Defining Reliable Friends, India's Strategic Defense Relations

[hello_10]

thanks :thumb:

and just go though the thread as below and tell us few good reasons, why would we allow these people to help them more in this world? they have a war every year, 20,000+ scores of civilians they are making every year, by targetting different countries one by one, like Lybia in 2010-11, Syria in 2011-12 including ongoing bombing on the civilians of Afghan by drones, like a mad. with different criminal activites in developing countries, including buying our corrupts/criminals, to give them protection in UK, US????

we must have few real good reasons, why won't we resist these efforts by UK+US??????

just go though this thread one time, as below:

=> http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...-qaeda-has-backfired-united-states-putin.html

India needs to learn from Chinese model"

the problem with immature Indians here, if they want to go against fanatic Islam then they find themselves with Western group. and if they want to resist western dominance, then they find themselves moving towards the Islamic Jihadi groups who fight with christian religious Western dominance. while your main ground would be to resist both of that side and put your stand clearly. and on my side, I always keep space for any credible change in society etc also, which may benefit the society as a whole, but first it would prove itself worth/good for the common people, the society......

few days before I was talking that Indian rulers/diplomats gotto learn from Chinese model. you always have to understand that US/West always trying to give you disadvantage on the different businesses, hiding the facts/truth, and trying to cheat the nation, India. even if IT companies have export orders from west, they pay very high tax and deliver the best projects at a very less cost? India, in fact, suffer Trade Deficit with US+EU. you gotto think to the level that, "no business was ever done to benefit other side and if you down yourself on any issue then it simply means that you want to benefit other side." India just need to stick with the norms of WTO and keep kicking US/West, who want to first give losses to India on different businesses and at the same time they want to involve india in their different wars, which they have mainly organized to solve their 1000s Christian religious issues with Islam. first India won't become an arm of Christianity against Islam and at the same time Indian diplomacy gotto be well prepared to handle those western champions, mainly British and British origins of US/Australia/Canada, who always want some space to give losses to India, on the business side, political side and also doing wrong publicity about India, about indian society as whole.......

if india sell products to US then India buy from them also and in fact India suffer trade deficit from US+EU? and no business was done to benefit other side and if western firms recruit high qualified professionals then they do this after a long process of selection and then they pick only their people of interest, who may develop new techs for them, and inprove the exixsting technologies also. as, why would they bring people from overseas while their own unemployment rate is very high? and in fact, whenever US's president and UK's PM visit India, they mainly beg for jobs in India? and if they want high skilled migration then its in very limited number and to select the best people they may find from India or an indian origin from a foreign institute? India needs to stick with norms of WTO/UN and keep kicking those enemies who just want to destroy your country...........

Indians gotto learn to handle to different sides in different ways. if you talk to a pakistani national then present every aspect in front of him and if you then get to face a US's national then you then have to talk in a different way, considering that side of politics. with always taking care that a western citizen will only serve his nation, whether he/she is an Indian origin or not. an Indian American will only defend his nation and you have to defend your own country you are based in, the India. as, every good and bad of India is concerned with Indian nationals only, regardless what an American Indian say here to defend US/UK/Australia/Canada...............

in short, India needs to learn from Chinese model and get very high growth like China, like how China achieved the highest growth during last 30 years on its geo-political stand, much higher than India.....
see how this pig beg in India in behalf of his voters

David Cameron delivers address at Infosys Bangalore: Full Text
July 28, 2010

The Tata Group is now the largest manufacturing employer in Britain. And more than 180 Indian companies have invested in our IT sector.

Indian companies employ 90,000 people in the UK. Many more jobs in Britain exist thanks to the activities of British companies in India.:thunks: Now I want to see thousands more jobs created in Britain, and of course in India through trade in the months and years ahead. That is the core purpose of my visit ."

David Cameron delivers address at Infosys Bangalore: Full Text | NDTV.com

India's exports to European countries increased by about 16 per cent to USD 57.7 billion in 2011-12, while imports rose by about 29 per cent year-on-year to USD 91.5 billion.

Exports to Europe up 16%; imports 29%

 

[hello_10]

Nam's Relevance in the Emerging Multipolar World and India
September 1, 2012 Nam

The 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has kick-started at Tehran amid an intense debate about the Movement's relevance after the end of the Cold War and bipolar world. The media and public discourse about the NAM's utility and relevance has intensified in the backdrop of stiff US opposition to the Movement as a whole and questioning Tehran's right to host it in particular.

When you look back at the more than five-decade-old history of the NAM, you will find that the US was always opposed to the Movement which stood in the forefront of the fight against manifestations of neo-colonial and imperial designs of that country. While the former socialist countries lauded the objectives of the Movement and extended moral-political support to it, the US treated it as its foe saying "those who are not with us are against us". When the NAM stood for political and economic independence of the newly-liberated countries, its member-states across the globe—be it in Asia, Africa or Latin America—were thoroughly destabilised in the most brazen manner, of course with US connivance.

The NAM was conceived as a grouping of countries that did not wish to be aligned with any of the two major military blocs—the NATO and Warsaw Pact—that emerged in the post–War world. People who question the relevance and utility of the NAM should ponder over the justification and relevance of the continuity of the NATO, which was set up to allegedly prevent export of communist revolution, while its rival, the Warsw Pact, has long disappeared from the global scene. The relevance and utility of the NAM is rightly justified by the neo-colonial policies manifested in the form of regime change across continents by the NATO headed by the arrogant sole superpower, the US.

The NATO's unilateral military intervention in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now its possible military action against Syria should not leave anybody in doubt that sovereign independent countries would be destabilised further if they do not fall in line with the US policy. If the 20th century would be remembered in history as the century that witnessed national liberation from colonial yoke, the 21st century is fraught with the danger of establishment of neo-colonial rule by the same old colonial powers headed by Britain, France and the US unless they are stopped on their tracks.

The NATO's unilateral military interventions, gunboat diplomacy, blackmail and arms-twisting policies cannot be stopped unless a powerful movement stands up to halt it. The NAM has that potential though it has been weakened over the years. This is precisely the reason why the US is so irritated with the Movement. Washington questioned the right of Tehran to host the NAM Summit, and asked UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon not to attend it. It is commendable that the UN-Secretary General, using his independence of mind, is participating in the Tehran Summit. This is a double slap on the US' face. The Summit is being attended by 35 heads of state and government, and Minister-level delegations from almost 80 countries. The only countries which are absent at the Summit are the US puppet regimes of the Gulf monarchies.

While the rationale of the existence of the NAM was called into question after the end of the bipolar world, many member-states, including India, a founder-member of the Movement, very judiciously argued against disbanding the organisation and pleaded in favour of continuing with the Movement.

