luttwak's Logic of strategy (LOS)

Suppose
#1 US
#2 China
#3 India
#4 Russia
#5 EU which is the joker in the pack.

LOS says
1) #1 will team up with #3 to prevent being displaced by #2.
2) Same time #2 will hit #3 to prevent teaming up with #1.
So far that is happening.
3) Now #1 doesn't want #3 and #4 getting together to protect #5. However #3 is a friend of #5
4) While #2 is teaming up with #4

LOS says #1 should prevent #2 and #4 from getting together.
Why is 4) not harmful to #5? They can ride roughshod on #5 in every which way.
The reality is #1 wants to preserve #5 at all costs and the rest is a charade.
Now work on everything with this as the top objective of #1.





What's wrong with this picture?

Mort Walker wrote:There is no difference between the neocons and neoliberals who have the same deep state agenda.

This is the Key point which many people are missing. The Deep State Agenda is world domination and they wont stop until they achieve it. They are backed by untold, not reported in main stream news, secretive funds. They understand turmoil in the world creates opportunities and in turmoil they invariably gain success and money.

ramana wrote: Suppose
#1 US
#2 China
#3 India
#4 Russia
#5 EU which is the joker in the pack.

My contention is #1 and #2 though they might be at odds they are one and the same. #1 and #2 are in a tight embrace economically, publicly they may squabble a lot but this is a facade. #1 and #4 are the sworn enemies and they were formerly #1 and #2 and I believe in terms of real military strength + sophistication they are the actual fight. Now #2 is going with #4 simply to invert the relationship that #1 and #2 have. #5 is being used as a doormat by #1. In all of this the odd man out is #3 which is a vexxing problem.

The actual nightmare situation for #1 is, if and when #2, #3 and #4 get together on a common plank, then #1 is in deep trouble. #1 and #5 will be no match to #2, #3 and #4. This alliance is easier said than done. In fact if India can line up other Asian nations into a Nato like formation then #2,#3,#4 form the Eurasian alliance which can dictate terms to the rest of the world. This will eclipse the Anglo Saxon empire completely.

If the US is really interested in getting India away from Russian influence, it's best strategy would be to offer India strategic and defence tech cooperation so that India can stand on it's own without the need for Russian arms. Start with fighter jet engines.

Trying to threaten and bully won't work and could totally backfire.

From the view point of #1,

#4 is good with #3, who is dependent on military equipment on #4
#4 is good with #2, b’cas #4 can provide commodities and worst case military support against #1
#3 and #2 do not go along with each other (legacy issues)
#1 is the biggest market for #2

So what does #1 do?

First, weaken #4, which automatically expose #3 and #2 (assuming #4 can be weakened)
Second, get #3 on your side by saam daam dand bhed, which further weakens link btw #3 and #4
If this is successful, #2 is further weakened and exposed
If #3 becomes as dependent as #5, assuming #4 is neutralized, go for a final kill of #2

Bala, does #2 have the wisdom to accomodate #3s interests. In order to get a Eurasian block with #2#3#4. Which has the added advantage of freeing them to take on #1.

Until now they have no shown this foresight.

Similarly #1 has not shown any wisdom to accomodate #4. Which has the advantage of saving#5 from #4. Allowing#1 to focus on#2.

Perhaps#1 &#2 don't want to fight each other. But are carving up the Eurasian block in respective sphear of influence. With an aim to arrive at a long term entente.

ramana wrote:

KLNMurthy wrote: is it like the drunk searching for his keys under the light?

India is seen as a soft & vulnerable state, so the US thinks it is easy to chalk up a win here.

Not so simple. We are missing some thing.
Ok per Luttwak's Logic of strategy (LOS)

Suppose
#1 US
#2 China
#3 India
#4 Russia
#5 EU which is the joker in the pack.

LOS says
1) #1 will team up with #3 to prevent being displaced by #2.
2) Same time #2 will hit #3 to prevent teaming up with #1.
So far that is happening.
3) Now #1 doesn't want #3 and #4 getting together to protect #5. However #3 is a friend of #5
4) While #2 is teaming up with #4

LOS says #1 should prevent #2 and #4 from getting together.
Why is 4) not harmful to #5? They can ride roughshod on #5 in every which way.
The reality is #1 wants to preserve #5 at all costs and the rest is a charade.
Now work on everything with this as the top objective of #1.





