Revived: plan to give access to bases to US

[sob]

Oh, we fully backed "Russian adventure", is it?
Nice. Except, not true.

The Bulletin - Google News Archive Search

Ind did not support the SU in Afghan War, read article above.

As for the Afghan war itself: It is well known that the mujahids were created and funded and armed by the US to cause destabilization at the SU border. The exact parallel is the neo-Nazis and other crazies funded by the US in Ukraine (Russia's border) today.

American graciousness at creating, arming and funding the mujahids has allowed for the creation of an unstable nation/region (that will not be stable for a long time to come) and India can thank america for that.

========================

@civfanatic once told me (paraphrasing) that India will eventually become an american puppet. I guess his words are coming true.
[MOD Edit: Expletive removed.] excellent.

Well we were one of the very few nations that immediately recognised the puppet Govt. in Kabul which was put in place by the Soviets.
Also many of the resolutions in the UN saw India voting in favour of the USSR.

 

[Zebra]

First of all if India sign LSA, then it is not for Indian forces may get similar kind of support else where, but it is more as a part of the US procedure for India to get what it wants.

Second, few of socialist zombies already startes their cry that US will get base on Indian soil if India sign LSA.

Specially for those low life idiot maroons, can they prove it by any link or article.

Again, can thay prove that by getting LSA aggrement sign in India, US will start their military base in India.

 

[Zebra]

us lackey. typical puppet with inferiority complex feeling all warm and fuzzy on the prospect of uncle.

person who wants foreign troops stationed is claiming to be a nationalist

Yippee, long live India - US co-operation , specially against socialist countries.

 

[Bangalorean]

All this base-shase is fine, but there has to be SOME sort of quid pro quo. There's no such thing as a free lunch. WHAT will we get in return? Some people have pointed out that we don't really need Diego Garcia. Fine, then there has to be SOME kind of benefit to us in exchange. Can someone list out the benefits for India, from getting into such an arrangement?

And for those who are saying, "Oh, USA does not treat NATO allies the way they treat Pakis, so we should be ok since we are not Pakis" - well, of course we are not Pakis. Pakis are Pakis, no one else can take their place at the bottom. But let us remember that the Judeo-Christian white nations which are the core NATO members (France, UK, Australia, etc.) are not placed at the same level as SDRE nations like India, in the eyes of the US. This is a very important factor.

So, let us not get too carried away. I will support anything that benefits India, and I don't mind giving the US some benefits if it benefits us in return. But I want someone to list down these potential benefits to India. With Doval at the helm, I am not too worried - we'll have the best interests of the nation taken care of, I am very sure. Yet, I want DFI members to list out the benefits, for discussion's sake.

 

[blueblood]

subject 1


now i dont want to get into one of those silly arguments
as sometimes happens here - especially with someone i dont yet know

having an additional base in madagas... is fine
but i was more interested in emphasizing the technological aspects of the DG base
rather than the strategic location , although that certainly is important but in the case of DG
its the specialized US technology - they have tremendous underwater tech.

if we are friends enough with the usa eg via quid pro quo they may, as terms of exchange
allow access to their developments ( at least ) some in the DG base - which is state of the art

~subject 2



...yeah that shd be fun

sbject 3



i was asking the possibility of quid pro quo ....we give them some limited access to our facilities
and they give us some access to DG.



no they are not ...but neither are they allowed to have a fully independent foreign policy
whatever they do is always under US scrutiny ....eg uk in practicce does not have independent nuke freedom
none of the nations you mention can freely develop nuke arsenal , that job is left to uncle usa.

subject 4




Neo-ji it is not too late at all for pakistan to mend their ways and become a true
friend of the democratic world as led by the usa, even if such leadership is not absolutely perfect.

It is better for pakistan to re-think the sinister alliance with ccp-china and truly turn around, repent
and be a friend of the usa , a real friend ...because i fear Pak is getting deeper and deeper into
something which at a later stage pak will deeply regret , but it may be impossible to get out of

with every passing quarter of a year it becomes increasingly obvious that ccp-pak alliance
is two countries vs the rest of the world ....just look even at this thread - we will have
ccp-pak vs usa, gulf countries plus NATO plus india, japan s korea australia ,israel
egypt and many if not almost all arab countries

and russia is straddling neutral as they too do not trust ccp-china due to far east territories.
the african and south american nations will either be neutral or mildly pro-usa
even the asean nations are very displeased with ccp
none will aid the pak-ccp alliance ,
not even cuba ( recent events )

so it's going to be ccp-pak vs the rest of the world - please turn around and
instead join us, the democratic world
while it is still relatively possible ? ::welcome:

if not , then ,

Again, we don't need DG in any way imaginable. We sit right on top of SLC's of China. IN as of today has pretty good capability to patrol from Persian gulf or Horn of Africa to Mallacca straits.