The term non-alignment was coined by our first Prime Minister, Pandit Nehru, in his speech in 1954 at the Colombo conference, which became a milestone event toward building the Non-Aligned Movement in subsequent years. Nehru's concept of non-alignment brought this country significant international prestige, particularly among newly independent states, that shared India's concern about military confrontation between the two superpowers and enhanced our position in global affairs. New Delhi effectively used non-alignment to ensure a major role for itself as a leader of the newly independent world in multilateral international bodies such as the UNO and NAM.

Non-alignment presupposes participation in international politics by countries having no bloc affiliation. At the same time it does not mean passive neutrality or equidistance from the military blocs. It is neither a policy of silence for fear of the big brothers nor a policy of isolation from world affairs. But it is rather a strategy to take judicious decisions on all important issues according to one's own independent judgement of right and wrong. In this connection it is worth recalling Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's words at the Seventh NAM Summit held in Delhi in 1983. Mrs Gandhi emphatically said: "Non-alignment is not negative, not neutral; and we cannot risk any shadow on our freedom of judgement and action. We have no quarrel with any group of nations, But we speak out against injustice." India under Indira Gandhi attempted to reassert its prominent role in the NAM by focussing on the relationship between disarmament and economic develop-ment. By addressing the developmental issues of developing countries, Indira Gandhi and her successors exercised a moderating influence on the NAM, by diverting it from some vexed Cold War issues.

♦

Fiftyone years after the NAM's foundation in Belgrade, the world may have survived the spectre of mutually assured destruction of the Cold War period. But in the unipolar world that has since emerged and is led by the sole super-power, the US, what we witness is a grotesque rebirth of neo-colonial wars, aggression, regime changes through use of brute force, destabilisa-tion of sovereign, independent nations, return to arms-twisting, gunboat diplomacy, black-mailing tactics and, ironically, a renewed threat of nuclear war—the very causes of malevolence that had motivated the formation of the NAM in the early 1960s. Neo-colonialism and neo-imperialism, manifest in the brazen interven-tions of the US and its NATO allies, have started hitting the sovereign countries where it hurts the most.

International laws, all benign international organisations, including the UN and its Security Council, have fallen victim to US hegemony and unilateralism. The post-Cold War era has seen more brazen interventions in the internal affairs of sovereign countries than before. And these have happened in the name of humanitarian interference, defence of democracy and human rights. It has seen more wars, more aggressions, more intimidations, more violence than in the bi-polar world of the Cold War era. The NAM may have lost some of its lustre, strength and momentum over the years but certainly not its purpose, goals and relevance. It still remains the largest world body (with 120 members and 17 observers)—the "biggest peace movement" in the global arena, to use Indira Gandhi's words—after the UN General Assembly. It represents nearly 55 per cent of the world's population and two-thirds of the UN body. :thumb: Of course, a new lease of life has to be breathed into the Movement through a strong leadership and a new vision but surely the Movement should not be disbanded or thrown into the dustbin by using the bogey of 'lost relevance and outlived utility'.

The NAM is not just the brainchild of India along with some other states, it stands for principles which India since independence has always espoused and pursued in international affairs: sovereign equality of states, respect for territorial integrity, a just, democratic, equitable world order and progress of the developing countries through accelerated socio-economic development. As a founding member of the NAM India has relentlessly and consistently worked to ensure that the Movement moves forward on the basis of cooperation and constru-ctive engagement rather than confrontation. India's broad approach to the Movement in general and to the Tehran summit in particular should be oriented towards channelling the NAM's energy to concentrate on issues that unite rather than divide its diverse and disparate membership so that the Movement can continue to serve as an effective mechanism for addressing the genuine concerns of the developing countries.

India's foreign policy with non-alignment as its cornerstone, shaped by Jawaharlal Nehru, has been diluted to some extent over the years. India's autonomy in foreign policy-making has been eroded during the last several years, which is reflected in numerous cases starting from our vote in favour of taking Iran's nuke issue to the UNO, the abandonment of the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project under US pressure to its voting pattern in the UN Security Council on a host of issues. India is tailoring its policy taking the possible US reaction into account and under its close watch. It is sacrificing the cardinal principles of our foreign policy in the name of 'pragmatism and realism'. Our first Prime Minister and the architect of independent India's foreign policy, Jawaharlal Nehru, once spoke with clarity on the issue as far back as in 1946 when he emphatically said: "I am not prepared even as an individual, much less as the Foreign Minister of this country, to give up my right of independent judgement to anybody else in other countries. That is the essence of our policy." India needs to do some introspection on the issue of making independent judgement in matters related to foreign policy articulation without the fear of the big brother or global hegemon.

We should no doubt strengthen our ties with the US. But this should not happen at the cost of our relations with other states, more so at the cost of Iran—our declared strategic partner. We need this strategic partnership with Iran for meeting our energy requirements; for resolving important issues concerning Afghanistan, Pakistan; for getting easy access to Afghanistan, Central Asia and other countries of the CIS and Middle East. We can ill-afford to spoil this strategic partnership for the sake of our relations with some other country, howsoever important it might be. In this connection it is worth mentioning the well-argued document prepared by some eminent foreign policy experts under the title "Non-alignment 2-0: A Foreign and Strategy Policy for India in the Twentyfirst Century". The document rightly stresses that the core objectives non-alignment were to ensure that India did not define its national interests or approach to world politics in terms of ideologies and goals that had been set elsewhere, that India retained maximum strategic autonomy to pursue its own development goals and that India worked to build national power as the foundation for creating a more just and equitable global order. The document further says that our objective should be to enhance India's strategic space and capacity for independent policy-making which will create maximum options for our own internal development. This should be taken note of seriously by our foreign policy-making experts and officials.

The US has been publicly urging India to leave the NAM. In this backdrop it is welcome that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is attending the Tehran NAM Summit, which gives us an opportunity to reassert our position in the Movement and impart new guidelines and a fresh vision as well as renewed momentum to the NAM while reinventing our strategic partnership with Iran.

Nam

 

[hello_10]

Nam's Relevance in the Emerging Multipolar World and India
September 1, 2012 Nam

The 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has kick-started at Tehran amid an intense debate about the Movement's relevance after the end of the Cold War and bipolar world. The media and public discourse about the NAM's utility and relevance has intensified in the backdrop of stiff US opposition to the Movement as a whole and questioning Tehran's right to host it in particular.

When you look back at the more than five-decade-old history of the NAM, you will find that the US was always opposed to the Movement which stood in the forefront of the fight against manifestations of neo-colonial and imperial designs of that country. While the former socialist countries lauded the objectives of the Movement and extended moral-political support to it, the US treated it as its foe saying "those who are not with us are against us". When the NAM stood for political and economic independence of the newly-liberated countries, its member-states across the globe—be it in Asia, Africa or Latin America—were thoroughly destabilised in the most brazen manner, of course with US connivance.

