India's Foreign Policy.

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841
Awesome....exactly what we deserve. Kudos to Iran & Pakistan to show our real standing & calibre to the world.

Spineless, apologist, pushover's like us deserve this & much more...we deserve sharpened Bamboo's in our ar**s regularly, because we keep electing spineless & corrupt political leaders to represent us.

We get the leaders we deserve.....a nation of shameless slaves deserve all this.

This is OT, but when people say that we are a young democracy so we would need more time to discipline ourselves, they are ignoring what US & other Western nations were doing when they were this young as a democracy. Those regimes were often guilty of corruption (though, not corrupt to the core with corruption in genes like us) but at least internationally, they never stooped to such levels of *******
 
Last edited:

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841
Bramha Chellany: An insecurity trap of India's making



As usual a hard hitting article by bramha. ABV, what was he drinking when he makes speeches like "within boundaries of humanity, we will do everything in JnK". This is being thrown by separatists everytime now if they are questioned. Also mentioned in article , outrightly surrendered india's option on tibet. Even pakis in dire straits didn't give up on JnK.

Now the big Q is, Can the bjp/congress get out of their vajpayee/nehru syndrome and practice a pragmatic pro-india policy???? @Singh @TrueSpirit @Tolaha @parijataka
I may sound politically incorrect today, but Advani or Jaswant Singh (armed with a strategic vision & foresight) would have made much better PM's. ABV was a curse as worse as Nehru (who he tried to model himself upon).

Most people might not be aware but Advani during his stint as Home Min. & Deputy. PM did a stellar job in exterminating ISI terror modules & conjuring up the right international collaborations that helped defeat the insurgency in J&K, post Kargil....Recall, the unimpeded spate of attacks in succession on sizeable Army camps (between 2000-2003). Our Army was simply not trained or equipped enough to contain that.

There was a method in the manner, things were fixed there. These two guys had a major role in that. Advani never really got the credit he deserved, except among the innards of Intelligence circles (think, AS Daulat & his staff).

ABV is highly over-rated. He was a good man, helped weave & materialize a unseemly coalition of 20+ parties quite successfully through his inter-personal skills, but like it or not, he was never a PM-material. He was a disaster as a PM, out & out.

Anyway, all that is past. NDA exists but in name. UPA-III is imminent. Indians would ensure this.

We deserve to be screwed, permanently & consistently. We would see to it that it happens.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

nrupatunga

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
2,310
Likes
960
I may sound politically incorrect today, but Advani or Jaswant Singh (armed with a strategic vision & foresight) would have made much better PM's. ABV was a curse as worse as Nehru (who he tried to model himself upon).
Advani is no better. A person who is DyPM, home minister saying that he wasn't aware of terrorists being released is big joke. Under his watch, parliament itself was attacked, Am not sure he was any better.

Apart from maybe Lal Bahadur Shastri (around 2 years was too less), and in some parts IG, the only PM who was really good was Narasimha rao. He had seen from inside how this nehru syndrome will take india no where. He took steps like to liberalise economy, open formal ties with israel, initiator of look east policy and many other steps to really make india a better place. Once in power, cleverly he also kept the family out.
 

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841
Advani is no better. A person who is DyPM, home minister saying that he wasn't aware of terrorists being released is big joke. Under his watch, parliament itself was attacked, Am not sure he was any better..
Politicians lie all the time. What options did he have ? He was no Putin to authorize armed assault on IC-814.

Do you think any leader in India has the gumption & wherewithal to authorize an armed assault ? A big NO. Self-preservation is what we are all after (including our politicians). Any casualty (which was inevitable in a commando raid) would have been an albatross around his neck & would have jeopardized whatever still-survived of his political career. Given the circumstances, I do not see how a contemporary leader would have behaved any differently. Anyway, once the plane was out of Indian territory, the helplessness of a spineless nation, that is us, was exposed. It is easy to blame someone & save oneself the guilt of complicity but as a nation under attack, we are not as tough as the Isreali or Russians to make sacrifices (civilians). Unless we show some spine, these things would keep happening to us.

Apart from maybe Lal Bahadur Shastri (around 2 years was too less), and in some parts IG,
Completely agree. They do not make men like him anymore.

the only PM who was really good was Narasimha rao. He had seen from inside how this nehru syndrome will take india no where. He took steps like to liberalise economy, open formal ties with israel, initiator of look east policy and many other steps to really make india a better place. Once in power, cleverly he also kept the family out
Yes, Rao did some real good, without fanfare & brouhaha. Deserves all kudos (even though little came his way).

ABV did consecutive blunders in dealing with Pak. He was not hard-headed & rationalist enough. Brajesh Mishra (who was forever on US payroll) & his son-in-law exercised too much influence upon him. That marred everything. Advani & co. was pretty much sidelined when it came to dealing with Pak due to over-bearing coterie of these two individuals & ABV's vulnerability towards this lobby.

