Obama's India Visit

Parthy

Air Warrior
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,314
Likes
149
India-US defence ties are multi-billion dollar prospect

NEW DELHI: As US President Barack Obama comes visiting India this week, expected on the platter are some multi-billion-dollar defence pacts to push bilateral military ties that have now started expanding rapidly after decades of mutual mistrust.

The biggest grab Washington is eyeing is a lucrative $10-billion project for 126 fighter bombers that the Indian Air Force plans to buy and for which two American companies -- Boeing and Lockheed Martin -- are among six contenders.

As India still keeps its options open on finalising the mother of all defence deals that has entered its last lap, sources told IANS the decks have been cleared for another mega contract of 10 C17 Globemaster III heavy transport aircraft through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route.

FMS is a government-to-government route of selling US defence equipment built by private manufacturers.

The value of the C17 Globemaster aircraft project has not been revealed as yet. But according to an official notification to the US Congress, the heavy transport planes are likely to come with a price tag of some $5.8 billion.

This overtakes the $2.1 billion contract for eight Boeing P-8I maritime reconnaissance aircraft inked last year.

The sources said the IAF is also likely to order four more P-8I aircraft and the contract is likely to be signed during the Obama visit. This contract would be worth around $1.1 billion.

Another project expected during the US president's visit is the procurement of nearly 100 GE 414 engines built by the US giant GE Aviation to power India's indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).

Defence cooperation between the US and India - which buys 70 percent of its military hardware from Russia - has seen rapid transformation over the years after four decades of mutual suspicion and mistrust during the Cold War era.

The visit of President Obama, who has described India as a "natural strategic" partner, follows a series of high-level trips of US civil and military officials this year.

Under Secretary of Defence for Policy Michele Flournoy who was here in August, like every visiting official from the Pentagon, expressed the desire to build on "growing" strategic and defence partnership between the two countries "which includes defence trade, military-to-military training exercises and technology cooperation".

Indian Defence Minister A.K. Antony visited Washington in September, underlining the importance the two countries give to strategic ties. However, the contention over pending key agreements that the US is pushing hard remains amid India's reluctance.

The pacts that will ease high-tech defence exports to India have been in a limbo for long.

These are the Logistics Support Agreement (LSA), the Communication Interoperability and Security Memorandum Agreement (CISMOA) and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geospatial Cooperation (BECA).

Official sources said the finalisation of the three military agreements was unlikely as New Delhi was "unsure" if signing the pact related to military logistics, technology safeguards and geospatial information would indeed benefit India because of some "misgivings".

The sources in the South Block said India had "yet not" changed its stance on the "restrictive" Communications and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA) and "intrusive" Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geo-spatial Cooperation (BECA).

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...llion-dollar-prospect/articleshow/6852457.cms
 

Parthy

Air Warrior
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,314
Likes
149
India not yet ready to sign defence pacts

NEW DELHI: US defence ware manufacturers may be looking forward to the visit of President Barack Obama to seal billion dollar deals, but New Delhi is yet not ready to sign pacts that are necessary for sales to go through.

The long-pending Logistics Support Agreement (LSA), Communication and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA), Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for geo-spatial cooperation (Beca) are crucial for the execution of defence deals between the two countries. It may be recalled that Lockheed Martin and Boeing are participating in the world's single-largest $12-billion defence deal for supplying 126 fighter jets, F-16 and F-18, to the Indian Air Force .

Although the two sides have been negotiating on these agreements for the past three years, New Delhi is worried that these pacts could have adverse impact on its other allies like Russia . While the LSA would allow Indian and American forces, aircraft and ships to obtain logistics from each others' bases, CISMOA would enable transfer of high technology.

"These (proposed pacts) are something brand new for us. We are not used to dealing with such agreements. We have to see whether this is a feasible route," national security advisor Shivshankar Menon told reporters on Saturday evening.
The issue has been figuring in all high level interactions. US defence secretary Robert Gates has been repeatedly seeking conclusion of talks on this agreement. The issue had figured prominently in defence minister AK Antony's talks with his hosts in Washington early this month.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...to-sign-defence-pacts/articleshow/6849640.cms

Two different articles with same message.. Hope India is suspicious on all US defense deals... :emot158:
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,797
Likes
48,276
Country flag
Obama in India

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Walkers_World_Obama_in_India_999.html

The White House has been at great pains to explain that President Barack Obama's visit to India this week is all about jobs and trade. But nobody in Asia believes it.

With China canceling a planned summit with Japan's prime minister, Kashmir erupting again, Afghanistan sinking deeper into disaster and Iran loading fuel rods into its new nuclear reactor at Bushehr, the Asian security agenda looks considerably more compelling.

And yet Obama is hoping to save some Democratic congressional seats from the likely wreckage in this week's mid-term elections, so the propaganda about jobs makes a kind of sense. As a result, he is taking the biggest entourage of top businessmen ever to grace a presidential trip.

A jumbo jet full of chief executive officers, some 250 at last count, will be joining Obama's own entourage of family, six armored cars and a total of 40 aircraft on the Indian mission, chasing deals.

And deals there will be. Ron Somers of the U.S. India Business Council is talking of more than $10 billion being signed in contracts next week, bringing with them 100,000 U.S. jobs.

GE thinks it has sewn up a $5 billion order to supply locomotives for Indian Railways. American hopes of providing India's new generation of advanced fighter jets may not come to fruition but Boeing is confident of a $6 billion sale of C-17 military cargo and another $2.5 billion in commercial jets to India's flourishing budget airlines.

"We want to highlight growing U.S. exports to India but also growing inward Indian investment into the U.S.," said a White House official, speaking off-the-record last week, and noting that India is the second-fastest growing inward investor to America.

The United States and India are each investing more than $10 billion a year into the other country and bilateral trade is running at $43 billion a year. That's good but it's not much more than 10 percent of U.S.-China trade.

There is some hard negotiating to be done over intellectual property rights and export controls and a bilateral investment treaty that may someday grow up to be a free trade agreement if roadblocks in Congress and over nuclear technology transfer can be resolved. It should be a no-brainer with U.S. corporations salivating over some of the $5 billion India is planning to invest in infrastructure this decade.

The really tricky negotiations will be over geo-politics. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have been at pains last week to stress that the United States didn't see China as an adversary. But there is little doubt that the United States, as the world's most powerful democracy, sees India, the most populous and fastest-growing democracy, as a natural ally against an authoritarian and potentially aggressive China.

But Obama must tread softly. His administration's regional envoy Richard Holbrooke got off to a bad start when India made it clear that it was no longer prepared to be seen through the traditional Indo-Pakistan perspective. India is bigger than that now and has never welcomed any outside interest in its troubles in Kashmir. Yet Pakistan remains crucial to the embattled U.S. mission in Afghanistan.

"The U.S. sees Pakistan as an indispensable but dishonest partner," suggested Pakistani commentator Imtiaz Gul, on a visit to Washington last week. "Pakistan has its own worries about the waning U.S. commitment in Afghanistan. It's a war between the short-term American agenda and Pakistan's long-term national interests."

The Pakistani military establishment still sees itself in terms of military parity with India, Gul suggests, ignoring the reality that India has eight times the population and its economy is eight times bigger. As a result, India thinks it has bigger geo-political fish to fry than the dysfunctional Pakistani nuisance and wants to be treated by the United States as an equal strategic partner.

Nor does India want to be taken for granted as a strategic ally in Asia, in part because India knows that it has much healthier long-term demographics than China. If China will be challenging the United States for the No. 1 economic slot around the year 2030, India thinks it could be the challenger by 2050.

Moreover, India is one place on Earth where Obama's predecessor remains popular for his own efforts to forge a close relationship with New Delhi.