The NAM was conceived as a grouping of countries that did not wish to be aligned with any of the two major military blocs—the NATO and Warsaw Pact—that emerged in the post–War world. People who question the relevance and utility of the NAM should ponder over the justification and relevance of the continuity of the NATO, which was set up to allegedly prevent export of communist revolution, while its rival, the Warsw Pact, has long disappeared from the global scene. The relevance and utility of the NAM is rightly justified by the neo-colonial policies manifested in the form of regime change across continents by the NATO headed by the arrogant sole superpower, the US.

The NATO's unilateral military intervention in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now its possible military action against Syria should not leave anybody in doubt that sovereign independent countries would be destabilised further if they do not fall in line with the US policy. If the 20th century would be remembered in history as the century that witnessed national liberation from colonial yoke, the 21st century is fraught with the danger of establishment of neo-colonial rule by the same old colonial powers headed by Britain, France and the US unless they are stopped on their tracks.

The NATO's unilateral military interventions, gunboat diplomacy, blackmail and arms-twisting policies cannot be stopped unless a powerful movement stands up to halt it. The NAM has that potential though it has been weakened over the years. This is precisely the reason why the US is so irritated with the Movement. Washington questioned the right of Tehran to host the NAM Summit, and asked UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon not to attend it. It is commendable that the UN-Secretary General, using his independence of mind, is participating in the Tehran Summit. This is a double slap on the US' face. The Summit is being attended by 35 heads of state and government, and Minister-level delegations from almost 80 countries. The only countries which are absent at the Summit are the US puppet regimes of the Gulf monarchies.

While the rationale of the existence of the NAM was called into question after the end of the bipolar world, many member-states, including India, a founder-member of the Movement, very judiciously argued against disbanding the organisation and pleaded in favour of continuing with the Movement.

The term non-alignment was coined by our first Prime Minister, Pandit Nehru, in his speech in 1954 at the Colombo conference, which became a milestone event toward building the Non-Aligned Movement in subsequent years. Nehru's concept of non-alignment brought this country significant international prestige, particularly among newly independent states, that shared India's concern about military confrontation between the two superpowers and enhanced our position in global affairs. New Delhi effectively used non-alignment to ensure a major role for itself as a leader of the newly independent world in multilateral international bodies such as the UNO and NAM.

Non-alignment presupposes participation in international politics by countries having no bloc affiliation. At the same time it does not mean passive neutrality or equidistance from the military blocs. It is neither a policy of silence for fear of the big brothers nor a policy of isolation from world affairs. But it is rather a strategy to take judicious decisions on all important issues according to one's own independent judgement of right and wrong. In this connection it is worth recalling Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's words at the Seventh NAM Summit held in Delhi in 1983. Mrs Gandhi emphatically said: "Non-alignment is not negative, not neutral; and we cannot risk any shadow on our freedom of judgement and action. We have no quarrel with any group of nations, But we speak out against injustice." India under Indira Gandhi attempted to reassert its prominent role in the NAM by focussing on the relationship between disarmament and economic develop-ment. By addressing the developmental issues of developing countries, Indira Gandhi and her successors exercised a moderating influence on the NAM, by diverting it from some vexed Cold War issues.

♦

Fiftyone years after the NAM's foundation in Belgrade, the world may have survived the spectre of mutually assured destruction of the Cold War period. But in the unipolar world that has since emerged and is led by the sole super-power, the US, what we witness is a grotesque rebirth of neo-colonial wars, aggression, regime changes through use of brute force, destabilisa-tion of sovereign, independent nations, return to arms-twisting, gunboat diplomacy, black-mailing tactics and, ironically, a renewed threat of nuclear war—the very causes of malevolence that had motivated the formation of the NAM in the early 1960s. Neo-colonialism and neo-imperialism, manifest in the brazen interven-tions of the US and its NATO allies, have started hitting the sovereign countries where it hurts the most.

International laws, all benign international organisations, including the UN and its Security Council, have fallen victim to US hegemony and unilateralism. The post-Cold War era has seen more brazen interventions in the internal affairs of sovereign countries than before. And these have happened in the name of humanitarian interference, defence of democracy and human rights. It has seen more wars, more aggressions, more intimidations, more violence than in the bi-polar world of the Cold War era. The NAM may have lost some of its lustre, strength and momentum over the years but certainly not its purpose, goals and relevance. It still remains the largest world body (with 120 members and 17 observers)—the "biggest peace movement" in the global arena, to use Indira Gandhi's words—after the UN General Assembly. It represents nearly 55 per cent of the world's population and two-thirds of the UN body. :thumb: Of course, a new lease of life has to be breathed into the Movement through a strong leadership and a new vision but surely the Movement should not be disbanded or thrown into the dustbin by using the bogey of 'lost relevance and outlived utility'.

The NAM is not just the brainchild of India along with some other states, it stands for principles which India since independence has always espoused and pursued in international affairs: sovereign equality of states, respect for territorial integrity, a just, democratic, equitable world order and progress of the developing countries through accelerated socio-economic development. As a founding member of the NAM India has relentlessly and consistently worked to ensure that the Movement moves forward on the basis of cooperation and constru-ctive engagement rather than confrontation. India's broad approach to the Movement in general and to the Tehran summit in particular should be oriented towards channelling the NAM's energy to concentrate on issues that unite rather than divide its diverse and disparate membership so that the Movement can continue to serve as an effective mechanism for addressing the genuine concerns of the developing countries.

India's foreign policy with non-alignment as its cornerstone, shaped by Jawaharlal Nehru, has been diluted to some extent over the years. India's autonomy in foreign policy-making has been eroded during the last several years, which is reflected in numerous cases starting from our vote in favour of taking Iran's nuke issue to the UNO, the abandonment of the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project under US pressure to its voting pattern in the UN Security Council on a host of issues. India is tailoring its policy taking the possible US reaction into account and under its close watch. It is sacrificing the cardinal principles of our foreign policy in the name of 'pragmatism and realism'. Our first Prime Minister and the architect of independent India's foreign policy, Jawaharlal Nehru, once spoke with clarity on the issue as far back as in 1946 when he emphatically said: "I am not prepared even as an individual, much less as the Foreign Minister of this country, to give up my right of independent judgement to anybody else in other countries. That is the essence of our policy." India needs to do some introspection on the issue of making independent judgement in matters related to foreign policy articulation without the fear of the big brother or global hegemon.

