Indo-US Relations

How is obama in regards to indian policies?

  • good

    Votes: 15 11.6%
  • bad

    Votes: 60 46.5%
  • need more time

    Votes: 54 41.9%

  • Total voters
    129
Status
Not open for further replies.

youngindian

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,365
Likes
77
Country flag
War games showcase deepening India-US ties

NEW DELHI, Oct 12 - India and the United States began a massive joint military exercise on Monday, underscoring their deepening security ties they view as crucial in a troubled South Asia region.

Hundreds of soldiers using heavy transport aircraft and battle tanks are participating in the biggest-ever war games between the two countries which were on the opposing side of the Cold War but now seek to build strategic and military ties.“This exercise is a clever policy for India, a correct thing to do and is clearly part of a larger programme started by both countries to improve relations by shedding old inhibitions,” Naresh Chandra, a former envoy to Washington said.

The two countries share security concerns centered around Pakistan and Afghanistan, and New Delhi seeks to enlist American support to press Islamabad to tackle militants on its soil. They also both share concerns about a rising China.

Washington is increasingly realising the impact of India-Pakistan rivalry on efforts to stabilise Afghanistan.

“Afghanistan and Pakistan will remain areas of concern for both countries and the U.S., instead of leaving Afghanistan as a theatre, is looking to quarantine the security threat in the region itself,” said Uday Bhaskar, a strategic analyst.

“Therefore, this tactical exercise between the two countries to prepare their troops for future makes sense,” Bhaskar, director of the National Maritime Foundation, said.

The military exercise comes after 17 people were killed last week in a bomb attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul that renewed focus on India’s tense relations with Pakistan.

Pakistan remains suspicious of India’s involvement in Afghanistan -- where New Delhi is spending $1.2 billion on development projects -- and fears being squeezed between India on the east and a hostile Afghanistan, backed by India, to the west.

The exercise will also allow Indian military officials to assess some of the American defence equipment being offered for sale to India.

India and the United States signed a landmark civilian nuclear deal last year and another pact in July has facilitated the entry of US companies like Lockheed and Boeing into India’s lucrative defence market.

For New Delhi, the growing ties with Washington are also a counterweight against China, which India fears could be trying to strategically encircle it as they jostle for resources and global influence.

With an ally in India, Washington also seeks to keep an eye on the Chinese army’s growing military mobility and strength in the area.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/67b97caa-b725-11de-96f2-00144feab49a.html?nclick_check=1
 

RPK

Indyakudimahan
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,970
Likes
229
Country flag
India takes hard look at U.S. defense technology

Link

Soldiers from the U.S. Army’s Second Stryker Brigade Combat Team conduct room-clearing exercises in a 150-year-old deserted village in Babina, India, as part of a joint ground combat exercise with the Indian Army that runs from Oct. 12-29. The exercises aim at sharing experiences in peacekeeping and disaster-relief operations. (U.S. Army Photo/Rodney Jackson)
Kolkata, India — India and the United States are exchanging expertise in two ongoing joint military exercises in India this month. Both nations’ armies launched a two-week joint ground combat exercise, codenamed Yudh Abhyas, or “war study,” at Babina in India’s Uttar Pradesh state on Oct. 12.Concurrently, both sides are conducting exercises in airlift, airland and airdrop delivery techniques, as well as aeromedical and disaster management practices, at the Indian Air Force’s Agra airfield near New Delhi in an exercise named Cope India, from Oct. 15-24.
While such exercises have been institutionalized as annual affairs, they have greatly expanded in scope.
Many analysts feel that beyond the rhetoric of interoperability, such exercises serve as a venue for the United States to showcase its defense technology to Indians looking to diversify their sources of military equipment. The U.S. pitch focuses on technologies that could allow India to counter China’s military development.
These joint field exercises include the first-ever maneuvers between U.S. mechanized units and their Indian equivalents. The U.S. Army brought in 17 Stryker 8×8 multirole vehicles of the type that have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. They form the standard wheeled armored personnel carriers for the U.S. military and constitute a family of vehicles that can be deployed for diverse uses from direct fire support to mobile ambulances.
Incidentally, the joint exercises are happening at a time when the Indian Army has issued requests for proposals for light tanks and tank destroyers, both tracked and wheeled. A sudden requirement for these vehicles has apparently arisen over a need to counter Chinese moves along certain stretches of the disputed India-China border, using armored vehicles nimble enough to be deployed in mountainous terrain.
U.S. defense contractors see India as a huge market for a number of niche products in which the United States is clearly a world leader. Moreover, they do not need to spend time underlining the fact that China already has access to a number of Russian developments, and buying the same may not therefore give India an edge.
On the other hand, the Western embargo on weapons sales to China since the Tiananmen Square crackdown of 1989 has ensured that China will not have anything comparable to the latest U.S. systems to which India is now being granted access, barring Chinese espionage of course.
The Indians, however, remain prudent in such matters. They will certainly not jeopardize their longstanding relationship with the Russians, now that both nations have extended their military-technical collaboration till 2021 and are currently engaged in over 200 joint development projects.
Nevertheless, India does require certain technologies from the United States to counter China’s expansionism. For example, both sides have deployed transport aircraft in their joint air force exercises. Included in the U.S. line-up are the C-17 Globemaster III and the C-130J Super Hercules transport aircraft. Interestingly, India has already ordered six of the latter and is seriously considering 10 of the former. Russia has aircraft in these classes, but does not have the U.S. equivalent operational capability.
Indians are also acutely aware that the United States is a world leader in sensors and electronic attack capability. In fact, one of the main reasons why India buys complete U.S. systems is because of this technology inside them, which is probably unmatched elsewhere and can give India an edge over the Chinese.
The deal for eight Boeing P-8I multi-mission maritime aircraft, crucial in antisubmarine warfare, and the earlier purchase of weapon-locating radars from the United States, underlines this fact.
The U.S. lead in defense electronics may also swing the Indian Air Force’s tender for the US$11 billion-plus multirole medium-range combat aircraft in their favor. The IAF has repeatedly said that the avionics suite of the aircraft – which is seen in the Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, UAC’s Mig-35, SAAB Gripen, Lockheed Martin F-16 and the Boeing F-18 aircraft – will be a key determinant in the final selection.
To be considered favorably, the fighter’s nose radar should be active electronically scanned array, the IAF says. Not surprisingly, the United States is a world leader in this technology, and its F-16 and F-18 aircraft field the mature AESA technology.
While AESA technology would be a key consideration in the final selection of a fighter plane for India, the degree to which technology transfer is agreed upon will be just as important. The Indians have made it clear throughout the aircraft selection process that the best technology may not necessarily win unless it is ready to be transferred in its entirety. This is where U.S. firms have a handicap.
In the past, the U.S. government has refused to share source code for radar even with close allies like the United Kingdom. However, with the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal in place and an End User Monitoring Agreement almost sown up, it seems that the United States could be willing to give up its old habits for the sake of the Indian market and the ensuing regional geopolitics.
The main thing the Indian military establishment remains wary of in engaging with the United States is the propensity of U.S. manufacturers to offer a system to India once an indigenous equivalent has crossed some significant milestones. To be fair, this is a tendency exhibited by other countries as well.
It is here that India’s leadership will be put to the test, as the country’s Defense Research and Development Organization becomes a significant innovator in its own right in years to come.
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
The Hindu : News / National : Missile defence off priority list during India-U.S. talks

India was among a select group of non-NATO countries to have been exposed by the Pentagon to missile defence concepts. As late as early last year, the Bush government had hoped for greater cooperation in BMD with India. Now with the Obama administration actively reviewing the ballistic missile defence policy, the issue has further receded from the DPG deliberations, said the sources.
The two proposed military pacts — Logistics Sharing Agreement (LSA) and the Communications and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA) — have been in the pipeline for long and have been discussed during visits by U.S. Secretary of Defence Robert Gates.

