India will grow in strategic importance: US

[Adux]

My government's primary role is to protect its citizens. If it hurts the feelings of other countries to do that, so be it. Mutual respect among nations is utopian.

Absolutely nothing wrong, expect the same from us. We will not be a extension of your foreign policy if we can help it. Of course we will help each other, when our objectives match.

 

[Adux]

You are alluding to August, 1945, I presume? That should be a separate thread.

Nothing wrong in it. Japanese should have known that when they started the damn war. I expected you to do it in Pakistan on September 12 2001, but you guys turned out to be complete tools for ISI. Toughie for you.

 

[trackwhack]

Nothing wrong in it. Japanese should have known that when they started the damn war. I expected you to do it in Pakistan on September 12 2001, but you guys turned out to be complete tools for ISI. Toughie for you.

Japan was finished even without the nukes. They were unnecessary. But yeah, thats for another thread.

Man its almost 1 AM. Adios Amigos.

 

[thakur_ritesh]

the only thing that should ever matter in foreign relations and foreign policy making has to be your interests, none of our concerns what those people are doing with the rest, its for them to decide, and likewise we never need to take any dictation from anyone on how to further our interests, though a little give and take is fine looking at the advantage.

same is the case with indo-US relations. these relations are bound to grow stronger in the coming at least two decades, lets brace up for it and make the most of it and not waste time over what has happened in the past. there is so much to be gained from this relationship, but that shouldnt mean we sideline our interests which run contrary to the wishes of the US, and we in such a position where we can more than keep our side of interests intact.

 

[Adux]

Japan was finished even without the nukes. They were unnecessary. But yeah, thats for another thread.

Man its almost 1 AM. Adios Amigos.

It is their war, they decided they wont loose one more soldier for yet another uninhabited island, so they nuked the Japanese who started the damn war. Their soldiers, their war , their nukes, absolutely nothing wrong in what they did. Its better than the Island hopping, and they were get slaughtered there.

 

[Adux]

the only thing that should ever matter in foreign relations and foreign policy making has to be your interests, none of our concerns what those people are doing with the rest, its for them to decide, and likewise we never need to take any dictation from anyone on how to further our interests, though a little give and take is fine looking at the advantage.

same is the case with indo-US relations. these relations are bound to grow stronger in the coming at least two decades, lets brace up for it and make the most of it and not waste time over what has happened in the past. there is so much to be gained from this relationship, but that shouldnt mean we sideline our interests which run contrary to the wishes of the US, and we in such a position where we can more than keep our side of interests intact.

Brilliant post, my sentiments exactly. India hasnt given up on their rights and views when things were worse than this, and we had no leverage over the US, today the tables have changed, We wont give an inch to anyone, we dont want to give.

We need to man-up like China, when Nixon visited them. Indians to stop being pussies, and make use of this opportunity for advantage.
Ofcourse we will need give them some too, isnt that how business is done, its a two way street. So we engage in what we can, dis-engage in what we dont want.

 

[Ray]

If India is to influence the regional and international arena, it will have to decide for itself.

To do so there has to be a national strategic vision.

Does India have it?

 

[SADAKHUSH]

Nothing wrong in it. Japanese should have known that when they started the damn war. I expected you to do it in Pakistan on September 12 2001, but you guys turned out to be complete tools for ISI. Toughie for you.

I see it from different optics. They were fulfilling the demands of Saudi Arabia to take out "Man of Mass Destruction" rather than WMD.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

If India is to influence the regional and international arena, it will have to decide for itself.

To do so there has to be a national strategic vision.

Does India have it?

An excellent subject, Sir, perhaps it should be a separate thread?

I found this presentation from 2006.

India's Strategic Vision

D. Suba Chandran

http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/090201_bsa_chandran.pdf

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Man its almost 1 AM. Adios Amigos.

Give us a report from Zuccotti Park tomorrow if you can. Didn't you say you work in that neighborhood?

 

[Ray]

An excellent subject, Sir, perhaps it should be a separate thread?

I found this presentation from 2006.

India's Strategic Vision

D. Suba Chandran

http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/090201_bsa_chandran.pdf

Go ahead and start a thread.

It would be interesting.

It will be more so since the politicians of India are talking about strategy in that link!

 

[thakur_ritesh]

Brilliant post, my sentiments exactly. India hasnt given up on their rights and views when things were worse than this, and we had no leverage over the US, today the tables have changed, We wont give an inch to anyone, we dont want to give.

