India-US News and Discussion

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Apr 2010 05:51

SBajwa wrote:I am all for Kamalnath exchange for Headley and Ravinder singh.

Chankian!

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 10 Apr 2010 05:55

Obama's India Problem

Author: Evan A. Feigenbaum, Senior Fellow for East, Central, and South Asia

http://www.cfr.org/publication/21862/ob ... ssue_brief

Disagreements loom, particularly on the Obama administration's Afghanistan-Pakistan policy. Indeed, it would be difficult to overstate just how skeptical many in India's strategic elite are of the administration's approach. In New Delhi, Pakistan's role as a central go-between in efforts to promote reconciliation with elements of the Taliban is widely seen as a fool's errand. Many believe the administration's effort will fail. And they believe--deeply--that India will be left holding the bag once U.S. forces begin to withdraw in 2011.

The administration needs to ramp up its relationship with India now. After all, even if Obama does everything right--and many Indians believe he has gone badly wrong in Afghanistan and with Pakistan--there will still be constraints on the U.S.-India relationship. India has moved beyond nonalignment, to be sure, but it has yet to coalesce around a new foreign policy vision. And although New Delhi may ultimately settle on a strategy that is conducive to a more open and global partnership with the United States, that is not assured.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 10 Apr 2010 06:16

Dinner in Nov and Chai biskoot in April. MMS visit upgraded to a structured meeting. Indians should be overjoyed by this.

http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/apr/ ... -singh.htm

All is well, Obama to tell PM

United States President Obama [ Images ] will host Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [ Images ] in a mini bilateral summit before the start of the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington beginning April 12, instead of the brief meeting originally slated on the margins of the parley, claim sources. The report about the possible meeting comes amidst growing concern in both the US and New Delhi [ Images ] that the Obama administration has been ignoring India [ Images ].

Administration and diplomatic sources told rediff.com that senior State Department officials, led by Under Secretary of State William Burns and Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs Robert Blake, had apparently prevailed on the White House to schedule a separate structured meeting between President Obama and Dr Singh.

bahut meherbani ki. Now ties are on track.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 10 Apr 2010 06:42

csharma wrote:Obama's India Problem

Author: Evan A. Feigenbaum, Senior Fellow for East, Central, and South Asia

http://www.cfr.org/publication/21862/ob ... ssue_brief

They want to sell reactors and maybe use Indian forex reserves to help prop up the dollar - but as far as Af-Pak is concerned, the US is committed to giving the Paks a central role.

Yes, the US did make a significant effort for India at the NSG, but I don't see any other positive developments for India.

Disagreements loom, particularly on the Obama administration's Afghanistan-Pakistan policy. Indeed, it would be difficult to overstate just how skeptical many in India's strategic elite are of the administration's approach. In New Delhi, Pakistan's role as a central go-between in efforts to promote reconciliation with elements of the Taliban is widely seen as a fool's errand. Many believe the administration's effort will fail. And they believe--deeply--that India will be left holding the bag once U.S. forces begin to withdraw in 2011. ....

The administration is unlikely to overcome this Indian skepticism anytime soon, at least on its approach to Afghanistan and Pakistan. It has committed and recommitted to its "AfPak" strategy. Thus achievements like the reprocessing agreement will be critical if the administration seeks to buttress other parts of the U.S.-India relationship.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 10 Apr 2010 06:43

The significant effort at NSG was done by the previous administration not this one.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 10 Apr 2010 08:37

Statement by the Prime Minister on the eve of his departure for USA and Brazil

http://www.indianembassy.org/newsite/pr ... /Apr/6.asp

I expect the Summit to focus on nuclear terrorism and proliferation of sensitive nuclear materials and technologies. These are legitimate concerns which require firm responses. India has a well developed indigenous nuclear energy programme, which dates back six decades. We have an impeccable record of security, safety and non-proliferation which reflects our conduct as a responsible nuclear power.

India has been a consistent advocate of complete and universal global nuclear disarmament. We were among the first countries in the world to call for a world free of nuclear weapons. I am encouraged by the fact that this approach is finding greater resonance today. We will continue to call for more meaningful progress in this direction.

During my stay in Washington I look forward to having bilateral meetings with President Obama, President Nazarbaev of Kazakhstan, President Sarkozy of France, Prime Minister Harper of Canada and other world leaders.