By signing the LSA, India could theoretically avail itself of refuelling facilities in Diego Garcia, while the U.S. could gain access to Indian facilities without too much paperwork or money being transferred each time. But sources said the U.S. was more keen on CISMOA because installation of communication systems on the Special Forces configured C-130 planes could not happen without this. CISMOA is also a requirement for the 126 fighter jet tender.
 

RPK

Indyakudimahan
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,970
Likes
229
Country flag
domain-b.com : India, US defence policy meet seeks to 'deepen' military ties

New Delhi: India and US have decided to "further deepen" their military-strategic ties, especially in areas like joint combat exercises, defence trade, maritime security and information exchange. The positive outcome was reflected in a joint statement by both the sides soon after concluding the two-day annual Defence Policy Group (DPG) meeting.

The meet was co-chaired by defence secretary, Pradeep Kumar, and US deputy secretary of defence, William J Lynn, on Friday.

"The world's two largest democracies working together on defence sends a powerful signal," said Lynn.

However, a measure of frustration may have seeped through on the American side, at the stonewalling of all attempts by India to sign two defence related agreements with the US which would enhance and facilitate US defence interaction and trade.

The two agreements that the US has been pushing India to sign up for long are the Logistics Support Agreement (LSA) and the Communication Interoperability and Security Memorandum Agreement (CISMOA).


Lynn pointed out that both agreements have been discussed over several years and there has been ''pretty full exchange on their elements and benefits but action remained to be taken by the Indian government in bringing them on to the signing table.

US officials once again informed their Indian counterparts about the need to ink the CISMOA as it would give an impetus to defence sales. They also pointed out that the LSA would enable them undertake more joint exercises, while cutting down on red tape.

Though the CISMOA is likely to be signed, India has certain apprehensions as to how the LSA would be perceived domestically, as it could give an impression that US forces have free run of Indian military bases without any corresponding and tangible benefits for the Indian Armed Forces.

Modelled on the Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreements the US has in place with a number of countries, the LSA envisages Indian and American militaries providing logistic support, refuelling and berthing facilities for each other's warships and aircraft on a barter, or an equal-value, exchange basis.

Through CISMOA, US wants to enhance the `interoperability' of the Indian and American forces, as also ensure secrecy of its C4ISR (command, control, communications, computer, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) systems.
 

Daredevil

On Vacation!
Super Mod
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
11,615
Likes
5,772
THE BEST AND THE WORST - AFGHANISTAN WILL BE THE CHALLENGE WHEN SINGH MEETS OBAMA

Diplomacy
K.P. Nayar

At one of the scores of meetings being called in Washington every week in the run-up to the visit of the prime minister, Manmohan Singh, to the White House in less than a fortnight, one participant posed the question, “What is the best thing that could come out of PM Singh’s visit?”

A bright Indian at the meeting responded that the best thing for India, the United States of America and the whole South Asia region would be if the Americans could find a way to translate the realization among sections of the Obama administration about the true nature of Pakistan as the fountainhead of global terrorism into a credible policy of making Pakistan change its ways of pushing the entire region into an abyss. The participants at this meeting were waiting for their main interlocutor to arrive and start the deliberations, so a counter-question popped up: “What would be the worst thing that could happen during the prime minister’s visit?”

This time, it was an American’s turn to answer. He said that would be if the Obama administration — or even loose cannons within the administration — pushed, during Singh’s visit, for a revival of the idea of including India, all over again, in ‘AfPak’, the Afghanistan-Pakistan conundrum. If only by way of clutching at any straw in America’s desperate bid to evolve a policy on Afghanistan that would show results and prevent Barack Obama from getting sucked into Afghanistan the way two of his predecessors, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, became trapped in Vietnam.

No one, absolutely no one, in the Obama administration will tell to the prime minister’s face, when he is in Washington, that India should be included in a triangular solution to the region’s problems and looked at collectively as Afghanistan-Pakistan-India.

Some of Obama’s close advisers on South Asia vividly remember a wintry December morning last year, only weeks after his historic victory in the 2008 presidential election, when an Indian with considerable influence over the United Progressive Alliance government’s policies on Afghanistan and Pakistan plainly told a Track-II meeting in Washington that if the incoming Democratic administration appointed a special envoy for India and Pakistan, he would be considered persona non grata and denied a visa to travel to New Delhi. In the end, it was that bold and unambiguous statement, albeit delivered unofficially, that persuaded the president in White House to trim Richard Holbrooke’s mandate and exclude India when he was appointed special envoy for what eventually came to be known only as AfPak.

Notwithstanding New Delhi’s known opposition to bracketing India along with Pakistan and Afghanistan, there are many policy-makers in the Obama administration who believe that the US cannot win the war in Afghanistan unless they also push for a solution to Kashmir and that the problem of a failing state in Pakistan cannot be adequately addressed unless New Delhi and Islamabad are nudged towards a reconciliation.

Last week, even as preparations for receiving Singh at the White House were briskly under way, the chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, held forth at the National Press Club in Washington on Indian threats to Pakistan. “They,” he said, meaning his counterpart men in uniform in Rawalpindi, “are still very concerned about India. That is not going to go away overnight, and we are not going to wish that away.”

A few weeks earlier, the top US General in Afghanistan, Stanley McChrystal, said in his assessment of the war in Afghanistan, a report that was leaked in Washington for maximum effect, that “increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani counter-measures in Afghanistan or India”. The General added in an accusatory tone in the same report that “the current Afghan government is perceived by Islamabad to be pro-Indian”.

Reflected in General McChrystal’s assessment is the dominant view within the US military establishment that the US cannot win the war in Afghanistan unless the interests of Pakistan across the Durand Line are taken into account, and that a big Indian presence in Afghanistan runs counter to the objective of peace in the region.

