Bharat Rakshak

Asia Foundation Proposes Cooperation 'Triangle' for US, China, India
By Steve Herman
New Delhi
29 January 2009


A call for the establishment of a diplomatic "triangle of cooperation" - among the United States, India and China - is receiving a mixed reception at its unveiling in New Delhi.

The influential Asia Foundation has rolled out its recommendations for the Obama administration's policy towards India. And, one key suggestion is hitting a log jam.

It is the call for three-way cooperation among Washington, New Delhi and Beijing. Proponents say such an effort will be essential to helping solve such thorny regional issues as instability in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The proposal, put forward by a task force of distinguished academics and diplomats, is in a chapter authored by former American Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs Karl Inderfurth.

Former assistant secretary of state for South Asia, Karl Inderfurth
Former Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Karl Inderfurth
"There have been some who have suggested that our approach to India and our strengthening of relations has been part of a containment of China - a hedge against China's rise," he said. "I think this would be a grave mistake. I know my Indian colleagues and friends would not want to be involved, in any way, shape or fashion, of a containment policy against China. We need to engage both countries on their own merits and find ways that we can work together."

The "cooperative triangle" is one of seven points for Indo-American relations put forth in a volume of policy recommendations, titled "America's Role in Asia," being released this week by the Asia Foundation.

The other six recommendations proposed: strengthening strategic ties; doubling two-way trade over the next several years; a broader nuclear dialogue; allowing American universities to operate in India; support by Washington for a permanent Indian seat on U.N. Security Council; and, collaboration to stabilize Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

The set of proposals earned a quick endorsement from the Indian prime minister's special envoy, Satinder Lambah.

"I fully agree with the seven-point agenda which has been given out by Karl Inderfurth," he said.

Others here, however, are less optimistic about the quick realization of an equal diplomatic partnership involving India, China and the United States.

Former Indian Ambassador to the United State Naresh Chandra said Beijing needs to alter its regional diplomacy before there can be talk of an equitable three-way relationship.

Former Indian ambassador to U.S., Naresh Chandra
Former Indian ambassador to U.S., Naresh Chandra
"The Chinese moves in our neighborhood display a certain pattern, which is somewhat disturbing. Their moves in Burma or with Pakistan; there is a kind of encirclement [of India] approach which we hope will change, over time," he said.

Chandra, also a former Indian cabinet secretary, called China's "circle of friends" - including Burma, North Korea, Sudan and Zimbabwe - "not that honorable."

Alarming to some veteran Indian diplomats is what they perceive as a recent shift by China to a strident tone, after India concluded an unprecedented civil nuclear cooperation agreement with the United States, last year.

Former Indian National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra noted China's state-controlled think-tanks and media are reopening old wounds, thought healed by Indo-Sino diplomatic agreements. These include the war between India and China, in 1962, and the sovereignty of two Indian states on Tibet's borders - Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh - where a significant percentage of the people follow Tibetan Buddhism.

"We have been reminded every other week about the humiliation we suffered in 1962. They keep on saying 'don't forget 1962.' … And there has been talk about China occupying what it calls southern Tibet, which is Arunachal Pradesh in India," said Mishra.

Mishra, a career diplomat, said India's government will be closely watching how President Obama formulates strategy towards China, hoping it will not adversely affect America's blossoming relationship with India.

"We have been reminded every other week about the humiliation we suffered in 1962. They keep on saying 'don't forget 1962.' … And there has been talk about China occupying what it calls southern Tibet, which is Arunachal Pradesh in India," said Mishra.

ramana wrote:
1962 debacle was an ambush by the PRC and others to reduce India's stature in Asia and the world.

MOSCOW — Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, said Friday that Russia had fast-tracked approval of a plan to allow the United States military to ship nonlethal equipment across Russian territory to Afghanistan.

“We gave our consent, literally, in 24 hours,” he said. “We expect our American partners to provide a concrete request with the quantity and description of cargo. We shall grant the relevant permission as soon as it happens.”