"It is ironic that there is nostalgia for the Bush years and apprehensions about the Obama administration," noted Ronen Sen, India's former ambassador to Washington. "It's true that Bush had a deep personal fascination and an abiding admiration for India, well before he became president. He did more for India than any of his predecessors. We should honor his legacy."

Bush, who also saw India as America's key ally in Asia against a rising China, set a positive course, and it will be up to Obama to use his personal charm to maintain and extend it. The problem is that he looks like arriving in India as a loser, as a defeated leader of the Democratic Party
after a humiliating loss in Congress, and with a big question mark over his power to get things done in Washington over the next two years.
 

nrj

Ambassador
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
9,658
Likes
3,911
Country flag
'Mention of Kashmir by Obama will be potentially explosive'


Any mention of Kashmir by US President Barack Obama during his trip to India can be potentially explosive, a top American strategic expert has said, adding that Pakistan will dominate in his talks with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Noting that Obama's visit would take place against the backdrop of
the revival of Kashmiri question, Bruce Riedel of Brookings Institute in his latest comment on the region said that Pakistan will move to capitalise on the unrest.

"The intifada that exploded this summer in Kashmir cannot be ignored by the President during the visit but any comments on it will be potentially explosive," said Riedel, a former CIA official, who is a known American expert on South Asian affairs.

He said Obama and Singh need to cooperate to help Pakistan solve its jihadist nightmare. It cannot be resolved by outsiders, nor can it be contained and isolated from the outside.

"Senior Indian officials in private say that New Delhi and Washington now share a common diagnosis of the problems, but neither has developed a strategy that promises success."


"It is an increasingly urgent concern, but one that does not have any magical answers. Both agree that engagement with Pakistan is the only way forward, but neither feels satisfied that its engagement is working," he said.

"The third parties also involved, particularly Pakistan's ally China, will also figure extensively in the private talks. Obama is keen to find ways to use regional diplomacy to strengthen Pakistan, and Beijing must be a player in that process," Riedel said.

"By all accounts, Obama and Singh have developed a good working relationship. They will have to brain-storm together about how they can collaborate to rescue the sick man of South Asia," he said.

Riedel said Pakistan will dominates the private conversations between the President, Singh and Congress leader Sonia Gandhi because it is the future of Pakistan that is the most uncertain question in South Asia today.

"Pakistan has become the most dangerous country in the world for everyone but especially for the US and India. It is the epicenter of the global jihadist movement that attacked New York in 2001 and Mumbai in 2008. Its weak civilian government may have good intentions, but seems powerless to address the country's multiple crises," he said
 

nrj

Ambassador
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
9,658
Likes
3,911
Country flag
US to spend 200 mn a day on Obama's Mumbai Visit

Mumbai: The US would be spending a whopping $200 million (Rs. 900 crore approx) per day on President Barack Obama's visit to the city.

"The huge amount of around $200 million would be spent on security, stay and other aspects of the Presidential visit," a top official of the Maharashtra Government privy to the arrangements for the high-profile visit said.

About 3,000 people including Secret Service agents, US government officials and journalists would accompany the President. Several officials from the White House and US security agencies are already here for the past one week with helicopters, a ship and high-end security instruments.

"Except for personnel providing immediate security to the President, the US officials may not be allowed to carry weapons. The state police is competent to take care of the security measures and they would be piloting the Presidential convoy," the official said on condition of anonymity.

Navy and Air Force has been asked by the state government to intensify patrolling along the Mumbai coastline and its airspace during Obama's stay. The city's airspace will be closed half-an-hour before the President's arrival for all aircraft barring those carrying the US delegation.

The personnel from SRPF, Force One, besides the NSG contingent stationed here would be roped in for the President's security, the official said.

The area from Hotel Taj, where Obama and his wife Michelle would stay, to Shikra helipad in Colaba would be cordoned off completely during the movement of the President.
 

Parthy

Air Warrior
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,314
Likes
149
One more article

'Let's move India away from Russian weapons'

The Republican Party has asked United States President Barack Obama to seek a large pie of India's estimated $35 billion defence expansion plan when he meets Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in New Delhi next week.

In a letter to President Obama, Republican Senator Ed Royce asked him to build on the defence co-operation between India and the US that was initiated by his predecessors Bill Clinton and continued by George W Bush.

"As you know, six foreign companies are competing to sell India 126 new multi-role combat aircraft in a deal that could be worth as much as $11 billion. India's selection process for this aircraft is advancing, with two US companies under active consideration," senior Republican lawmaker from California Ed Royce said in a letter to Obama.

Senator Royce, in his letter of October 26, said heads of state from France, Russia and the United Kingdom were moving aggressively to advocate for their countries' aircraft proposal.

"Moving India away from its tradition of purchasing Russian equipment towards a US supplier would provide New Delhi with the best product, enhance Indian military's role in the region and improve interaction amongst our militaries," he wrote in the letter, a copy of which is with PTI.

Royce, co-chair of powerful Congressional Caucus in the House of Representatives, had accompanied Clinton during his trip to India in 2000 but he would not be travelling with President Obama this time.

"Defence cooperation between the US and India has made impressive strides in the last decade. India-US Defence Policy Group was revived in 2001 and now meets annually. In 2005, the US and India signed a 10-year defence pact, which outlines planned collaboration in multilateral operations and expanded two-way defence trade," he said.

He said based on mutual struggle with terrorism and interest in maintaining regional stability, both the countries have held a series of unprecedented and increasingly substantive combined exercises involving all military services in recent years.

He expressed his agreement with the Commander of US Pacific Command Admiral Robert Willard, who testified to Congress earlier this year, that "India's strategic location, shared democratic values, growing economy and evolution as a regional power combine to make them a partner with whom we need to work much more closely."

The Congressman said India was expanding its military's reach and key to that transformation would increase defence trade between our two countries.

"While it is estimated that Russia still provides India approximately 70 per cent of its defence supplies, Washington and New Delhi have reached major agreements on military transport and maritime surveillance aircraft in recent years. Some estimate that India could spend as much as $35 billion on defence procurement over the next decade," Royce said.

"No doubt you will be covering many critical issues on your trip to India; such is the nature of our comprehensive relationship. However, I think you will agree that military cooperation, consistent with US law, is among the most important aspects of our transformed bilateral relationship and encourage you to keep this aspect of the relationship moving in a positive direction on your visit," he said.

Reminding President Obama about the "opportunity to build our relationship into one of the defining partnerships of the 2lst century" while welcoming Dr Singh during his first official state visit of his presidency, Royce said "active defence cooperation between our two countries will be vital if that vision is to become a reality," he said.

Meanwhile, Deputy National Security Advisor Mike Forman deviated questions at a special White House briefing when asked about the possibility of C-17 deal with India during President's visit.

"I think I'll leave announcements for the announcements. But there are a whole range of potential contracts that are being worked on as we speak," Forman said.

http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2...lets-move-india-away-from-russian-weapons.htm
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
Time for reset of Indo-US ties


M.K. Bhadra Kumar

Barack Obama's visit has triggered an extraordinarily creative period in the Indian strategic thinking. How do we bring all these strands of new thinking together?

Whichever way one looks at it, there is going to be an indeterminate fatefulness when United States President Barack Obama arrives in India. Not that Mr. Obama is god or that he is an elderly bearded man wrapped in a swirling cloak with the "finger of the paternal right hand" — as in the fourth section of the Michelangelo fresco on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. Nor is India Adam waiting to receive the spark of life.