We should no doubt strengthen our ties with the US. But this should not happen at the cost of our relations with other states, more so at the cost of Iran—our declared strategic partner. We need this strategic partnership with Iran for meeting our energy requirements; for resolving important issues concerning Afghanistan, Pakistan; for getting easy access to Afghanistan, Central Asia and other countries of the CIS and Middle East. We can ill-afford to spoil this strategic partnership for the sake of our relations with some other country, howsoever important it might be. In this connection it is worth mentioning the well-argued document prepared by some eminent foreign policy experts under the title "Non-alignment 2-0: A Foreign and Strategy Policy for India in the Twentyfirst Century". The document rightly stresses that the core objectives non-alignment were to ensure that India did not define its national interests or approach to world politics in terms of ideologies and goals that had been set elsewhere, that India retained maximum strategic autonomy to pursue its own development goals and that India worked to build national power as the foundation for creating a more just and equitable global order. The document further says that our objective should be to enhance India's strategic space and capacity for independent policy-making which will create maximum options for our own internal development. This should be taken note of seriously by our foreign policy-making experts and officials.

The US has been publicly urging India to leave the NAM. In this backdrop it is welcome that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is attending the Tehran NAM Summit, which gives us an opportunity to reassert our position in the Movement and impart new guidelines and a fresh vision as well as renewed momentum to the NAM while reinventing our strategic partnership with Iran.

Nam

I dont understand why the newspapers keep destroying links of their own news

the new link of the above news is as below :thumb:

Nam's Relevance in the Emerging Multipolar World and India - Mainstream Weekly

Nam's Relevance in the Emerging Multipolar World and India - Mainstream Weekly

 

[hello_10]

I would like to keep a record of my own concept/advise on the POK issue as below. I made these posts before on DFI but I would like to keep its record in this thread, the thread which is concerned with discussing India's strategic relations, while concerning with mainly US, China, Russia :thumb:


=> India's Strategic Position on POK, (Pak Occupied Kashmir)

An Indian Stand on the Border Dispute with Pakistan on the Pak Occupied Kashmir issue is as below, in the light of historical facts and agreements signed at the time of freedom of both the countries.......:thumb:

this article below represents Indian claim on POK but I find partition of Kashmir was done in the same as rest of other border states of India-Pakistan. for example, "East Bengal" went to Pakistan and "West Bengal" to India, "East Punjab" to India and "West Punjab" to Pakistan, 'Sindh' to Pakistan and 'Gujarat' to India and hence, POK to Pakistan and Indian Kashmir, the crown of India

while on my own side, when I was to open my mouth on this issue and I found people of POK more willing to come to join India, once I proposed $60billion offer to Pakistan in return of POK, which will make them free of whole external debt, and it may then be saved by Indian side too on long run by saving on the military expanses on the border of Pakistan over LOC, they spend right now to avoid infiltration. my personal level proposal :ranger:

Spineless India, Cunning Pakistan, Toothless UN

Despite of three all out wars between India and Pakistan only one in 1947 was fought by India to regain its own territory illegally occupied by invader Pakistan. On October 22, 1947 Pakistani army disguised as tribals and branded as Mujjahiddins invaded Jammu & Kashmir then an independent princely state ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh. The ruler of Kashmir, who on October 26, 1947 using the provisions of Indian Independence Act 1947 passed by the British Parliament merged his state with India. By virtue of the signed Instrument of Accession, the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir like other more than 500 princely states of pre-partition India became integral part of India. Thereafter Indian army initiated military actions to push out disguised Pakistani army out of own territories in Jammu & Kashmir but before regaining entire territories illegally occupied by Pakistan J. M. Nehru the then Indian prime minister unilaterally declared ceasefire on January 1,1948.

Just one day before unilaterally declaring cease-fire, the Indian Prime Minister J. M. Nehru declared to conduct plebiscite in Jammu & Kashmir. J. M. Nehru's offer of Plebiscite in UN on December 31, 1947 itself was unauthorized and illegal. First of all Nehru had no right or powers to offer plebiscite in Jammu & Kashmir in UN or anywhere else due to signing and acceptance of Instrument of Accession on October 26, 1947 as the Jammu & Kashmir had become integral part of India. If at all, any one had the right or power to declare plebiscite or cede any territory to any other country in any part of India it was Indian Parliament and that was under process of coming into existence. The Constituent Assembly, which was in existence at that time was constituted with only objects to bring the Indian constitution and parliament into existence and had no powers or rights to take any decision to conduct plebiscite or cede any territory of India to any other country.

Jammu & Kashmir - Spineless India, Cunning Pakistan, Toothless UN : Peace Kashmir

=> The Point of Paying $60billion for POK, why?

the above proposal was a response to the question raised by one pakistani national, "what pakistan got this way after so many conflicts with India?" and this proposal was meant to make Pakistan in "no loss" position. Defense expenditure of Pakistan was around $4.2billions in 2009 and it was assumed by us that Pakistan might be spending around $1.0 billion in addition due to its conflicts with India, as anyhow they need a defence similar to ASEAN nations, even if they dont have any conflict with India. and after 64 years of Independence in 1947, Pakistan has got $64billions foreign debt and this $64billions offer will eventually make them in the position of no loss with India.

it was also cleared that meaning of Foreign Debt is much more than Internal debt as even if you spend more on the defence, it is then kept inside the country and the military personnel/arm industries also pay direct tax on it, and then they spend that money inside the country itself generating Indirect tax also this way. hence even if Pakistan was spending around $4.2billion on defence annually, as of 2009, it would be getting at least $2.0billions back as taxes. but if the money goes to foreign, its the total loss..... hence, meaning of Foreign Debt is much more than internal debt and a struggling economy of Pakistan may suddenly become a healthy economy this way.

2nd, the offer was made in the light of the news that Pakistan could lease POK to China, so why not to India, as Kashmiris are in fact very different to Chinese. and also we won support on our stand on the facts that even if Pakistan is an "All Weather Friend" of China, its the POK, from where the support/arms go to "Xinxiang Uighur Autonomous Region" of China, making it the only terrorism affect state of China. while even if India is considered as an rival of China, there is no such export of terrorism from India to China. and POK under control of India will also give an assurance of peace to Xinxiang state of China this way....
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/gilgit-baltistan/31577-pakistan-lease-gilgit-baltistan-china.html

3rd, Time Frame: the time frame of the above proposal is based on that certain time when Pakistan may not be able to keep Baluchistan with it. and that certain time would be the best for Pakistan to get rid of its total foreign debt this way, for promising a bring future for at least the rest of people based in Punjab+Sindh .........

4th, the proposal would come with offering Indian Citizenship to around 3.0mil people of Jammu and Kashmir and 2.0mil of Gilgit-Baltistan, a total of around 5.0 millions population of this certain region, with separating all those migrants who aren't belonging of POK :thumb:

this deal would bring total Northern Area, POK, in green of the map as below, with leaving the issue of that part of POK which Pakistan has gifted to China .......