But the risk for the prime minister on Afghanistan during his forthcoming visit to Washington may not be how the US military establishment views India’s role in Kabul. It may not even be any aspect of US policy on AfPak. Anything the prime minister and his top aides may say to their American interlocutors on the subject will, however, have to be first weighed against an epic internecine war that is going on within the Washington establishment over Afghanistan.

Consider this. On paper, Richard Holbrooke is Obama’s point man for Afghanistan. He goes to Islamabad with the US secretary of state on Hillary Clinton’s just-concluded visit to Pakistan. Coincidentally, the election process in Afghanistan has drawn to a conclusion, and Hamid Karzai has been re-elected to another term as president. But Holbrooke is unable to go to Kabul, at least on the pretence of assessing the post-election scenario, because Karzai will not even see him.

Flashback to the last week of October. Obama holds a crucial video conference, which is a key input into his future policies on Afghanistan, and Holbrooke is excluded from its deliberations. Undeterred, the special envoy calls an on-the-record media briefing at the state department to create the impression that he is, indeed, in charge of AfPak.

Despite the Pentagon’s known disdain for Holbrooke, he manages to appoint his protégé, Robin Raphel, to the lucrative, Islamabad-based job of deciding how the massive new assistance to Pakistan of $7.5 billion in the next five years should be spent and who should get the money. Raphel, known to most Indians as the assistant secretary of state who questioned Kashmir’s instrument of accession to India, is an ‘FoB’ or Friend of Bill and equally close to the former president’s wife, Hillary Clinton. Even if Obama wanted to get rid of Holbrooke, the president will not be able to do so because the special envoy has made himself indispensable in Islamabad, but he is hated in Kabul, and there is no love lost between him and his Indian interlocutors.

Then there is a vastly understated player, Karl Eikenberry, the US ambassador in Kabul. It will be an irony if the task of rebuilding Obama’s broken bridges with Karzai has to be successfully executed by Eikenberry through his celebrated past connections with Afghan warlords like Mohammed Fahim, who will be vice president in the new Karzai government. The Obama administration had made much of Karzai’s ties with warlords as part of Washington’s failed campaign to soften up, and possibly remove, Karzai from office under the pretext of calling for a clean election.

In 2001 and 2002, as then president, George W. Bush, was preparing to wage war in Iraq, there was little understanding in India that the Bush enterprise against Saddam Hussein would turn out to be disastrous on multiple counts. Similarly, there is lack of comprehension now in New Delhi that the Obama administration intends to eventually legitimize the Taliban: what Washington is looking for is a way to put the best front on that eventuality and justify such an about-turn. With 55 American troops dead in Afghanistan in a month, October has been the deadliest month for the US forces since the war started there in 2001. In addition, the last three months accounted for a quarter of all battlefield injuries in Afghanistan in the previous eight years.

If this trend continues, the war in Afghanistan may be a factor in the mid-term Congressional elections next year, with the Democrats already facing rough weather on other fronts such as healthcare and the economy. As 2012 approaches, Obama will have no desire to follow Lyndon Johnson and withdraw from the re-election campaign or be defeated because his country is stuck in a quagmire in Afghanistan. That may require making peace with the Taliban on its terms, and dealing with Afghanistan on that premise may be one of the challenges that the prime minister will face as he meets Obama in the White House.
 

ppgj

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
168
Make The Visit Count

G PARTHASARATHY12 November 2009, 05:56am IST

With public attention focused on reports of a possible repeat of the 26/11 terrorist strike and China’s melodramatics on the Dalai Lama’s visit
to Tawang, one should not forget that – given the importance of Washington’s relations with Beijing and Islamabad – the future course of events in our neighbourhood will be significantly influenced by understandings reached during Manmohan Singh’s November 24 state visit to Washington.

The Obama administration is now finding that its relations with our neighbours are going to be more complicated than it earlier imagined. Hectored by Pakistani officials about alleged shortcomings in US policies, despite the unprecedented level of American military and economic assistance to Pakistan, an irate Hillary Clinton recently accused Islamabad of sheltering Osama bin Laden. She also said: “If we are going to have a mature partnership...there are issues that not just the United States, but others have with your government and your military security establishment” – a blunt indictment of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism in Afghanistan and India.

Washington is also finding that, as its economic and military clout grows, China is becoming increasingly assertive and determined to exclude the US from the emerging security and economic architecture of Asia and the Asia-Pacific region. China now calls for US withdrawal from Afghanistan, seeks to undermine the role of the dollar in determining global oil prices and is using its vast foreign exchange reserves and possession of around $800 billion in US Treasury bonds to leverage its global economic ambitions.

More important, China is showing growing aggressiveness to enforce its claims that its territorial waters encompass three million square kilometres out of a total area of 3.5 million square km in the South China Sea. It has disputes on its maritime frontiers with North and South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, the Philippines , Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei. It is becoming increasingly aggressive in enforcing its authority in disputed areas it claims are within its territorial waters. Barack Obama’s decision to avoid a customary meeting with the Dalai Lama, for fear of offending Beijing, has only strengthened the belief that with the US in retreat, China will be more assertive in its dealings with neighbours, including India.

American strategic analyst Ashley Tellis, who played a key role in shaping the Bush administration’s policies towards India, has lucidly spelt out how the Obama administration should understand India’s policies. Alluding to Indian concerns about calls for a US-China “condominium” to set the global agenda, he notes that India would like the US to “manage its relations with China in such a way that precludes both collusion and confrontation , between Washington and Beijing” . He states that India expects Washington to work to “preserve a favourable balance of power” in Asia, enabling India “to concentrate on economic development, without any distracting security competition”.

Cautioning Obama against any intrusive attempt to meddle in Kashmir, Tellis notes that “India desires greater American support in confronting the terror emanating from Pakistan” . While Clinton made it clear in Pakistan that Washington has no intention to meddle in Kashmir, Manmohan Singh would no doubt tell the White House that, following “back channel” negotiations, India and Pakistan had reached a broad agreement on the framework for a settlement on J&K in 2007. This recognised that borders could not be changed, but that free movement of people, goods, services and investments across the Line of Control would make them “irrelevant” . It is for Pakistan, seeking to turn the clock back, to honour and abide by understandings reached between 2005 and 2007.

The India-US nuclear deal has cleared the way for nuclear collaboration with France, Russia and the US and opened the door for meeting India’s crucial needs concerning uranium ore. But American restrictions and delays on transfer of hi-tech items remain and need addressing. Signing of the “End Use Monitoring Agreement” and “Technical Safeguards Agreement” during Clinton’s visit to India cleared the way for expanding cooperation in defence and space. It would be useful if Singh’s “Washington yatra” could set the stage for some imaginative India-US ventures in space.

Moreover, while issues like nuclear non-proliferation , climate change and clean energy will come up for discussion, rural India will benefit from Singh’s visit only if high-sounding bilateral agreements on agriculture are seen to lead to greater agricultural productivity and better water management in India. Hopefully, HRD minister Kapil Sibal’s initiatives will also see early progress in cooperation with the US in university education.

