Indo-US Relations

He has nothing substantial (non-political) to offer against pushing US planes for MRCA. If they still think so, Obama is definitely living in denial. All they can hope for is added C17s.

thats why i said bring women leadership back.

India third most powerful nation: US report

WASHINGTON: India is listed as the third most powerful country in the world after the US and China and the fourth most powerful bloc after the US, China and the European Union in a new official US report.

The new global power line-up for 2010 also predicted that New Delhi's clout in the world will further rise by 2025, according to "Global Governance 2025" jointly issued by the National Intelligence Council (NIC) of the US and the European Union's Institute for Security Studies (EUISS).

Using the insights of a host of experts from Brazil, Russia, India and China, among others, and fictionalised scenarios, the report illustrates what could happen over the next 25 years in terms of global governance.

In 2010, the US tops the list of powerful countries/regions, accounting for nearly 22 percent of the global power.

The US is followed by China with European Union at 16 percent and India at eight percent. India is followed by Japan, Russia and Brazil with less than five percent each.

According to this international futures model, by 2025 the power of the US, EU, Japan and Russia will decline while that of China, India and Brazil will increase, even though there will be no change in this listing.

By 2025, the US will still be the most powerful country of the world, but it will have a little over 18 percent of the global power.

The US will be closely followed by China with 16 percent, European Union with 14 percent and India with 10 per cent.

"The growing number of issues on the international agenda, and their complexity, is outpacing the ability of international organisations and national governments to cope," the report warns.

This critical turning point includes issues of climate change, ethnic and regional conflicts, new technology, and the managing of natural resources.

The report also highlights the challenges proponents of effective global governance face.

On one hand, rapid globalization, economic and otherwise, has led to an intertwining of domestic politics and international issues and fuelled the need for more cooperation and more effective leadership.

But on the other hand, an increasingly multipolar world, often dominated by non-state actors, has put a snag in progress toward effectual global governance, it said.


Read more: India third most powerful nation: US report - The Times of India India third most powerful nation: US report - The Times of India

'Obama approval dips in India, Pak'

With a little over a month to go for President Barack Obama's visit to India, his administration's approval ratings there have fallen to its lowest since 2008, according to a poll by Gallup. Only 18 per cent of the 6,000 Indians interviewed for this survey approved of United States


leadership, compared to 31 per cent in 2008 and 26 per cent in 2009. US leadership ratings
But it was not as if the rest of the respondents disapproved — 72 per cent said they either did not know or did not have an opinion. “Indians who do offer an opinion are more likely to approve than disapprove,” said Gallup.

Could the Obama administration's declining approval ratings have anything to do with the President's stand against outsourcing or the fee hike for H1B visas used mostly by infotech professionals to work in the US? Or a widely held view that Obama's predecessor George W Bush did more or cared more about India?

But India is not a lost case. Pakistan is. The Obama administration disapproval rating is 68 per cent. And this may not come as a surprise to the administration that has been struggling to look good at a nation it considers a crucial ally in the fight against terrorism.

In fact, the US has tried use it relief work in Pakistan's flood-devastated areas to shore up its sagging image, without much success. Rajiv Shah, chief of USAID, which is spearheading US flood relief efforts, was forced to flee Pakistan within hours of landing there.

Afghanistan is the other country where the US leadership took a beating, according to the Gallup poll -- 54 per cent of those interviewed said they disapproved, compared to the 45 per cent who approved. Not bad in a country where the US is fighting a war — it still has many friends.

India conveys displeasure over Ohio outsourcing ban to U.S.

Anand Sharma turns the table on the U.S.
Timely response from U.S. awaited

Protectionism will slow down recovery



WASHINGTON: Describing the State of Ohio's ban on offshore outsourcing by government departments as ‘ill-advised', India has ‘firmly' conveyed to the U.S. its displeasure over the move and other protectionist measures such as the hike in visa fees for professionals.

“We have put it firmly in our discussions. I feel that the U.S. has seriously registered India's viewpoint as well as concerns of the Indian IT industry. We do hope there will be timely and appropriate responses,” Indian Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma told reporters here on Tuesday after his meeting with top U.S. officials, including Trade Representative Ron Kirk.

Mr. Sharma was here to attend the Trade Policy Forum (TPF) meet, which is the principle trade dialogue platform between the U.S. and India.

Citing the example of the recent Airtel-IBM deal, Mr. Sharma turned the table on the U.S., stating, “Airtel, an Indian company, has placed orders of $3.5 billion on IBM. Isn't that outsourcing? Where would those jobs be created? Where (would) those jobs would be supported?”