The point is, in comparison with the U.S. Presidents New Delhi has welcomed in a generation or two, Mr. Obama is truly a brilliant intellectual with a view of the world imbued with the struggle of the mankind for survival, dignity and development. Fareed Zakaria tactfully described him as "a kind of practical idealist" who admired George Bush Sr.'s approach to ending the Cold War in an apparently cooperative way, with an emphasis on productive, constructive relations with the world powers. Mr. Obama is also someone instinctively wary of ideology and shrewd enough to balance the impulse of principle and the realities of politics — a master of the rhetoric of common ground.

The Indian strategic community did not seem to have got him right when it anticipated him as a crusader of "Asian democracy" — a code word for "containment" of China. Do not look beyond the joint statement issued after the third session of the U.S.-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue that concluded in Washington recently. It speaks of a "strategic, comprehensive and long-term partnership" between the two countries based on "shared values, mutual respect, and mutual interests." We may expect similar rhetoric on India, too.

Passionate moralism has never been a trait of Mr. Obama's political personality and the Indian establishment has done well to leave the rhetoric of his visit almost entirely to the able hands of American officials and instead concentrate on the hardball — "real politics," as a top Indian policymaker candidly put it. Having said that, Mr. Obama is also a man of infinite charm with a rare capacity for cheerful impersonal friendliness who, with his gargantuan self-confidence bordering almost on hauteur, can very gracefully stoop to conquer to ease jealousies or form alliances.

One thing is absolutely certain. As the dusk gently descends on Delhi in the balmy autumn evening of November 8, Mr. Obama is destined to deliver a great speech in the hallowed Central Hall of Parliament.

{So they have an advance copy or its contours.}

Indeed, Mr. Obama's visit is going to be a fateful happening in the region's tangled history and politics. So much has changed since a U.S. President last visited India in 2005. The geopolitics of the region has changed and alongside, inevitably, the U.S.-Pakistan pivotal cooperation in the Afghan endgame has crystallised, the world has changed, India has changed, and indeed the trajectory of the U.S. and India's expectations and aspirations has hugely transformed. Situating the U.S.-India relationship against this complex backdrop truly demands a "reset." Except in a dogmatic way, it is not possible to see the future of the relationship as turning, and turning in a widening gyre of alliance equation. Perhaps, there never was such an equation. There is indeed a disconnect between our pundits and policymakers here. The Indian leadership seems willing to apply new thinking. Will our pundits be capable of appreciating that the U.S. has specific regional and global interests and its partnership can be selective?

First and foremost, India's regional environment. National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon's keynote address — in the August presence of Rashtrapathiji — at the 75th jubilee of the National Defence College underscored that a lot of creative thinking is going on to structure a forward-looking strategic vision that can help India navigate the highly volatile regional and international situation. The global vision based on the "balance of power," which our pundits merrily espoused for a decade, has been exposed as naivety. India does not foresee the prospect of the major powers using force in their dealings with each other. This, in turn, makes the emergence of a direct conflict betwixt them or involving any of them with India highly improbable, no matter the existing discords, disputes or differences. Again, a nuclear war or confrontation between nuclear powers is not as likely, as threats which are derivatives of nuclear deterrence such as terrorism strain the very fabric of a country like India, which is secular, plural, and democratic.


In sum, Mr. Obama's visit has triggered an extraordinarily creative period in the Indian strategic thinking. How do we bring all these strands of new thinking together? Evidently, as Mr. Menon brilliantly summed up: "The challenges of a globalised world cannot be handled by twentieth century military alliances or containment strategies."

Hasn't something fundamentally changed in the world order since the international financial crisis erupted? The emerging powers have shown unexpected resilience to pull through the crisis while the industrial world continues to languish. China and India in particular are cruising forward at great speed and are becoming evermore innovative. A transfer of wealth of historic proportions may be under way. As Paul Krguman wrote recently, this has engendered claims that the payback time is approaching for the emerging powers to transfer some of their new wealth to the ailing U.S. economy. China already figures in the U.S. cross hairs and India needs to carefully figure out when its turn might come. There is a lot of churning going on at the moment, as the meeting of the G-20 Finance Ministers in the South Korean city of Gyeongju underscored. The U.S. displayed its determination to push for "fair" exchange rate rules and for setting numerical targets for trade balance, while India and China promptly rebuffed the move. The paradox is that whereas the G-20 has emerged as the most important forum for global economic policymaking since the financial crisis, it is increasingly finding it difficult to agree on anything but the broadest brushstrokes.

The Indian strategic analysts who visualise an alliance of Asian democracies or conjecture a U.S.-India axis patrolling the "global commons" are not seeing the writing on the wall — that the number one priority for a highly focussed leader like Mr. Obama is going to be global issues such as trade balance and exchange rates, and climate change, which are of immense concern to his agenda of regenerating the ailing American economy. Mr. Obama would like to know how India sees its interests and explore if tangible benefits can be derived to generate new jobs in America. He can anticipate that the Seoul heads of government meeting in November may turn out to be a damage limitation exercise rather than a leap forward toward a monumental agreement on rebalancing the global economy. In short, trust an extraordinary cerebral mind like Mr. Obama's to be able to comprehend the meaning of India's rise. That he empathises with India is not in doubt, but these are hard times.

The lobby of American arms manufacturers played up China's growing diplomatic and military clout and the angst of our pundits poured out on newspaper columns. But let us hear first how the U.S. proposes to deal with China's rise. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said last week: "The relationship between China and the U.S. is complex and of enormous consequence, and we are committed to getting it right "¦ In the 21st century, it is not in anyone's interest for the U.S. and China to see each other as adversaries. So, we are working together to chart a positive, cooperative, and comprehensive relationship for this new century "¦ And we do look forward to closely working with China, both bilaterally and through key institutions as it takes on a greater role and, at the same time, takes on more responsibility in global and international affairs."

She highlighted, "We will welcome President Hu Jintao to Washington in early 2011 ... The United States is committed to making this visit a historic success." Our pundits should do some honest introspection. Surely, there's some political symbolism in that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh scheduled four meetings with the Chinese leadership in the weeks straddling Mr. Obama's visit — "stop in India" during his "major trip to Asia," as Ms Clinton quaintly put it.

Similarly, it has been crystal clear that the U.S. is involved in a clausewitzean war in Afghanistan. The David Headley saga is a stunning reminder that realpolitik can trump soap operas of the "concert of democracies." Alas, our discourses are again missing the plot to imagine that our discord with Washington is merely a question concerning the Taliban or the Haqqani network. It's much more profound and it is long-term. Pakistan will be a pivotal relationship for the U.S. in the "new great game" once Gwadar shapes up as the port head of the Silk Road (protected by NATO), unlocking the multitrillion dollar mineral wealth of Central Asia and Afghanistan. A reset of India-U.S. ties has become necessary for deepening the partnership despite such glaring differences.

(The writer is a former diplomat.)
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
No 'big bang' outcome from Obama's visit: Nirupama Rao


NEW DELHI: India is not expecting any "big bang" outcome from the forthcoming visit of US President Barack Obama but said it will help in creating a long-term strategic framework by providing substantive content and shape to the bilateral ties.

Besides reflecting an "essential continuity" to the ties, the visit will also provide another opportunity to consolidate all that have been built by two countries in the past decade, foreign secretary Nirupama Rao said while addressing a gathering here.

"We are not at a stage in our relationship, perhaps for another big bang but certainly there will be positive outcomes...from the forthcoming Presidential visit.

"We will see concrete and significant steps in wide range of areas that will expand the long-term strategic framework in a way that we can create productive partnership for the mutual benefit and (will be) equally important to give substantive content and shape to the global strategic partnership," she said.

Rao said recent months has seen an accelerated momentum in the relationship in various areas, including trade and counter-terrorism which was evident from the way India got access to Pakistani-American terrorist David Headley, currently lodged in jail in the US.

The ties have not only sustained but have deepened and intensified, she said.