US don't need us for logistics, they want IN to act as their lieutenant in the IOR region. And you are right, neither Japan nor UK has independent foreign policy.

 

[blueblood]

Let us get some very important facts clear

1. As long as we are a brown water navy, we do not need any outside support. ( Never mind the serious deficiencies in our sub fleet)

2. It is very clear to anybody that the US does not need any kind of base in India. With a base in the Gulf and in Diego Garcia their present requirements are met. They are IMO trying to safeguard their present supply chain and plug in some weak links with possible Indian help.

3. Why do you think that we have had almost 70 odd exercises with the US forces in the last decade? Every exercise has focussed on one single thing-- The exercise strengthens and broadens interoperability and cooperation between both the Armies and complements a number of other exchanges between the two forces,( source- Indo-US military exercise 'Yudh Abhyas 2014' in progress - Economic Times). And this has blessings across the political divide and has the agreement of the three services in India.

Let there be 700 exercises more. Let there be more cross training with the US military. Let's jointly develop high end weapon systems like EMALS, EM gun, ABM and ASAT systems or next gen helicopter systems. Let there be more trade and replace China as the manufacturing hub for American companies.

Foreign troops on Indian soil on a permanent or semi permanent basis is a big giant huge no no. Things might change in the future with China turning into a bigger pain in the ass every passing day. But today is not that day.

 

[blueblood]

All this base-shase is fine, but there has to be SOME sort of quid pro quo. There's no such thing as a free lunch. WHAT will we get in return? Some people have pointed out that we don't really need Diego Garcia. Fine, then there has to be SOME kind of benefit to us in exchange. Can someone list out the benefits for India, from getting into such an arrangement?

And for those who are saying, "Oh, USA does not treat NATO allies the way they treat Pakis, so we should be ok since we are not Pakis" - well, of course we are not Pakis. Pakis are Pakis, no one else can take their place at the bottom. But let us remember that the Judeo-Christian white nations which are the core NATO members (France, UK, Australia, etc.) are not placed at the same level as SDRE nations like India, in the eyes of the US. This is a very important factor.

So, let us not get too carried away. I will support anything that benefits India, and I don't mind giving the US some benefits if it benefits us in return. But I want someone to list down these potential benefits to India. With Doval at the helm, I am not too worried - we'll have the best interests of the nation taken care of, I am very sure. Yet, I want DFI members to list out the benefits, for discussion's sake.

It is the assumption that we will be one upping the yanks not the other way around. But that's not gonna happen as US-India relations are based on mutual respect and love for freedom and democracy.

I think every member on this forum wants India to benefit from such agreements just like every member wants India to be the largest economy. It's a very very long and winding road.

 

[sob]

Let there be 700 exercises more. Let there be more cross training with the US military. Let's jointly develop high end weapon systems like EMALS, EM gun, ABM and ASAT systems or next gen helicopter systems. Let there be more trade and replace China as the manufacturing hub for American companies.

Foreign troops on Indian soil on a permanent or semi permanent basis is a big giant huge no no. Things might change in the future with China turning into a bigger pain in the ass every passing day. But today is not that day.

Why should the US co-operate with India by giving us access to cutting edge technology for which they have spend Millions of Dollars on research.

There has to be some quid pro quo. It cannot be a one way street.

Plus nowhere it is mentioned that US wants a foothold in India, they are only asking for access to Indian bases for their crafts.

 

[blueblood]

Why should the US co-operate with India by giving us access to cutting edge technology for which they have spend Millions of Dollars on research.

There has to be some quid pro quo. It cannot be a one way street.

Plus nowhere it is mentioned that US wants a foothold in India, they are only asking for access to Indian bases for their crafts.

They shouldn't. But that is exactly what I am trying to say. Let's get something from them first and then consider LSA and CISMOA. Our intent should be to out-Baniya the greatest Baniya ever.

IMO, US is doing just great without us. Along DG and Qatar, they have berthing rights Singapore and then there is Guam. For the last time, they don't need our ports they need us.