Singh is more than familiar with power equations in Washington and the frustration there with Pakistan’s policy of running with the Taliban hare while hunting with the American hound. The Americans have been extremely forthcoming after 26/11 in sharing intelligence and assisting terror-related investigations in India. It is crucial to enhance such cooperation in dealing with terrorist violence that both Indian and US citizens could well face again in the near future. With Pakistan’s state structure virtually imploding, India and the US need to remain in close touch, especially by complementing their efforts to restore peace and stability in Afghanistan.

The writer is a former high commissioner to Pakistan.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/.../Make-The-Visit-Count/articleshow/5221593.cms
 

anoop_mig25

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,804
Likes
3,151
Country flag
PM`s coming visit to USA

I found this article in newspaper indian express . i am confused by going trough it.the trip only for worth of showing or it has something more of it.

BY Dhruva Jaishankar
The writer is programme officer for Asia at the German Marshall Fund of the United States in Washington DC


In private, [Bill Clinton] disclosed, Indian officials spoke of knowing roughly how many nuclear bombs the Pakistanis possessed, from which they calculated that a doomsday nuclear volley would kill 300 to 500 million Indians while annihilating all 120 million Pakistanis,” Taylor Branch writes in his recently-released history of Clinton’s presidency, The Clinton Tapes. “The Indians would thus claim ‘victory’ on the strength of several hundred million countrymen they figured would be left over.

Whether a consequence of misunderstanding or credulity, the seriousness with which the former president took such Indian statements is enormously revealing. Clinton may have been aghast at the apparent recklessness of India’s leadership, but he found this tempered by — and also difficult to reconcile with — the immense enthusiasm he had for India and its people. For Clinton, and many members of the Baby Boomer generation in leadership positions in the United States, India held a captivating, exotic appeal. It was a land of intuitively peaceful, tolerant, and hardworking people held back by an incompetent and irresponsible leadership that was obsessed with advancing its parochial interests, building a nuclear arsenal and fighting Pakistan.Barack Obama may be the first post-Boomer president, but he appears to retain a similar orientation to Clinton in matters pertaining to India, although for his generation India is more closely associated with Satyam than satyagraha. That the outward manifestations of his worldliness and his closeness to Indian-Americans have not yet translated into an overt appreciation of India at the political and strategic levels should therefore come as no surprise. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit in July was meant to draw attention to India’s importance in American decision-making, but by involving just a single day of official meetings in Delhi, it only reinforced the belief that the Obama administration intended on bypassing the Indian political establishment in its engagement of India. Today, a year after Obama’s election, Indian concerns that he may not implement the civilian nuclear agreement signed in 2008 appear misplaced, but they overshadow transformations in American policy of a more fundamental, philosophical nature.
What exactly explains recent changes to the US approach to India? Idealism alone is too simple an attribute and does not level with what has so far been an essentially pragmatic presidency. It should, however, be noted that the administration has been more comfortable with multilateral approaches to global and regional challenges — whether through the G-20, CTBT or APEC — than with bilateral engagements. More significantly, India’s phenomenal growth over the past two decades, while widely understood and appreciated within Democratic foreign policy circles, is considered but part of a larger phenomenon in Asia and the developing world. The rise of India is placed somewhere in the gulf between those of China and Indonesia: important but not extraordinary, and certainly not unique. The concept of “Indian exceptionalism,” so dear to the Indian strategic community, has not yet been fully embraced in Washington.

Another reason, whispered conspiratorially, is that India is being “punished” for the warm relationship it enjoyed with the United States under George W. Bush. This theory was further fuelled by news reports last month quoting anonymous American officials, who were critical of India for celebrating the former president during his visit. At a more practical level, two outstanding strategic concerns, one — to India’s east — influenced by US economic considerations and the other — to its west — by American security imperatives, offer added friction to the relationship. It should be noted that the Bush administration managed both challenges without jeopardising relations with New Delhi, although admittedly with less than satisfactory results. That domestic economic and regional security situations have deteriorated over the past year from an American perspective suggests that India may become less, not more, of a factor in US strategic calculations.In this light, Manmohan Singh’s visit later this month to Washington appears to be more of symbolic than of substantive worth. High-level travel in both directions in recent weeks has evidently been intended to clear the ground for some major advances, but the Obama administration has already indicated its preference for engaging India on matters of economic and social welfare and development. This should certainly be wholeheartedly embraced, but with the understanding that an adequate appreciation of India’s leadership, and by extension the value of warm political and strategic ties, is still necessary for a well-rounded bilateral relationship.

plz give ur opions
www.indianexpress.com/news/a-cold-wind/540427/3
 

roma

NRI in Europe
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
3,582
Likes
2,538
Country flag
To be honest, I never liked Obama right from the start... I sensed something fishy vis-a-vis India... and upto now he's only lived upto my expectations that he's not going out of the way to do anything for us...

Though, I'd wait a couple of more months before deciding to take a call on his credentials in the poll...

For now, in my books, he's "Slightly Negative, but will give more time"

his top assignment is to prove that an afro-american can lead the ship and so economics is gonna be his top priority , not the international arena.

If necesary he will sacrifice the usa's clout internationally to save the bolster the economy - so you will see things like bring the folks back from iraq and increased govt sepnding on healthcare - that's all in keeping with being more popular, saving in areas where it doesnt show immediate gains for him and spending in areas to keep the populace happy
 

anoop_mig25

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,804
Likes
3,151
Country flag
what if american loose afgan war?

THE BEST AND THE WORST - AFGHANISTAN WILL BE THE CHALLENGE WHEN SINGH MEETS OBAMA

Diplomacy
K.P. Nayar

Similarly, there is lack of comprehension now in New Delhi that the Obama administration intends to eventually legitimize the Taliban: what Washington is looking for is a way to put the best front on that eventuality and justify such an about-turn.
if american leave to Afghanistan without defeating Taliban then whether they want it or not it will once again became heaven for al-quaid.same like Vietnam when they broke their promise and captured south Vietnam .it will disastrous for india and pakistan would once became bold and would start their proxy war.plus will we have china in Afghanistan making huge profit by investing in afgan mines i am sure taliban would allow them to do so to earn some money
 

mattster

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
1,171
Likes
870
Country flag
He doesn't have a Choice. The USA is depending on China to fund its massive spending, and continue to keep the dollar afloat by buying US Currency.

China has already made noises about ditching the dollar in favour of a new global currency, and Russia just backed the idea. If that happens, the US will drop like a stone, literally.

Why do you think Hillary is shuttling between Beijing and Washington?

I think that you guys are missing something here.

China bought so many US dollars so that the easy credit would further entice US Consumers to buy more Chinese made goods.

The 2nd reason they invested so much money in the US financial and mortagage backed investments was because they were sitting on a huge pile of cash and needed a good return on their investments in a safe stable location.