Rao said the two countries have also completed the remaining steps of implementation of civil nuclear cooperation agreement, including arrangements and procedures and assurances.

She said the country has also signed Convention on Supplementary Compensation ( CSC) on nuclear damages at International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

"We welcome the commencement of commercial negotiations between Indian operators and the US companies and we look forward to shared goal of robust Indo-US civil nuclear sector," she said.

She also mentioned that the two countries were at a stage where they can give concrete shape to their democratic values by reforming the global institutions of governance to reflect contemporary realities.

Read more: No 'big bang' outcome from Obama's visit: Nirupama Rao - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ama-Rao/articleshow/6860935.cms#ixzz149XEyNFF
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
Obama may push India's case for membership of elite N-clubs


NEW DELHI: The India-US nuclear deal is poised to take another leap with US President Barack Obama expected to endorse India's membership to the world's top non-proliferation regimes, like Wassenaar Arrangement and Australia Group. Due to some NPT sensitivity, the US is likely to give "forward-leaning" support for a future Indian membership to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).

A possible Indian membership to these groups will not only open India Inc's access to advanced and controlled technologies, it will also bring India into a tightly run club, which controls the flow of advanced military, civilian and dual-use technologies to non-members. This would be in sectors like avionics, composite materials, machine intelligence and robotics, sensors, signals processing, simulation, chemicals, pharmaceuticals etc.

India now ranks fairly low in competitiveness in advanced infrastructure. This could change dramatically.

Essentially, it means benefits of nuclear deal can extend to not only civilian nuclear sector but cut across many applications, which, if utilised correctly, will open up a whole new universe to the Indian entrepreneurial class. "A strategic partnership with the US without a fullscope technology partnership would restrain India's potential to build its socio-economic infrastructure," Ravinder Pal Singh, international security expert, said.

In return, India will have to harmonise its export control regulations and keep a tight lid on who and where it exports to. But it means Indian companies can significantly improve their technological standing with a world of advanced technologies opening up. At present, Indian technologists, or companies, are not even in the running.

In 2005, Israel, another country that has not signed the NPT, signed a classified agreement with the US to adhere partially to the Wassenaar Arrangement and worked out its export control laws by 2007.

The membership to NSG is a little further down the line because some criteria has to be developed that will accept India as an NPT-compliant country rather than as an NPT signatory. Government sources believe 2008 waiver has opened the door for India. India is keen to become a member of NSG, because it wants to get into the commercial civilian nuclear business.

More importantly, India wants to get into the tent before the NSG decides to block enrichment and reprocessing technology for non-members which would seriously hamper the development of India's civilian nuclear sector.

Read more: Obama may push India's case for membership of elite N-clubs - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...N-clubs/articleshow/6856196.cms#ixzz149XTu2fM
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
Obama's visit to accord India its global positioning

Washington, Nov 2, (PTI):

President Obama's maiden visit to India this weekend will accord the nation the kind of global positioning it aspires to and take the relationship to a new level, head of the prestigious Asia Society has said.

"Indeed, the expectations are high that President Obama will show his personal commitment to the relationship, accord India the kind of global positioning it aspires to and declare, in substance and in style, that this is indeed the 'defining relationship' as described by the under secretary Bill Burns," Visakha Desai, president of Asia Society said days ahead of President Obama's much awaited visit to India.

On both sides, expectations are high to elevate the relationship, she said, adding that on the Indian side, there are several reasons. "It is widely perceived that President George W Bush was personally committed to taking the relationship to a new level, as evidenced by the civil nuclear energy deal," she said.

"On the other hand, several comments by President Obama, ranging from ill-timed comments about Kashmir to a joint statement with the Chinese about China's role in maintaining stability in the South Asia region, have created more suspicion than trust," Desai said.

Desai, an eminent Indian-American, said Indians have felt that Americans have not fully understood the cultural complexities of fighting a war in Afghanistan and have relied too heavily on Pakistan. (Meaning, they have not been consulted enough).

Also, Indian economy is booming (expected to grow at nine per cent this year) and the government has allowed the rupee to rise against dollar, even though that has meant its own garment sector has suffered, she noted.

Indian companies have been investing in the US and Indians were ready to make big purchases from the Americans, especially in terms of military aircraft and equipment intended for the civil nuclear plants.

Desai said all of this is eminently achievable but it is equally important for India to show what it can and must do to deepen the dialogue and elevate the relationship to a new level.

"First of all, it is simply not enough to always demand that it needs to be assured of its nascent global power status. It needs to come to the table with ideas and agendas for its role as an Asian player and as a global player," she said.

"What it is prepared to do to develop a pan-Asia Pacific architecture as well as how it could work with the US on the globally critical issues of climate change and trade imbalance should be high on the Indian leader's agenda.

"Both India and the US will have to recognize that while there may be agreement on many of the end goals in Afghanistan or toward Iran, the two countries will differ on strategies," Desai said.

"Not surprisingly, the two partners would have to agree to disagree as good friends with deep mutual trust can do. It's time for this relationship to mature at a level where mutual respect and stronger trust can move the agenda forward even amid disagreement on some of the specifics," she said.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
NSA downplays Headley tiff; unprecedented progress in US ties


NEW DELHI: Seeking to downplay the Headley controversy, National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon today said the access given by the US to the Pakistani-American terrorist was "unprecendented", saying such cooperation may not have been possible five years back.

Menon's remarks seeking to clear the air ahead of the visit of US president Barack Obama, came within days of home secretary G K Pillai voicing disappointment over the US not sharing specific information on David Headley, a key accused in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks.

"In India, (there is a debate on) how much did the US knew about Headley at what time and how much did they tell us. If you look at the broader picture, the kind of access we got to Headley is unprecedented. This is not what many states do very easily," he said at a function organised by FICCI here.

Menon wondered whether this kind of cooperation would have been possible about five years back.

He said the dissatisfaction over certain aspects of the ties was because people expect "much more" out of this growing relationship.

"People expect much more out of this relationship. So, a lot of dissatisfaction we hear, whether it is outsourcing or counter-terrorism, (it is because) we expect this relationship to do much more," Menon said.

The NSA said the achievements of the relationship were "unprecedented" which neither of the two countries would have considered five or ten years back.

"The level of engagement between our two countries is unprecedented. We never had this kind of engagement with each other in our history. There is no sphere of human endeavour in which we do not actually cooperate... the range of our engagement is quite unprecedented," he said.

Menon said the visit of Obama has given both the countries an opportunity to "actually put into practice and not just to showcase what we actually practice".

Asserting that he was "very optimistic" about the future of Indo-US ties, the NSA said the best thing for the countries to do was to be have a pragmatic approach in furthering the relationship.

"I think we should do what we do best. We should be pragmatic and work the relationship where it works... I think we have the moment where we can be ambitious about the relationship," Menon said.

Read more: NSA downplays Headley tiff; unprecedented progress in US ties - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...US-ties/articleshow/6859304.cms#ixzz149fiAUq2
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
^^ They will never be able to do so because the coming decade has a slew of JVs with Russia and the decade following that would make India at least 90% self-reliant except for some critical tech which again we can acquire from multiple vendors.
 

Parthy

Air Warrior
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
1,314
Likes
149
^^ They will never be able to do so because the coming decade has a slew of JVs with Russia and the decade following that would make India at least 90% self-reliant except for some critical tech which again we can acquire from multiple vendors.
But still, they're trying to invade us politically.... :thinking: Our politicians are more attracted by Western Fancies....
 