From Washington, I will proceed to Brasilia to attend the fourth IBSA Summit and the second BRIC Summit. These groupings reflect the growing role of emerging economies in shaping the global economic order.

...

I will also hold separate bilateral discussions with President Lula da Silva. Relations with Brazil are an important pillar of our policy towards Latin America and have witnessed substantial expansion in recent years.

In Brasilia I will also have bilateral meetings with President Hu Jintao of China and President Dmitry Medvedev of Russia.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 10 Apr 2010 09:41

Remarks on Nuclear Nonproliferation at the University of Louisville as Part of the McConnell Center's Spring Lecture Series

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/04/139958.htm

And so there are three pillars to the Nonproliferation Treaty. One is disarmament, one is nonproliferation, and one is the peaceful use of nuclear weapon – nuclear energy, the peaceful use of nuclear energy for civil nuclear purposes. So the United States will continue to demonstrate its willingness, in concert with Russia, because we have so many more weapons than any of the other countries by a very, very big margin. And other countries that have pursued nuclear weapons, like India and Pakistan, for example, have done so in a way that has upset the balance of nuclear deterrent, and that’s why we’re working with both countries very hard to try to make sure that their nuclear stockpiles are well tended to and that they participate with us in trying to limit the number of nuclear weapons. And both of them will be in Washington this next week.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Apr 2010 11:45

deleted - do not post entire articles.

What is the relevance of an article about Russian children being adopted/returned by Americans to this thread? What is so important about this that you would violate the copyright holder's rights and post the entire article?

negi · Post by **negi** » 10 Apr 2010 21:33

csharma wrote:Dinner in Nov and Chai biskoot in April. MMS visit upgraded to a structured meeting. Indians should be overjoyed by this.

That is because the self professed Messiah has nuclear disarmament on mind , now I see the reason for token cosmetic change in Unkil's nuclear doctrine followed by a shrill nonsensical statement issued by Madam kilton as to how Bakis and Indians have disturbed the nuclear balance in the region . All this is part of fielding being set for MMS .

What is absurd is our foreign policy is to take $hit until eternity but not issue any public statements to seek clarification from the entities who indulge in slander and issue libelous statements , and all this when Indian track record has been clean . The MEA should have called the lady's bluff then and there and put Unkil in the box instead as it was Unkil who acted as a pimp in nuclear blackmarket where lizard and TSP were busy proliferating nukes to NoKo and Iran .

And then people have the temerity to label us on fora as confrontational and maximalists .

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 11 Apr 2010 00:01

India to seek Headley's extradition

kittoo · Post by **kittoo** » 11 Apr 2010 00:44

India to play role in Afghanistan 'with or without America

http://toi.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ ... 782551.cms

Amid talk of the US looking for a strategy to exit Afghanistan, India today made it clear that it would continue to play a role in the war-torn nation "with or without America" as it has crucial stakes in the stability of country on its periphery.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 11 Apr 2010 03:05

US accepts India's stand on not signing NPT: State Dept Advisor

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 11 Apr 2010 03:19

While skimming through channels, just watched a tit bit on Faux news talking about the nuke summit in DC. Surprisingly, the anchorwoman highlighted the viiews of MMS on preventing nuke terrorism to an MIT security specialist who was the guest. She went on to ask his views on MMS's statement that India has an impeccable record on profileration (don't know why she brought that up), to which the MIT security expert laughed and said that India tested, India has the bomb, India has not signed the NPT, and thats not an impeccable record

.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 11 Apr 2010 03:24

Stray dogs barking at the nuclear caravan as it passes by.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 11 Apr 2010 04:33

MIT security expert laughed and said that India tested, India has the bomb, India has not signed the NPT, and thats not an impeccable record .

And the great unwashed lap up the vomit.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2010 05:17

CRamS wrote: MIT security expert laughed and said that India tested, India has the bomb, India has not signed the NPT, and thats not an impeccable record.

NPT is unfortunately, from the US point of view, the sole measuring scale for nuclear proliferation.. Again, unfortunately so.. Someone needs to wake 'em up..

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 11 Apr 2010 05:31

shukla wrote:
CRamS wrote: MIT security expert laughed and said that India tested, India has the bomb, India has not signed the NPT, and thats not an impeccable record.
NPT is unfortunately, from the US point of view, the sole measuring scale for nuclear proliferation.. Again, unfortunately so.. Someone needs to wake 'em up..

