India-US Strategic News and Discussion

[gakakkad]

OT But Thats why Indians should vote for republicans . They ll wreak further havoc in the American economy and thereby hasten India's rise as a super power . Besides they ll never raise taxes .

>>But Philip sir and Ramana sir won't maintaining relations with Iran harm relations with Israel ? (No offense I'm actually curious )

Israel does not have any known natural resource of Interest to us . While Iran has oil . Yummy .

[SwamyG]

CRamS: It is just not Faux News, it is the whole system. There are liberals who are worried about Iran having nooks as well. Then are the fringe liberals - who are against nooks - including USA having them who are opposed to Iran's weaponization. If O wanted to play it down, he could clearly indicate. He has not. The parties are unanimous regarding the decision that Iran should not have nook. Their rhetoric changes according to their constituent of voters.

[Anantha]

This media manipulation is a hallmark of free US, ever since I have been monitoring the worthies. In 1999 State Dept says "nuclear danger in South Asia" and then next day there was an editorial in NYTimes on the same subject. Reporters placed in India would write, "India says" and "Pakistan says" during Paki terror attacks and on terror attacks in Kashmir but when State dept accused some nation when US interests are involved, next day it was taken as a gospel of truth by the media.
NYT lost its credibility amongst the educated readers when it shamelessly went with the WMD before the Iraqi attack.
But lot of damage has been done by unsuspecting desis believing that NYTimes is an aggressively free newspaper. Atleast once a month there is a report on caste system and poverty in India with pictures from obscure places, whereas one never sees these type of reports with countries "allied" to US.
Americans at work place now regard Indians as decent, knowledgeable and as good friendly people. In a way the Indians in the US have contributed (in a small way) to this understanding, but a lot remains to be done to decolonize the Indian and the American mind.

[Agnimitra]

Philip In every local speech BO says he wants to bringg back jobs from India and China in that order!

Indians chart New World waters

A latter-day Christopher Columbus could be forgiven for thinking he was right all along as Indians are set to become the largest segment of foreign workers in the United States. India leads Asia's rush west with 65% of the work visa applications received by US embassies worldwide, but Indian trade associations still complain they cannot get through enough.

In a year in which immigration polices are stormily featuring in the debate for the November elections, United States President Barack Obama appears singing a different visa tune from when assumed office four years ago. India had the highest American visa rejection rates in the world in 2009, a year after Obama became president, according to a US immigration report this month. Visa rejections for Indians rocketed up eight-fold to 22.5% of applications from 2.8% the previous year.

[ramana]

Carl, They are not doing India a favor. They are utilizing the best brains they can get for their money to help revive their economy. In all the recent downturns from Y2K and dotcom bust onwards it was the use of Indian labor force that revived the US companies. They did it two ways: moved their R&D centers to India and brought in high skilled workers. If it werent for that the US high tech companies would have been swamped by South Korean chabols.
One of these days they will give taxt incentives for workers in such important fields!

[ramana]

Some people here might have a fit!

Feeding the US Army


Applies to BO too.

[Philip]

BO,Typical ingrate ."Biting the hand that feeds it..."!

[Christopher Sidor]

Carl, They are not doing India a favor. They are utilizing the best brains they can get for their money to help revive their economy. In all the recent downturns from Y2K and dotcom bust onwards it was the use of Indian labor force that revived the US companies. They did it two ways: moved their R&D centers to India and brought in high skilled workers. If it werent for that the US high tech companies would have been swamped by South Korean chabols.
One of these days they will give taxt incentives for workers in such important fields!

I totally agree with you. US is not doing India any favor, rather it is helping itself. So it is US which owes India and not the other way round.

[krisna]

Indian IT companies employ over 1 lakh in US: Nirupama Rao

Indian companies have invested more than $26 billion in the US in the last five years and the IT companies employ more than one lakh people in that country, New Delhi's top diplomat in Washington has said.

"As per our estimates, Indian IT companies employ over 100,000 people in the US and the Indian IT industry supports over 280,000 jobs indirectly out of which about 200,000 are with US residents," she said.