The largest orders for Boeing aircraft had also been placed by India. “How many jobs would have been sustained and how many jobs would be created?,” he asked.

Referring to the ban on government offshore outsourcing, he said, “We hope that there is no other State which would follow the ill-advised and less informed path chosen by the Ohio state government.”

He said at a time when the global economy was reeling from the aftershocks of the economic crisis and was coming out of a recession, any inward-looking step of protectionism would slow down the pace of recovery.

“It is better to avoid it, particularly since the U.S. is the world leader, is the largest economy and, therefore, there are expectations (from it) in that context,” he said.

Under the Border Security law, the U.S. had in August hiked the fees for H-1B and L1 visas by at least $2,000 for the next five years. Indian professionals, particularly in the IT sector, use these visas for short-term contracts in the U.S., which account for about 60 per cent of Indian software exports of $50 billion.

The two sides also discussed the issue of a Totalisation Agreement, under which the Indians on short-term jobs would not have to pay the social security tax in the U.S. Since they do not stay there for long, they are not able to use the benefit of the social security in return for the taxes. — PTI

US wants to strengthen military ties with India Gates

WASHINGTON: Ahead of his meeting with Indian counterpart A K Antony, US defence secretary Robert Gates has said the Pentagon wants to strengthen and expand its military to military ties with India.

"We are looking to expand this relationship in ways that are mutually beneficial," Gates told reporters at a Pentagon briefing ahead of the crucial Antony visit next week.

"They (India) have a big competition going on for a new modern fighter. We'll probably have some conversations about that," Gates.

The defence secretary said he had a very good visit to India last year wherein he met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and defence minister A K Antony.

Responding to a question on the India's concerns about restriction on export of high-technology items, Gates acknowledged that this is high on the agenda and he would like to see those restrictions removed.

"I think that that is certainly high on our list, particularly in the context of export-import, or export controls, and my view of the importance of changing those export controls in ways that better protect the things that are really important and open up trade and allow US companies to sell abroad those things that technologies that are not critical," Gates said.


"So, I think India certainly is high on our list in terms of a country that we would like, I would like to see those restrictions eased," Gates said at the Pentagon news conference which was jointly addressed by Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The military-to-military relationship with India is exceptionally strong and growing, said Mullen.

"We are very committed to that, and with all of our services. I was recently there and it has taken on a significance that is equal to so many other historic relationships for us, and we know that," Mullen said.

"The Indian Ocean, we also know, is an incredibly important body of water; not just now, but also in the future. So we recognise the importance of keeping that relationship as strong as it is, and also making it grow," he said.

India wants technology co-production with US

Washington, Sep 27: Defence Minister, AK Antony stated that India is more concerned about the technology transfer and co-production with US rather than mere buyer-seller relation.

Buzz up!
"Now, our approach is rather than buyer-seller relations, we want technology transfers, and if possible co-production and joint production,"Antony said during his US tour on Sep 27.


US defence secretary Gates also expressed their willingness to build strong military-to-military ties with India.

"We are looking to expand this relationship in ways that are mutually beneficial," Gates said.

He continued, "They (India) have a big competition going on for a new modern fighter. We'll probably have some conversations about that."

Antony also hinted that they would raise their concern before US that Pakistan is misusing the arms, which were supplied by US to fight against terrorism.

However, Antony claimed that Pakistan used the supplied arms against India.

WASHINGTON: Go for a Kashmir solution and help bring stability to the region for a ticket to UN Security Council membership and fulfilling your big power aspirations. That's the broad message President Barack Obama will be bringing to New Delhi during his upcoming November visit to India, preparation for which are in full swing in Washington DC.

The Kashmir settlement-for-seat at high table idea (euphemism for UNSC membership) is being discussed animatedly in the highest levels of the US administration, according to a various sources. President Obama himself has decided to revive the process of a US push in this direction, albeit discreetly, because of New Delhi's sensitivities.

Key administration officials are confirming that the UNSC issue will be on Obama's agenda when he visits New Delhi. The US President is expected to announce an incremental American support to India's candidature during his address to the joint session of India's parliament, depending on New Delhi's receptiveness to resolving the Kashmir tangle.

"[UNSC reforms] is something that is under discussion as we prepare for the President's important visit," US Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake confirmed on Monday during a read-out of the meeting between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her Indian counterpart S.M.Krishna, saying the two had agreed the "President's visit will be a defining moment in the history of our bilateral relations."