Gilgit-Baltistan - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jammu and Kashmir - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Uighurs and China's Xinjiang Region

XUAR (Xinxiang Uighur Autonomous Region), or East Turkistan, is a territory in western China that accounts for one-sixth of China's land and is home to about twenty million people from thirteen major ethnic groups, the largest of which (more than eight million) is the Uighurs [PRON: WEE-gurs], a predominantly Muslim community with ties to Central Asia. The Uyghur American Association (UAA) says that East Turkistan is a part of Central Asia, not of China. Some Uighurs call China's presence in Xinjiang a form of imperialism, and there have been movements for independence since the1990s through separatist groups like the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), inflamed in part by large migrations of Han Chinese to the region.

In February 2012, at least a dozen people died after being attacked on the street by Muslims armed with knives near Kashgar, the western part of Xinxiang located near China's border with Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. After the Chinese government said the men involved had links to terrorists in Pakistan, a Chinese woman was also killed in Pakistan in what was considered a retaliatory attack. China claims the rioters were trained in Pakistan and has asked Pakistan to take "credible measures" to safeguard its citizens. XUAR shares borders with five Muslim countries--Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan--which seems to be a Chinese concern. The China-Pakistan relationship in particular has been strained by the recent killings, and questions about China's traditional friendship with Pakistan are rising.

Terrorism and Counterterrorism

During the 1990s, Uighur separatist groups in Xinjiang began frequent attacks against the Chinese government. The most famous of these groups was the ETIM, labeled as a terrorist organization by China, the United States, and the UN Security Council. China claims the group has links to al-Qaeda and says that they were trained in jihadi terror camps in Pakistan to launch attacks in Urumqi. Reports say Pakistani officials have also admitted that the militants in western China have ties to the Pakistani Taliban and other militants in northwestern Pakistani regions along the Afghan border. Pakistan, a close ally, has assured China of full support to contain terrorism in China. Concern about Uighur terrorism flared in August 2008--just days before the Beijing Olympics--when two men attacked a military police unit (NYT) in Xinjiang, killing sixteen.

Uighurs and China's Xinjiang Region - Council on Foreign Relations

=> one comparison between India's and China's border disputes as below....

Border Disputes of India Vs China:

there is difference between border disputes, India and the China have with its neighbors, I explain it as below:

1st. China has border disputes with that Taiwan whose governments have been a puppet to US against China under over 66% majority governments. Taiwan, whose every strength was used against China during 80s, 90s and last decade under over 66% voting of the governments they elected but now they look like have surrendered to China.

and again, China has border disputes with India on Arunanchal Pradesh whose every system wants to fight against CHina in case of any war. Arunanchal Pradesh is that part of India who wants to fight against China's claim over it, many voting were also done in this regard, and mainly Mr D.Lama lead those people who consider him like a Lord.....

a straight and bottomline difference between border disputes, India and China have with its neighbors...............

2nd, India has border dispute with that Pakistan on Kashmir issue whose every state wants separation from Pakistan. Indian Kashmir has an "Elected State Democratic Government", while POK is now the most peaceful part of Pakistan. rest, neither Muhajir's want Karachi to go on the control of rest of Pakistanis, neither Balochistanis itself have their mid-set with the mainstream of Pakistan and want independence, and not even the North West state of Pashtun's Pakistan ever wanted Punjabi dominance over them and want to go with their Pashtun brothers of Afghanistan........ and with that, neither Indian Muslims also find Muhajirs of Pakistan in any good condition, which always give a lesson to Kashmiris too to always be ready to fight with infiltration from Pakistan to maintain their independence :thumb:

 

[hello_10]

India's Strategy on Economy/Trade Side

my view on the key issues

I would like to keep a record of the posts I made on few of the Economic's Strategy of India, as below: :ranger:

=>

India's external debt nearly trebles as trade deficit widens - The Times of India

COIMBATORE: With the trade deficit increasing, the country's external debt has nearly trebled and has the potential to fuel an already high inflation. The external debt has risen to $365 billion in the third quarter of 2012 from $137 billion during the same period in 2006.

if external debt of India is at around $365billion right now, it has foreign reserve at around $290billion also which means for buying debts of US and other countries???? I mean, India itself keep around $290billion in the foreign countries this way, mainly in US????

at the same time, India not only have foreign investment but also it has Investment in foreign countries as below???? widening trade deficit is an issue and it requires further depreciation of Indian rupees to make the import expansive enough to be imported, thats it. and if we have a look on the inflation India had since 2006, around 6.5% on average inflation since 2002, while 1USD = Rs 50 even in 2002, then there is no reason why India won't depreciate its currency to at least at a reasonable level which may reduce its import in the same way.....

Indian Rupee to US Dollar Exchange Rate Graph - Feb 24, 2003 to Feb 21, 2013

we find Indian companies making around $2.0 billion to $4.0 billion foreign investment every month as below: (I couldn't find total overseas investment amount, can someone do this???)

Overseas direct investment by India Inc soared by 179 per cent in the month of January to $3.303 billion against $1.184 billion in the year-ago period.

Indian companies' overseas investment in the first 10 months of the current financial year have been about $3 billion lower, aggregating $23.325 billion ($26.468 billion).

Business Line : Industry & Economy News : India Inc's investment abroad jumps 179% in January

there is no problem on the external trade level except the fact that Indian Rupees would stand at around 1.0 INR = 1.5 Pakistani Rupees and 1.0 Yuan = 10 INR. and hence its true level would be at around 1.0 USD = 65 INR, somewhere close to it :thumb:


=>

India is looking at financial crisis ala 1991. We are going for BOP crisis. The west has no gold, india has loads. Easy way for west to acquire Indian gold is for situation to worsen.

Petrol is perhaps going to treble in price from todays rates- it has to. It accounts for biggest import bill. Socialism can take a country into quicksand, and we are already in this bog.

Consequences:
Food becomes expensive
Depopulated cities as people move back to villages to seek access to food
Realty values crash
Wide spread unrest


Even if UPA 3 comes to power we may for the very first time see something like storming the bastille in India.


Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk

Gold Import Keep India on Safe Side of Trade/ CAD

sir Gold has shown its price increase in the same way as oil price increase since 2003. there was almost similar increase in Gold price as Oil price, making Gold the best Return On Investment (ROI). hence buying gold has been a good sign, both for the aspect of high return on an investment, and also it has shown its export tendency too in the first quarter of 2009 when rupees suddenly got depreciated to the level 1 USD = Rs 50, from 1 USD = Rs 40 in just 3-4 months of that recession period. making the Gold price expansive in Indian market this way, than its $ value in the international market, hence was exported that time to help India maintain respect on the trade side during the recession period. as below:

Singapore: Investors in India, the world's largest gold consumer, sold 17 tonnes of bullion in the first quarter of 2009, marking its first disinvestment ever, while investment demand plunged more than 70% in Vietnam on import restrictions, industry data showed on Thursday.