Public is simply not aware of how many & how deeply entrenched ISI modules were busted in India under Advani's watch. Or, how he handled the Kashmir militancy + attacks on Army camps, what steps he took to strengthen the fencing at LoC, etc. The situation in post-Kargil days days was un-imaginable.

Public memory is short. But, the ones who were at the receiving end have not forgotten those days...

Our men-in-uniform were regularly getting beating at the hands of LeT cadre in J&K. Even, officers of Colonel rank were not spared on any occasion.

& then it all stopped !!!!! Just like that !!!!!!

Guess what happened on the Indian side .................................(apart from the obvious geo-polity change in subcontinent due to arrival of US forces in Af-stan)

Unfortunately, we in India do not have the privilege of govt. archives getting "de-classified" after a certain duration so public may never even know who did what.

But, I have been privy to personal accounts, directly from people involved in those operations (intelligence, para-military & military) & it is an undeniable fact that the intelligence community (both RAW & IB, not sure about MI), till date, swears by Advani's stint in government. Maybe, some of those accounts could be published some day.

What I am saying is Advani might not have done a perfect job; but as a PM, he would have been way better than the poet, who rudderless-ly rambled from one foreign policy fiasco to another & whose inter-personal skills would have better served the nation, if he was only the convener of NDA, rather than doubling up as PM (which was the surest recipe of disaster, as Bramha Chellany has amply illustrated).
 

Compersion

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
2,258
Likes
923
Country flag
in spite of that there is a general under pinning below the dust and knee-jerk situations that others keep pricking on us that positions and stances are being made properly (thats the beauty of india). its not comfortable to watch and see but its moving along and i have confidence in the thought process of the foreign policy of india. it would be better if others respected us more (for example the iran ship situation recently). it might be also because of the greater role of india. but i guess thats more internal (leadership) issue not external issue. once the internal issue sorts it self out the natural external respect will (re)arrive and grow further.
 

nrupatunga

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
2,310
Likes
960
in spite of that there is a general under pinning below the dust and knee-jerk situations that others keep pricking on us that positions and stances are being made properly (thats the beauty of india). its not comfortable to watch and see but its moving along and i have confidence in the thought process of the foreign policy of india. it would be better if others respected us more (for example the iran ship situation recently). it might be also because of the greater role of india. but i guess thats more internal (leadership) issue not external issue. once the internal issue sorts it self out the natural external respect will (re)arrive and grow further.
Are you saying that it's other countries fault by actually mistreating india. Sorry, didn't get you here at all. Please elaborate.
 

Compersion

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
2,258
Likes
923
Country flag
Are you saying that it's other countries fault by actually mistreating india. Sorry, didn't get you here at all. Please elaborate.
prima facie it does seems that other countries are mistreating us. yet in spite of that foreign policy positions and stances are being made properly (thats the beauty and a positive). its shown that the mistreatment is due to a vacuum of strong internal (leadership) by india. its difficult to watch and see the mistreatment (in other words others disrespect shown to us) and it ought to not happen in the first place. i do concur and believe once the leadership issue sorts it self out the natural external respect will (re)arrive and grow further.

this mistreatment might be also because of the greater role and choices made by india - taking stances that involve geographical and terrestrial corridors that we did not enter into before. positions taken to highlight our qualifications for a seat on a bigger table (i believe we have crossed that qualification long time ago).

but there is still a general viewpoint that once the leadership issue sorts it self out the natural external respect will (re)arrive and grow further. one which one needs to remind themselves will lead into later a even greater role of india and inevitably a wider array of situations to deal with and more mistreatment(s). something that is occurring to some extent now (semi-leadership).

i take the iran ship situation recently, italian marines, and bhutan elections as points in case. the latter(s) handled well "post facto". now watch how the iran ship situation gets handled properly [i have the confidence in the thought process of the foreign policy of india].

but people will say why rejoice afterwards that it gets handled well when it ought to not happen at all. this reoccurring mistreatment also is happening probably a bit too much. but has there been a calculation by anyone on the value of rejoice (solution and respect gained) it might have significant value. further the accumulation of extrinsic resolutions achieved by india has garnered a certain admirable value in the comity of nations. and also empathetic behavior of the adversary (a kind of respect).

i believe the same will occur with iran ship situation. its painful and it hurts but the result will be satisfactory.

to conclude in other words to some extent i feel pain when someone mistreats my country and i would prefer a different approach with better leadership. yet i am able to sleep at night proud to be a indian because if i look closely good (mature) decisions are getting made and others are taking notice.
 

nrupatunga

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
2,310
Likes
960
prima facie it does seems that other countries are mistreating us. yet in spite of that foreign policy positions and stances are being made properly (thats the beauty and a positive). its shown that the mistreatment is due to a vacuum of strong internal (leadership) by india. its difficult to watch and see the mistreatment (in other words others disrespect shown to us) and it ought to not happen in the first place. i do concur and believe once the leadership issue sorts it self out the natural external respect will (re)arrive and grow further.