The clearest insight into Obama's thinking on the matter comes from Bob Woodward's latest book "Obama's War" in which top US policy makers are shown mulling on defusing the Kashmir situation as part of an exit strategy for US from the AfPak theater.

"Why can't we have straightforward talks with India on why a stable Pakistan is crucial?" Obama is reported as musing at one meeting. "India is moving toward a higher place in its global posture. A stable Pakistan would help." Implicit in the rumination is the idea that settling Kashmir would mollify Pakistan, where, US officials say, hardliners are using the unresolved issue as an excuse to breed an army of terrorists aimed at bleeding India.

But that is easier said than done, according to Bruce Riedel, author of the Obama administration's Af-Pak strategy, who has canvassed the centrality of the Kashmir issue to peace and stability in the region. The spoiler to any settlement is the hardline Pakistani military and its jihadist proxies for whom attrition and confrontation with India is an article of faith.

In fact, the solution Washington has in mind (also proposed by Riedel) is likely more palatable to New Delhi than to Islamabad. It's on the same lines of what Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Pakistan's deposed military leader Pervez Musharraf broadly agreed on before the latter was turfed out of office: The Line of Control would become the international border, but it would be a soft, permeable border, allowing Kashmiris on both sides to move back and forth. The rest – safeguards, procedures etc – is a matter of detail.

"President Obama's strategy for dealing with Afghanistan and Pakistan always needed a Kashmir component to succeed; that need is becoming more urgent and obvious now. His trip to India in November will be a key to addressing it," Riedel said in a commentary this week.

"India cannot become a global power with a prosperous economy if its neighbor is a constant source of terror armed with the bomb. A sick Pakistan is not a good neighbor," he added, echoing Obama's words (Woodward's book also suggests he influenced Obama's thinking).

Virtually setting the agenda for Obama's India visit, Riedel says Obama's challenge is to quietly help Islamabad and New Delhi work behind the scenes to get back to the deal Musharraf and Singh negotiated. "He will have a chance to work this subtly when he visits India in November," he writes.

But Riedel and other US policy makers portrayed in Woodward's book also recognize that the biggest hurdle to a settlement is a hardline Pakistani military. While the civilian leadership in Pakistan would like to embrace the deal "it is unclear if the army chief, General Kayani, is on board."

Woodward's book shows that most top US officials, save Admiral Mike Mullen, believe Kayani to be a closet jihadi and a two-faced "liar" intent on perpetuating war with India. "I'll be the first to admit it, I'm India-centric," Kayani is quoted as telling US officials in one exchange.

Although three top cabinet principals from India -- S.M.Krishna, A.K.Antony, and Pranab Mukherjee -- are in the US this week and next, exchanges on the UNSC and Kashmir are said to be taking place directly between President Obama and Prime Minister Singh through trusted interlocutors such as National Security Advisor Shiv Shankar Menon, who is also in Washington DC this week.

Source

This is completely unacceptable. USA is playing double game here. This statement is to appease pakistan that we are doing something for you as well. Who the hell is america to ask India to solve Kashmir issue. Its our Internal matter and no one has any right to interfere.

yeah Obama is right, if you cannot take entire Jammu and kashmir from China and Pakistan, you cannot get UN permanent seat and veto right.

let us fix new mexico ,texas,california too.India does not trade territory for fake prestige neither it does believe in rewarding terrorism as usa does.

In a way, the policy is right. JK problem is regional issue & India should fix it not for US but for its own. If the problem is solved peacefully then it reflects immense credit on Indian side as a responsible power.

whats your take on proposed MMS-Mushraff solution? In that case, the resolution will be peaceful & acceptable to both the parties. No other country will be interfering in such scenario.

The Americans are completely disconnected from the realities in the sub continent. hell they have not been able to fix AfPak with all their might as well as coercion. Not only Obama, but the west in general actually dont understand how things work in the sub continent.

Talks between India and Pakistan though are not as straightforward. Any talks between any country and Pak is not possible as the US itself found out in its talks with Kiayani when he was there.

To link the UNSC seat to Kashmir is basically unacceptable. The US can actually help India resolve the Kashmir dispute by actually getting India into the UNSC. And there are more reasons than one as to how that is possible.

Mushy-mms secnario will end up making valley full of wahabists and porous borders will present easy way for infiltration.And by looking at pakistan's track record in disobeying and shredding all the agreements with india including the one done with 3rd party mediation(indus water treaty), to pieces who will guarantee that pakistan wont turn around after mushy-mms solution.Thank god it didnt happened otherwise india would have been debating another harakiri done by a PM by now on kashmir like those of done by Nehru,shastri and indira.