[CRamS]

Indian IT companies employ over 1 lakh in US: Nirupama Rao

If ever a day comes when even an Indian PM can declare that he/she will bring high-tech jobs from US back to India, that is the day when India can say indeed we will do so unless you (USA) stop the gifting of F-solas to TSP and play these India TSP "balance of power" games. It will be relationship based on an even keel, where each respects the other's strategic considerations.

[Charlie]

Mihir S Sharma: US and them

The tortuous, incestuous and backstabby ethnic politics of the world’s second-largest and second-noisiest democracy has recently been convulsed by debate about the term “Israel-firsters”. It was being used for people accused of continually discovering reasons why US foreign policy should bend to Israel’s interests – and who were being held responsible for the thunderous, warlike drumbeat accompanying increasing tensions with Iran. Everyone then recalled the extremely problematic history of the term, first used in the 1970s by some pretty nasty anti-Semites, and it was quite rightly dropped like a hot potato.

I bring up these distant squabbles over identity and foreign policy partly because that insistent drumbeat began to be heard on our shores last week, with the attack on an Israeli diplomatic vehicle. Israel’s PM blamed Iran — though our own security establishment was quite unusually reticent this time. Immediately, a dozen angry voices began to complain in harsh chorus about India’s apparently unconscionable “pandering” to Iran. After all, it’s Israel that sells our army all that nice tech the Americans can’t sell directly.

And I brought up the now-discredited term partly because, as you listen to people red-facedly demanding to know why Delhi isn’t lining up behind Washington and tightening the screws on Teheran, you’re forced to conclude that India has now been saddled with a large bunch of America-firsters.
Now, on the one hand, we need someone to balance our Blame America Firsters, currently muttering darkly that it was probably Mossad anyway, trying to push India’s slavish neoliberal elite further into line behind the lone superpower. The head of Mossad was here week before last, wasn’t he? That practically proves it.

But the America-firsters’ anger that India is openly conspiring to break the sanctions that the US-led West has so painstakingly imposed needs a bit more examination than does the random conspiracy-mongering of the other lot. For these gentlemen, the attack in Delhi was just another sign that the US, Israel and India are “on the same side”. And the reason India was not immediately offering to provide back-office support to bombing raids against Iran was our hopeless political pandering to Muslims, all of whom presumably vote in Uttar Pradesh as Ayatollah Khamenei tells them to.

Here are the reasons America-firsters are wrong, as well as shockingly hypocritical.

First, they continually underplay what India has to gain from ties to Iran in purely realist terms — economically and strategically. Economically, Iran is India’s second-biggest, and cheapest, source of crude oil. As the world cuts down on Iranian exports, we have the chance to get an even better deal from them. Not just cheaper fuel, but also a rupee-only trade, which means that our faltering export market gets a bit of a boost, too. Strategically, Iran is crucial as an alternative route to India’s allies in Afghanistan once the West callously abandons that country to the tender loving care of the Taliban and their controllers in Rawalpindi.

Second, the claim that foreign policy shouldn’t be “held hostage” to domestic considerations – specifically, the justifiable belief among some sections of our citizenry that we have civilisational links to Iran – is very odd. Of course, the two-facedness of this claim is astonishing: it insists that India must not attend to domestic preferences when shaping its foreign policy in America’s image — even though the US’ foreign policy is, in this respect, pretty transparently a product of its own domestic election-year politics.

But the claim also makes a grave theoretical error. What determines foreign policy in a democracy? The realist pursuit of interests, sure. But those interests are defined by the leanings, emotional and economic, of our citizens. Many of us love America, have lives there and connections there. Oddly, when those are taken into account, it isn’t pandering. But when those with similar ties of emotion to Iran are taken into account, everyone stands around, pointing in horror and bellowing “pandering” at the top of their voices. This magical transmutation of politics-as-usual into pandering happens whenever Indian Muslims are involved, and so it is presumably their fault somehow.

Meanwhile, someone should point out to the America-firsters that suggesting this minor attack means India should help isolate Iran ever so slightly contradicts their other strongly-held view, which corresponds neatly to Washington’s preferences, that India keeps on engaging and placating Pakistan’s security establishment. Wait, Rawalpindi has fewer proven ties to terrorists than Teheran?