Russia has emphasized its desire to cooperate with the United States and NATO in Afghanistan since the announcement on Tuesday that Kyrgyzstan, a close Russian ally, will close the Manas air base, a critical link in supplying the war effort in Afghanistan. Losing access to the base is a serious setback to President Obama, who hopes to increase the number of troops in Afghanistan.

Though Washington scrambled to dissuade Kyrgyz officials, the national security chief, Adakhan Madumarov, said Friday, “The fate of the air base is sealed.”

Competing interests shape Russian policy on Afghanistan. The Kremlin is eager to ensure stability in the region out of fear that the heroin trade and Islamic extremism could spread across its borders. But many Russians also feel deep frustration at the presence of the United States military in former Soviet republics.

The new highway linked the Afghan towns of Zaranj, on the Iran border, and Delaram, 217 kilometres to the northeast.

It was constructed at the cost of six Indian and 129 Afghan lives, victims of attacks by an increasingly muscular Taliban insurgency. And it was hailed as a landmark in co-operation between India and Afghanistan.

Its strategic value – connecting the Iranian port of Chahabar with major Afghan cities – set alarm bells ringing in neighbouring Pakistan, whose relations with India are at a low point after Islamic militants carried out a massive attack on Mumbai in November.

A NATO official hinted that transit through Iran, once condemned as part of the "axis of evil," might be an alternative to the escalating risks of Pakistan's lawless borders.

If the Indian-built road becomes part of a new transit route, it would be an added boost to relations between India and the West, even as the U.S. cools toward Pakistan.

"It's a Pakistani nightmare," said Kamran Bokhari, director of Middle East analysis for the U.S.-based intelligence analysis company Stratfor.

"India believes the only way to neutralize Pakistan and keep it in the box, is to have good relations with the Afghans.

"But Pakistan's situation gets worse and worse."

A series of projects that have made India Afghanistan's largest regional supporter.

Since the Taliban were defeated in 2001, India has spent $1.2 billion (U.S.) in Afghanistan on projects ranging from dams and roads to backing for international agencies' nutritional campaigns.

It has about 4,000 aid and security officials working in the country, and has trained Afghan police officers.

Indian aid is visible on the ground. Hungry Afghan school children nibble high-nutrition biscuits between classes

Once-parched villages are rejuvenated by newly dug tube wells..

Homes that were in the dark are connected to power sources with the construction of transmission lines.

In a hearts-and-minds campaign, India is on the home stretch.


Pakistan, which tried to shore up its security and influence in a hostile neighbourhood after the Soviet invasion of 1979, backed Islamist insurgents who have added to Afghans' misery.

Afghanistan is only one forum for rounds of rivalry between India and Pakistan that began with the partition of India in 1947 and continued through a succession of bloody wars, including conflicts over Muslim-dominated Kashmir.

A nuclear arms race raised the stakes of the conflict.

But Pakistan's backing for the militants, including the Taliban, has sparked outbreaks of violence that have killed hundreds of Pakistanis, including former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

Now, says GTA-based security and defence analyst Sunil Ram, "Pakistan is using both Afghanistan and Kashmir as a means to get rid of its more radical elements, sending them on a jihad."


Meanwhile, says Bokhari, "Pakistan's Islamist project has backfired, they're being attacked by their own creations, the U.S. is on their tail, and Afghanistan still has a hostile regime."

US economic policy may lead to confrontation with China

The Catholic church sees the faithful leaving the church in droves after the controversial lifting of the excommunication of a group of rightist bishops, a German Vatican expert said Saturday ... . . . .

Analysis: Biden promises foreign policy shifts

In the course of the weekend gathering, Iranian parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani spoke of a "golden opportunity for the United States" — suggesting if Washington was serious about conciliation Tehran could respond in kind. He said more than once that the U.S. needed to change "to a chess game instead of a boxing match."