Those high risk US investments were giving them a good return and that is why it kept going for so long until it collapsed under its own weight.

Now that China has almost a trillion dollars in US currency, they cant really dump it anywhere fast because that will cause the dollar to go down and will only hurt them.

Also, despite all the talk about the Chinese economy, major consumption of Chinese exports is still mainly in the US and Europe. Asians in general save a much higher percentage of their income and the GDP in many Asian countries is not high enough to support high level of consumerism.

So this is a 2-way street for China and the US. There are only so many cards that China can play against the US. I still think that China needs the US more than the US needs China.
If you want prove of that, just look at the trade imbalance between these 2 countries.

If the US economy totally collapses, it will affect the whole world but no country will get whipped as bad as China. So there is a good reason why the Chinese are holding on to their US dollars, and they may divest in some of it but not all.
 

ppgj

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
168
INDIA GROWTH STORY: Indo-US ties: A 26-Point Agenda

Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Indo-US ties: A 26-Point Agenda




Tarun Das, former chief mentor of The Confederation Of Indian Industry (CII), suggests a charter of action on the eve of PM Manmohan Singh's visit to the US
Over five decades of distance and mistrust have been gradually replaced by an evolving friendship and partnership, cooperation and collaboration between India and the US. There is still much distance to travel because mutual suspicions still remain in different corners of the bilateral relationship. The visit of PM Manmohan Singh to the US could be the right time to move ahead, together. Here's an A to Z roadmap for going forward
Aviation: Going beyond the few direct, non-stop flights connecting India and the US, there should be 20 non-stop flights daily connecting cities on both sides.
Business:The target for this,taking trade and investment, should be $100 billion (to move forward to $200 billion). We should have a bilateral investment treaty and an online portal for small enterprises on both sides to connect. The US-India CEO Forum must make these happen.
Climate: There should be collaboration in energy and environment beyond where it is today. A private sector-led Indo-US Climate Change Centre would make sense, adding to the Green Business Centre (GBC) in Hyderabad which focuses on Indo-US cooperation in energy efficiency. C is also for capital markets, for cooperation in financial regulation, corporate governance, insider trading issues, etc.
Defence: A beginning has been made but progress is slow because of concerns and insecurities. This cooperation is critical for international security and must go beyond expanding dialogue, defence purchase by India, joint exercises and a somewhat flexible offset policy against US defence sales to India.
Education: The 100,000 plus Indian students in the US could be raised by 50%. Indian investment in top American universities is desirable. American institutions also need to open in India. There should be cooperation in disabilities training, vocational education, curriculum flexibility and student-level exchanges.
Food: With 60% of India in the villages, the Green Revolution with US partnership in the 60s needs revisiting. This time, the focus should be on R&D, technology, productions, storage, warehousing, distribution, nutrition and high value agriculture. An industry-led Indo-US Institute of Agribusiness Management and Technology makes sense.
Going Green: Green factories, green homes, green schools, green buildings — all of these should drive our environment agenda. The Indian Green Building Council and the US Green Building Council partnership is the foundation for this.
Healthcare: This is beyond medical tourism. India's challenges to provide quality healthcare to a billion-plus means upgrading hospital standards, expanding training,developing R&D,NGO collaboration, all of which represent a massive joint agenda for strong mutual benefits.
Infrastructure: With India set to spend $500 billion on building infrastructure like roads, ports, railway, airports, etc, US participation through investments, sale of equipment, consultancy, and training, is crucial. A joint group on infrastructure needs to go beyond the macro and work on the micro and implement projects.
Judiciary: The American judicial experience, technology and systems would help immensely to clear the backlog of cases and usher in best practices.
Knowledge: This includes technology transfer, intellectual property rights (IPR) protection, innovation, nanotechnology, standards, all of which result in deep exchanges and mutual development at lower costs.
Leadership: Partnerships such as the one between Aspen Institute, the US and Aspen Institute, India, should be replicated to help build value-based young leaders using a unique methodology and encompassing all segments of society.
Media: And, of course, entertainment. The film industries of the two countries are the biggest in the world and cooperation is just about beginning. The potential here is huge.
Nuclear: The civil nuclear agreement dominated the bilateral landscape for over three years. It' s now time to implement and establish, jointly, nuclear power plants that will promote clear energy. 0
mnipatient: Or to endure all things,
including listening to each other and not to lecture each other. It will be a new experience for both Indians and Americans. To be patient. To try to understand. To learn to trust.
People: People-to-people links have happened long before the two governments developed links or did business. It needs to be expanded. India centres in American cities are required.
Quest: For R&D, space exploration, underwater exploration, ocean development technology, weather forecasting and much more that need to be central to the bilateral agenda.
Reforms: Both nations need these to happen, in a calibrated way and through consultation and collaboration. It should happen across economy and society. Two open democracies can support each other in minimising mistakes and help make the future more stable.
Security: It's an essential cooperation to deal with terrorism. It involves sharing intelligence and technology, training and equipment.
Training: Good training of both young and the old would empower people of the both countries. It's an enormous area of potential partnership.
United Nations: History shows years of differences between India and the US at UN. It's time now to bridge the gap and help frame consensus on global issues. US support for India for a permanent seat on the UNSC would help move the process.
Visas:Actually,it's more than just visas; it's about freer travel both ways, especially since more and more Americans are relocating to India for work. The vision should be to converge on systems and standards and aim to reach a visa-free regime.
Water: The key to security of people, especially the poor, is access to safe drinking water. In the US, even tap water is safe to drink. Indians must have the same facility and the US can assist.
Xenogogue: This means guide. The two countries must evolve their strategic partnership to a level w here, mutually, the role of guide is performed by each for the other.
Youth: That's the future. The next generation. To harness the young Indians' network and build connectivity with US counterparts and chart out future.
Zenith: Or the peak. President Obama and PM Manmohan Singh can take the Indo-US relationship to a new peak. This is the real possibility.
The A to Z is just a broad framework. The nitty-gritty has to be filled in. That's the task before us.
 

ppgj

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
168
Obama's China(credit)card casts shadow on PM's US visit

Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN 18 November 2009, 06:28pm IST

WASHINGTON: He bowed deeply before the Japan emperor out of respect in a moment captured by the cameras, but did he bend unseen before the Chinese leadership in acknowledgment of the Beijing's growing clout?

As President Barack Obama winds up his four-country East Asia tour with a final stop in South Korea on Wednesday before returning to Washington DC in time for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit next week, it's the China leg of his travels that has pundits of all aflutter. The question agitating their minds is whether his engagement with Beijing marked a visible shift in the international power dynamic, with the US openly acquiescing to Chinese influence in the world, with the possible return of a bi-polar world. ( Watch Video )

In the past few months Japan, Australia, New Zealand among others have bowed to Beijing on various issues. Obama himself postponed meeting the Dalai Lama in Washington DC in deference to Chinese sensitivities. But in Beijing, there was an unmistakable sense that he stooped to concur, that China talked to him not just as an equal, but as an ascendant power.