Third, India doesn’t need to choose between Israel and Iran. India’s ties with Israel are strong and sustainable. India is now Israel’s second-largest export market, and, frankly, they’re not going to start grumbling at us. Israel’s government has as few allies in the General Assembly and regular trading partners as its people have congenial and safe destinations for tropical vacations.

The essence of realist foreign policy is recognising when someone needs you, and driving a hard bargain. Both Iran and Israel do, currently. Of course, Israel’s occupying this bit of land that isn’t theirs and Iran happens to be ruled by an obscurantist, homosexual-hanging, election-stealing bunch of millenialist theocrats, so we needn’t get misty-eyed about either regime. But India shouldn’t ever be expected to choose between them — especially not when pushed into it by America’s dysfunctional domestic politics.

Basically, the claim that India must choose as America does rests on the unstated belief that this is what our long-term, strategic partnership with America requires. I’m a fan of having a strategic partnership with the US. But someone should remind its backers here what the word “partner” actually means. Hint: it doesn’t mean “poodle”.

Excellent article but I still donot see an appropriate responseby India to US pressure over Iran i.e., US' complete support to Pakistan in every possible way. This should be the only argument that should be made and see how US justifies it.. Iranian Oil, Israeli business come later. Americans Sheltering Dawwood Headley is same as Pakis sheltering UBL.

[Philip]

The Yanquis can "like it or lump it",when it comes to our foreign policy,that is if our foreign policy is determined by the bedrock and foundation being India's fundamental interests as the yardstick and measure of our diplomacy.Unfortunately,for the better part of the UPA-2's term,our foreign policy at times seemed to have been "outsourced" to Washington as a balance for our IT prowess! However,the duplicitous manner in which Pak has been molly-cuddled by Uncle Sam to India's detriment and the induction of new Paki devilry into the equation-our non-existant interference Baluchistan as a trade-off for its perfidy in J&K,et al,has much displeased the Indian establishment to put it mildly.

Regrettably,this weakness in our global "weight" in recent times is in stark contrast to the days of Mrs. G, when India strode the world like a colossus inside and outside the NAM movement.Our influence stretched from Asia to Africa and the Americas too,amongst the former colonies and developing nations.Even within the Commonwealth we showed our mettle over the issue of the apartheid regime of S.Africa,where we battled with Britain to keep S.Africa out of the CW as a pariah state until the regime relented and handed over rule to the black Africans.We do not even display 1% of that influence today, while our non-elected plasticene puppet PM,in turn deliberately appointed his own puppet FM, who appears to suffer from a severe dose of diplomatic Alzheimers,embarrassing the nation not knowing whether he is representing India or Portugal at of all places the UN!

However,despite our buffoonery behaviour and our outsourcing of policies to the US,there appears to be a limit to its arrogance and impertinence that we can stomach.No matter what perfidy Pak pursues against the US,the number of US military lives it has directly or indirectly murdered,the US continues its lust affair with Pak.Even for the weakest kneed Indian diplomutt,this is unacceptable,hence the sudden and surprising stiffening of the spine over the Iran issue.The UPA jolly well knows that if petro prices hit the roof,there will be riots countrywide .This fundamental has not been lost by the political wing of the party which is fighting elections right now ,crucial to its survival until the next gen-election. Indo-US "strategic " blah-blah,has been dumped for more basic neccessities like oil.

[shyamd]

India-US to hold Army exercises in Mahajan Ranges near Pokhran in Rajasthan in March. Defence dialogue on Feb 21, 2012

[Pranav]

The Yanquis can "like it or lump it",when it comes to our foreign policy,that is if our foreign policy is determined by the bedrock and foundation being India's fundamental interests as the yardstick and measure of our diplomacy.

The Iran issue is not so much about non proliferation per se as it is about Israel. I think people are underestimating how deeply passionate US elites are about the security of Israel.

Look at these folks -

[A_Gupta]

Matt Taibi on US media's war-mongering.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/bl ... r-20120217

[ramana]

The Mihir Sharma article shows there is a large MUTU contingent in India.