Energon

DFI stars
Ambassador
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
1,199
Likes
767
Country flag
^^ They will never be able to do so because the coming decade has a slew of JVs with Russia and the decade following that would make India at least 90% self-reliant except for some critical tech which again we can acquire from multiple vendors.
Unlikely. India does not possess the industrial infrastructure to develop and sustain a cache of state of the art military hardware by itself. Two decades from now the Indian establishment will be mulling over a vast inventory of outdated weapons that suck up an equally vast amount of resource which could be better used elsewhere. This scenario is no different from the one seen two decades ago.

Vice Admiral Raman Puri is right when he states that building the LCA results in an institution. What he doesn't mention however is that multiple sophisticated preexisting industries are required to enable the process. The reason DRDO flounders when it comes to the development of modern military hardware is because unlike the West or even China, India does not yet possess the litany of smaller sophisticated industries that can support and contribute to the overall industrial capacity of the nation. All the prolific modern military hardware producers have a very solid chain of institutional capabilities that feed off one another. Starting with basic science research at university level which is then forwarded to first line industries dealing with the material sciences who then supply simple and complex manufacturing etc.
India has all the components but no synergy. There is mostly one centralized body that attempts to do everything and in the bargains spends a lot of precious time and money reinventing an outdated wheel.

Until the basic groundwork is laid this scenario will not change, and mind you it takes decades to perfect this industrial cycle. Either way there are no short cuts, or silos. In the mean time it actually makes more sense to purchase the bare minimum modern military hardware from cooperating nations who are willing to pursue industrial offsets.
 

Energon

DFI stars
Ambassador
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
1,199
Likes
767
Country flag
But still, they're trying to invade us politically.... :thinking: Our politicians are more attracted by Western Fancies....
Really? Yet you have no issue with the social and political "invasion" of Indians into the West, particularly the USA? How about the benefits of American and Western outsourcing thanks to their open market policies guaranteed by their respective governments? What about the rapidly growing technical input from the West benefiting a vast array of industries and institutions in India such as higher education, agriculture, energy, electronics heavy industry etc. etc.? Let's not even get into information technology.

Maybe it might be worth reassessing the question... who exactly is "invading" whom here?
 

IBRIS

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
1,402
Likes
796
Country flag
Endorse India for permanent UNSC: USIBC to Obama

Washington: The US-India business community wants President Barack Obama to endorse India for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council, and address issues of concern for New Delhi like the H-1B visa fee hike and fears about outsourcing of US jobs to India.

Ahead of Obama's India visit this week, they have also advocated the lifting of most dual-use export licensing requirements specific to India and batted for making licensing and clearance for defence articles easier for India.

At the same time, the report submitted by the US-India Business Council (USIBC) has said suggested that India needs to increase the FDI investment cap to 74 percent to spur greater investment and transfer of technology.

"The United Nations Security Council remains the clearest symbol of decision-making in world security matters. The US-India business community strongly feels that our partnership should begin here," said the report 'Partners in Prosperity Business Leading the Way' released by the USIBC, whose chairman is Terry McGraw, chairman president and CEO of The McHGraw-Hill Companies.

"President Obama calling for a renewal of the UN Security Council and the inclusion of India as one of its new permanent members will galvanise both societies, laying the groundwork for deeper collaboration at every level," it said.

Observing that the US midterm election season has resurrected unfounded fears about outsourcing of US jobs to India, the report also noted that the US Congress' recent move to raise H1-B and L1 visa fees for foreign companies has caused concern in the industry.

"These bumps in the road present both a challenge and an opportunity. The way ahead is full of promise, but in order to get there, executives in the US and India must bring along and carry public sentiment on both sides favouring deeper US-India commercial ties.

"To accomplish this, we must achieve positive change via specific advocacy," said the 12-page report.

It said the US should treat India as a favoured nation when it comes to information exchange relative to advanced technology or defence cooperation.
The US should also raise India's partner status and category tier-listing on the National Disclosure Policy, the US Munitions List, and the Commerce Controls List, it said.

Contending that American procedures are complicated when it comes to defence articles, it said the US should designate a senior official with the authority to act as ombudsman to resolve complex licensing and clearance issues.

At the same time, it says India has the responsibility to make its complex bureaucratic procedures defence procurement simpler. It also called for increasing the 26 percent cap on FDI in the defence industry to 74 percent.

USIBC also urged India to open the multi-brand retail sector to organised players.
With US interest in India at an all-time high, US industry believes that the natural next step is to conceive a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) especially tailored for India.

The two countries should revitalise Bilateral Investment Treaty negotiations to come up with a treaty that will spur greater investment and employment opportunities in both the US and India.

Businesses in both countries must advocate for the protection and vigilant enforcement of intellectual property across all sectors. This will spur research, invention, and discovery, it said, adding that the US and Indian governments should facilitate greater movement of technical professionals between the US and India by advocating a special technical visa/work permit regime.

"Developing a viable alternative to a Totalisation Agreement, and making it suitable to today's Knowledge Partnership with India, is a practical fix which is especially important as our two economies become more closely intertwined," the report said, adding that the industry should continue to press for the opening up of India's legal sector to foreign law firms.

"Legal alignment will be a conduit for greater two-way investment between our economies," it said.

USIBC also called for modernising US export controls by lifting most dual-use export licensing requirements specific to India. This would place India on par with the closest allies of the United States, it said.

It has also demanded granting dual-use licensing exception for intra company transfers that would permit US companies to transfer commodities, software, and technology to their foreign subsidiaries without prior approval.
It also pressed for full and satisfactory implementation of the US-India civil nuclear accord, the successful implementation of which will spur a new era of commerce in high technology.

It called for encouraging establishment of a Global Entry-Trusted Traveler programme between the US and India to allow business travelers between the two countries greater ease of access.
Besides, it supported a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement that will allow India to upgrade its Air Traffic Control technology to world-class standards.
http://www.punjabkesari.com/frmNewsDetails.aspx?uid=141001
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article865356.ece

Considering the volume of defence equipment under negotiation with the U.S., it is only a matter of time before the highly dependable 'jugaad' ceases to exist as a force multiplier in the Indian military.

The steady flow of varied American material and the anticipated ingress of much more following President Barack Obama's visit later this week could impinge adversely on India's 'jugaad' or innovative fix-dependent defence systems.

U.S. pacts like the End Use Monitoring Agreement (EUMA), the only one of three crucial accords concerning American defence exports to which New Delhi has so far agreed, foreclose the possibility of the Indian military pursuing its accomplished, long-established and, at times, essential 'jugaad' route. This not only provides the military the much-needed flexibility but ably renders overseas equipment wholly serviceable in climatic extremes, assorted terrain, and diverse operational requirements.

The fine print of the EUMA, concluded after much wrangling and extended negotiations last year, proscribes the buyer — in this case India — from retrofitting and adapting military equipment to its needs without the Original Equipment Manufacturers' (OEMs) consent and participation for the entire duration of its service which in the case of the U.S. has almost never ever been permitted.

With the 80-odd countries with which it has concluded the EUMA, the U.S. has reportedly made an exception only once by allowing the Israel Air Force to incorporate locally developed sensors and weapons into the Lockheed Martin F 16s supplied to Tel Aviv. Recent reports indicate that a similar agreement has been reached with regard to some systems aboard Lockheed Martin's F 35 Lightning II fifth generation fighter, of which Israel is planning to acquire two squadrons.

Significantly, all U.S. military purchases by India via the Foreign Military Sales or FMS programme have been concluded under the stricter "Golden Sentry" EUMA, governing not only physical verification of the equipment — over which New Delhi and Washington have managed to reach a workable via media — but also its final disposal. This protocol is far stricter than the "Blue Lantern" EUMA governing the direct commercial sale of U.S. materiel worldwide.

But such foreclosure on U.S. defence goods supplied to India would, military officers concede, encroach on decades of amazing and efficient implementation of 'jugaad,' elevated to sophisticated levels and one which has ensured that imported weapon systems perform well above their declared operational potential.