this mistreatment might be also because of the greater role and choices made by india - taking stances that involve geographical and terrestrial corridors that we did not enter into before. positions taken to highlight our qualifications for a seat on a bigger table (i believe we have crossed that qualification long time ago).

but there is still a general viewpoint that once the leadership issue sorts it self out the natural external respect will (re)arrive and grow further. one which one needs to remind themselves will lead into later a even greater role of india and inevitably a wider array of situations to deal with and more mistreatment(s). something that is occurring to some extent now (semi-leadership).

i take the iran ship situation recently, italian marines, and bhutan elections as points in case. the latter(s) handled well "post facto". now watch how the iran ship situation gets handled properly [i have the confidence in the thought process of the foreign policy of india].

but people will say why rejoice afterwards that it gets handled well when it ought to not happen at all. this reoccurring mistreatment also is happening probably a bit too much. but has there been a calculation by anyone on the value of rejoice (solution and respect gained) it might have significant value. further the accumulation of extrinsic resolutions achieved by india has garnered a certain admirable value in the comity of nations. and also empathetic behavior of the adversary (a kind of respect).

i believe the same will occur with iran ship situation. its painful and it hurts but the result will be satisfactory.

to conclude in other words to some extent i feel pain when someone mistreats my country and i would prefer a different approach with better leadership. yet i am able to sleep at night proud to be a indian because if i look closely good (mature) decisions are getting made and others are taking notice.
On the bolded line, please let us know what are those decisions and how are they good/mature???
 

Compersion

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
2,258
Likes
923
Country flag
On the bolded line, please let us know what are those decisions and how are they good/mature???
Perhaps you can list some decisions that are bad and also good (but immature).

Again you will find not only me that will reply. :namaste:
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
Despite all the smart politics that we claim to play in our region, We as a country still lag behind serious when it comes to strategic culture and national policy vis a vis our relationship to the world.


What India today needs, is a strong multi-pronged approach that is based more on hard-nosed pragmatism rather than rosy-eyed idealism that is being followed at the moment. And all this keeping in mind not to lose out friendly countries for the sake of too much independence.

IMO, Indian foreign policy needs to be divided into four parts:

1- Trade, financial and commercial engagement

2- Military engagement, diplomacy, trade and usage (yes, usage)

3- Cultural/ soft power projection.

4-Rapid strategic asset building


Till now, we lag behind in every point other than point number 3.

That is the only point we have proven to be strong enough. Having a host of admirers of SRK and Deepika Padukone will not earn India the name of a world power.
Ding serious business, being able to bargain for India as a nation favourably and be able to create a positive impact in the minds of foreign leaders, will.

In point 1, we are weak because most of our trade is on import basis of strategic and key industries. We barely export anything serious other than few automobiles and trucks and some basic machinery compared to the 'GRAB THE CONTRACT' attitude that prevails in Eastern Asia, which our neighbours the Chinese have pioneered in.

In order to be able to change this position into a dominating position, the government needs to focus on massive infrastructure overhaul in the that would enable manufacturing and production to take over and enable us to exploit geopolitical tensions with our bigger rival. To have manufacturing capabilities and a ready work force means to be able to churn out goods with the same quality that the service industry provides in outsourcing, at the same time keeping the costs low. The need of the hour is to have international standard roadway, inter-regional connectivity that would encourage foreign investors like Japan who are fed up of China, and are looking for a substitute to invest into.

We are the best option for them, PROVIDED we are able to prove that we are.

To sustain this powerful manufacturing based economy, we will need to strengthen our economic and trading profile with many resource rich countries of CAR countries and CIS countries, as well as ASEAN countries. Afghanistan's copper mines are the biggest attraction for all the manufacturing countries around the world. There may be even a lot of rare earths available there which will further attract massive amounts of attention from manufacturing countries.

And we are nowhere close to exploiting these capabilities.

The equation to becoming a power is something like this:

Infrastructure --> manpower skill development ---> transition economy ---> heavy FDI magnet ----> production capabilities ----> foreign dependence on your goods.


The second point, is to offer more than just military training to friendly countries. Which takes us to a part of point 1 here. Offering to buy weapons from a third manufacturing country for a weaker ally will get us nowhere and instead give a strong leverage to the country that supplies them strategic military material.

Our inaptitude in military diplomacy was amply visible when Vietnam requested us for BrahMos and frigates for their Navy. The whole episode was extremely embarrassing with half of our regional rivals laughing their behinds off on it. What did we come up with? Our production lines are busy and until they meet our local requirements, we cannot export. Another excuse: BrahMos is a strategic asset and the sale of it has to be considered carefully.

Who were we exporting potentially to? Vietnam, a key Russian ally, a long-standing friendly country and a country facing the same threat as we are in our eastern flank.

This... is the excuse we had. It shows the grim situation that our military industry is facing, due to eternal subsidization, eternal zero-accountability and never-ending bureaucracy and string of dirty politics played behind a useless behemoth.