It would be useful to debate/berate them than indulge in Don Quixote tilts on the BRF againts imagined MUTUS in the forum.

[JwalaMukhi]

Neshant in iran thread writes...

The Iran stuff looks like US/NATO attempt to raise energy insecurity for India & China and throttle both country's development efforts.

It is not just Iran stuff, even support for pakistan is based on energy control. Follow the "energy trail" and everything will fall into place. The hydrocarbon society is going to be for atleast half a century to 100 years, inspite of all things about new clear etc. The control of that either to deny others the enabler nay the very essence on which development rests is paramount.
9 out of 10 recessions have their origins in oil price spiking in US. The amount of paranoia associated with controlling the source of hydrocarbon is obvious. The pakis are also very important in such an endeavour. It explains, why even when unkil gets hit by pakis, they take it on the chin and move on. The maldives and other assorted pieces are used to steer the direction of the energy policy. Even to sell "new clear" fuel route, gentle and not so gentle pushes and nudges will be applied. Just as "follow the money", "follow the energy" is even more important in the dynamics.

[Prem]

http://vintage-everyday.blogspot.com/20 ... -1962.html
Jackie Kennedy visits India, 1962
Chacha Jaan was happy.Check the slide.

[Anurag]

Indo-US bilateral trade expected to cross $100 bn this year
http://www.hindustantimes.com/business- ... 08315.aspx

Can someone tell me how they plan to make this happen within a year. According to the US Census Bureau the bilateral trade was roughly $58 Billion for 2011.

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5330.html

[Prem]

Its goods and services combined trade between Bharat and America.

[Anurag]

Its goods and services combined trade between Bharat and America.

No $hit Sherlock, my question was how do they plan to double it within a year compared to previous trends. What changed in terms of economic policies!!

[VikramS]

http://political-science.uchicago.edu/f ... s-asia.pdf

Must read article about history of US policy in the sub-continent. Nothing most here will not know but everything bought together in one place. Includes reference to the British influence on US policies, and how controlling the "wells of power" was the driving theme six decades ago, and continues to remain so now. Note the later emphasis on Iran in the last part.

[nawabs]

India, China, Brazil driving oil prices higher: Obama

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ind ... epage=true

The growing demand for petroleum in countries like India, China and Brazil would be the major reason for increase in oil prices in the long-term, the US President, Mr Barack Obama, has said. In his remarks on economy in Florida, Mr Obama said in the short-term, instability in West Asia is the reason for its increase. “The biggest thing that’s causing the prices of oil to rise right now is instability in the Middle East — this time in Iran. When uncertainty increases, speculative trading on Wall Street can drive up prices even more. So there are short-term factors at work here,” Mr Obama said.

“But over the long-term, the biggest reason oil prices will rise is growing demand in countries like China, India, and Brazil,” he said. “Just think in five years, the number of cars on the road in China more than tripled. Nearly 10 million were added in 2010 alone. Ten million cars in one year — think about how much oil that requires. And those numbers will only get bigger over time,” Mr Obama argued.

He said the US consumes more than a fifth of the world’s oil, but it has only two per cent of the world’s oil reserves. “That means we can’t just rely on fossil fuels from the last century. We can’t just allow ourselves to be held hostage by the ups and downs of the world oil market. We have to keep developing new sources of energy,” he said. In 2010, the dependence on foreign oil was under 50 per cent for the first time in 30 years. In 2011, the United States relied less on foreign oil than in any of the last 16 years, Mr Obama said.
“Because of the investments we’ve made, the use of clean, renewable energy in this country has nearly doubled — and thousands of Americans have jobs because of it.
“We’re taking every possible action to safely develop a near hundred-year supply of natural gas — something that experts believe will support more than 600,000 jobs by the end of the decade,” he said.

Your wars will drive up the cost of oil for us.
Looks like he is readying the US public for rise in oil prices after they attack Iran.

[arunsrinivasan]

Very good take down of Khan/Nicholas Burn's hypocrisy by an American - Read in full.

Is India Being Irresponsible?