And thats why as much as we SDREs like the US to view us differently from TSP, US won't, because even TSP has not signed the NPT, pegged its signing to that of India, and hence in US mind, no matter how much TSP proliferates, its India TSP equal equal onlee.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2010 05:41

CRamS wrote:And thats why as much as we SDREs like the US to view us differently from TSP, US won't, because even TSP has not signed the NPT, pegged its signing to that of India, and hence in US mind, no matter how much TSP proliferates, its India TSP equal equal onlee.

yup.. and seems like the only way to convince the Paki's to sign it is to get India to sign it.. Obviously the summit on non-proliferation is aimed at our neighbors who produced the "father of Nuclear Proliferation" - A Q Khan... and I am sure he's not the only one there..

Also, the illusion that signing the treaty would prevent the likes of AQ's is just funny..

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2010 05:45

Self-interest, not US, decides India’s regional policy: Officials

On the eve of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s talks with the US President Barack Obama here on Sunday, sources in the Indian delegation confirmed that the regional security situation in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran would figure prominently in the discussion between the two leaders. India and the US share many common goals in the region such as the stability and independence of Afghanistan, the officials said. The issue at hand, they added, was about “how we get there”.

Meanwhile, India has received and accepted an invitation to an international conference on nuclear issues being organised by Iran later this month. The Indian participation is expected to be at the level of the ambassador in Tehran.

As they seek to limit the differences on the evolving regional situation, Singh and Obama will also review the progress in the bilateral relations since they met last November at the White House.

There is satisfaction on the Indian side with progress made since last November on implementing the civil nuclear deal. The negotiations on the ‘arrangements and procedures’ for reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel have been concluded.

On the civil nuclear liability Bill that Indian Parliament must approve before the US companies can sell reactors to India, the officials said there was greater appreciation at home of the necessity for such a legislation. The officials hope that a parliamentary standing committee will discuss and resolve the remaining differences.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 11 Apr 2010 06:31

I would not pay too much attention to the nuclear meet, important as it is.

However ..........................

shukla wrote:Self-interest, not US, decides India’s regional policy: Officials

This is a pronounced deviation from previous, perhaps, quieter effort/s. Even China has somewhat come around to considering sanctions via the UN.

On Iran, too, India is saying that it has a mind of its own. Landing in here amid a strong American campaign to isolate Tehran, India is saying that it remains to be persuaded.

“We don’t think sanctions are the way to go,” the officials said. Questioning whether new sanctions will solve the problem, the officials called for a “broader engagement” with Iran that will resolve the international concerns about Tehran’s nuclear programme.

Meanwhile, India has received and accepted an invitation to an international conference on nuclear issues being organised by Iran later this month. The Indian participation is expected to be at the level of the ambassador in Tehran.

Looks like the US has crossed the (Indian) line drawn on the Ak-Pak policy.

Waiting for the US Senate to step in now.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Apr 2010 06:34

The US and the Western world have for long ( a couple of centuries?) been accustomed to playing by what they can only call "our rules'

"We make the rules the world follows..Anyone who doesn't is a pariah and either does not count or will be consistently opposed, punished and forced to come into line. "

Many of the things we take for granted arise from this paradigm and they are so deeply engraved in our own minds that we innocently seek to belong more and more and more to the structures set up by those who have made the rules. We want to be equal with them in a game where they make the rules. They will punish us if we make new rules or do not follow their rule book.

But the mental slavery of many Indians is so complete that they believe that all other Indians also think like they do and seek to follow the rules set by others AND that it is the following of those rules that will "give us honor" because "honor is to be bestowed by the great nations who made the rules"

Indians seeking a seat at the "high table" - a security council seat is a classic example of mental slavery. "You set the rules. I will follow them and beg you to appoint me a place at your table"The idea assumes that there is a some unbiased dharma among the occupiers of the seats at that high table. The only dharma there is is unmitigated greed at protecting partisan self interest while pushing everyone else down. The only way to get any seat is to push other chairs aside and put one's own chair there and say "So there..."