We are not ready for military export. Dhruv just happened to be lucky export. Let's face it; until we are able to export weapons with extremely rapid manufacturing capability, with massive assembly lines churning tanks, warships and aircraft, we cannot get anywhere near the wrd called 'power'.

The Indian leadership is clearly myopic in not recognizing this yawning gap which stands in front of us like a deep gorge.

Usage:By usage here, I mean being able to instil confidence in the minds of potential allies who seek military help or protection from us.

Case 1:

Maldives.

For 3 decades, we had a government there that was liberal, open-minded, non-imposing and friendly to Indian citizens. there were no tensions in the country and no resentment against India.

Scene: Overthrow of India friendly government --- What did India do? It sat and watched as its premier airport company struggled on a private lawsuit, threatened by Maldivian generals of their property being seized; all while refusing to intervene on behalf of Nasheed especially when half the Maldives was not even convinced of the new regime who exhibited OPEN contempt against Indian interests.

Instead, had the GOI conducted a similar combat operation to Operation Cactus, we might have been able to counter a brazen Chinese attempt around us.

Instead, a meek so-called PM and his so-called strategists sat there, hand on hands, doing nothing.


Case 2:

Bhutan.

We have strong relations with Bhutan for the various obvious reasons that have concerned both the countries' governments for all these years.

The Manmohan Government has become numb to audacious incursions made by our larger rival in the region who dares to enter our territory and calls it as theirs while the pacifist and down-right corrupt top echelons of the incumbent regime have the nerve to call up for 'talks' instead of mounting an operation to expel the intruders. The latest unsettling and most visible issue being the 30 Km deep incursion into a state territory of the country. It cannot get clearer than this.

Similarly, the government has shown no concern about the lives of the soldiers of its own troops who have been boldly and daftly killed in cross-border violations not just by firing (which is normal considering that they are not from within the territory) but beheading of our men in green. All while the Manmohan Government has the nerve to call up for 'firm talks' with the new government that has taken seat in Islamabad, under the hawkish surveying and suspicious eyes of its generals, commanders and admirals..


For a country like Bhutan, which relies on us for its own national defence, factors such as these only SAP AWAY their confidence from trusting a protector nation.

Their leadership will simply think: ' If these people cannot save themselves, how will they save us? Perhaps it is better to side with the stronger and bolder China rather than meek cowards like these.'



Skipping point 3, which our callous incumbent government always chest thumps about, I will move to point 4.

For calling oneself battle-ready, one must be able to ensure the availability of strategic reserves ready in case of a conflict.

Strategic reserves include multiple things such as defence platform spares, logistical equipment, transport infrastructure, transport approach, manpower readiness and most importantly the very fuel to warfare: OIL and GAS.

India, for many years has kept a strategic reserve ONLY targeting a conventional tank-and-jet battle with a country one sixth its size and one-tenth its resources: Which shows the TERRIBLE myopia with which successive governments since post-Kargil have proven to suffer from.

Talking about strategic build up, the reason why China is getting so belligerent for a battle is because: it has already got massive strategic reserves for war:

A- A developed indigenous weapons capability (even if copied 'illegally' which has no relevance in the military world) manufacturing capability which ensures infinite supply of spare parts, maintenance supplies and logistics of transport.

B- Conducting massive trade deals across resource rich nations like CAR, Afghanistan, African nations etcthat ensure a steady supply of raw material like pig iron, copper, zinc, special metal alloys etc that would be used in producing weapons in times of conflict.

C- Extended massive strategic cooperation with countries that are enemies of India and therefore using their terrain, plan to establish DIRECT oil and gas pipelines which would ensure that the only advantage we have against Chinese i.e. blockade of Malacca in a region where Indian Navy is stronger than PLAN, becomes useless.

_______________

In short, there is NO foreign policy being followed in India except the culture of handing out a few handouts.

We don't even know the military-strategic developments that our government is (if at all doing) doing in Afghanistan where $ 2 billion of Indian money has gone without any tangible results beyond Kabul's government.

Afghans view us favourably which is a good thing but the only kitty in our bag is the massive iron ore deal which our companies have won.
 

Compersion

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
2,258
Likes
923
Country flag
_______________

In short, there is NO foreign policy being followed in India except the culture of handing out a few handouts.

We don't even know the military-strategic developments that our government is (if at all doing) doing in Afghanistan where $ 2 billion of Indian money has gone without any tangible results beyond Kabul's government.

Afghans view us favourably which is a good thing but the only kitty in our bag is the massive iron ore deal which our companies have won.
A caveat no one is perfect. The beauty is that there is always room for improvement. And there are opportunities and the old gets replaced by the new. I don't want to sound like I am anti-PRC as a lot of your points refer to our eastern neighbor. I have try to answer all your points and added a few points to what you say:
Others will also have their views. I would like to hear and read them and like to learn new things but i still havent changed my mind - if i look closely good (mature) decisions are getting made by india and others are taking notice:

1- Trade, financial and commercial engagement

The importance and significance of Indian corporations and diaspora. The approach of indian industry we can take the example of Arcelor Mittal, Jaguar Land Rover and SsangYong Motor Company and Novelis and locally Hindustan Unilever and Maruti Suzuki. Dwell into each one and discover why "Indian" works. in fact if the local countries and partners examine if it was worthwhile that Indians got involved the answer would be in affirmative.