The money quote

And look, Burns is making a very solid point. If India wants a good relationship with the United States, they shouldn't do business with America's enemies. After all, the U.S. has certainly held itself to that standard with India's enemies. Right?

[Ravi Karumanchiri]

X-POSTED NOTICE RE: STRATFOR “Strategic Forecasting” // “Global Intelligence”

Rakshaks,

I’m not sure how much “play” this story got – I’ve had my head down for a few weeks now – but perhaps this event provides an opportunity you’ll want to avail yourself of:

It recently made the news that one of America’s “thought-leader” think tanks “STRATFOR” was badly hacked, probably by the Chinese, and a list of all their subscribers was revealed, including a virtual “who’s who” in the US Government’s Departments of State and Defense. Indeed, STRATFOR stuff has been required reading for this lot since forever.

Well, in response to this enormous security breach, STRATFOR has removed the (completely compromised) password/login rigmarole and is now offering all of its web content for free.

Go to http://www.stratfor.com/ where the top line reads “Temporarily offering all content for free”. The “Geopolitical Diary” and “Analysis” sections are particularly interesting.

There are literally hundreds of articles on all sorts of (security/defense/geopolitical) topics, many of which will greatly interest Rakshaks.

Certainly, it is interesting to read what those folks are reading – it provides a window on their world, which after all, we all share.

Enjoy!

[Prem]

U.S. Said to Offer India Help With Replacing Iran Oil Supply

Burn is Churned

The U.S. government has offered to help India get alternative supplies for Iranian crude as it looks to squeeze the Persian Gulf producer’s oil revenue, according to three people with knowledge of the matter.
The U.S. may help broker deals with suppliers such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia, the people said, declining to be identified because the information is confidential. Saudi Arabia has already offered to replace Iranian oil supplies if needed, two of the people said. The U.S. is in talks with countries around the world on reducing their dependence on Iranian oil, Victoria Nuland, a spokeswoman at the State Department in Washington, said in an e-mail yesterday. The assurance follows Iran’s offer to sell extra crude to India as the Persian Gulf nation, OPEC’s second-biggest producer, cuts supplies to some European nations in response to sanctions imposed over its nuclear program. The U.S. and European Union tightened sanctions on Iran last month, restricting trade and financial transactions. They say the program is a cover for developing atomic weapons. Iran denies the accusation. This move is going to have an impact and India is going to be hard-nosed in the way they are going to deal with it,” Praveen Kumar, an analyst at Facts Global Energy in Singapore, said. “It’s turned the situation a little in favor of India, which can potentially use it to get a better deal from Iran.India is seeking an additional 5 million tons a year of oil from Saudi Arabia in the year ending March 2013, Junior Oil Minister R.P.N. Singh said in New Delhi yesterday. Saudi Arabia is producing 9.8 million barrels of oil a day and has spare capacity of 2.5 million barrels a day, according to Prince Salman bin Abdulaziz, the kingdom’s deputy oil minister

[Philip]

A warning to all what is going to happen if M.Romney ever becomes pres. of the US of A.Romney is a practising Mormon,the faith founded by one Joseph Smith,who thanks to a vision,allegedly found some golden plates with mysterious markings later deciphered to "show" that JC after his crucifixion went to the Americas and that the US of A is the true "promised land"! The attraction of the faith a long time ago was polygamy,sadly defunct now thanks to the well-known persecution of the Mormons by other white men.

Now the Mormon faith,controversial even in the US has embarked upon even new controversies ,where they posthumously "baptise" dead individuals in order to save their souls.Just days ago,they hurriedly withdrew their baptism of the late Simon Weisenthal,Nazi hunter extraordinaire,after Jewish protests.This has however not deterred them from carrying on with their "crusade" of bptising world famous individuals who must be turning in their graves at the outrage! The latest individual to deserve such an honour from the Mormons is Anne Frank,the courageous Jewish girl ,whose iconic diaries of the terrible purge of Jews from Europe during WW2 became world famous.Once Romney becomes pres.,the Mormons will embark upon their crusade in full flow,with perhaps great souls like Mahatma Gandhi,Sai Baba,etc.,being baptised into the Mormon faith."Pres." Romney,a staunch Mormon who allegedly also indulges in posthumous "baptisms",will we are sure be performing such baptisms himself in the hallowed space of the Oval Office .Watch this space!