The CTBT, NPT and FMCT are another bunch of rules made by a few and sought to be imposed on others. India has broken many but not all those rules. Those who make the rules have already broken all the rules set for others or break them regularl. Sticking to the rules is only for the ghulaams who must follow the law: "We make the rules the world follows..Anyone who doesn't is a pariah and either does not count or will be consistently opposed, punished and forced to come into line. "

The MTCR with a 300 km limit is yet another such set of rules that has been broken by many. And for many years I have viewed the Geneva convention itself as a similar bunch of biased rules - humane as they may seem.

The point of saying all this is that we have to make and follow our own rules. In the course of doing that the people who are going to be pissed off the most are the people who are accustomed to sitting at the table making rules and expecting the ghulaams of the world to eat the crap rules. And when they are pissed off they will do exactly what pissed off people do
1) try and "punish" the rule breaker India
2) try and "insult" rule breaker India by equating with GUBO-giving slave-whore like Pakistan

The West/US often tells India "Behave like the slaves you are. Behave like Pakistan. And we will help you like we help Pakistan" It is wrong to get angry when they say that. It only means we are on the right track.

JMT

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 11 Apr 2010 07:46

The point of saying all this is that we have to make and follow our own rules. In the course of doing that the people who are going to be pissed off the most are the people who are accustomed to sitting at the table making rules and expecting the ghulaams of the world to eat the crap rules. And when they are pissed off they will do exactly what pissed off people do
1) try and "punish" the rule breaker India
2) try and "insult" rule breaker India by equating with GUBO-giving slave-whore like Pakistan

Interesting.

Which is why Pokhran I and II were game-changers. IG and ABV are less appreciated than they should be for the fartburn they caused tfta greats like Nixon-kissinger ("She's a bltch")) and Clinton ("we'll fall on them like a ton of bricks") only.

Sure the NSG regime and a whole complex set of sanctions regimes set in thereafter but the rule-setters couldn't get Yindia to give up either J&K or the 'strategic' program.

BTW, even the gubo wh0re TSP hasn't given up its n-jewels unless N-cube's nook-nude theory holds.

So yup, whilst the high-table sitters can smoke themselves ever higher, situ on the ground says when push comes to sh0ve, even the SDREs may (surprise, surprise!) shove some ageing and broke high-priests off the high table. Until the time is right, SDREs ought to bide their time, smiling and fawning excessively (Jaswant-Talbott anybody?) to further delude the high-priests.

Who knows, we may witness history returned in our own lifetimes?

Jai ho and Jai hind.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 11 Apr 2010 08:29

When the P5 destroy their nuclear arsenals as required by the NPT India will happily sign the NPT. Until then, a one finger salute is all they get. The MTCR has always been a pet peeve of mine. The US openly defies it by gifting Trident SLBMs to the UQ. Yet we have DDM in India proudly stating we adhere to "international norms" by restricting the Brahmos CM to 290 KM.

APJ Kalam once mentioned India should export missiles and openly defy the MTCR. Alas no one in the GOI had the cajones to do so.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Apr 2010 08:53

tejas wrote: APJ Kalam once mentioned India should export missiles and openly defy the MTCR. Alas no one in the GOI had the cajones to do so.

Alternative explanations exist

a) Indian cojones are in the grip of some squeezer
b) Indian missiles are no good

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 11 Apr 2010 09:36

Shiv garu, Indian cajones have been in the grips of Unkil's sqeezer for over 60 years now. Its just before they could always squeeze away with impunity. With India's current rate of economic growth and the size of its domestic market, I think Unkil is no longer the ringmaster he once was.

The europeans (mainly France) and Russians are tripping over themselves to offer us products which is like pulling teeth to get from the US. I say buy $100 billion worth of reactors from anyone willing to give fuel guarantees and reprocessing tech. before buying a single reactor from the US. Give the MRCA contract to Russia or France. Then lets see how many more free F-16s the Pukes get.

Before India sanctions Iran we should ask for sanctions against a far greater threat to world peace: Pukistan. Playing good cop with Unkil has gotten us nowhere. Time to start playing bad cop.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 11 Apr 2010 10:01

tejas wrote:When the P5 destroy their nuclear arsenals as required by the NPT India will happily sign the NPT. Until then, a one finger salute is all they get. The MTCR has always been a pet peeve of mine. The US openly defies it by gifting Trident SLBMs to the UQ. Yet we have DDM in India proudly stating we adhere to "international norms" by restricting the Brahmos CM to 290 KM.