The reason was not to steal ipr, and raid assets. It was for development, cooperation and in good faith. That is preferred to certain eastern asian role models.
The foreign policy of india has the indian business model as a sword not a shield. and the sword is not openly used.

Also your equation of power (export economy):
Infrastructure --> manpower skill development ---> transition economy ---> heavy FDI magnet ----> production capabilities ----> foreign dependence on your goods.

I add that is only a certain approach. "The foreign dependence on your goods". It also means making sure you have raw materials and human resources. These resources that would have been done at the foreigners place are now the responsibility of the manufacturer. Also these resources that can be used for local benefit is now done for foreigner benefit. The responsibility to manufacture a plastic bucket for a foreigner is not a responsibility I would like to have. Yes I would like to manufacture plastic buckets, high-technology and things for (internal) nation building. FDI is welcome for internal supply.

Also steady supply of raw material like pig iron, copper, zinc, special metal alloys etc is not used in producing weapons in times of conflict but for manufacturing sector and infrastructure sector that is dependent on social stability of that country. I would rather be the foreigner making you dependent on making sure that the foreigner gives you order(s) of plastic buckets. I would also focus to make our internal economy strong and change your equation to:

Infrastructure --> manpower skill development ----> production capabilities -- strong internal (self-sufficient) economy.

We are going down that path. Look around you. We have a high current account deficit. Mainly due to the USD and oil import (being done in USD). The solution to oil dependence is not only an indian problem. And I believe it is being worked on. But we use what we use and efficiently more compared to others.

Efficient economy vs Inefficient economy: In fact a theory goes that our economic development is not bad. A benefit of the indian approach is the latest best practice is available without wasting too many resources on the redundant. We also get on the development curve at a later stage. the first mover advantage is not always a advantage (one can see with the timeline of Telephone Landline and Cellular development - we skipped the first part).

2- Military engagement, diplomacy, trade and usage (yes, usage)

I don't see a problem. Our military engagement is robust and our military and diplomatic leaders have interactions that are at a high strategic level with like minded and professional countries. I think you are trying to say we ought to be selling our military hardware overseas. Its more a question of developing our local defence industry. I refer to you the following article that was well written:

The realisation of India's grand-'naval engineering' dreams - Hindustan Times

On the other hand we are able to import advanced weapons and jointly produce them because we respect intellectual property rights and are trustworthy. We get offered advanced systems. Having a Sukho MKI, Brahmos, Rafael is good model(s) for us to follow. So what if these are not exported to other countries by us. Do you doubt their ability. With reference to Vietnam and many countries. The potential for developing that friendship is there naturally. Its not fake and coerced into and also without any underlying innuendos. Our partnerships with countries are because we are trustworthy and won't backstab. We also justify our actions openly with reason.

I think it might be better if you said why don't we have a naval and airforce base in Vietnam instead of exporting weapons to them. That could be a consideration why we don't sell. We can move weapon systems to our partners - are we doing that is an evolving question. Also we respect the original manufacturer of the weapon systems and will give them the authority to sell. That means we have three allies not two allies because of our approach.

3A- Cultural/ soft power projection.

A bit like M. Gandhi's journey its better for the reader to discover the beauty of india on their own. Its difficult for the immature. But the good and reasoned discover. That's why the soft power will spread without forced projection.

3B. Potential allies who seek military help or protection from us.

Maldives:

I support Indias position on Maldives 100%.

For reference our official position at this moment on the surface is: We will not interfere in their internal policies and respect the choice of the democratic voice of their people. If the majority of population hates us we have to deal with it. That is far from the reality in Maldives. Infact India is viewed favourably by Maldivians. The Airport situation at the moment is that it will be decided after the elections. We would rather be on the side of the people. Instead of being on the side of certain individuals that have been coerced into favouring certain countries. Because the support of the people and support the democratic system will provide long term benefits. The next leader will also have more authority.

Wait for the elections to finish. We are playing our hand well. (we also don't know whats below the surface and all of our cards).

Bhutan:

I support Indias position on Bhutan 100%. And Bhutan will consult India not PRC for its future direction even when they are talking with PRC. Talking about border to PRC means there is a problem with PRC. India will give advice for the benefit of Bhutan. As a Indian when I meet a Bhutanese I always ask them: "would you rather be in Bhutan, would you rather be in Tibet". He shakes my hand and smiles at me and thanks me. I always wonder why. We must be really bad.

4-Rapid strategic asset building

Why do you doubt that India has no capacity for strategic asset building. The intellectual side of that can be seen by what we are doing on the borders as we speak. Also I am not a military expert and there are many elders here who will have more to say on this but our military capability and strategic asset building is there.