(The "counter-baptists" reaction!) "It has also proven a boon to late-night comics. Stephen Colbert, the TV satirist, on Thursday announced that he intends to convert all dead Mormons to Judaism, by way of a ceremony involving a frankfurter and a cigar-cutter.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 40503.html

Mormons posthumously baptise Anne Frank

Anne Frank, the famous diarist and Holocaust victim, was put to death on account of her Jewish faith. But earlier this month, she was nonetheless secretly co-opted into the Mormon Church.

So claim researchers investigating the US-based Church’s practice of posthumously baptising dead people - sometimes without the knowledge and almost always against the will of surviving friends and family members.

Ms Frank was “christened” at a Mormon temple in the Dominican Republic, in apparent violation of a pact between the Church and Jewish leaders. A local child, acting as her spiritual proxy, is believed to have been dunked in a font during the ceremony.

Computer records of the event register Ms Frank under her full name, Annelies Marie Frank, and say that she lived from 1929 to 1945. The baptism was “completed” at a temple in Santo Domingo on 18 February.

In an apologetic statement, the Mormon Church’s PR department neither confirmed nor denied that the event had taken place, but declared itself “absolutely firm in its commitment to not accept the names of Holocaust victims for proxy baptism.”

“It is distressing when an individual wilfully violates the Church's policy,” the statement continued, "and something that should be understood to be an offering based on love and respect becomes a source of contention.”

It’s the second time in days that the Church has issued a similar mea culpa. Last week, it emerged that the parents of Simon Wiesenthal, a Nazi death camp survivor and Jewish rights advocate, had been recently baptised in Utah and Arizona.

Both affairs highlight a curious avenue of Mormon theology. Members of the Church believe that dead people who are posthumously inducted into their ranks will then, in the afterlife, be offered a chance to enter one of the higher tiers of heaven.

Over the years, they've duly held baptism ceremonies for around 650,000 Holocaust victims, along with countless late celebrities, including John Lennon, and Albert Einstein. Thanks to her prominence, Ms Frank is believed to have been baptised at least nine times.

The practice also sometimes extends to the political arena. It was recently reported that Barack Obama’s late mother, Stanley Ann Durham, had been the subject of a ceremony. And Mitt Romney, the US presidential candidate, is believed to have held one for his dead father-in-law Edward, a staunch atheist.

Unfortunately, other faiths view it as deeply offensive. So amid growing public disquiet, the Mormon Church announced in 2010 that its members would no longer be trying to recruit dead Holocaust victims.

Their apparent failure to keep that promise isn't just sparking stern criticism. It has also proven a boon to late-night comics. Stephen Colbert, the TV satirist, on Thursday announced that he intends to convert all dead Mormons to Judaism, by way of a ceremony involving a frankfurter and a cigar-cutter.

[Philip]

Report in the Deccan Chronicle.

US Congress members from the US's largest rice growing states are on the "warpath",as Iraq has resumed buying Indian basmati rice
"We liberated their country for one thing",said Texas Congressman Ted Pope,meaning trade with the US,as the Iraqi Grain Board decided to buy Indian basmati which was cheaper.Baghdad hasn't bought US rice since 2010.Talk about "strategic relationships" with the US!

[ramana]

Shades of MRCA deal expectations.

[Agnimitra]

Now the Mormon faith,controversial even in the US has embarked upon even new controversies ,where they posthumously "baptise" dead individuals in order to save their souls.

AFAIK, the Baptism of the Dead is a rite undertaken in Mormon Temples only from genealogical lists submitted by members of the church and entered into the church database. So unless someone genealogically related to Anne Frank joined the church, such a rite to baptise her posthumously would not be valid. Besides, according to Mormon doctrine, such a baptism does not initiate the dead souls, but only gives them a chance to better their situation of grace while they wait in a sort of purgatory. Its a bit like the Vedic rite to the pitris.

