US Offers To Match India's Ally Russia

[Yusuf]

US selects its partners very carefully, Under NATO one must give its resource for US cause, Under NATO ones view and concern is less matter but mutual view with others, And many more restriction on ones role in his region.

So far all that I have heard is concessions from the US recently. They want to be a "Russia"! Transfer tech, sell advanced stuff, asks india to take the lead and "act east". US has realized that it will have to devise a different policy for India and they are working hard at it.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

US selects its partners very carefully, Under NATO one must give its resource for US cause, Under NATO ones view and concern is less matter but mutual view with others, And many more restriction on ones role in his region.

India may not have to join NATO to get defense items. Take PHALCON AWACS as
an example no NATO nations have it.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Why will it not apply to an Asian NATO? As with the original treaty in the Atlantic, the one in Asia will have its share of heavy weights as some rather lots of smaller nations allying to secure their interests and also act as "poodles". india will not be a poodle. France comes to mind.

India presently is a regional power in south Asia and its influence is very solid, Any other nation in this region does give a think 'What Delhi would think about this action ' before taking steps includes even Australia, India dont need a NATO tag to conform its influence in the region..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

So far all that I have heard is concessions from the US recently. They want to be a "Russia"! Transfer tech, sell advanced stuff, asks india to take the lead and "act east". US has realized that it will have to devise a different policy for India and they are working hard at it.

I cannot take that coz US is not known for such behavior, this kind of talks are just commercial..

What India need what Israeli did in past..

India may not have to join NATO to get defense items. Take PHALCON AWACS as
an example no NATO nations have it.

X2

Kunal self reliance is always best but it takes time that India does not have in
the present security environment.

Than we must work harder, steps are taken in this direction..

1. India position is better than what was in past in reg-politics & Global - Politics..

2. In Military sense, We are lot better than what we were in late 80s in self-reliant and moving forward to this direction.


And these are only Improving in right direction..

 

[Bhadra]

So far all that I have heard is concessions from the US recently. They want to be a "Russia"! Transfer tech, sell advanced stuff, asks india to take the lead and "act east". US has realized that it will have to devise a different policy for India and they are working hard at it.

Amin or ammen what ever is better ! India does need assistance in technology. We have no dearth of theoreticians..

 

[Yusuf]

I cannot take that coz US is not known for such behavior, this kind of talks are just commercial..

What India need what Israeli did in past..



X2

They are being forced to change.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Amin or ammen what ever is better ! India does need assistance in technology. We have no dearth of theoreticians..

Building a industrial military infrastructure takes a long term commitment that Indian Govt
has never demonstrated. India has millions of engineers but where are the industries?
Even Chinese have to be hired to build India's infrastructure while India has excess of
civil engineers.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

They are being forced to change.

This cannot apply with US, We cannot force them, there are other means they can get the job done just it wont be easy..

 

[civfanatic]

Forming an alliance of the willing to safeguard common interests is not surrendering sovereignty or loosing self respect.

I agree. But we should be involved in such diplomatic commitments only so far as they protect these interests, and nothing more.

Not acting after a terror attack was a complete loss of self respect and shameless surrender of sovereignty.

The main reason we didn't attack Pak in 2008 was because of the U.S. presence of Afghanistan.

 

[Ripples]

This is just the beginning. Things are changing decisively and changing fast. I still strongly believe that Rafale is no way the right choice for IAF. Only US can provide us with the scarecrow to keep Chinese crows at bay.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

This is just the beginning. Things are changing decisively and changing fast. I still strongly believe that Rafale is no way the right choice for IAF. Only US can provide us with the scarecrow to keep Chinese crows at bay.

On your last point i agree that going with a french plane offers us little to no political
gain. But the decision has been made US was only country with 2 planes in the
MRCA so this stings even more.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-n...tan-france-to-enhance-broad-based-cooperation

Pakistan, France to enhance broad-based cooperation

 

[The Messiah]

This is just the beginning. Things are changing decisively and changing fast. I still strongly believe that Rafale is no way the right choice for IAF. Only US can provide us with the scarecrow to keep Chinese crows at bay.

 

[Zebra]

I agree. But we should be involved in such diplomatic commitments only so far as they protect these interests, and nothing more.

The main reason we didn't attack Pak in 2008 was because of the U.S. presence of Afghanistan.

So US presence do effect on Indian decisions. Even India is not US ally.

Flip it over, be a US ally, then do it again, attack on PoK, if things go against India.

Well Turkey did in North Iraq. First time they dropped it, bcz of US request. Second and third time they just keep going, even US army was there in Iraq at that time.