India gold investment turns negative for first time - Livemint

I meant to say in my last post#8, that due to around 6.5% annual inflation since 2002, the prices of home products are around twice expansive this way, while the currency was depreciated by around 10% only since late 2002, making the import cheap this way as China suffered very less inflation during this period, making their products cheap enough to beat the Indian home manufactured products this way. and the same is true in case of import from Europe, where India suffers heavy trade deficit as below. even if depreciation of rupees will have an impact on the petrol/diesel prices, we do know that this item has a share of around 40% in Indian import bill and we can't import it more than this, so we do need to make them expansive enough to be less imported...............

you can't have luxury of cheap imported products for longer, and you do need to keep INR somewhere around 1.5 Pakistani rupees to 1 Yuan = 10 INR to reduce import bill, to make import expansive enough to be imported this way :thumb:

India's exports to European countries increased by about 16 per cent to USD 57.7 billion in 2011-12, while imports rose by about 29 per cent year-on-year to USD 91.5 billion.

Exports to Europe up 16%; imports 29%

rest, India is a Net Food Exporter so we dont have this problem "at present".......:ranger:


=> With CAD at a Reasonable Level, Only Two Things State About an Economy in Today's World

India headed for economic doom, prominent US thinktank says

India headed for economic doom, prominent US thinktank says - TOI Mobile | The Times of India Mobile Site

Indian economy is in a much better shape than the ability of US's think Tank...... better US would worry for their own economy, which is in a seriously bad shape, heavily indebted and just no future, in place of worrying about the Indian economy...... their these poor quality statements only means to state that now US is more willing to get help from the Indian economy, to avoid a set fall of their own economy, it may face by end of this decade, very likely

as a man who is just interested in economics, had just few subjects in my management studies but no professional degree in economics, but even I may say that Economic State of a country may well be measured on the basis of the below two main criterion only, in today's world :ranger:

1st, PMI Report:
Average Composite PMI of India for the year 2012 to last month was around 55, showing an expansion of around 10% in combined Manufacturing and Services both this way. which is considerably better in today's struggling world market. please check these news as below, with PMI for Manufacturing for the last month too

=> India's manufacturing PMI up at 54.2 in February 2013 | NetIndian

=>

Accordingly, the HSBC India Composite Output Index - which maps both the manufacturing and services index – stood at 56.3 in January, unchanged from December's reading.

India services PMI rises to one-year high in January: HSBC Markit - Indian Express

2nd, Investment to GDP
which has now come down to 30%, which India needs to raise. hence more investment is required this way, mainly high investment in Infrastructure to raise GDP numbers. but we do have a news of around $1.0trillion Investment in Infrastructure for the next 5 years, which is not high but not very low too......

https://www.cia.gov/library/publica...=India&countryCode=in®ionCode=sas&rank=19#in

and if average Composite PMI is well above 55 for the last 14 months, showing pretty good expansion of Manufacturing+Service industries this way, with 30%+ Investment to GDP ratio also, then even the low GDP growth number isn't a worry for a person like me, under these very bad external markets.... India only needs to increase Investment in infrastructure, thats it

 

[hello_10]

Western nations use Pakistan as an arm against India, like how pakistan served its purpose since 1947, as guided by the Britain/US/West, including during Cold War by full support of Western arms for Pakistan. when we talk to a pakistani nationalist, he/she would only be concered with good of pakistan while the people like Mr Musharraf are of the purpose to help the Western nations first, and then try for the Good of Pakistan along with it, if possible.......

=> Three Sides of World Politics: there are three type of people/sides in world in 'Power Game', the 1st one who is defending itself and the 2nd one the aggressor and then we find a third side, the 'Beneficiary' of any type of war/conflicts etc. and I would say that Pakistan has been aggressor with India since they lost East Pakistan in 1971, by terrorism in Punjab in early 80s, then it switched to Pakistan's support to militancy in Kashmir in between 1989 to 2007, and India only defended itself since 1972. while the 3rd side, British/US always try to get benefit out of any type of conflict between India and Pakistan by keeping Pakistan's rulers in their pocket. and since India qualified with China among the BRIC, the new big powers of world, India is now on the target of Western War Champions, similar to China and Russia. and here, you can't ignore 'Role' of US/UK in any type of conflict India may face, either from Pakistan or China . you always need to understand that if US can't control India then you are on their target, same as China and Russia op:

Criminals Know Ways of Crimes Only to Get Their Interests Done

few days before I was talking that Western War Champions understand the ways of getting their interests by wars only, the reason why they have every technique to find out wrong reasons, why things would go wrong...... for them, things are wrong as their economy/society is falling, so they always look for those reasons, why things are wrong, to get few good reasons to organize social/political/economical/military wras etc..... I was saying that if they have any good reason, then they may get their work done by just a cup of tea, they don't need to offer their women/money to criminals they brought in Australia. but as they know that they just can't discuss the things in a healthy way, as they have to fight and win few wars now, so obviously they always look for the wrong reasons to do wrongs......

and how exactly they performed during the wars they fought since WW2, I discussed it as below: :ranger:


=> US Lost Every War Since WW2

Without Any 'Proud' Performance Even in WW2 Too

Afghanistan has been the graveyard of empires.

rocky.idf ↑

thats the mistake people do while discussing about wars and whether you may continue hold the position for longer.......

what about Vietnam, a truly Asian country with Buddhist background? US had the similar experience there also, isn't it?

what about the UN's wars in African countries, these African militias are posing much more problem for the US's/UN's peace mission than the consequences they faced in Afghanistan???????

with the fact that, they could win over Saddam but they couldn't maintain hold in Iraq too, over $1.7 trillion dollar loss with 1000s of deaths of US's soldiers and Mr Bush was finally kicked with a 'shoe' ??????

from here, we do know that the oppositions of US like China, Russia including India, South America etc only got powerful since WW2. and even in WW2, Japan faced nuclear attack on the non-military cities, the reason why they surrendered to US????

I mean, its not just the Afghan but US lost almost every war since WW2. and their victory in WW2 too, isn't of very proud for the US/West, including victory over Nazi-German who were in fact defeated by the Russians :thumb:


=> Why US and Western Allies Won in Libya? at least

Further to the above talk, I was told by one member that at least in Libya, US and allies won after so many humiliation in most of the wars since WW2. and I answered as below:

In Libya, the opposition party won over the ruling person, who belongs to the Libya itself. it was more like how Bangladeshis, Mukti Bahini, won over Pakistan by help of India Army and formed 'majority' 'local' government this way. in Libya, people of locals fought for that war, over 50,000 rebels died to get the hold on Libya and they formed a 'majority' government this way. the Role of foreign military was limited to air strike only and then get Gaddafi killed when the rebels take over the state . in Libya, people of the same state won their war, who fought on the 'ground'. :thumb:

but its almost 'impossible' to take the people out of their home they are living in, win over a very different part of the world, as in case of Afghan, Iraq, Vietnam, African countries, including how the opposition of US like China, India, South America etc have got enough strength till ow too.