On a side note, I wouldn't jump on the Mormon-bashing bandwagon. In many ways its a far clearer, process-oriented religion for self-improvement than other conventional Western religions. Its also far more open minded in many ways. The buried gold plates myth is no more outlandish than the umpteen myths and miracles that mainstream Christianity or Judaism are filled with. In the US, people label any new religious movement a "cult" all too easily. We need not encourage that, IMHO.

[Raja Bose]

Shades of MRCA deal expectations.

Yup! The uncomfortable truth leaks out in moments of candor after all! Now every time, we see a "do-gooder/savior of the world" argument trotted out in support of US actions anywhere in the world, this senator's quote also needs to be trotted out too.

[pgbhat]

From Chindu..
The Indian footprint of US firms

American multinationals appear to have substantially expanded their presence in India. The Bureau of Economic Affairs of the US Department of Commerce has recently released the results of its benchmark survey for 2009 of the operations of US multinationals, which is conducted once every five years. Those results show that the value added by majority-owned foreign affiliates (MOFAs) of US multinationals located in India had risen from $1,068 million in 1999 to $3,937 million in 2004 and a substantially higher $13,997 million in 2009.

An interesting feature of this expansion is the change in the sectoral distribution of value added in India by US MNCs. Even after adjusting for the overestimation of the relative size of the financial sector in 2009 as a result of the inclusion of banks, we find that the share of manufacturing in total nonbank value added by US MOFAs in India had fallen from 43 per cent in 2004 to 29 per cent in 2009. On the other hand, the share of services (excluding banking) had increased from 53.8 per cent to 71.8 per cent. American multinationals appear to be shifting their attention away from manufacturing towards services. This had been flagged in the past by the exit, for example, of IBM out of the manufacture of computer hardware that it had dominated, and its growing focus on consulting and software.

As compared with these developments in manufacturing, in services US MNCs seem to have expanded their presence in Professional, scientific and technical services. This is the area that has received more attention in the US in recent years. These services are largely “produced” for export, indicating that the rapid expansion of US MNCs is either due to firms such as Microsoft or Adobe setting up captive units for generating in India a part of the output of services they produce for world markets or of firms such as Accenture using India as a location for generating services exported to third parties abroad. In both cases the intention is clearly to benefit from the low-cost, English-speaking, skilled labour available in India. Expanding in India allows these firms to face up to competition and increase profits earned in global markets.

[sanjaykumar]

On a side note, I wouldn't jump on the Mormon-bashing bandwagon. In many ways its a far clearer, process-oriented religion for self-improvement than other conventional Western religions. Its also far more open minded in many ways. The buried gold plates myth is no more outlandish than the umpteen myths and miracles that mainstream Christianity or Judaism are filled with. In the US, people label any new religious movement a "cult" all too easily. We need not encourage that, IMHO.

Thanks, it is a sensible and tactically sound position to take. One must watch for unconscious bias. Of course it is much easier to take the position-a pox on all your houses.

[Neshant]

U.S. Said to Offer India Help With Replacing Iran Oil Supply

No thanks! It looks like an attempt by US to control the supply of oil to India.

When we need it most, the they will ask the Arabs to turn off the taps.

[ramana]

Recently a baseball player successfully argued against his drug test not following rules for handling. The arbitrator was an Indian America lawyer Shyam Das.

Incidentally he is Mr. Arbitrator in US with a long history in arbitration.

His email is a pun in German on the word Arbitrator!

[A_Gupta]

post deleted by moderator

[pgbhat]

^

an aircraft carrier.

I had look up the map of Wyoming.... twice.

[Rony]

Kanwal Sibal: India has been criticised by the U.S. but it is in no way a freeloader

India is criticised in US circles for its reluctance to take a position on difficult issues facing the international community, for fence-sitting and avoiding decisions that could carry political costs.

It is accused of piggy-backing on the exertions the West makes to uphold the international order, without assuming its share of the responsibility. Many Indian commentators join in such disparagement of India's foreign policy.

But is India really a freeloader on the international system, enjoying its benefits but shirking responsibility for sustaining it?

India, in reality, has been discriminated against and even punished by those who created the system in 1945 and who still resist calls to restructure it to reflect contemporary shifts in global power.