What's wrong with this picture?

If #1 wants to retain its influence over #5 no matter what the cost, then given the rising strength of #2, #1 needs to acquiesce to a spheres of influence model.

That is, #1 must let #2 have mastery over #4 and #3. #2 will be granted this by #1 if #2 promises to keep #4 on a short leash that prevents #4 from extending any independent influence into Europe (#5). #2's BRI network must also terminate at Istanbul and Kaliningrad. Everything west of that unquestionably belongs to #1.

#1's calculus is that because of sanctions etc, #4 will turn into a dysfunctional satellite of #2, much like NoKo, Laos, Pakistan. #2 exerts its imperial authority via the zamindar-hiring-dacoits model. #2 gives loans, builds infrastructure, etc in its tributary states, but also has rogue states under its payroll to keep the tributaries in line. #1 says ok to all this, as long as #4 is never allowed to intimidate #5.

#1 also knows that #3 will (very soon) chafe at the dominance of #2 in its sphere of influence. #1 aims to make #3 a Super Ukraine of sorts... strong enough to bog down #2 but not strong enough to win decisively and extricate itself from the bog. #1 is counting on tensions between #2 & #3, and ultimately between #2 & #4, to shift the balance of power westwards in favour of the #1+#5 sphere of influence.

The swing areas will be the Ummah states (from Egypt/Turkey to Pakistan), where the UK will be brought in as #1's proxy/emissary, and the Indo-Pacific (especially the Western Pacific). Africa and Latin America will be of secondary importance.

In the Indo-Pacific, #1 will turn over ASEAN to #2's sphere of influence quite readily (allowing #2 & #3 to compete for it) but #1 will still consider the Pacific littorals: Japan, SoKo, Australia as its own sphere of influence.

Am I missing anything?

No you are not. It's amazing to see future being shaped with so many moving parts with so much clarity.

ramana wrote:
Suppose
#1 US
#2 China
#3 India
#4 Russia
#5 EU which is the joker in the pack.

LOS says
1) #1 will team up with #3 to prevent being displaced by #2.
2) Same time #2 will hit #3 to prevent teaming up with #1.
So far that is happening.
3) Now #1 doesn't want #3 and #4 getting together to protect #5. However #3 is a friend of #5
4) While #2 is teaming up with #4

LOS says #1 should prevent #2 and #4 from getting together.
Why is 4) not harmful to #5? They can ride roughshod on #5 in every which way.
The reality is #1 wants to preserve #5 at all costs and the rest is a charade.
Now work on everything with this as the top objective of #1.


What's wrong with this picture?

the Only Explanation is #1 and #5 are blood relatives(add ANZ to #5) and

#1 has accepted a fait accompli of G2.
#4 was pushed against the wall and had to decide between accepting Hegemony of #1 or #2 and had to choose #2
#3 is all alone and has always been. we better get our act together(atleast order the damn krestel or ATAGS for gods sake)
#2 is laughing all the way to the Bank


there is a #6 soko,Taiwan and japan and ASEAN. Soko will eventually go back to how Joseon tilted. Nippon will pay the price of being Neutered.

Rammana Garu, the Mershimer video now has 24 M views. would be interesting to see where these views are coming from? he is basically arguing on LOS theory but no one is listening to him

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4

Interesting thoughts but the urge is to give a rapid response.
Think it over.
I didn't post on a whim.
It's the essence of a week or so of thinking.

One way to understand is the word Order.
No one cares for Law which is made by those who impose Order.
And Justice is implementing the law.
The problem for Hindus is they think Justice is Dharma when there is a word Nyaya.
#1 wants to impose Order.
Even Biden thatha said he wants the US to be the one that imposes new world Order.
Rest all want to get rid of that chain like the chimp in Planet of Apes.
So think it over from that angle.
No rush.

Atmavik, only #1 thru #5 matter rest are lemmas.
Don't have salience.