APJ Kalam once mentioned India should export missiles and openly defy the MTCR. Alas no one in the GOI had the cajones to do so.

Be careful for what you wish. They MAY increase the range of the Brahmos to 299 Kms.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 11 Apr 2010 10:18

Hopefully Rao garu, the 290 KM range is for show only and the real range known only to God and Sonia Maino.

Cheers.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Apr 2010 18:13

India to seek direct access to Headley under 2005 accord

India will seek direct access to Pakistani-American terrorist David Headley under a bilateral agreement signed in 2005 and a communication is being sent to the U.S. to allow its investigators to question him. The draft letter was being examined by Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram after it was prepared by Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam and officials of National Investigation Agency (NIA), official sources said here.

The NIA has registered a case against Headley and his Pakistani-Canadian accomplice Tahawwur Rana for allegedly conspiring to wage a war against the country and under other sections of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

The letter would be sent to the U.S. through diplomatic channels for seeking direct access to Headley as he is wanted in India for conspiring with terror outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba in carrying out attacks in Mumbai on November 26, 2008 that left over 160 people dead, they said. Headley had pleaded guilty to the charges in a U.S. court at Chicago.

India had signed a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) with the U.S. in 2001 which was further revised in 2005. The new provisions enhance the ability of the two countries to pursue their common objective of law enforcement by putting in place a legal mechanism to enable them to provide to each other assistance in connection with the investigation, prosecution, prevention and suppression of crime including those relating to terrorism, narcotics, trafficking, economic and organised crime.

The assistance under the Treaty shall include taking the testimony or statements of persons, providing documents, records and items of evidence, locating or identifying persons or items; serving documents, transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes, executing requests for searches and seizures, assistance in proceedings related to seizure and forfeiture of asset, restitution, collection of fines.

The issue of access to Headley will be also raised by India at official level during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s four-day visit to the United States. According to American law, the U.S. Department of Justice will have to take permission from the Chicago court, which is hearing Headley’s case, about India’s request for direct access to him. Headley, who was arrested by FBI in October, had pleaded guilty to all terror charges before a US court on March 18.

negi · Post by **negi** » 12 Apr 2010 07:19

Obama's faulty new start
Pretty much sums up Jingo pov on MMS , India and Unkil .

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 12 Apr 2010 09:07

negi wrote:Obama's faulty new start
Pretty much sums up Jingo pov on MMS , India and Unkil .

Good arguments, but thats not the way US sees them. India can repeat Chincom TSP nuke prolidferation yada yada till it turns blue, it will be like beating a rock, but US will be unmoved. In their colonial/racist worldview, the smarty SDREs must eschew nukes, nukes areonly meant for the "big boys", the smartie SDREs must instead focus on back office IT and the like, as this not only benefits India, but west as well (and thats the strategic vision US has for India). And once the SDREs fall in line, US will take care of the Guboing TSP RAPE in a heartbeat. Those TSP pipsqueaks are nothing if not for their usefulness to be a pain in India's ass. So you get the picture, in US's mind, its India TSP, India TSP, and this is not going to change through force of argument. India needs a game changer, or just painly endure the current status quo.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 12 Apr 2010 10:22

AFPak dominates PM Manmohan Singh-Obama talks

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 786085.cms

US-India ties appear to be back on track after President Barack Obama assured Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that Washington fully recognized India's security concerns arising from the AfPak region and wouldn't do anything inimical to it since it valued the prospect of a strong strategic partnership with New Delhi.

Relief, satisfaction, and a renewed confidence was palpable among Indian officials as they briefed the media on a 50-minute meeting between Obama and Singh on a beautiful spring afternoon that brought hordes of people to the vicinity of the White House to see the finale of the cherry blossom festival. It also brought back color to US-India ties with Obama's assertion of support on various issues after a rather bleak run-up that called into question that state of play between the two countries.

Among the assurances that the Indian side reported receiving from Obama was that the US would work through the legal process to provide access to LeT terrorist David Headley (a sore point with New Delhi) and also seek continued Indian support in the developmental efforts in Afghanistan.

Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao, who briefed the media on the Obama-Singh meeting said the US President told Prime Minister Singh that he fully understood India's concerns about the security situation in the region and assured him that "there is no country in the world where the opportunities for a strong strategic partnership are greater and more important to him and the United States" than the one with India.