I mean to say, a Christian background, White US military lost heavy money with over 50,000 troops to Buddhist background Chinese Race Vietnamese in their 10 years efforts but all gone. similarly again, the Christian background, White Race US/NATO, lost over one trillion dollar in Iraq, with over 50,000 NATO troops too but lost finally after 6-7 years. and the same we see in Afghan and also in the troubling African wars with the local militants..........

its very simple that you can't enter in other's home and "Rule" over them. even if you had come to Iraq for few years, its only mean for losing over a trillion $ and 50,000+ troops to hold the position for few years only, the same thing happened in Vietnam too.... and similar experience they got in Afghan, continuing in Africa etc, with enough resistance from China, Russia, India, South America, ASEAN nations etc who have got heavy strength now......

and here we have example of WW2 again, which fits with the above theory. Japan surrendered to US after nuclear attack on the non-Military cities, for good of their own people, to defend themselves/ their own families. and Russians won over Nazi-Germany after losing over a million to defend the main Russian city, and then they chased them to Germany. but they first won their own land against the Germany and then they proceeded to Germany......:ranger:

 

[hello_10]

double post

 

[Ray]

I mean to say, a Christian background, White US military lost heavy money with over 50,000 troops to Buddhist background Chinese Race Vietnamese in their 10 years efforts but all gone. similarly again, the Christian background,

The earliest established religions in Vietnam were Mahayana Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism (called the three teachings or tam giáo). According to Pew Forum figures, most of the Vietnamese practice indigenous religions, worshiping local spirits, gods and mother goddesses (45.3%), as these religions have experienced a revival since the 1980s.[12] Buddhism is the second-largest religion with 16.4% of the population adhering, around 8% of the Vietnamese are Christians (mostly Catholics), and around 30% are religiously unaffiliated. Roman Catholicism, Caodaism, and Hoa Hao are the largest religions after Buddhism. Smaller minorities of adherents to Hinduism, Islam and Protestantism exist.

(Wiki)

Chinese Race Vietnamese

To the best of my knowledge there is nothing called Chinese Race Vietnamese. .

During the foreign domination of North Vietnam, several Indianized civilizations flourished in the central and south of what we know as Vietnam, particularly the Funanese and Cham. The founders and rulers of these governments, however, were not native to Vietnam. From the 10th century onwards, the Vietnamese, emerging in their heartland of the Red River Delta, began to conquer these civilizations.

In 111 BC, Han troops invaded Nanyue and established new territories, dividing Vietnam into Giao Chỉ (pinyin: Jiaozhi), now the Red River delta); Cửu Chân from modern-day Thanh Hoá to Hà Tĩnh; and Nhật Nam (pinyin: Rinan), from modern-day Quảng Bình to Huế. While governors and top officials were Chinese, the original Vietnamese nobles (Lạc Hầu, Lạc Tướng) from the Hồng Bàng period still managed some highlands

In 40 AD, the Trưng Sisters led a successful revolt against Han Governor Su Dung (Vietnamese: Tô Định) and recaptured 65 states (including modern Guangxi). Trưng Trắc became the Queen (Trưng Nữ Vương). In 43 AD, Emperor Guangwu of Han sent his famous general Ma Yuan (Vietnamese: Mã Viện) with a large army to quell the revolt. After a long, difficult campaign, Ma Yuan suppressed the uprising and the Trung Sisters committed suicide to avoid capture. To this day, the Trưng Sisters are revered in Vietnam as the national symbol of Vietnamese women.

In fact, southern China is of the Yues who were of the Yue stock that is in Vietnam.

The Chinese Yues were Sinicised, but the other Yues of Vietnam, who were attempted to be captured, threw out the Han and maintained their identity.

 

[hello_10]

here, i remember when I gave my letter to Russian Diplomat in mid 2010 in Sydney, my letter for Mr Putin, I clearly mentioned that, "United States of America is nothing but a Rogue Nation.", and I find my experience is very similar to life time experience of Mr Chavez too, as below:

Hugo Chavez

In power for 14 years, the late leader of the New Bolivarian Revolution, Hugo Chavez, has left enough memorable quotes for his successors. Part of his political legacy, some of the phrases showing great wit and sense of humor have made history.


International politics

"No part of the human community can live entirely on its own planet, with its own laws of motion and cut off from the rest of humanity."

"I hereby accuse the North American empire of being the biggest menace to our planet."

"We must confront the privileged elite who have destroyed a large part of the world."

"We're not perfect, but we do have democracy."

"It wouldn't be strange that there had been civilization on Mars, but once capitalism got there it would finish the planet." (2011)

"I think we are suffering from political impotence. We need political Viagra." (2006)

Hugo Chavez: Never lost for words — RT News

=> also I have mentioned many times that as per my experience, if you find a snake and a British/American/Australian/Canadian politician/Diplomat, then first kill that politician/diplomat, and later think about the snake......... and again I find my experience with Mr B.Clinton, Mr T.Blair, Mr J.Howard, and Mr G.Bush type people is very similar to the life time experience of Mr Chavez as below:

Hugo Chavez

"We've been around for 500 years and never shut up, much less to a monarch. The king is the head of state just like me. The only difference is I've been elected three times with 63 per cent. We are equal as heads of state, be it the leader of the Indian State Evo Morales or King Juan Carlos of Spain." (2007, to the demand of King Juan Carlos I of Spain to be quiet during the XVII Ibero-American Summit in Chile).

"Yesterday the devil came here. Right here. [crosses himself] This place still smells of sulfur." (after getting to the rostrum at the UN General Assembly the day after then-US President George W. Bush in 2006)

"Come here, Mr. Danger, coward, murderer, you're a mass murderer, you're an alcoholic, you're drunk, you're immoral, you are the worst, Mr. Danger, you're a sick, I know it personally"¦You're a fool, Mr. Danger, or to tell you in my bad English - you are a donkey, Mr. George W. Bush"¦ You are the worst I have seen on this planet. God save the world from this threat." (on the US president in 2006).

"Israel criticizes Hitler a lot, so do we, but they've done something very similar, even worse, than what the Nazis did." (visiting Iran in 2006)

"The Holocaust, that is what is happening right now in Gaza"¦The president of Israel at this moment should be taken to the International Criminal Court together with the president of the United States." (2009)

"Fascists are not human. A snake is more human."

Hugo Chavez: Never lost for words — RT News

=> and yes its all about freedom, as below

Hugo Chavez

"Being rich is bad and inhumane. So condemn the rich." (2005)

"Much of Europe's wealth comes from the mineral riches of the new world, which fed the coffers of the monarchies of Europe." (2007)

"The world has enough for everybody, but some minorities, the descendants of the same people that crucified Christ, and of those that expelled Bolívar from here and in their own way crucified him . . . have taken control of the riches of the world."