Gerard wrote:The Persistence of Ideology

Keshav wrote:Just reading that nonsense about Chinese censorship makes you glad our respective countries operate as they do.

Sanjay M wrote:

Keshav wrote:Just reading that nonsense about Chinese censorship makes you glad our respective countries operate as they do.

Except for BR, of course. They prefer politburo censorship.

INDIA’S GROWING interests in Central Asia are well-recognised. There is a growing convergence between the US and Indian interests, especially their reluctance to see the region fall under the exclusive influence of Russia or China. India was worried in the 1990s when Russian influence in Central Asia weakened substantially with a commensurate rise in the Chinese influence. This negatively impacted upon Indian threat perceptions which stabilised only after the growing US presence in the region since 2001.

India views itself as a stabiliser and security provider in the region and, with its growing economic clout, an attractive economic power. India’s interest in securing reliable energy supplies and trade through Central Asia remains substantial. India’s ties with the regional states are growing. It has little incentive to support forces that seek destabilisation in Afghanistan. It is no surprise that India opened its air base in Ayni, Tajikistan, in 2002 to guard against growing instability in the region. India’s ties with regional states are growing and the moderate Islam of the region makes it imperative for India to engage the region more substantively. Other powers, barring China, have recognised this reality and have sought to harness India towards achieving common goals. Russia, for example, supports Indian membership in the SCO.

The Obama administration has indicated its willingness to bargain with Russia on major global issues. Yet, as the recent events in Kyrgyzstan demonstrate, the underlying tone of the US-Russia bilateral relationship is becoming more competitive. This will make it harder for India to pursue its interests in Central Asia. As such it becomes imperative for Indian diplomacy to work towards major power cooperation to bring some measure of stability to Afghanistan as well as the larger Central Asian region.

Harsh V. Pant teaches in King’s College London

A report published in January by the United States Joint Forces Command called Mexico and Pakistan "two large and important states [which] bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse".

"We have every reason to believe that the United States and China will recover and that together we will help to lead the world recovery," Clinton said as she held a news conference with the Chinese foreign minister, Yang Jiechi. "I appreciate greatly the Chinese government's continuing confidence in United States treasuries. I think that's a well grounded confidence."

China, which has foreign exchange reserves worth around $2tn, is the world's largest holder of US government debt.

Yang said: "In making use of our foreign exchange reserves, we want to ensure the safety of the reserves, the good value of them and also the liquidity of the forex reserves."

Igorr wrote:"I appreciate greatly the Chinese government's continuing confidence in United States treasuries. I think that's a well grounded confidence."

China, which has foreign exchange reserves worth around $2tn, is the world's largest holder of US government debt.

Feb. 27 (Bloomberg) -- Poland is looking beyond a missile- defense system that President Barack Obama might scrap and is focused on other elements of a security deal with the U.S. while mending ties with Russia, the top Polish diplomat said.

Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said his country is most interested in U.S. pledges in the agreement he signed last year in the face of Russian opposition, including an American garrison with Patriot interceptor missiles. The two sides also agreed to act jointly on military and non-military threats.

“What we would like to be honored is what went along with” the missile-defense system, Sikorski, 46, said in an interview yesterday during a visit to Washington that included a meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “We paid quite a political price for the agreement, both in terms of internal politics and in our relations with Russia.”

Sikorski’s stance follows repeated signals from Obama’s national security officials that they might delay or drop the system devised under President George W. Bush. Russia has described the proposed shield as a threat.

Sikorski said Polish leaders aren’t “lobbyists” for the missile-defense system, to be located in Poland and the Czech Republic and intended to ward off potential missile attacks from Iran. “It’s a U.S. project and a U.S. decision,” he said.

Poland and other eastern European nations are gauging their relationships with the new U.S. administration after building close ties with Bush, who was eager to draw on them as partners amid tensions with Iran and Russia. Governments in the region also are pushing for one of their leaders to take over as Secretary-General of NATO when Jaap de Hoop Scheffer’s term ends in July.
..
....