Obama's assurance came after Prime Minister Singh strongly raised India's concern with him about Pakistan's relentless pursuit of terrorism as a policy option. "India's interests are constantly on the US mind," Rao, who was part of the Indian delegation at the meeting, quoted President Obama as saying.

A Prime Minister who has gained the reputation of being the most pro-American leader to occupy high office in India stepped up to a Sunday meeting with the US President to convey to him that New Delhi cannot forgo its strategic and security interests to US prevarication or Pakistani pressure in AfPak region, especially as both US and India desired the same end result – the defeat of terrorism.

In this context, Singh had a litany of complaints and grievances that over-ran Obama’s suggestion to reduce tensions through dialogue with Pakistan. Singh told him that he saw no will on part of Pakistan to punish the perpetrators of the 26/11 Mumbai massacre even as terrorists such as Hafeez Mohammed Saeed and Ilyas Kashmir continued to operate with impunity.

...

Rao told journalists that the 50 minute meeting was “extremely positive and constructive” although the media scrum before the meeting began made much of the stolid body language on a warm spring day. It was the first meeting between the two leaders after the Singh State visit last November when Obama hosted an elegant dinner banquet for him at the White House.

Ahead of the meeting, the Indian side made it clear in unusually blunt language that New Delhi will not forfeit its core interests in its sphere of influence (read Afghanistan) just because of Pakistani’s existential paranoia.

Pakistan wants Washington to press India to downsize its growing presence and influence in Afghanistan because it fears being caught in a pincer. New Delhi believes its interests in Kabul pre-date the formation of Pakistan; Afghanistan was India’s neighbor before Pakistan was even a glimmer in its founder’s eye.

...

The tough language used ahead of the meeting – and the litany of grievances conveyed by Singh to Obama -- was unusual for New Delhi which has preferred to play a rather muted role even as Washington has ignored India’s concerns over growing Pakistani belligerence built on U.S dependence on it for the war in Afghanistan.

But it reflected the frustration in the Indian establishment over US prevarication in Afghanistan and its pandering to Pakistan’s toxic policies that include backing selective Taliban factions that remain its proxies. Washington has winked at this, and sometimes endorsed it, continuing its efforts to get a handle on the situation.

Singh also pushed back at Obama’s pressure on India to seek accommodation with Pakistan, which Indian officials say was unnecessary considering the prime minister is ahead of (and often at odds with) the public mood in India when it comes to seeking peace with Pakistan.

...

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 12 Apr 2010 10:36

Audio file of the media briefing by Foreign Secretary Ms. Nirupama Rao at Marriott Hotel, Washington DC on April 11, 2010

http://www.indianembassy.org/Voice/Apr%201110.mp3

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Apr 2010 13:26

Well one sincerely hopes that Uncle "O" means what he says and more importantly gets the "O" Team doing his bidding.We've seen Ma Clinton equate India and Pak in her latest mouthing,as if India was a nuclear proliferator like Pak.More's the pity.Perhaps if we had also sold missiles and N-tech to all and sundry,we would have the US prostrating before us ! The problem with the US is that in recent times with Pak,especially when the going gets tough for the US in Af-Pak,it does an about turn,lavishly rewarding Pak with gifts for its open blackmail.

When Dubya Bush played his "India gambit" on the global chessboard,despite many Indians sceptical about it,it did appear that he wanted an entirely new change in Indo-US relations.It was however "fogged" by the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,but its contours could be clearly made out.There was even in his administration many pro-Pak elements belonging to the US establishment who reward dictators and military men and penalise genuine democracies like India.However Bush stuck to his guns,one must give him credit fot that, and one hoped that a new US foreign policy that did not twin India and Pak together was forthcoming.It also saw India make many concessions to the US on economic (investment),foreign (Iran) and defence (Buying US arnms) policy in the hope of a lasting new change because of the new "strategic relationship" .

Sadly,that hope has been belied by the US's intransigence to bring Pak to book over 26/11,extraditing Headley/Gilani and a host of other terrorist leaders and in the re-arming of Pak,ignoring India on Afghanistan,moves totally detrimental to India.How much this tete-a-tete between MMS and Uncle "O" will achieve in the US's foreign policy pendelum swinging back towards India remains to be seen.As Reagan famously said,"trust but verify".We will have to watch and wait and keep our powder dry.