Experts noted that Beijing virtually micro-managed Obama’s visit, rejected US pleas on almost every major issue (monetary policy, climate change, human rights etc), and sent him back empty-handed. "US China in strained diplomatic embrace," read the Wall Street Journal headline of the encounter that didn't impress anyone and worried almost everyone.

Obama's reference to China's role in South Asia during the joint ''question-less'' presser was not part of the mainstream discussion in Washington DC, but South Asia experts who noted it differed on its significance. ''This is most unhelpful and counterproductive. It will cast a shadow over PM Singh's visit,'' said Ashley Tellis, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

But Teresita Schaffer, director of the South Asia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies said she wouldn’t give it ''much significance,'' noting that it’s the ''kind of ritual statement that we want to work with everyone for peace everywhere.'' Sumit Ganguly, a South Asia scholar at Indiana University described the statement as ''unexceptional and anodyne'' and rejected the idea that it was a throwback to the Clinton presidency, when, soon after the 1998 nuclear tests in the region, the then president invested Beijing with a oversight role in South Asia, provoking much anger in New Delhi.

Soon after Obama’s remark about China’s salience in South Asia (which incidentally were not mentioned by President Hu, who spoke first, and were not noted at all in the US media) was reported in the Indian media though, a state department spokesman remarked that since President Obama will have just gotten back from China by the time Prime Minister Singh arrives here, ''he will share some of his impressions and thoughts about his visit to China as well.''

Whether this emollient will truly be applied and whether it is enough to pacify the more tetchy and trenchant China watchers in India remains to be seen, but for now there is a sense in the diplomatic community that while India is a key player in the G-20, the US and China are heading towards a G-2 club. That, says Ganguly, is not something that should upset New Delhi given the enormous financial clout Beijing enjoys vis-a-vis Washington. With $ 800 billion in US treasury bonds, China is Washington's biggest creditor, and is seen as having a virtual stranglehold on the US economy (although it could work both ways).

''China’s dramatic rise along economic, diplomatic and commercial axes and the US dependence on the PRC necessitates a robust US-PRC relationship,'' Ganguly said. ''if that upsets India then Indians need to start putting their own economic, political and security houses in order rather than fretting about a growing US-PRC relationship.'' That apparently is one of the objectives of Singh's visit to the US.

Obama's China(credit)card casts shadow on PM's US visit - US - World - The Times of India
 

RAM

The southern Man
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,288
Likes
445
Country flag
India, US to study the seas together, with Indian satellite

Washington, Nov 19 (IANS) Ahead of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit here next week, Indian and US space agencies have signed a letter of intent (LoI) for collaboration on India’s Oceansat-2 satellite for studying the seas.The LoI signed between the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) promotes opportunity for receiving Oceansat-2 data by the US agencies for research, education and activities of public good, the Indian embassy sai

The LoI was signed here Wednesday by R.R. Navalgund, director, Space Application Centre for ISRO; Michael H Freilich, director Earth Science Division, for NASA; and Mary E Kicza, assistant administrator for Satellite and Information Science for NOAA.The LoI was signed on the sidelines of the Sixth Plenary Session of the Group on Earth Observations (GEO) here with India’s Deputy Chief of Mission Arun K Singh and Counsellor (Space) Deviprasad Karnik from the Indian Embassy and representatives of NOAA and NASA participating in the event.

Launched by ISRO Sep 23 using the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) from Shriharikota, India’s spaceport, the oceanographic satellite Oceansat-2 carries three instruments, the eight band Ocean Colour Monitor (OCM) to study ocean biology, Ku band pencil beam Scatterometer to measure sea surface wind vectors and Radio Occultation Sounder for Atmosphere (ROSA).While the first two instruments are built by ISRO, ROSA has been contributed by the Italian Space Agency. All three payloads have been switched on and are working satisfactorily, providing valuable data.

The joint activities would include calibration, validation, algorithm development, scientific investigations and operational applications.While ocean colour data is envisaged to be useful for fisheries, monitoring of harmful algae and in studying global carbon cycles, wind vectors from scatterometer would be useful in facilitating better weather forecasting.This initiative is under the overall Joint Civil Space Cooperation agreement signed earlier by India and the US.



India, US to study the seas together, with Indian satellite
 

RAM

The southern Man
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,288
Likes
445
Country flag
PM may sign major guns deal during US visit

New Delhi: India is expected to initiate the process for a major government-to-government deal in artillery guns with the United States during the visit of prime minister Manmohan Singh later this month. India, US along with other states discuss way ahead for Afghanistan If it goes through, it will break the jinx of Bofors that has held back artillery modernisation since the mid-1980s.

According to military sources, work is under way for a foreign military sales deal with the US for the purchase of ultra-light howitzer guns, worth over $1 billion (Rs5,000 crore). A military source said the proposed deal "could be taken forward" during Singh's visit to the US.If it goes through this will be the first major artillery gun purchase by India since the Bofors scandal, over kickbacks in the purchase of the artillery guns from Sweden, erupted into a political controversy.

Though the proposal is being termed "serious" by sources, many are not willing to commit if it will go through. Singapore Technologies, which had led the race for the contract, has been blacklisted after its name cropped up in a Central Bureau of Investigation probe into alleged corruption by former Ordnance Factory Board chairman Sudipto Ghosh.
However, pleading innocence, the Singapore firm is carrying out intense lobbying at various levels to get back the contract. Army sources are not willing to write off the Singapore firm from the contract.The army is preparing detailed notes for a deal for the much-needed ultra-light howitzers. The proposal is for outright purchase of M777 towed artillery guns that have shown their capabilities in Afghanistan. It is in service with the US Marine Corps and army, besides the Canadian military

PM may sign major guns deal during US visit - dnaindia.com
 

RPK

Indyakudimahan
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,970
Likes
229
Country flag
Liberal tech transfer, nuke cooperation on PM agenda in US

India will seek a "liberal" regime of technology transfer from the US and an early operationalisation of the civil nuclear deal, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has said ahead of his visit here next week.

Terming the US and India as "strategic partners," Singh said renewing partnership with a new administration and identifying new areas of cooperation will be an important part of his visit as the first state guest of President Barack Obama.

"We are strategic partners. We have good relations. But there is a new administration in America. So it is appropriate that I should renew our partnership," Singh said in an interview to The Washington Post ahead of his visit that begins on Sunday.

Describing the Indo-US civil nuclear deal as a landmark agreement, Singh said India would like to operationalise it and ensure its objectives are realised in full.

"My hope is that we can persuade the US administration to be more liberal when it comes to transferring technologies to us. The restrictions make no sense. India has an impeccable record of not participating in any proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. So that's my number one concern," he said.