NEW DELHI, Feb. 28 (Xinhua) -- The six-member Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) has invited India to attend an international conference on Afghanistan to be held in Moscow on March 27, according to a report by local daily the Asian Age on Saturday.

SCO secretary-general Bolat Nurgaliev Friday held talks with Indian defense and security analysts in New Delhi and called on India to contribute to the success of the conference, which he hoped would "frankly discuss the situation in Afghanistan and its influence on neighboring states," according to the report.

"India had an important role to play in strengthening the SCO. We respect India's peaceful foreign policy. We share common positions on many issues. India has good relations with all SCO members and the prospects for future relations are very bright," the report quoted Nurgaliev as saying.

The Russian diplomat also said that the Iranian nuclear issue should not be solved with the use of force or the threat of use of force, and called on the international community to "involve (Iran) and not isolate it," said the report.

Russia is the current rotating chair of the SCO which includes China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, the Kyrghyz Republic and Tajikistan. India holds observer status at SCO.

Sanjay M wrote:With drug-war violence increasingly spiraling out of control in Mexico, media and experts are speculating on the increasing possibility of Mexico as a failed state approaching collapse.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blog ... psing.aspx


Under what scenarios and event triggers would US military forces engage in direct intervention on Mexican territory?

What are the options and consequences, when it comes to intervention or non-intervention?

Sanjay M wrote:With drug-war violence increasingly spiraling out of control in Mexico, media and experts are speculating on the increasing possibility of Mexico as a failed state approaching collapse.

Sanjay M wrote:If the US military were to become heavily involved in war across the border, what is the possibility of external actors like Chavez or AlQaeda seizing the opportunity to intervene in the situation? After all, the Mexican conflict is shaping into an intensely bitter struggle, and any criminals on the losing end due to US intervention might be very open to assistance from external actors.

Perhaps Chavez doesn't have the guts to take on the US by backing armed factions near its border, but AlQaeda certainly has that audacity. With their complexions, trans-nationalist arab militants could certainly blend in easily with the Mexican population.

The thing is that AlQaeda would certainly like to come within striking range of the American homeland, instead of battling with them from afar. As 9/11 proved, the ability to strike your opponent's homeland has a powerful psychological effect.

We all know how the Spanish Civil War became a magnet for leftists around the world to join that fight. Is there any potential for a Mexican Civil War to mutate into something similar?

Tilak wrote:History in the making.. Capitalistas seeking bail-outs from Communistas and ~ vice versa. IMF and World Bank to follow suit..

Igorr, definitely bad news for India. I will be posting two sets of news items, to clear the air a bit wrt. your question.

At the heart of this crisis is the huge imbalance between the United States, with its current account deficit in excess of 1 percent of world gross domestic product, and the surplus countries that finance it: the oil exporters, Japan and emerging Asia. Of these, the relationship between China and America has become the crucial one. More than anything else, it has been China's strategy of dollar reserve accumulation that has financed America's debt habit. Chinese savings were a key reason U.S. long-term interest rates stayed low and the borrowing binge kept going. Now that the age of leverage is over, "Chimerica" -- the partnership between the big saver and the big spender -- is key.

In essence, we need the Chinese to be supportive of U.S. monetary easing and fiscal stimulus by doing more of the same themselves. There needs to be agreement on a gradual reduction of the Chimerican imbalance via increased U.S. exports and increased Chinese imports. The alternative -- a sudden reduction of the imbalance via lower U.S. imports and lower Chinese exports -- would be horrible.

There also needs to be an agreement to avoid a rout in the dollar market and the bond market, which is what will happen if the Chinese stop buying U.S. government bonds, the amount of which is now set to increase massively.

Memo to President-elect Barack Obama: Don't wait until April for the next G-20 summit. Call a meeting of the Chimerican G-2 for the day after your inaugural. Don't wait for China to call its own meeting of a new "G-1" in Beijing.