India's permanent membership of the Security Council is still a far away prospect. Without this India's role is to implement decisions, not shape them, apart from having to tolerate an inferior international status vis a vis China.

The international financial institutions are still dominated by US and Europe; the G-8 has been expanded to G-20, not to cede control of economic and financial levers but to preserve the existing system by co-opting a larger number of players, mostly allies of the West.

The NPT and the non-proliferation regime spawned by it, discriminatory ab initio against India, has been an instrument, bilaterally and through the NSG, to punish its nuclear sector with international sanctions for decades. The CTBT negotiations recall the animus in the international system against India's nuclear posture.

Our missile and space programmes have been targetted by technology denial regimes like the MTCR. Changed international thinking on India's nuclear programme has come at a price. India has had to accept onerous non-proliferation obligations not applicable to the five nuclear weapon states.

India is still denied recognition as a nuclear weapon state; it remains outside the NSG and MTCR; its access to dual use technology is still a problem.

The pressure on India to dilute its nuclear liability legislation shows that an independent approach to issues hitherto determined by the dominant nuclear power is not accepted.

By not joining any alliance system, India has tried to deal with its security problems on its own. Unlike many countries who by outsourcing their security to the US reduced their own defence burden and, as in the case of Japan and Germany, concentrated on building their economies that later challenged US interests, India has not benefitted from any such 'free-loading'.
It has received no military aid either. On the contrary the US has endangered India's security by arming Pakistan- a massive 'freeloader'- and winking at its clandestine acquisition of nuclear weapon technology.

China too has been a 'free-loader'. It was built up strategically in the 70s by the US to counter the Soviet Union, with prodigious economic support from its allies as well.
The US repeatedly overlooked China's egregious nuclear and missile proliferation activities. Today China has become a strategic competitor of the US. It seeks to revise, not uphold the US built international system.

India has neither enjoyed such latitude and support from the US, nor does it seek to undermine US interests.

So, in what way has India 'piggy-backed' on the US? The security of the sea lanes of communication in the Indian Ocean is critical for China's trade and energy flows.

The US, in mounting cooperation with India, is active in providing maritime security with its naval assets in the Indian Ocean.

The US, it is argued, is underwriting the stability of the Gulf region, which is a vital source of energy for China, through its political and military presence there. Even as China benefits from the US security presence in the Indian Ocean/Gulf area, it is challenging the US strategically in the South China Sea before it extends its presence into the Pacific and the Indian Oceans to cause further strategic headaches to India and the US in the future.

This is 'free-loading'.

US is pressing India to downgrade its ties with Iran, and unmindful of India's energy security, Iran's oil sector is being targetted. US policies are exposing India to the double jeopardy of rupture of relations with Iran and a higher financial burden because of increasing oil prices. India can probably buy additional oil from Saudi Arabia, but at prevailing commercial prices, bringing India no benefit. India is not 'free-loading', it is bearing the costs of US policy.

The changes in the Arab world in the name of democracy or the Right to Protect are bringing to power Islamist regimes. US intervention in Iraq has brought neither democracy nor stability to the region, even as it has strengthened Iran's position.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been harnessed to lead the charge against the secular Syrian regime. The promotion of a Shia-Sunni conflict, with Iran and Saudi Arabia as protagonists and US and its partners playing a dangerously ambiguous game with Israeli prodding, imposes unwanted choices on countries like India that have no rational interest in choosing sides.

Demanding India's support for dubious interventionist, regime change policies in which negotiations are excluded unless those targetted capitulate, and on not obtaining it to accuse India of 'slapping the US in its face' is hectoring, not diplomacy.

Why does India's unwillingness to endorse questionable policies without demur mean 'fence-sitting'? Is it advisable that we suspend our judgment on the merits of issues from our perspective to become eligible for rewards for opportunism?

And if the US opens the space further for Islamism in our region, and this includes negotiations with the Taliban and exposing Afghanistan to an increasingly radicalised Pakistan, how will have India 'piggy-backed' on US policies?

[Altair]

Is India giving a cold shoulder to US?

[subodh]

post deleted by mod