We need to man-up like China, when Nixon visited them. Indians to stop being pussies, and make use of this opportunity for advantage.
Ofcourse we will need give them some too, isnt that how business is done, its a two way street. So we engage in what we can, dis-engage in what we dont want.

fact of the matter is we tend to get way too emotional about the US-pakistan thing, and most tend to make it a zero sum game and while doing that our expectations tend to grow many fold, leave the americans aside, have the russians for that matter given up on china? forget that, have we given up on japan for russia or iran/burma/syria for the US? take the whole india-china-pakistan thing, have the chinese given up on us for their "deeper than ocean, high than mountain", rather rhetorical, freindship with the paks? which country has ever done that for any country?

it just ought not to be the case, and we should never be looking for such zero sum games because once we start to bargain that, we need to match up as well, are we ready? what about much talked aboutindependent foreign policy? lets negotiate only to the extent it is beneficial and no more.

the other idea of having US in a position to manipulate/influence pakistan is that the mad dogs manning that nation dont go berserk, and our best way to do that is without a doubt through the US. US ought ot be in a position where they have a strangle hold on PA, and other policy makers, which is much needed to keep our dream of making it big economically.

 

[JayATL]

US keen on developing new weapons with India

Foreseeing India as a major military partner in the long-run, the United States on Wednesday said it was working to transfer some of its most advanced technology to New Delhi and offering co-development of weapon systems, including on the futuristic Joint Strike Fighter.



In a one-of-its kind report on India submitted to the US Congress, the Pentagon said it was also pursuing new avenues of collaboration in maritime security and counter-terrorism.

Envisaging building up of "robust" and "mutually beneficial" defence ties over the next five years, the report said that it is in US interest to support India's rise through military-to-military ties, arms sales and joint exercises

The sales include C-17 and C-130J transport aircraft, TPQ-37 fire-finding radars, Self-Protection Suites (SPS) for VVIP aircraft, specialised tactical equipment, Harpoon missiles, Sensor-Fuzed Weapons, and carrier flight and test pilot school training


Though the US companies lost in the race for bagging India's lucrative $10 billion contract for 126 jets, the Pentagon informed the Congress that it is seriously interested in making India join in the multi-nation project to develop the stealth F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.


Keen to develop deeper defence industrial cooperation with India, including a range of cooperative research and development activities, the Pentagon said the US "is committed to providing India with top-of-the-line technology".


The Defence Department also said it is exploring the potential of co-development of military weapons systems with India.

"As our relationship continues to mature we expect co development of armaments to become a reality," it said.


"Despite this setback (on MMRCA deal), we believe US aircraft, such as the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), to be the best in the world. Should India indicate interest in the JSF, the US would be prepared to provide information on the JSF and its requirements (infrastructure, security, etc) to support India's future planning," the Pentagon informed the Congress.


"Over the next five years, we will continue to build the support structures necessary to ensure the maturation of a robust and mutually beneficial defence relationship with India in the Asia-Pacific and globally," the Pentagon said.


US keen on developing new weapons with India - Rediff.com News

 

[JayATL]

every russian project practically ( majority) has had issues from phucked up products to delays. drop them and go with US or EU companies that not only provide quality but aslo do it ahead of time. PKA - FA I guarantee will be a headache

 

[JayATL]

Why india has to ally with US..

Before you go nationalistic on me and give India is king rah rah replies - read the entire thread and quoted material. Stop think before you reply

I have a opinion that says India has to ally itself with the US or lose its influence in its back yard. This based on several articles, even the recent one here posted about Australia needing to get close to India- have all unanimously agreed that china has plans to be the only dominate power in Asia. It is single mindedly after the goal to remove all US influence and military might in this region( Asia). Its building its military at break neck speed and the lethality of which is only going to get astounding.

Auz's PM Rudd for example stated that - their closeness to US is going to increase as well as military spending because of what they see as dangerous Chinese ambitions for this region. You are seeing portions of that ambition and tone in South China Sea today.

This is not just about Indo_china border but much larger play at risk. Economic zones, rights to protect indian assets ( like w/ vietnam)...the chinese ambition is to bully in those areas. Hell! you even had their ships ask an Indian ship what it was doing in " international free waters" on its way back from vietnam.

This means India has two options-

One is meet china head on, risk spending it itself into a USSR kind of situation -especially in military strength

OR

Two- ally with US and both use their influence to curtail china. Else India risks loosing on both fronts - influences to take on china diplomatically in Asia ( and world) and also in terms of military strength. I know that India cannot match China's military ambitions- so its option two clearly for me

In a truly fascinating section Rudd listed what he saw as China's strategic ambitions in the next decade. Rudd cited various of China's aims, but among them was one that government ministers seldom advert to in public. Like Richardson, Rudd was admirably straightforward.