"Strategic reserves include multiple things such as defence platform spares, logistical equipment, transport infrastructure, transport approach, manpower readiness and most importantly the very fuel to warfare: OIL and GAS." I don't see a problem.

Do you realise that the intellectual thought process that has gone into making the India – Pakistan relationship to what it is now. Shimla Agreement was an intellectual document and the current dynamics is intellectually done. Now with reference to PRC. We are moving our intellectual resources and focus there. Look closely I don't see a problem but confidence and optimism.

"Talking about strategic build up, the reason why China is getting so belligerent for a battle is because: it has already got massive strategic reserves for war:"

It could be also because of internal (any of economic, structural, leadership, social, political, etc) problems. Diverting internal attention. That's the danger. Not because we are weak.

Also "Extended massive strategic cooperation with countries that are enemies of my enemies". Like I said we are moving our intellectual resources and focus there. There are many state players that would favour India relationship over others.

For Afghanistan again the answer is I support India position 100%. The Pakistan approach was (disaster and stupid) wrong. The PRC approach would be to get the raw materials for their export industry and forget the longer term development. The Indian approach is to support a sustainable and friendly republic. I would rather have an afghan that supports me even 100 years later compared to one the supports me only for 3 years. Please read this document:

http://www.mea.gov.in/Uploads/Publi...and-afghanistan-a-development-partnership.pdf
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
Then tell me @Compersion, why is it that our response to the Chinese is so mute like our prime minister?

We don't have to send in every soldier waving the Indian flag, but in retaliation at least the IA can round the intruding soldiers and send them back. If they attack. shoot them on our land.

That way we can easily get rid of this escalation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Compersion

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
2,258
Likes
923
Country flag
Then tell me @Compersion, why is it that our response to the Chinese is so mute like our prime minister?

We don't have to send in every soldier waving the Indian flag, but in retaliation at least the IA can round the intruding soldiers and send them back. If they attack. shoot them on our land.

That way we can easily get rid of this escalation.
Our response is not mute. It might not be aggressive and assertive. Each and every incursion and also border situation created by Prc supplements and adds to the greater PRC provocation happening in india, Japan, Vietnam, Taiwan, Philippines, and others.

Our response is mature and we don't need to sit down for days with tents and dogs to prove we are powerful. We don't need to try and show off we have fancy uniform and shoe laces. Our morale and military hierarchy will be robust even without border provocations. Not sure if we can say the same about PRC.

Ask yourself not only what india thinks about PRC intruding but what other countries in the region and global comity think of PRC. Doing such things. It's not good for PRC. In fact the common man in PRC doesn't even know PRC military confronts IA. A common man in PRC might also like the company of Indians - we generally get along.

The only fan base for PRC military and such moves on the border is Pakistan and North Korea.

Have you ever asked yourself that making PRC behave like a immature country that is using provocation and is unable to explain why they did what they did before their pm visits india on a landmark visit was and is a disgrace. They lost a huge amount of face and it would have been a lot more if not for india taking those mature positions.

I prefer the status quo because it makes the PRC look like a bunch of amateurs. And that's why IA will not over react what the pla does. But in future with more intellectual capital being invested you will see more advanced indian army and strategic moves occurring. These will involve a wide array of channels to put pressure on PRC to resolve the border. It works in our favor to keep status quo. What we do with Pakistan is not what we do with PRC yet (we are starting to move in that direction which has been conveyed to PRC). Don't underestimate the intellectual thought process we have when we move in one direction.

Also we still don't know why they intruded right before their pm visited india. His first visit overseas and landmark visit and where PRC mandarins imply such actions to be significant. Yet they provoke and sit down for days on the border. No one has explained and answered why they did that. It makes no sense to a reasonable and mature perspective. Can anyone tell me why even today.

We live in a period where india had to talk to PRC and tell them to leave because what they did was wrong (before the visit).

Is PRC setting a good role model to others. Answer no.

Is india setting a good role model to other.
You decide (100% yes).

With manmohan Singh silence. It's a separate topic. But again no on knows what he is exactly doing. He might write a book later. He might even explain later. He might be sick and unwell. Who knows. I think the congress is also upset that its done a lot for country and is not getting the respect. Hence it's sulk behaviour. But again that's only assumption.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

nrupatunga

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
2,310
Likes
960
^^^
When you say
Is PRC setting a good role model to others. Answer no.
I feel it should be said as "Is model setup by PRC is seen as "correct" by their neighbors. Answer no". But in geopolitics "correct" is decided by powers and not by others. Somehow i feel "powers" set the model by their " actions" and not by their "inactions".

But if you feel that india is doing right things when it comes to protecting/promoting its interests, then fine. Its just that i (or few others) are not able to see the long term benefits of the current action/inactions of the state.
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
Our response is not mute. It might not be aggressive and assertive. Each and every incursion and also border situation created by Prc supplements and adds to the greater PRC provocation happening in india, Japan, Vietnam, Taiwan, Philippines, and others.
Our concern is not what is happening in rest of Asia. While it might be true that there are other countries that are fed up with PRC's provocation, but take it in written; no country will form alliance against China as all of them have severe trade deficits with Chinese and depend seriously on them.