He said India and the US could be partners in refocusing attention on an "equitable, balanced global order". "We would like to strengthen energy cooperation with the United States -- (in) clean coal technology and in renewable energy resources," he said.
 

jayadev

Founding Member
Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
137
Likes
24
Country flag
Obama and Indian PM Singh hail 'strategic relationship'

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, on a visit to the White House, expressed optimism about an "India-US partnership" to contribute to "global peace and stability."


AFP - Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh offered a hand to the United States to help build an "open and inclusive" Asia as President Barack Obama prepared to toast him Tuesday with his first state dinner.

Singh said the world's two largest democracies had common aims on issues from Afghanistan to global health, and said he and Obama would reach some form of common statement on one of the most divisive issues -- climate change.

Obama invited Singh for the first full-fledged state visit since he entered the White House, a ceremonial affair that will culminate in a black-tie dinner Tuesday that is one of Washington's most coveted invitations.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the elaborate welcome showed that Obama considered the India relationship "very important."

Some in India were uneasy about Obama's early focus on reconciling with neighbor China and his giant aid package for traditional rival Pakistan.

Singh, in an address to the Council on Foreign Relations, said the United States and India together can reshape the political landscape in the wake of last year's US-bred global economic meltdown.

"Our generation has an opportunity given to few to remake the new global equilibrium after the irreversible changes" of the crisis, Singh said.

"The India-US partnership can contribute to an orderly transition to the new order and be an important factor for global peace and stability," he said.

Saying Asia was the focal point for major changes, Singh said: "India and the United States can work together with other countries in the region to create an open and inclusive regional architecture."

Obama welcomed Singh days after the US leader paid his maiden visit to China, which in the course of a decade has emerged as the largest holder of the soaring US debt.

The president has faced heavy criticism at home for not achieving more in China, which made no visible goodwill gestures to the young leader such as freeing dissidents and did not nationally broadcast his sole public forum.

While Singh declined to criticize China, he brushed aside concern that India has not grown as quickly as the other Asian giant. He said New Delhi can be proud of its respect for human rights and cultural and religious minorities.

"There are several dimensions of human freedom which are not caught by the number with regard to the gross domestic product," said Singh, himself an economist who spearheaded India's free-market reforms.

In an earlier address, Singh nonetheless highlighted efforts to open the economy and appealed for US investment -- even in once taboo areas of defense and nuclear energy.

"A strategic relationship that is not underpinned by a strong economic relationship is unlikely to prosper," Singh told a luncheon of the US Chamber of Commerce and the US-India Business Council.

Under the previous George W. Bush administration, the United States signed a landmark agreement to end India's isolation on civilian nuclear markets despite New Delhi's refusal to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Obama has pledged to move ahead on the nuclear accord, even though some members of his Democratic Party had initially opposed it.

Singh offered Obama advice on his key foreign priority -- Afghanistan -- urging him to stay committed.

Obama met with top US brass late Monday as he finalizes a decision on whether to reinforce the 68,000 US troops who will be stationed in Afghanistan by year-end.

"Any premature talk of exit will only embolden the terrorist elements who are out to destabilize not only our part of the world but civilized world everywhere," Singh said.

Singh has also called for the United States to step up pressure on Pakistan to rein in Islamic radicals, one year after the Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people.

Pakistan has been critical of India's growing involvement in Afghanistan. But Richard Holbrooke, the US envoy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, said that Islamabad had nothing to fear from Singh's visit.

"We seek to improve our relations with Pakistan. We seek to improve our relations with China. We seek to improve our relations with India. This is not a zero-sum game," Holbrooke said.
Obama and Indian PM Singh hail 'strategic relationship' | France 24
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
Obama's Forgotten Friends

For his first state dinner, the president tonight is hosting India’s prime minister. And yet until now, Obama has been indifferent to the world’s largest democracy. Tunku Varadarajan on the cost of ignoring our allies.

On Tuesday evening, the world’s most consequential turbaned man, Manmohan Singh, will glide through White House security and take his place at a dinner table beside Barack and Michelle Obama. He is the prime minister of India, a country that could, if Mr. Obama shoots his diplomatic hoops right, come to be a preeminent American ally in the 21st century, taking its place alongside Britain, Israel, and, assuming the bolshie Yukio Hatoyama doesn’t live forever, Japan.

It doesn’t take a genius to recognize the political, strategic, and moral worth to America, the world’s most powerful democracy, of a strong alliance with India, the world’s largest. Mr. Obama, by no stretch a man of tepid intelligence, has calibrated things artfully: Not only is Mr. Singh the first state visitor to Washington since the president took office in January, his trip is the first time that India has headed an American president’s list for a state visit—ever. (Richard Nixon must be turning in his grave.)

For all his emphasis on diplomacy in dealing with hostile states, Mr. Obama has failed to grasp the diplomatic importance of tending to alliances.

And yet, until this moment, Mr. Obama has been indifferent to India. No doubt his mind has been focused on other matters: the American economy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian and North Korean nuclear shenanigans—not to mention health-care reform (although one must ask what prompted him to add that burden to an already heaving haversack of misfortune). What has been left of Mr. Obama’s attention has been consumed by China, itself inseparable in so many ways from any resolution of America’s economic crisis. (Treasury Secretary Geithner has done more hard yards on China than Secretary of State Clinton.)

Given all this swirl, Mr. Obama has had scant inclination to pay much attention to, let alone court, Delhi. This has not gone down well in India, a country surrounded by a wall of thin skin. India had grown used, under Mr. Obama’s predecessor, to alpha-dog treatment. George W. Bush was the best American president India ever had, and Mr. Obama’s ability to take India for granted is, in some measure, a tribute to the extent to which Mr. Bush locked the two countries into a presumptively inseparable alliance. But for all his emphasis on diplomacy in dealing with hostile states, like Iran, or inveterate competitor-states, like China, Mr. Obama has failed to grasp the diplomatic importance of tending to alliances, whether they be old and true ones, such as the one with Israel, or young and sensitive ones, such as the one with India.

India is not the India of Eisenhower’s time, or Nixon’s, or Carter’s, or Reagan’s. Sometime in the early 1990s, India finally acquired a “foreign policy” to replace the vexatious, preachy “postcolonial policy” that had previously guided its international relations. Equally, the United States, under Bush, finally acquired an “India policy,” as opposed to a “Pakistan policy” of which India was a mere byproduct. In fact, under Mr. Bush, improved relations between the two democracies came to acquire an almost moral imperative, one than can—and must—survive the short-term reliance on Pakistan in the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

In any case, this is a war in which the U.S. has not, so far, been able to count on worthwhile Pakistani support. True, that country has taken pains to maintain the appearance of an ally; but every passing day brings new strains, and new cynicism. Pakistan is “in” so that it can use the war to its advantage in its messianic conflict with India. Besides, its overriding aim is to re-establish a Taliban regime in Kabul: How much plainer does its dissonance with American aims in Afghanistan have to be before Mr. Obama works out that his country’s long-term interests in the region lie with New Delhi, not Islamabad?