For decades, 'jugaad' has rendered a range of platforms not only highly serviceable and effective but in some instances even lethal. These, to mention just a few, include the fleet of 180-190 Chetaks and Cheetahs — principally Alouette IIIs and SA-315B Lamas — capable after the 'jugaad' of operating almost daily for decades at heights of over 14,000 feet in the Siachen glacier region which their French manufacturers could never have imagined possible.

Alongside, some 125 Mig 21 bis ground attack fighters have been effectively upgraded with Russian collaboration by innovatively equipping them with French, Israeli and locally developed weapons, sensors and electronic warfare systems. These include the deadly RR 550 Magic air-to-air missile developed by Matra of France. The fleet of ground attack Jaguars too has been retrofitted successfully, provided with mid-air refuelling capability among other capabilities supplied by vendors other than the OEM.

Even the frontline Su-30MkI multirole fighters, the muscle of the Indian Air Force's combat squadrons, have local and other-than-Russian competent force multipliers fitted on board. Earlier, during the 1999 Kargil conflict, the IAF had ably equipped its Mirage 2000Hs with indigenous 1000-lb precision guided munitions, delivering them with devastating effect on the Pakistani army.

Similarly, the Indian Navy's depleting Sea Harrier fleet is getting an upgrade that includes replacing the original Blue Fox radar, supplied in a downgraded export configuration through the 1980s and 1990s, with Israel's Elta EL/M-2032 multimode fire control radar with a 100-km operating range. Matching Israeli Rafael Derby beyond visual range air-to-air missiles completes the retrofit.

And, the Army's Soviet and Russian T72 and T 90S main battle tanks, range of artillery guns and infantry combat vehicles, in addition to numerous naval assets, have all been cleverly and effectively adapted through 'jugaad' with their efficiency, operability and lifespan much enhanced.

But under the EUMA, it seems India's military will have to forgo this functional option to retrofit U.S.-supplied equipment which, for the duration of its service, would exclusively remain the OEM's responsibility.

The Comptroller and Auditor-General's audit some years ago of INS Jalashwa — formerly the USS Trenton, the 38-year old Austin-class landing platform dock which the Navy acquired in 2007 — made special reference to this aspect. It declared that the Navy would remain 'dependent upon U.S. support' for the LPD's spares and servicing for its service life, requiring American technicians to be flown in whenever it faced technical problems.

And though the government has obliquely claimed success in concluding the EUMA on Indian terms by securing the concession that the time and location of the U.S. equipment's verification process would be determined by New Delhi, it has cleverly avoided all mention of the life-long and costly reliance on the OEMs to keep all American equipment in service.

Earlier this year, Army Chief General V.K. Singh cautioned the government over acquiring U.S. defence equipment materiel via the FMS route, saying that after-sales maintenance support for it could prove "problematic."

The Army claimed it had been facing recurring problems with the 12 Thales-Raytheon Systems AN/TPQ-37 (V) 3 Firefinder artillery locating radar acquired in 2002 for $142.4 million through the FMS programme. More than two-thirds of these radar — India's first significant U.S. military equipment purchase in nearly four decades after Washington lifted sanctions on Delhi in October 2001 for its 1998 nuclear tests — were 'off road' awaiting either spare parts or maintenance or both precluding their operational deployment mostly in Kashmir. Many army officers believe 'jugaad' would have prevented the breakdown of the radar.

Meanwhile, India's hesitancy in confirming the Communications Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMoA) and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geo-spatial Cooperation (BECA) also forecloses the option of the U.S. transferring advanced avionics and communication equipment and satellite navigational aids aboard the eight Boeing P8I Poseidon multimission maritime aircraft (MMA) and six Lockheed Martin C-130J Super Hercules transport aircraft configured for Special Forces employment, all costing over $3 billion. Under the U.S. law, both pacts need bilateral confirmation to ensure client compliance with sensitive technology control transfers.

The IAF and the Navy, however, are planning repeat orders for at least six additional C-130Js and four more P 8Is. The Border Security Force and the Meteorological Department too have expressed interest in acquiring C-130Js in varied configurations.

But the absence of secure and encrypted communication equipment aboard them would curtail the operational efficiency of both aircraft, reducing them to little more than sophisticated aerial platforms even though Air Chief Marshal P.V. Naik, somewhat disingenuously, dismissed such claims recently.

National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon too parsed India's stand, claiming that the proposed defence pacts with the U.S. were "something brand new" and that the government would evaluate whether inking them was a "feasible route" forward.

Complex legal issues on warranty, liabilities and possible arbitration over supply of military equipment if something were to go amiss were still under negotiation between the U.S. and Indian officials. In the absence of crucial pacts remaining unsigned, many contracts like the transfer of three wide-bodied Boeing Business Jets for the IAF's VVIP squadron had, for instance, been concluded individually.

Of the three VVIPs jets, however, only one is believed to be equipped with missile deflecting security suites provided out of courtesy by President George W. Bush's Republican administration to a nascent strategic partner with military hardware buying potential. The remaining two Boeings await closure of CISmoA and BECA.

Washington's initial indulgence, it seems, has slid into obstreperousness and exasperation over India's reluctance to sign blanket agreements to facilitate materiel transfers that govern all American military sales. Considering the volume of defence equipment under negotiation, on offer and under trial, it is only a matter of time before New Delhi buckles and the ubiquitous and highly dependable 'jugaad' ceases to exist as a force multiplier in the Indian military.
 

SHASH2K2

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
5,711
Likes
730
US midterm polls: Setback to Obama's Democrats as defeats roll in


Republicans captured control of the House of Representatives on Tuesday and expanded their voice in the Senate, riding a powerful wave of voter discontent as they dealt a setback to President Barack Obama two years after his triumphal victory.

A Republican resurgence, propelled by deep economic worries and a forceful opposition to the Democratic agenda of health care and government spending, delivered commanding defeats to Democrats from the northeast to the south and across the Midwest. The tide swept aside dozens of Democratic lawmakers regardless of their seniority or their voting records, upending the balance of power for the second half of Obama's term.

But Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, narrowly prevailed and his party hung onto control by winning hard-fought contests in California, Delaware, Connecticut and West Virginia. Republicans picked up at least six Democratic seats, including the one formerly held by Obama, and the party will welcome Marco Rubio of Florida and Rand Paul of Kentucky to their ranks, two candidates who were initially shunned by the establishment but beloved by the Tea Party movement.

"The American people's voice was heard at the ballot box," said Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, who is positioned to become the next speaker of the House. "We have real work to do and this is not the time for celebration."The president, who watched the election returns with a small set of advisers at the White House, called Boehner shortly after midnight to offer his congratulations and to talk about the way forward as Washington prepares for divided government. Republicans won at least 56 seats, not including Western states where ballots were still being counted, which surpassed the 52 seats the party won in the sweep of 1994.

The most expensive midterm election campaign in the nation's history, fueled by a raft of contributions from outside interest groups and millions of donations to candidates in both parties, played out across a wide battleground that stretched from Alaska to Maine. The Republican tide swept into statehouse races, too, with Democrats poised to lose the majority of governorships, particularly those in key presidential swing states, like Ohio, where Gov. Ted Strickland was defeated.

One after another, once unassailable Democrats like Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Reps. Chet Edwards of Texas, Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota and Rick Boucher of Virginia fell to little-known Republican challengers.

Yet Republicans did not achieve a perfect evening, losing several states they had once hoped to win, including the Senate races in Delaware and Connecticut, because candidates supported by the Tea Party movement knocked out establishment candidates to win their nominations. But they did score notable victories in some tight races, like Pat Toomey's Senate run in Pennsylvania.