Current #2, #3 were former #1, #2 or vice versa. The Brits came and injected themselves into #3 and weakened #2 leaving in its wake the current #1. The entities #4, #5 were no where near the picture. #4 was a result of feud between Brits and Germans ( the current #5; brits/germans are blood relatives - Angel, Saxon, etc) and jumped to #2 as a result.
(Just as an aside, the Brits stole not only wealth but the basis of its science and math from India. Newton lifted the laws from Vaisesika Sutra lock stock and barrel which unleashed the industrial age on the world. Calculus was lifted from India. Of course the entire number system and decimal system too. )

Coming back to #2 and #3 they established the notion of G2 long back and co-existed with each other. Switch to the current and #1 and #2 are wanting the G2 position but are threatened by #3 and #4. #5 still remains the doormat. #3 will over time become #2 due to youthful demographics and could be staring at competing with #1 thereafter. This is in the back of the minds of #1 and #2. #3 requires a leader of the stature of Chanakya to understand the dynamics and prepare for the inevitable.

#3 has the power to check #2 and influence #4.
That is the key. See how 58 states abstained in UNGA. Add those who voted no it makes it significant.
#5 goes where the money is.
#1 sees Order slipping away.

bala You get distracted with old stuff.
Always deal with just the present.
Past is past and future is what the present makes it out to be.
KS garu wrote.

Ok why did G2 fail?
G2= #1 and #2.
It failed because #2 saw in 2008 its chance to become #1 if they work for it.
However, #1 was busy suppressing the rest (#3 thru 5) not understanding that G2 was over.
That helped #2 even more.

ramana wrote: Past is past and future is what the present makes it out to be.

Thanks Ramana.

ramana wrote:Ok why did G2 fail?
G2= #1 and #2.
It failed because #2 saw in 2008 its chance to become #1 if they work for it.
However, #1 was busy suppressing the rest (#3 thru 5) not understanding that G2 was over.
That helped #2 even more.

Has #1 accepted that G2 failed?

What if, whatever it is doing is to present a tribute to #2. So that #2 accepts the formulation.

In this circumstance other than #5 both #3 & #4 are expendable.

Sharing some thoughts that one normally cannot

Analysis of #1, #2, #3, #4, #5 must be based on the most fundamental and unchangeable facts - religion and race. #1, #5 were both created by destroying pagan religions and civilisations. #4 is part of same religion but less so due to 70 years of communism plus a growing Hindu (via ISKCON) movement there. #1 and #5 are also same race but don't consider #4 as same race. That is why #1 and #5 are so upset with #4 due to its attack on Ukraine. #4 is Eastern Orthodox which is seen as a bit different than Catholic and Protestant which are somehow seen closer to each other despite a bloody history. All hate moorti poojaks as the devil worshippers of course. #2 is closest to #3 civilisationaly and religiously but due to colonisation of #3 its soldiers were used to suppress #2 during a brief period. Plus communism may have changed #2 in ways that I cannot be sure of. So what does this mean

1. #1 and #5 will always see #3 as a people to be colonised due to race and religion, never as equal. Ideally they would want #3 to be Xian. They may not say this but as a people subconsciously they very much believe this. It's an inevitable consequence of Xianity. How can heathens not be converted.
2. #4 is seen as an enemy that #1 and #5 can crush but #2 as one it cannot. So #1 and #5 will keep bullying #4 but not irritate #2
3. #2 has never exercised full extent of hard power and will have to do so to become a real player. But I don't think it will take on #1 and #5 in a war till end of this decade. For now It has both of them exactly where it wants. It will take Taiwan at some stage and as long as #1 doesnt interfere, there will be no war. This is ideal case for #2
4. #3 should never ally with #1 and #5 because they are its natural enemies. Can #2 be made to realise its civilisation similarity to #3 ? #2 has started making some overtures. If #3 can rediscover its own civilisational and religious roots and also hold on to its ground vs #3 it can signal strength and clarity to #2 which will make #2 respect it. This may lead to a resolution of disputes with #2 and allow both to be independent but not competing powers
5. #3 should stay fiercely independent and focus on rediscovering its civilisation and religion and mentally decolonise. That is the only way it can survive in the inevitable hard conflict that will happen sometime this decade or early next decade. It should maintain its bonds with #4.