 

[roma]

i think the whole business of dumping one for the other eg russia for usa, or getting too close to one , fear of potentially becoming a poodle of th eusa shows a mindset that feels that we are incapable of managing our defence portfolio and we need to be in someone's camp . PRC communist china had dumped that attitude decades ago - they had gone it alone from the ideological point of view since inception of the CCP in 1934

INdia needs to be in charge of our own defence - we need to manufacture our own - this continual buying from others perpetuates the mentality of having to be in someone else's camp

of course at the start we have had to buy - but we are not at the beginning stages in most areas of technology unless it's new technology and indeed we dont have it .....its' a long road ahead and it involves getting rid of various forms of corruption and inefficiency

no short cuts on this on e and the education of the masses is probably the best answer given the highly complicated and entangled situation in india - the people at large are tho only ones who can solve this - educate them , let them decide

meanwhile it will be piece meal solutions for indias military - forget about long-term vision - just surviving from one challenge to another

perhaps the better way to do it is to break up the military units into smaller components to allow better management and accountability eg ISRO being an organization on it's own has fared pretty alright

 

[The Messiah]

So US presence do effect on Indian decisions. Even India is not US ally.

Flip it over, be a US ally, then do it again, attack on PoK, if things go against India.

Well Turkey did in North Iraq. First time they dropped it, bcz of US request. Second and third time they just keep going, even US army was there in Iraq at that time.

pakistan is us ally!!!

if usa really considered pakistan to be enemy or thought it was of no use any longer then they would have done the invading part themselves or turned on the screws. fact is usa still considers pakistan of some use against "growing powers" in the region.

us-paki relationship is like a quarreling marriage between husband and wife but is still a marriage at the end of the day...India is merely the sexy 3rd person with a potential of an affair. Another factor is that usa doesn't want India to get so powerful that we want them to be kicked out of the Indian ocean.

 

[The Messiah]

We dont need the yanks in anycase. We are not in danger of any invasion, only small battles like kargil. Nukes will fly long before any chini tank gets near patna let alone delhi. And that is assuming that chinis will be able to get past our army which they wont.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Bill, both Romney and Obama have been quite bullish on relationship with India, and their views are quite similar on this.

We need to work with the US on an equal level. There will be give and take, but we need to shed our old inhibitions of the cold war. Nobody is out to do anybody a favour.

Regarding US Pakistan, as long as both the countries shared a common goal and understanding the US kept on supplying weapons even when there were Dictators. The problem was with Pakistan, drifting towards China and adopting a jehadist mentality.

US had to pull the plug on pakistan because of their activities and not because of any back stabbing. You cannot harbor your allies enemy in your hinterland and continue to expect uninterrupted dole.

For India and US the paths of convergence are more than divergence. I say go for it and with the transfers in technology or with production units in India, we can built a robust defence industry in India.

Eye on China, Romney plays India card - Times Of India

Terming China a major foreign policy challenge for the US, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said that if elected, he would ensure strong ties with India to counter the Chinese influence.

INDOlink - International News: 'Obama-Manmohan's Working Relations Fantastic'

"President Obama developed a fantastic working relationship with Prime Minister Singh that you're well aware of. We recognize importance of India as an important regional and global power, and this why we are keenly interested in continuing to grow that relationship," Mike Hammer, Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, said on Thursday.

The U.S. looks to address "regional and global issues" of mutual concern between the two nations, Hammer said, noting that people from both the countries have "benefitted tremendously" from this relationship based on "common values".

Hammer also congratulated Pranab Mukherjee on being sworn in as the 13th President of India and said the U.S. would "look forward to work with him" as well.

Responding to a question on India-U.S. trade relationship and apprehensions in the U.S. about India's investment climate, Hammer said the U.S. has always looked for opportunities to promote American business and American jobs.

"As a way of promoting American businesses and jobs, we're always looking to advance free trade opportunities and develop the kind of important trade relations like the one with India, which, I think, can be beneficial to both countries," he said.

Acknowledging India as a crucial economic partner of the U.S., Hammer, however, pitched for "lower barriers" to ensure a "free and fair" level playing field to enable both the countries "compete" and look for best possible ways to "promote economic growth and business opportunities".

"When there's growth in India, that creates markets for American products," Hammer noted, calling for joint efforts for ensuring that "opportunities are available for U.S. businesses" to succeed and to promote "an investment climate that is beneficial and allows economic growth."

"U.S. will always be looking to create jobs for itself, but we also see that through our relationships and through increased trade, that does create increasing number of jobs not only in the country that we're partners with, but also at home. So I don't see a contradiction in that," Hammer said.

 

[The Messiah]

To be honest ewald i have always preferred the republicans although im sure our reasons may be different

 

[W.G.Ewald]

To be honest ewald i have always preferred the republicans although im sure our reasons may be different

I have never been a member of the GOP. Too far to the left. :-D

 

[civfanatic]

I have never been a member of the GOP. Too far to the left. :-D

You or the GOP ?