PS: A note of caution on "tidings of glad news".I had a conversation recently with one in the know of things,who surprised me when he said that I would be shocked at the number of pro-US media outfits,who were doing their "Uncle's bidding"!

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 12 Apr 2010 14:09

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/internati ... 394714.ece

During the media interaction Mr. Rhodes however declined to comment on whether or not Mr. Obama had assured Dr. Singh that India would have access to Mumbai attacks suspect David Coleman Headley, currently in custody in the U.S. The case is the responsibility of the U.S. Justice Department and the Attorney General, he said.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 12 Apr 2010 14:16

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/internati ... 394751.ece

The U.S. President said he favoured reduction of tensions between India and Pakistan but the Prime Minister made it clear that the “future of South Asia would be determined by the manner in which terrorism is tackled“.

During the meeting at the Blair House, Dr. Singh emphasised that Pakistan needed to take “convincing action” against those responsible for Mumbai attacks, she said.

Mr. Obama said the U.S. understood India’s concerns with regard to activities of Lashkar-e-Taiba and other terror groups from Pakistan and Afghanistan and that Washington was “engaging” Pakistan on these issues.

While talking about the menace of terrorism emanating from Pakistan, Dr. Singh referred to Headley, activities of LeT and its chief Hafiz Saeed and HuJI terrorist Ilyas Kashmiri, Ms. Rao said.

“Unfortunately, there is no will on part of Pakistan to punish those responsible for terrorist attacks in Mumbai,” Ms. Rao quoted the Prime Minister as telling Mr. Obama.

...

To a question, Ms. Rao said the fate of Indo-Pak dialogue had no connection with the meeting between Dr. Singh and Mr. Obama.

She said the U.S. as also the entire world, was aware of India’s approach on dialogue with Pakistan. “The U.S. fully understands” India’s position on the dialogue.

...

Ms. Rao said there would be no meeting between Dr. Singh and Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani here during the Nuclear Security Summit but did not categorically rule out such a possibility in Bhutan during the upcoming SAARC Summit.

...

While talking about Indo-US counter-terrorism cooperation, Mr. Obama said the US was working through legal systems for provision of access to Headley. He said he was supportive of India’s request for provision of access.

...

The US President referred to the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill and expressed hope that it would be passed by Parliament as expeditiously as possible.

...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Apr 2010 17:18

Obama has tried hard to keep to his key election promises,shutting down Camp Gitmo,withdrawing from Iraq and Af-Pak,getting his Health Bill passed,reduction in Strategic Arms,accelerate Middle-East peace talks,etc.
To give him credit he has tried on all fronts,succeeding at home on Health,with Russia on N-arms reductions,stymied on Camp Gitmo and withdrawal of US forces on its two fronts.

On the Af-Pak front,the importance of Pak cannot be underestimated,as perceived as a US "Non-NATO" military ally,Pak's military relationship with the US far supercedes its relationship with India.However,the US is trying hard to fudge the issue by promising India weaponry,which will turn India into another Egypt while Pak will always have the edge like Israel.Sales,rather gifts of US OH Perry anti-sub frigates which the Oz navy has excellently upgraded,P-3 Orion ASW LRMP aircraft are meant to counter the IN not be any means any of the species of Talibs that roam the badlands of Af-Pak! The seduction of India is aimed primarily at reducing Indo-Pak tensions,where Pak is the belligerent and India the victim.Since the "victim" gets ra*ed time and again without kicking the ra*ist in the ghoulies,the US is trying to calm down the aggressor (Pak),by trying to get the victim (India) to forgive and forget and to go along allowing the aggressor his "right of way" in J&K!

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 12 Apr 2010 23:06

I am not sure if this article in Washington Post by G. PARTHASARATHY has been discussed here http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj

Here is something I found interesting

The fact that President Obama didn't take questions from reporters after he left Sunday's meeting with Mr. Singh speaks volumes. What a change from the heady days of the Bush administration, when there was growing recognition in India about the potential for a "new era" of bilateral ties with the U.S.

Since this is coming from an insider in North Block I am feeling there is lot more than what Nirupama Rao said in her press conference.