Expect neither Korea, Japan nor Vietnam to open a front of aggression if it escalates to a minor conflict tomorrow.

That's something we might need to see.

Please remember. Chinese always gauge response of the other countries before invading.

They always want to see how a potential threat would be.. much like an antelope testing the depth and temperature of a pond it wants to cross over. It does that by repeatedly prodding the surface of the water and checking it, while causing ripples on its surface. That is exactly what PLA is doing.

Our response is mature and we don't need to sit down for days with tents and dogs to prove we are powerful. We don't need to try and show off we have fancy uniform and shoe laces. Our morale and military hierarchy will be robust even without border provocations. Not sure if we can say the same about PRC.

I didn't expect this from a fellow Indian especially after 1962.

Very unfortunate to see you justify.

The commanders of our armed forces have raised concerns and you are talking as if we are hiding some secret super weapon that Chinese will be helpeless against one day.

Ask yourself not only what india thinks about PRC intruding but what other countries in the region and global comity think of PRC. Doing such things.It's not good for PRC. In fact the common man in PRC doesn't even know PRC military confronts IA. A common man in PRC might also like the company of Indians - we generally get along.
Emotions are silly whne it comes to national interests.

When PLA attacks us, others' opinions won't matter.

It was we who lost land to the PLA in Ladakh while all the world just swooned and protested meekly.

That is the reality.

Wake up. If we have to defend ourselves, we have to be hard-nosed.

The only fan base for PRC military and such moves on the border is Pakistan and North Korea.

And foes that even matter?

Have you ever asked yourself that making PRC behave like a immature country that is using provocation and is unable to explain why they did what they did before their pm visits india on a landmark visit was and is a disgrace. They lost a huge amount of face and it would have been a lot more if not for india taking those mature positions.
I just don't understand how are you talking about mature and immature when the country is intruding into our territory.

This isn't some silly little behavioural class where we can just sit idle and do nothing.

There has to be an aggressive response.

No one has any face saving when it comes to land grabbing.

Come out of rosy land my friend.

USA, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, CAR.... NONE will help us get our land back. It will be on the shoulders of our own men and the government that commands it.

All these fancy words 'mature' and 'diplomatic' and 'face saving' look good on paper.

Out here in the Himalayas it is the real battle.

I prefer the status quo because it makes the PRC look like a bunch of amateurs. And that's why IA will not over react what the pla does. But in future with more intellectual capital being invested you will see more advanced indian army and strategic moves occurring. These will involve a wide array of channels to put pressure on PRC to resolve the border. It works in our favor to keep status quo. What we do with Pakistan is not what we do with PRC yet (we are starting to move in that direction which has been conveyed to PRC). Don't underestimate the intellectual thought process we have when we move in one direction.

I don't over or underestimate anything after my state was almost completely taken over by the Chinese.

Remember mate, I am a Sikkimese and my state has to face the flak day in and day out if shit hits the fan, while you people sitting in far away metro towns will only talk about policies and intellectual approach. My people will be grinding their behinds along with the jawans of IA and IAF pilots if our country gets attacked.



Chinese will never come in hordes of troops now especially after 1987. They will take land by inches. That is what they do.

You just don't get it, do you?

Look at Bhutan,China, India triangle. That was Bhutanese territory in 1970s.

Now, we Sikkimese cannot directly move into Bhutan without entering northern Bengal and going through Darjeeling.

Wake up and smell the coffee.


Same flimsy excuses were given by the so-called intellectuals even then.

I'd like to see how you would like to react if PLA troops entered your house if your state was bordering China and ask you to leave.

This is what bordering states face all the time.

It is easy to comment about 'intellectual' and all that but there is nothing we have to show in return.

Prove me wrong if you can.

Also we still don't know why they intruded right before their pm visited india. His first visit overseas and landmark visit and where PRC mandarins imply such actions to be significant. Yet they provoke and sit down for days on the border. No one has explained and answered why they did that. It makes no sense to a reasonable and mature perspective. Can anyone tell me why even today.
Dear Goodness! You are still wondering about why and who and where and when and what, while our national territory is at stake!

I pray that those sitting in Delhi don't think about all this.

We live in a period where india had to talk to PRC and tell them to leave because what they did was wrong (before the visit).
As if they don't know that already.

Seriously man, this gandhigiri is useless and doesn't work with an aggressor.

Is india setting a good role model to other.
You decide (100% yes).
Who the Eff cares about what's a role model!?

The point is, our territory is at stake and you're talking about models, images, perspectives, analysis, reasons etc.