He said: "China's strategic objective is over time to reduce US military influence and, as a consequence, US alliances in East Asia and the Pacific."

Later in the speech Rudd identified a key Australian objective as maintaining and strengthening our alliance with the US. Rudd is certainly right in his analysis and he serves the cause of public debate by putting it on the record. But he also makes it clear that China's strategic objective -- diminishing US alliances and the US military presence in the region -- is in direct contradiction of Australia's strategic objectives.

In the same speech, Rudd further stated that another strategic objective of China was to "protect (its) sea lines of communication right out to the sources of China's long-term energy supply, across the Indian Ocean to the Gulf where most of its oil supplies come from, but also its land-based supply lines to various other countries in terms of delivery of natural gas as well".

This means that Rudd has concluded, rightly in my view, that China's massive military build-up is destined to go on for a long time and to reach extremely lethal capabilities to project military force over long distances.

You see no amount of peace will stop their aspirations and single goal. That being the master of all in Asia -and a military bully in the region. If India wants to relent that role to them - then fine , be in their shadow and get bullied and expect to be a dud on the international stage.

But - voila! the Indian foreign service heads don't. Every indicator from india's foreign policy office so far- is that they understand that relenting Asia to China is their death knoll. The direction India is headed is where every, I mean every, other nation in Asia that matters is going i.e. getting closer to the US to mitigate what would be the most dangerous power in this part of the world - China.

 

[mayfair]

Not this codsawallop again. Don't we have enough threads discussing Indo-US entante (or detante)?

Getting close to US has in no way mitigated the danger that Pakiland poses to the world is it?

 

[asianobserve]

Funny they did not feel that way for 60 fkn years!

It was India who did not feel it all those fkn years!

 

[JayATL]

nvm...........

 

[Rage]

US offers India joint F-35 development? Wouldn't that lead to a conflict of interest in terms of the design technologies in light of India's involvement with the PAK FA ? It sounds pretty intuitive to me. Offering "information on the JSF and its requirements (infrastructure, security, etc)" sounds like a cute way of getting India to chip in with the major costs for the project. I can understand sub-assembly work, as with the Super Hornet but full-fledged production lines is something that will not happen unless it is mutually exclusive. Which India should and will-not-do.

If India does buy any variant of the F-35, it will be for the Navy and the scale and scope of the purchase won't envisage ToT or partnership in the program.

In fact this statement seems to support it: With own 5G jet plan, India 'rejects' US offer - Times Of India

India should join land-base platform developments, however, such as it has already done with the Stryker: artillery, next-gen S-A missile defense systems, radar, laser, tactical and logistics vehicles etc. Those are programs that are both more feasible and with shorter PDC's. In the end, cost and delivery of crucial platforms is necessary, even if cutting-edge technology is secondary.

 

[Adux]

fact of the matter is we tend to get way too emotional about the US-pakistan thing, and most tend to make it a zero sum game and while doing that our expectations tend to grow many fold, leave the americans aside, have the russians for that matter given up on china? forget that, have we given up on japan for russia or iran/burma/syria for the US? take the whole india-china-pakistan thing, have the chinese given up on us for their "deeper than ocean, high than mountain", rather rhetorical, freindship with the paks? which country has ever done that for any country?

Exactly the morons in India dont understand, that RUSSIA IS ARMING CHINA AT OUR EXPENSE WORSE WITH OUR MONEY! Its like we are exactly like the Paki's to China(best friend, who never helped in their times of need), Indians to Russia ( fact, they dont care about us); They didnt sell weapons to Pakistan, because of Soviet-Afghan aftermath as well as heavy US presence in Pakistan. It has nothing to do with us.

it just ought not to be the case, and we should never be looking for such zero sum games because once we start to bargain that, we need to match up as well, are we ready? what about much talked aboutindependent foreign policy? lets negotiate only to the extent it is beneficial and no more.

Indian Independent Foreign policy made sense when India didnt have much. Today, arent we pressuring the US to turn screw on Pakistan at their expense (because we are pussies to fight our own battles) of goodwill in Pakistan, for us! Wont US have a little more easier time, if they screw India for Pakistan. But they arent, are they. What a bunch of hypocrites we are, where did our independent non-Medelling foreign policy go, when we are pushing others foreign policy to do our work?

the other idea of having US in a position to manipulate/influence pakistan is that the mad dogs manning that nation dont go berserk, and our best way to do that is without a doubt through the US. US ought ot be in a position where they have a strangle hold on PA, and other policy makers, which is much needed to keep our dream of making it big economically

Pakistan cant be controlled beyond a point. Indians need to understand that, US and India are in the same boat. That country is on a tail spin to complete obilivion, we need to manage the failure to our advantage.