 

[sob]

There were unconfirmed reports that during 1st Gulf War the US navy had fuel at Diego Garcia for their ships but had a shortage of Jet Fuel. There was a proposal to source the jet fuel from India and if sources are to be believed then India did supply JP 5 to the USN.

 

[Bangalorean]

There were unconfirmed reports that during 1st Gulf War the US navy had fuel at Diego Garcia for their ships but had a shortage of Jet Fuel. There was a proposal to source the jet fuel from India and if sources are to be believed then India did supply JP 5 to the USN.

This is the truth. India did allow them to refuel at that time. And there was a good quid pro quo also. We asked the US to prevail upon the IMF to release massive loan to India, since that was the time India had become bankrupt, thanks to NehruGandhi socialism.

 

[Zebra]

India has an informal fuel exchange agreemènt (FEA) with US .

IN warships can take fuèl at sea from US tankers with reciprocal facilities.

 

[Ray]

@Ray

the article uses 3 terms to define this agreement

1. Allowing ships to replenish & restock - FINE

2. USe of bases / & base access - USE OF BASE ? Surely not logistical ? - NOT FINE

3. Joint operation in times of urgency - Joint operations ? -NOT FINE

Base means sovereign right of the Nation having a Base.

However, if infrastructure and personnel are stationed to service, victual and supply a ship or aircraft in a port or airforce base/ airport, it does not qualify to be a Base since it is open to checks by the host country and personnel and laws of the host nation.

Point to note is

India and the US to grant mutual access to each other's military bases, refuel and replenish warships and fighter planes and, in a contingency, participate jointly in multi-nation military operations.

 

[blueblood]

participate jointly in multi-nation military operations.

Do we really want that?

 

[Ray]

IMO, it always start like that. Some "help" here and some "minor" demands there, in return. Indian Navy is decades away from acquiring a global footprint and the required logistics. IN's goal for current and near future will be IOR and we do not need USN's logistics assistance for that.

Yes, it may be that it starts like that. But then if the host country gives in, then it is the host country at fault.

What is so startling in mutual use of bases for refuelling and victualling? We have been doing so informally as it is as also when we attend joint training and exercises.

We have trained many countries on High Altitude Warfare and CI at our schools as also had joint exercises off our Bases. We have had air force exercises in the US too. We participate in the Patrolling Competition in the UK at a UK Base. So, it is nothing new.

Singapore uses our Kalaikunda Air Base for training annually as they use our Ranges in Rajasthan working off our bases in Rajasthan.

My second point is that we will /can never be UK, Israel or Japan to Americans. The best we will ever be is Turkey or Jordan, i.e. can be discarded any moment now.

Indeed we will not be.

We will not obviously not permit use of our bases to undertake military actions that do not coincide with our strategic aims.

It is an Alliance that is bounden to assist in the other countries operations. We are not an "Alliance".

We signed and had the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation 1971 that specified mutual strategic cooperation. Did that make us an Alliance?

They might. Sino-Indian border disputes are relatively less complex than the island disputes in East and South East Asia. Solving them would essentially mean a military that is about to become more powerful than Japan will stop breathing down their neck.

One has to understand the Chinese and their mentality. They chanted the Panch Sheel and its off shoot Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai. All were taken in and then..........1962!

While exulting on fraternal brotherhood with USSR, they went on to attack USSR at the Ussuri River.

They waxed on fraternal brotherhood with Vietnam and then went to war with Vietnam.

China will not forsake her hegemonic adventure.

Therefore, while you may feel China will settle the border issue, I, having studied them, are very, very doubtful.

 

[grampiguy]

The problem is not giving logistics assistance to US Forces or their air/naval craft. The problem begins with their text of the treaty.

CISMOA and BECA which Americans want India to sign, mentions quite restrictive use of their technological products and restrictive procedures to maintain and replace them. The restrictions were so severe that after a few years of operating INS Jalashwa/USS Trenton, Indian Navy decided to replace all of their electronic gadgets with Indian/Israeli/French replacements, just to avoid their intrusive inspections, which was nothing but an affront to Indian operational sovereignty. Hello, we bought with hard cash, NO? Its not an aid !!