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 13 Apr 2010 00:14

I found this exactly 180 degree opposite view of India US relations in atimes article by some Peter J Brown http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LD13Df01.html

Pomper said the real problem with the deal is that it gives India a better deal in terms of reprocessing rights from the US than both Japan, which is a non-nuclear state, and Euratom, which is a mix of European nuclear and non-nuclear states.

"Not to mention those countries are closer allies to the US as well," said Pomper. "Those deals laid out explicit criteria under which the US could suspend the agreement. The most important of which that is in Euratom's [deal], for example, but is missing from the India deal is if the other party tests a nuclear device. This seems to open the door to further Indian nuclear tests. Also missing is a provision that it could be suspended in the case of a safeguards violation by Euratom and that was missing from this [agreement]."

Now that means babus at MEA and DAE have really worked hard to ensure India's strategic interest are well served in the deal

Yes, there is a provision that if the agreement is suspended for more than six months, the US will have to enter into consultations on compensating India for its loss, too.

I was

when I read this piece. Its too good to be true

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 13 Apr 2010 02:51

US figures out ‘love-starved’ India : All-year events for happiness - K.P. NAYAR

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 13 Apr 2010 03:20

In South Asia, Obama juggles tactical, strategic considerations

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 395572.ece

Briefing reporters about the Obama-Manmohan meeting on Sunday, Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao quoted the U.S. president as saying there was no country in the world where the opportunities for a strong, strategic partnership are greater and more important to him personally or to the United States, than that with India.

Taken at face value, these words are a throwback to the George W. Bush era, whose strategic embrace of India from 2004 onwards produced the Indo-U.S. nuclear agreement. Indian officials present in the meeting told The Hindu it was reassuring to hear the U.S. President speak directly and warmly about the importance of the bilateral relationship at a time when inter-agency differences on Pakistan and Afghanistan — particularly between the Defence and State departments — have created the impression in New Delhi that Washington no longer considers its partnership with India to be important.

Indian officials said Mr. Obama gave the impression of being aware that the Pakistani military – whose patronage in the past of extremist groups is widely recognised to lie at the root of the present problems of terrorism in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India – had yet to make a full course correction. A timely reminder of the double-game the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate in Pakistan is still playing was provided on Sunday by the Washington Post, which front-paged allegations sourced to American intelligence officials that the ISI had quietly released two Taliban commanders previously in their custody.

Though the Pentagon has consistently sought to push the argument that India needs to be more accommodating of Pakistani concerns across the Durand Line and the Line of Control in Kashmir, Mr. Obama made it a point to reassure Prime Minister Singh that he welcomed the continuing Indian development assistance to Afghanistan. True, the White House readout on this was brief and to the point, and omitted the reference Mr. Rao made in her briefing to the press about Indian “sacrifices.” But a more public expression of American support for India's interests in a country the Pakistani military considers its backyard would be unrealistic given the business Washington hopes to transact with GHQ in Rawalpindi.

Indian officials have taken heart from the fact that President Obama did not link his stated desire to see a reduction in tension between India and Pakistan with what is happening on the Afghan front. Even his reference to the need for tension to be reduced was understated. “If you weren't paying attention, you'd have missed it,” an Indian official who was in the room said, adding that the President made no reference to talks or dialogue, composite or otherwise.

...

While it is too early to take full stock of the Obama-Manmohan meeting, it would seem as if India and the U.S. have come away with a slightly better understanding of each other's policies and constraints.

Even before the April 11 bilateral, senior Indian officials said it would be wrong to assume the U.S. does not know what it is doing with Pakistan or that it is blindly placating the military establishment in the hope that its war in Afghanistan could be outsourced. Indeed, the official conceded that the U.S. was acting rationally in trying to use parts of the Pakistani system to its advantage, while also developing other options. What India didn't want was for any act of appeasement to undermine its own legitimate interests in Afghanistan. In this context, the meeting between President Obama and his Kazakh counterpart, Nursultan Nazarbayev, is especially significant with Astana agreeing to participate in the ‘Northern Distribution Network' supplying U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

The fact that the U.S. did not press India to resume the composite dialogue with Pakistan despite the Pentagon's strong internal advocacy of such a line suggests the Obama administration is not buying the ‘threat from India' alibi the Pakistani military cites as the reason for holding back on the Afghan front.

...