Still, the outcome on Tuesday marked nothing short of a comeback for Republicans two years after suffering a crushing defeat in the White House and four years after Democrats swept control of the House and Senate. It places the party back in the driver's seat in terms of policy, posing new challenges to Obama as he faces a tough two years in his term, but also for Republicans – led by Boehner – as he suddenly finds himself in a position of responsibility, rather than simply the outsider.

In the House, Republicans found victories in most corners of the country, including five seats in Pennsylvania, five in Ohio, at least three in Florida, Illinois and Virginia and two in Georgia. Democrats braced for the prospect of historic defeats, more than the 39 seats the Republicans needed to win control. Republicans reached their majority by taking seats east of the Mississippi even before late results flowed in from farther West.

Throughout the evening, in race after race, Republican challengers defeated Democratic incumbents, despite being at significant fund-raising disadvantages. Republican-oriented independent groups invariably came to the rescue, helping level of the playing field, including in Florida's 24th Congressional District, in which Sandy Adams defeated Rep. Suzanne Kosmas; Virginia's 9th Congressional District, where Boucher, a 14-term incumbent, lost to Morgan Griffith; and Texas's 17th Congressional District, in which Edwards, who was seeking his 11th term, succumbed to Bill Flores.

Democrats argued that the Republican triumph was far from complete, pointing to their own victories, particularly in the Senate race in Delaware, where Chris Coons defeated Christine O'Donnell, whose candidacy became a symbol of a year where unorthodox political candidates swept onto the ballot in Republican primary contests. In West Virginia, Gov. Joe Manchin III, a Democrat, triumphed over an insurgent Republican rival to fill the seat held for a half-century by Sen. Robert C. Byrd Jr. And in California, Sen. Barbara Boxer overcame a vigorous challenge from Carly Fiorina, a Republican.

But Democrats conceded that their plans to increase voter turnout did not meet expectations, party strategists said, and extraordinary efforts that Obama made in the final days of the campaign appeared to have borne little fruit.

The president flew to Charlottesville, Va., on Friday evening, for instance, in hopes of rallying Democrats to support Rep. Tom Perriello, a freshman who supported every piece of the administration's agenda, but he was defeated despite the president's appeals to Democrats in a state that he carried two years ago. Obama and the vice president rallied Ohio voters to support Gov. Ted Strickland on Sunday, but he fell to defeat.

In governors' races, Republicans were, as expected, showing gains in the nation's middle.

They held onto governorships in Texas, Nebraska and South Dakota, and had seized seats now occupied by Democrats in Tennessee, Michigan and Kansas. Sam Brownback, a Republican, easily took the Kansas post that Mark Parkinson, a former Republican turned Democrat, is leaving behind.

Though Democrats, who before the election held 26 governors' seats compared to 24 for the Republicans, were expected to face losses, there were also bright spots. In New York, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo easily defeated the Republican, Carl P. Paladino, even as Republicans were expected to pick up seats in the state legislature and the congressional delegation. In Massachusetts, Gov. Deval Patrick won a second term.

As election results rolled in, with Republicans picking up victories shortly after polls closed in states across the South, East and the Midwest, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other party leaders made urgent appeals through television interviews that there was still time for voters in other states to cast their ballots.

But the mood in Democratic quarters was glum, with few early signs of optimism in House or Senate races that were called early in the evening. Surveys that were conducted with voters across the country also provided little sense of hope for Democrats, with Republicans gaining a majority of independents, college-educated people and suburbanites – all groups that were part of the coalition of voters who supported Obama two years ago.

The election was seen as a referendum on Obama and the Democratic agenda, according to interviews with voters that were conducted for the National Election Pool, a consortium of television networks and the Associated Press, with a wide majority of the electorate saying that the country was seriously off track. Nearly nine in 10 voters said they were worried about the economy, and about four in 10 said their family's situation had worsened in the past two years.

The surveys found that voters were even more dissatisfied with Congress now than they were in 2006, when Democrats reclaimed control from the Republicans. Preliminary results also indicated an electorate far more conservative than four years ago, a sign of stronger turnout by people leaning toward Republicans.

Most voters said they believed Obama's policies would hurt the country in the long run, rather than help it, and a large share of voters said they supported the Tea Party movement, which has backed insurgent candidates all across the country.

Voters who said Obama was a factor in their decisions Tuesday were more likely to say they opposed him than supported him. About 4 in 10 voters overall said their vote was an expression of opposition to Obama, roughly the same number said he was not a factor in their vote and one-quarter said their vote was in support of the president.

The yearlong midterm election campaign, vitriolic and aggressive in spirit, played out on an unusually wide battleground stretching from Alaska to Maine and covering nearly every state in between. In the final weeks of the race, nearly 100 congressional districts became competitive, along with a large batch of Senate and governors' races, all of which were fueled by a major influx of cash from outside groups.

The political environment left almost no Democratic senator or representative, regardless of seniority or rank, free of a forceful challenge by Republicans. The Democratic strategy was primarily rooted in defense, largely because the party had made such gains in the past two election cycles that Republicans found vast opportunities.

The Republican winds began blowing back in January when Democrats lost the seat long held by Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, with the victory of Scott Brown serving as a motivating force for the budding Tea Party movement and a burst of inspiration for Republican candidates to step forward and challenge Democrats everywhere.

On Tuesday, the president did not leave the grounds of the White House, taking a respite from days of campaigning, so he could meet with a circle of top advisers to plot a way forward for his administration and his own looming re-election campaign. The White House said Obama would hold a news conference Wednesday to address the governing challenges that await the new Congress.

"My hope is that I can cooperate with Republicans," Obama said in a radio interview Tuesday. "But obviously, the kinds of compromises that will be made depends on what Capitol Hill looks like – who's in charge."

But even as the president was poised to offer a fresh commitment to bipartisanship, he spent the final hours of the midterm campaign trying to persuade Democrats in key states to take time to vote. From the Oval Office, Obama conducted one radio interview after another, urging black voters in particular to help preserve the party's majority and his agenda.

"How well I'm able to move my agenda forward over the next couple of years is going to depend on folks back home having my back," Obama said in an interview with Chicago radio station WGCI, in which he made a special appeal for voters to keep his former Senate seat in Democratic hands.

There was little Democratic terrain that seemed immune to Republican encroachment, with many of the most competitive races being waged in states that Obama carried strongly only two years ago. From the president's home state of Illinois to neighboring Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio – all places that were kind to the Democratic ticket in 2008 – Republicans worked aggressively to find new opportunities.

Two years after a historic presidential election, in which Democrats, independents and even Republicans voted on a pledge to change Washington, the coalition that carried Obama to the White House was showing significant signs of fraying. Throughout the midterm elections, the Democratic Party tried to recreate the spirit and enthusiasm of the last presidential campaign but was met with a sense of frustration and anxiety from voters that their lives had not gotten better.

For all the drama surrounding the final day of the midterm campaign, more than 19 million Americans had voted before Tuesday, a trend that has grown with each election cycle over the past decade, as 32 states now offer a way for voters to practice democracy in far more convenient ways than simply waiting in line on Election Day.

They held onto governorships in Texas, Nebraska and South Dakota, and had seized seats now occupied by Democrats in Tennessee, Michigan and Kansas. Sam Brownback, a Republican, easily took the Kansas post that Mark Parkinson, a former Republican turned Democrat, is leaving behind.

Though Democrats, who before the election held 26 governors' seats compared to 24 for the Republicans, were expected to face losses, there were also bright spots. In New York, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo easily defeated the Republican, Carl P. Paladino, even as Republicans were expected to pick up seats in the state legislature and the congressional delegation. In Massachusetts, Gov. Deval Patrick won a second term.