Similarly, India bought Boeing BBJ for VIP travel and installed RWR, MAWS and other EW safety electronics in them from Americans. After a year, there was serious friction between Indian Air Force and US DOD over annual intrusive inspections and annual counting of their products. That was one reason why when Americans wanted India to sign CISMOA, BECA and LSA during 2005-2009, AK Antony was pressurised by Indian Military services to not sign those restrictive clauses. The benefit was minor which could be supplanted by electronic stuff from other countries but loss of operational sovereignty was severe. So we got P-8I, C-17, C-130J without their electronic gadgets and we have not missed their gadgets so far.

LSA had some other kind of opposition. As I said earlier, India has no problem with supplying or maintaining American air/naval craft at Indian bases. What India will never agree to is the expectation that a portion of all Indian bases would be reserved for exclusive American use (with perfunctory annual Indian inspection). Logistical assistance is different than logistical basing and India will never agree to the latter. So, instead of Americans insisting India to ign these three agreements, need of the hour is mutually writing a fresh agreement which is a win-win for both parties.

 

[blueblood]

Yes, it may be that it starts like that. But then if the host country gives in, then it is the host country at fault.

Sir, who's to say we won't. Is there a guarantee that a nationalist government will be at helm forever? Modi is there right now, tomorrow it very well could be a Gandhi, a Yadav, a Karat or a Banarjee or worse. Nehru gave away Coco islands and involved us in the mess called Tibet, Gujral and Desai messed up our intelligence apparatus and MMS decided to vacate Siachen. If history has taught us anything it is that for every Prithvi Raj Chauhan we have 10 or more Jaichands.

What is so startling in mutual use of bases for refuelling and victualling? We have been doing so informally as it is as also when we attend joint training and exercises.

We have trained many countries on High Altitude Warfare and CI at our schools as also had joint exercises off our Bases. We have had air force exercises in the US too. We participate in the Patrolling Competition in the UK at a UK Base. So, it is nothing new.

Singapore uses our Kalaikunda Air Base for training annually as they use our Ranges in Rajasthan working off our bases in Rajasthan.

I am all for the joint exercises. The more the merrier. But I am completely against stationing foreign troops. Sir, a tiny Singapore's influence cannot be compared to that of US. They genuinely need airspace, US don't need our ports.

Indeed we will not be.

We will not obviously not permit use of our bases to undertake military actions that do not coincide with our strategic aims.

It is an Alliance that is bounden to assist in the other countries operations. We are not an "Alliance".

We signed and had the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation 1971 that specified mutual strategic cooperation. Did that make us an Alliance?

Off course not. With all due respect Sir, didn't we end up modelling our economy on USSR. Look what good it did. Didn't we end up having a licence raj, central planning, massive subsidies and near bankruptcy.

One has to understand the Chinese and their mentality. They chanted the Panch Sheel and its off shoot Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai. All were taken in and then..........1962!
While exulting on fraternal brotherhood with USSR, they went on to attack USSR at the Ussuri River.
They waxed on fraternal brotherhood with Vietnam and then went to war with Vietnam.
China will not forsake her hegemonic adventure.
Therefore, while you may feel China will settle the border issue, I, having studied them, are very, very doubtful.

Formally not so much, but informally it can be done as IMO China would like to focus more on East and South East Asia. And getting India off it's back can be a boon to them, hence my optimism.

 

[Ray]

The problem is not giving logistics assistance to US Forces or their air/naval craft. The problem begins with their text of the treaty.

CISMOA and BECA which Americans want India to sign, mentions quite restrictive use of their technological products and restrictive procedures to maintain and replace them. The restrictions were so severe that after a few years of operating INS Jalashwa/USS Trenton, Indian Navy decided to replace all of their electronic gadgets with Indian/Israeli/French replacements, just to avoid their intrusive inspections, which was nothing but an affront to Indian operational sovereignty. Hello, we bought with hard cash, NO? Its not an aid !!

Similarly, India bought Boeing BBJ for VIP travel and installed RWR, MAWS and other EW safety electronics in them from Americans. After a year, there was serious friction between Indian Air Force and US DOD over annual intrusive inspections and annual counting of their products. That was one reason why when Americans wanted India to sign CISMOA, BECA and LSA during 2005-2009, AK Antony was pressurised by Indian Military services to not sign those restrictive clauses. The benefit was minor which could be supplanted by electronic stuff from other countries but loss of operational sovereignty was severe. So we got P-8I, C-17, C-130J without their electronic gadgets and we have not missed their gadgets so far.