Finally, a broader word about India and its relationship with America: Unlike China, which is inherently competitive for global leadership—and which will never accept American leadership or direction—India is a country that would, like Britain or Japan or Germany, settle for a partnership with the United States that guaranteed mutual benefit and respect. India’s natural state, if nations can be said to have such a thing, is neither triumphalist nor antagonist; it is cooperative and redemptive, much as America’s tends to be. One trusts that Mr. Obama will come to see these qualities as clearly as his predecessor did. If not, this could be one area in which history will judge Mr. Obama to have been “dumb,” and Mr. Bush to have been the “smart” one.

Obama's Forgotten Friends - The Daily Beast
 

RPK

Indyakudimahan
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,970
Likes
229
Country flag
fullstory

India, US sign six MoUs to enhance cooperation

Washington, Nov 25 (PTI) India and the US have signed an MoU on counter-terrorism and five other agreements as they agreed to chart their ties as "one of the defining relations" in the 21st century in which New Delhi will have a leadership role in the region and the world.

Besides the Memorandum of Understanding on 'Advancing Global Security and Countering Terrorism', the two countries signed pacts covering education and development, health cooperation, economic trade and agriculture, and green partnerships.

The pacts were signed after Prime Minister and US President Barack Obama held talks here at the White House.

Singh is the first foreign leader to be hosted as the State Guest under the 10-month-old Obama Administration.
 

ppgj

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
168
Indo-US ties: Important, not urgent- Comments & Analysis-Opinion-The Economic Times

Indo-US ties: Important, not urgent
25 Nov 2009, 0502 hrs IST, Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiyar, ET Bureau

While the US needs Pakistan to target the Taliban and China to protect the dollar and sustain recovery in the short term,it sees India as a
long-term ally against Islamic terror and an ambitious China, says Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiyar

After reading the McChrystal Report on the Afghanistan issue and watching President Obama’s visit to China, dismayed observers complain that the US views Pakistan and China as more important partners than India.

The truth is more complex. There is certainly a strong urgency to US relations with Pakistan and China right now. By contrast, ties with India are important, but not urgent. This raises short-term worries, yet bodes well for the future.

US casualties in Afghanistan are rising, and the Taliban looks stronger than ever. The US urgently needs Pakistani help in Afghanistan. It is getting a mixture of help and sabotage.

Pakistan is cracking down on the Pakistani Taliban, and this diminishes the urgent threat from the Afghan Taliban too. However, the US knows that Pakistan would like to have the Taliban back in Afghanistan eventually, which is why it gives the Afghan Taliban leadership protection to stay in Quetta.

The US lives with this manifest duplicity since it urgently needs at least partial cooperation from Pakistan. Yet, Pakistan’s unreliability as a long-term ally is well understood in Washington. The latest Pew Global Attitudes report shows that only 22% of Pakistanis think the US takes their interests into account when making foreign policy decisions, essentially unchanged from 21% since 2007.

Fully 64% of the Pakistani public regards the US as an enemy, while only 9% views it as a partner. So, while the US-Pakistan partnership has an urgent short-term basis, its longer-term prospects are poor, and both sides know it.

A recent report of General McChrystal, US military commander in Afghanistan, has one section that has raised concerns in India. This states that “increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani counter-measures”.

The statement is obviously true: after all, Pakistan created the Afghan Taliban to reduce Indian influence and increase its own in that country.
Indian observers worry that the US will placate Pakistan by trying to reduce India’s role in Afghanistan.

However, whatever McChrystal may say, there is really no chance of the US forcing India to quit its Afghan presence. The US cannot stay in Afghanistan forever, and when it leaves, India will be a more reliable anti-terror partner than Pakistan can ever be.

The latest Pew report shows that 76% of Indians have a favourable image of the US, up from 66% in 2008. Indeed, fewer Israelis (71%) have a favourable view of the US than Indians.

Commercial, educational and personal ties between India and the US are strong, and many Indians migrate to the US. Both Indians and Americans see Islamic terror as an existentialist threat. So, economic, social and security considerations provide a solid basis for long-term Indo-US partnership, even if it lacks the urgency of some other partnerships.

Fareed Zakaria, editor of Newsweek, has succinctly highlighted India’s long-term value to the US. “South Asia is a tar-pit filled with failed and dysfunctional states, save for one long-established democracy of 1.2 billion people that is the second-fastest growing major economy in the world, a check on China’s rising ambitions and a natural ally of the US. The prize is the relationship with India. The booby prize is governing Afghanistan.”

As for China, Obama’s recent visit suggested a change of attitude in China’s favour. He did not condemn human rights violations in anything like the terms used by his predecessors.

Given that China is now the global locomotive of growth, helping pull the US economy out of recession, Obama was subdued in criticising China’s mercantilist policies and refusal to revalue the yuan. China is now a major creditor of the US, and debtors cannot be too harsh on their creditors.

The Chinese managed to insert a phrase into the Obama-Hu statement saying the two would work for stability in the “south Asia region”. Indian observers took this to mean that the US had officially blessed Chinese interference in Indo-Pak affairs, and expressed strong displeasure.

The US said the reference was to Af-Pak rather than Kashmir. Yet, it seems clear that China has scored over India on this
occasion.

However, this sort of diplomatic point-scoring has little long-term relevance. China has long been an important ally of Pakistan, aiding its nuclear bomb and building the Karakoram highway and Gwadar port. So, protesting about Chinese ‘interference’ in south Asia is somewhat comic: it has long been a major player, not a mere interferer.

The positive recent development is that China also fears Islamic terrorism, and that complicates its traditional pro-Pakistani stance.

The US today rightly views engagement with China as urgent. China has been growing much faster than India for decades, and is streets ahead of India in every economic respect. It is a very important trade partner of the US, and the largest foreign holder of US gilts. Economic circumstances have thrown the two countries together to form what some call Chimerica.

Yet, China’s rising economic strength is getting reflected in rising military strength and assertiveness, and this worries the US. China has potentially dangerous differences with long-standing US allies in east Asia, including Japan, Taiwan and South Korea.

Globalisation of China’s economy has the positive effect of making military adventures more disruptive and costly economically. Yet, the greater economic strength globalisation gives China translates into military heft.
In this context, India has become important to the US as a potential regional counterweight to China.

Everybody hopes that China will limit its military ambitions, but nobody can be sure. And so, the US sees India as a long-term strategic partner with a common interest in containing Chinese expansionism. This is one reason why President Bush pushed so hard for the nuclear deal with India: he saw it underwriting a strategic partnership going well beyond mere nuclear supplies.

This underscores the main thesis of this column: that Indo-US ties have less urgency for the Obama administration than ties with Pakistan or China, but have more long-term importance. This carries some short-term disadvantages, but also major long-term advantages.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top