As election results rolled in, with Republicans picking up victories shortly after polls closed in states across the South, East and the Midwest, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other party leaders made urgent appeals through television interviews that there was still time for voters in other states to cast their ballots.

But the mood in Democratic quarters was glum, with few early signs of optimism in House or Senate races that were called early in the evening. Surveys that were conducted with voters across the country also provided little sense of hope for Democrats, with Republicans gaining a majority of independents, college-educated people and suburbanites – all groups that were part of the coalition of voters who supported Obama two years ago.

The election was seen as a referendum on Obama and the Democratic agenda, according to interviews with voters that were conducted for the National Election Pool, a consortium of television networks and the Associated Press, with a wide majority of the electorate saying that the country was seriously off track. Nearly nine in 10 voters said they were worried about the economy, and about four in 10 said their family's situation had worsened in the past two years.

The surveys found that voters were even more dissatisfied with Congress now than they were in 2006, when Democrats reclaimed control from the Republicans. Preliminary results also indicated an electorate far more conservative than four years ago, a sign of stronger turnout by people leaning toward Republicans.

Most voters said they believed Obama's policies would hurt the country in the long run, rather than help it, and a large share of voters said they supported the Tea Party movement, which has backed insurgent candidates all across the country.

Voters who said Obama was a factor in their decisions Tuesday were more likely to say they opposed him than supported him. About 4 in 10 voters overall said their vote was an expression of opposition to Obama, roughly the same number said he was not a factor in their vote and one-quarter said their vote was in support of the president.

The yearlong midterm election campaign, vitriolic and aggressive in spirit, played out on an unusually wide battleground stretching from Alaska to Maine and covering nearly every state in between. In the final weeks of the race, nearly 100 congressional districts became competitive, along with a large batch of Senate and governors' races, all of which were fueled by a major influx of cash from outside groups.

The political environment left almost no Democratic senator or representative, regardless of seniority or rank, free of a forceful challenge by Republicans. The Democratic strategy was primarily rooted in defense, largely because the party had made such gains in the past two election cycles that Republicans found vast opportunities.

The Republican winds began blowing back in January when Democrats lost the seat long held by Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, with the victory of Scott Brown serving as a motivating force for the budding Tea Party movement and a burst of inspiration for Republican candidates to step forward and challenge Democrats everywhere.

On Tuesday, the president did not leave the grounds of the White House, taking a respite from days of campaigning, so he could meet with a circle of top advisers to plot a way forward for his administration and his own looming re-election campaign. The White House said Obama would hold a news conference Wednesday to address the governing challenges that await the new Congress.

"My hope is that I can cooperate with Republicans," Obama said in a radio interview Tuesday. "But obviously, the kinds of compromises that will be made depends on what Capitol Hill looks like – who's in charge."

But even as the president was poised to offer a fresh commitment to bipartisanship, he spent the final hours of the midterm campaign trying to persuade Democrats in key states to take time to vote. From the Oval Office, Obama conducted one radio interview after another, urging black voters in particular to help preserve the party's majority and his agenda.

"How well I'm able to move my agenda forward over the next couple of years is going to depend on folks back home having my back," Obama said in an interview with Chicago radio station WGCI, in which he made a special appeal for voters to keep his former Senate seat in Democratic hands.

There was little Democratic terrain that seemed immune to Republican encroachment, with many of the most competitive races being waged in states that Obama carried strongly only two years ago. From the president's home state of Illinois to neighbouring Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio – all places that were kind to the Democratic ticket in 2008 – Republicans worked aggressively to find new opportunities.

Two years after a historic presidential election, in which Democrats, independents and even Republicans voted on a pledge to change Washington, the coalition that carried Obama to the White House was showing significant signs of fraying. Throughout the midterm elections, the Democratic Party tried to recreate the spirit and enthusiasm of the last presidential campaign but was met with a sense of frustration and anxiety from voters that their lives had not gotten better.

For all the drama surrounding the final day of the midterm campaign, more than 19 million Americans had voted before Tuesday, a trend that has grown with each election cycle over the past decade, as 32 states now offer a way for voters to practice democracy in far more convenient ways than simply waiting in line on Election Day.

Read more: US midterm polls: Setback to Obama's Democrats as defeats roll in - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...roll-in/articleshow/6864014.cms#ixzz14CRURYRu



Good news for future and bad new for present . Obama will come to India as wounded tiger .
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
We're the boss here, Mumbai cops tell Obama's men


India is no more in the 1970s and 1980s, the state's police and general administration seem to have made it clear to US security agencies and White House officials while driving a hard bargain over relaxation of security norms demanded by the latter.

The convoy of and security cover to US president Barack Obama will be led by the city police. Also, the White House cannot import guns or arms for its security personnel.

White House officials have had five to six meetings with the state's officials and sought 'flexibility' and special relaxations for their teams visiting Mumbai and Delhi. But the officials here were not willing to entertain many of the requests.

"They wanted the immigration procedure to be waived at the arrival point at the international airport. They thought it would be cumbersome for the 3,000 people accompanying the president. They were told straightaway that our rules do not permit such relaxation and paperwork for every person entering the country will have to be done," a top Mantralaya official said. Even access and entry permission at all events will be taken care of by the city police.

The official said the White House officials were denied permission to carry guns and other equipment. "Barring the security personnel in the innermost circle, no other security official is allowed to carry any weapon. The city police will be the final authority as far as security is concerned. After all, we can't rely on a security force that is completely new to the culture and habits of the people here," he added.

The police and state officials have been upset at the White House decision that Obama would pay homage to 26/11 martyrs at the Taj Hotel. The state home department wanted the venue for the homage to be either the Police Gymkhana or the CST as more deaths were outside the five-star hotel.

The White House officials also wanted an assurance from the home department that photographs would not be clicked from adjoining buildings during Obama's visit to the Mani Bhavan.

"Our officials were prompt enough to tell them that ours is a democratic country and we do no advocate too much restriction on the citizens," the official said.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
MoD, Navy and Air chiefs object to US defence pact



The Defence Ministry, too, is said to have shared its concerns at the highest levels that signing these agreements will send a "negative" signal to other important defence partners, particularly Russia.


...
In fact, none of the defence deals with the US that have been in the works will be announced during the visit. However, Obama will be given assurances in "private conversations" that deals like the C-17 aircraft are in the works and would be concluded soon. Government sources said the US had to make certain revisions in the letter of the agreement for the C-17 aircraft and, hence, the process got delayed.

...
...
The Defence Ministry is learnt to have raised the point that the US is likely to use Indian bases much more than Indian ships or aircraft utilizing American bases. The frequent movement of US ships and aircraft, according to the Defence Ministry, could convey a different political impression to India's other strategic partners and may not serve the "national interest" depending on the context. The argument is that India should not bind itself by these agreements.


Washington is said to have provided a revised text making a distinction between using these facilities in combat and non-combat situations. This too has not found favour with the Defence Ministry, which is of the view that it would be very difficult to make such distinctions if live action is in another theatre but Indian facilities are being used. The point being made is that such agreements would limit India's political options in tricky situations.

On CISMOA, too, the key issue for the Defence Ministry and the Armed Forces is interoperability. The question being asked is whether interoperability with NATO forces is desirable. While Russia has not directly taken up the issue with India, it keeps making the point at various levels that Russia does not sell military hardware to Pakistan.

...
...
On being repeatedly told that not signing these agreements would adversely affect military purchases as the US would not be able to provide hi-tech ancillary equipment, the Defence Ministry asked the the two forces currently affected by this —the Navy and the Air Force. The view from them is that much of this equipment can be obtained from elsewhere and some others are needed.


The third agreement, the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA) for Geo-Spatial Navigation, is still under consideration as it was brought up much later. India, it may be noted, has already finalised an end-user monitoring agreement.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top