LSA had some other kind of opposition. As I said earlier, India has no problem with supplying or maintaining American air/naval craft at Indian bases. What India will never agree to is the expectation that a portion of all Indian bases would be reserved for exclusive American use (with perfunctory annual Indian inspection). Logistical assistance is different than logistical basing and India will never agree to the latter. So, instead of Americans insisting India to ign these three agreements, need of the hour is mutually writing a fresh agreement which is a win-win for both parties.

That is correct.

I am sure these will be ironed out or it will be a no go.

This part of the agreements is what is irksome and not allowing the use of bases.

 

[Ray]

Sir, who's to say we won't. Is there a guarantee that a nationalist government will be at helm forever? Modi is there right now, tomorrow it very well could be a Gandhi, a Yadav, a Karat or a Banarjee or worse. Nehru gave away Coco islands and involved us in the mess called Tibet, Gujral and Desai messed up our intelligence apparatus and MMS decided to vacate Siachen. If history has taught us anything it is that for every Prithvi Raj Chauhan we have 10 or more Jaichands.

I cannot deny that if we sign the treaty, there will not be Jaichand at a later date.

The flip side is sign and foster the bond to our advantage so that Jaichands of the future are hamstrung. Also has a clause that it will be reviewed every 5 years (term of the Govt).

Further, there is no guarantee that a Jaichand of the future will not totally sell the country.

I am all for the joint exercises. The more the merrier. But I am completely against stationing foreign troops. Sir, a tiny Singapore's influence cannot be compared to that of US. They genuinely need airspace, US don't need our ports.

Actually, the joint exercises are more dangerous since they learn of our tactics, mindset etc. After all, wars are won by men and men who man machines and not machines.

If one knows how an Army 'ticks', then one is armed to take on that Army.

Off course not. With all due respect Sir, didn't we end up modelling our economy on USSR. Look what good it did. Didn't we end up having a licence raj, central planning, massive subsidies and near bankruptcy.

Well, after Independence, the meagre wealth we inherited only lay with the Govt. Therefore, there was no option but to adopt a command economy. But Indians are sharp cookies and so they started milking the system, but you can hardly blame the idea that necessitated the command economy. With all its disadvantages, it did lay the foundations of modern India on which we are now build upon. Just look at Pakistan. It had laissez faire. See where it is. To be frank, it was Indira Gandhi, who did good work otherwise, but she exploited the system to its being reviled totally. Narashima Rao, was the real architect who turned India. And today, we are in a different ballpark. That, however, does not mean that the earlier system before the morass set in, was totally flawed.

Formally not so much, but informally it can be done as IMO China would like to focus more on East and South East Asia. And getting India off it's back can be a boon to them, hence my optimism.

Of course, China would like to look East. That is where the gold lies in the Sea.

But she will spout pious platitudes and homilies to 'disarm' India that a border agreement is near and then after consolidating in the East, will turn with vengeance to India. Why do you think they are building infrastructure rapidly in Tibet and Xinjaing? They love the Tibetans and Uighurs? Not at all. They are deep thinkers and sees ahead. That is why they lulled India and then attacked in 1962, They had plans to expand their hold over area that bordered Tibet claiming it was a part of Tibet. The problem festers even now and which they want to fester so that India is diverted from becoming stronger by squandering finances on defence.

Why do you think the occupied Tibet? They see way way ahead, unlike us, who are lulled by sweet words and our ego massaged regularly.

And never forget the "Peaceful Rise" humbug that took in the US. During the so called 'Peaceful Rise', she rose with all asset that was hardly peaceful and now the US regrets it.

Trusting a Communist Chinaman is facing a bowler who bowls a Chinaman. Dicey and Deceptively Dangerous.

The latest ego massage by certain countries who have their axe to grind and to which we have succumbed is that India is a budding superpower. We are hardly anywhere near it.

 

[hit&run]

Well, the details will come out late or may never be shared. GoI will always do balancing act to keep anti west lobby and opportune political opposition serene and at the same time be realistic about threat perception.

Networking and Intel sharing during wartime is most important rest of the things like USA docking their ships and InN doing the same should be of no consequence to any nationalistic Indian. Our home department on terrorist threats has been already cooperating with USA.

As far as buying technology or JV is concern then I don't think we lack brains and experience not look after our interests. We have done many valuable mistakes to not to learn. We are still learning from our mistakes with Russians. Last I heard was Russians have shared source codes (If this the right word) or TOT of Brahmos with China.

The final point I would like to make is by asking what benefits USA will have using Indian bases ? I mean India will be better off in the scheme of things than USA.