With manmohan Singh silence. It's a separate topic. But again no on knows what he is exactly doing. He might write a book later. He might even explain later. He might be sick and unwell. Who knows. I think the congress is also upset that its done a lot for country and is not getting the respect. Hence it's sulk behaviour. But again that's only assumption.
Now I get it why you are not at all concerned....Thanks for clearing my doubt. :rolleyes:
 

Compersion

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
2,258
Likes
923
Country flag
Now I get it why you are not at all concerned....Thanks for clearing my doubt. :rolleyes:
I support a lot of what you say. I am also from the school of thought where its better to stop someone from trying to slap me instead of me not responding and explaining to the person afterwards why did he slap me and make sure he doesn't do it again. A person will not slap me if i am strong and also if i have shown to him i wont get slapped and have disciplined others and even them from doing that before. but the reality is the border with prc is dynamic and a lot of our land is occupied by them for example north eastern kashmir and kashmir seceded by pakistan. Its a dynamic situation with borders that have not been settled and agreed upon. The prc situation is a problem and needs to be dealt with. And fighting and reacting with aggression might not be wise. Also there are other ways we can make prc uncomfortable and negotiate on our terms. And with this again I reaffirm in future with more intellectual capital being invested you will see more advanced indian army and strategic moves occurring towards prc. These will involve a wide array of channels to put pressure on PRC to resolve the border. It works in our favor to keep status quo. Because we can really put a wide array of pressure. Something to that effect happened on times now today...

Don't overestimate the prc. They have a lot of weakness and also the india of 2013 is not the india of 1959. We havent touched tibet. Also don't underestimate the provocation the prc does on many of its neighbours. We don't need others help to defend us. But there is a lot of possibilities that include fighting and not fighting. Take the latter and work in the pressure prc feels for its image. And the calculation that is for its internal image. A Chinese intellectual will not impress himself much with what prc is doing. A Chinese intellectual is patriotic but reasonable and pragmatic. Chinese intellectuals talk to many people and interact with many people and want to be considered intellectual. If they aren't its a problem because they will blame not you and I but prc because of its policies. The prc has a lot of internal calculations. And there are certain calculations that they prioritise. World opinion about prc being aggressor and immature is not be taken lightly and it's impact on prc. can you make fun of a Chinese person because of what prc did. Don't underestimate that.

Also take fighting. Why not make the border militarised and build trenches and barb wire. It's a calculation we can deal with and it will be more disadvantageous to prc internally and externally.

Also I loved the Chinese pm visit few months ago. Because the incursion happened which was illogical and immature by prc side and also I saw a sea change in indian military thought suddenly. That was the prc cannot say why india considers them a threat and why india will develop its military hardware with china in mind. Our military if you have now noticed is responding look closely and even more in the last few months. They just gave the nation motivation and the region realisation that they are aggressors that was mixed opinion in the past few years.

I agree the we can do with some executive leadership that is more reassuring and firm and I would say congress has failed terribly on that account.

But I refer to the video of the times now released today of the prc incursion and officer and soldiers dealt with beautifully. Do these incidents and the way we manage them help us - yes 100%. It makes the prc look like aggressors, immature (picture their soldiers running like its a child's contest) amateurs. If you and I have differences we can talk. Why provoke it can get messy if both are not mature. And this case thank god india is mature. But the risk is the prc is aggressors and these situations can get out of hand. But from my understanding the prc are obedient and follow direction at the low level. I read somewhere the prc is pricking us to make us over react to allow them to act aggressively and militarily. That's the question why are they doing this. Is there something they are not telling to the world. Do they have some problem they are not sharing. Be open. Hence why they are asking for a new border agreement. They are immature and aren't able to handle such things. They want to stop us...

Whatever happened to the peaceful rise of china and it being a reasonable power. Don't discount the bigger picture and also have faith in india intellectuals that work behind the scene. Yes the executive can be more firm and show more leadership. But despite that if I look closely mature and good decisions are being made by india and others are taking notice.

Also brother I will stand by your side. Rest assured I want you and Sikkim to be strong. Things will get better I have belief in the india and our story.
 

SamwiseTheBrave

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
391
Likes
147
we need diplomats who are well versed in the art of power politics and can use realpolitik, not swayed by emtions and idealism -which are useful only to a limited extent.
 

TrueSpirit

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,893
Likes
841
we need diplomats who are well versed in the art of power politics and can use realpolitik, not swayed by emtions and idealism -which are useful only to a limited extent.
Idealism in Indian foreign policy is but a tool for exercising political opportunism, to be jettisoned at first cue. No more real than US's talk of freedom, democracy & humanitarian propaganda; & this is how it should be.

The main issue that people seem to be ignoring is that our embassies/consulates in most countries (of interest) are highly under-staffed, so over-stressed (especially compared to Western consulates in countries of interest like Af-stan).

Trust me, these babus & their families are under lot of strain due to this over-utilization & this alone affects their efficiency/productivity negatively.

External Affairs is no easy job (not meant for mediocre individuals) but in India, there are inherent structural flaws when it comes to the tenure/posting of these over-worked individuals.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top