"If you get up at three in the morning to go to the bathroom, man, why you have to turn on that little light? Put the torch there on the nightstand." (2009, when announcing more measures to alleviate the energy crisis)

"If I keep quiet, the stones would cry out for the people of Latin America who are willing to be free after 500 years of colonialism."

Hugo Chavez: Never lost for words — RT News

 

[hello_10]

Common Geo-Political interests of India, Russia with China factor
(as explained in the next post as below about China's importance on defence side also)

Defining a Reliable Friend

=> few things are always very simple while discussing Indian-Russian friendship. for example of SU-India friendship which then continued till now as India-Russia friendship. India was made in the position to sign NPT while SU/Russia firmly supported Indian stand on NAM and its nuclear holding on the ground of its non-signatory of NPT. India got enough support from SU/Russia in terms of having Space Research techs while US simply doesn't want anyone else to challenge them in space technology. and similarly SU/Russia helped India in many Industrial development side. for example we talk about Chinese best J10/JF17 aircrafts whose even engine was supplied by Russia till 2010, as Russia was heavily industrialized till 1990 and again they have covered up the losses due to fall of SU. as we do talk that J10 is the best Chinese aircraft while the similar capable Mig29s were developed by SU/Russia by even 80s and India got full access of its techs. I just talked few days before that first ever Aircraft Career of China is in fact the Russian made which they gave to Ukraine in early 90s. Indian first man visited Space in 80s, Rakesh Sharma, while the first one of China did the same by last decade. Space Station MIR etc were nothing but the milestones which made US on the side of always being Jealous with SU/Russia. India enjoyed a long time of Military Superiority over China as India did have the next generation military equipments through SU/Russia while the same was not available for China, while being on opposite side of US/NATO also. for example of 5th gen PAK FA, with which India is involved from design to production with sharing all the key techs of Russia while Russia didnt do this type of favor with any other country of world. Indian first manned moon mission is also confident because of the facts of Russian assistance too.

and about the recent incidents happened on different defense deals between Russia and India, with India's willingness of buy US's arms. then still the same questions remain on the table even right now, which Mr Nehru and Ms I.Gandhi faced in 60s, 70s when they formed NAM. and I would like to ask other members here to make sure they do have answer of these few questions as below, the questions which made Indian rulers understand meaning of Russian friendship in 60s, 70s:

1st, are you getting military arms from US with full technology transfer? I mean, India got the Russian best SU30mki with 100% tech transfer from Raw to product, and full involvement in PAK FA project from design phase with sharing all the key techs of Russia. including full techs of Russian best T90 tanks, Russian best submarines are also offered in the same way for the Project 75I. is it the same while buying arms from US? even if not the same, does India get even 50% technology of the military arms they buy from US??????

2nd, we do know that few Apache, Transport aircraft etc, the US is supplying which is very superior than other customers. then also, I remember that even if China had hardly 2nd/3rd generation aircrafts by early 90s but they were capable enough to give a 'clear' warning to UK/US to hand over Hong Kong. and even right now also, China is unarguably more powerful than India, despite India get these best arms of Russia, and now from US also? then here, why we always find that Indians are so scared of military preparation while we find Gorakha Rifle/Rajputana Rifles are much more capable to win any war by just 2-3 arms of hands? why cowardness is always justified by Indian side and they always look unsecured while being threatened with China????? its in fact a shame that Russia has offered every key techs to India, which were always a dream for China and they have been trying to copy those russian tech in fact. but still India try for few arms from US as they are always threatened with China?

3rd, we do know that recent defence deals between India and Russia are troubling. but here, why would Russia lose its market of India if they themselves dont face problems and if they also face problems in supplying key defence arms to India then it has a simple meaning that we have to short out those problems. as we do have these production lines of defense arms which still need to be improved otherwise, buying arms from US simply means for a customer-supplier relation with keeping dependence on US forever, isn't it? we always need to make sure that we may build key arms, have key technologies by our own, and we must always be willing to work in this direction other than surrendering to US for military dependence/other technologies

meaning of my this long post has a simple question, "India needs to 'rely' on itself and try for those reliable friends who may help you being able to rely on yourself. you need to be capable enough to think to the level that 'reliability' is only means for being 'independent' on yourself for every technology :ranger:." and Im a strong fan of Chinese stand in this regard, that, even if they have inferior arms than US, but they are making these arms by themselves and I would like to see India also doing the same


=> Supply of few faulty Missiles to IAF and IN resulted in loss of few lives, a question raised one time....

I would like to state this side of defence also, a question raised one time: do we know, how many lives are compromised by Russian side also for making different arms, we get so easily? do you know that their own Nuclear submarine Akula-2 killed all of them during a test, while you got this same as 'secret' deal, the current Top Gun of Indian Navy. as we do know that US won't simply let get these key arms from Russia easily. do people know, how much US made noise when Russia wanted to transfer Cryogenic engines to India in 90s, which Russia finally transferred to India from back door???? while among other missiles, the Brahmos missiles are the finest and fastest missiles of world. things are always complicated while considering many issues altogether......

=> Russia says in race to bag mega sub deal - Indian Express

I presume it was because no one else was ready to share technology with India except Russia.

And Russia was not financially in a good position to take on the project themselves, IIRC.

Yes, TOT is a very important input since that will not makes us susceptible to sanctions.

Russian hydrogen based batteries are most dangerous to IN crew till date, All these batteries are replaced with German batteries..

Russian offers are attractive both Politically and economically, But not very safe for crew who operate them..

French can provide TOT and in due time DRDO will come up with its..
@Decklander

Yeah... that's not gonna happen. In case you missed it: £2 billion Spanish navy submarine will sink to bottom of sea - Telegraph Even with American help fixing it, they're still looking at an extra two years.

As for the rest, the German boats are probably too small for India's purposes and the Australians have already had bad luck modifying a Swedish design for a similar operational environment to India's.

The best AIP boats right now are Japan's, but they have issues with weapons export. However, there are some noises about cooperation with Australia, which is looking to build the largest AIP subs ever designed. http://asw.newpacificinstitute.org/?p=11560 Perhaps India could join the venture in some way or another.

... or you could just sign up for another *equal partnership* with Russia...

Thats the main issue. for example, if we compare SU30mki deal of India with Rafale, then we know that you may get few higher techs but even if you may get 70%+ tech transfer in Rafale deal then also you will be lucky. while Su30mki came with 100% tech transfer over the period of time, from raw to products, while its also fit in comparison to Rafale, a 4++ generation aircraft too....

we also have example of Scorpion Submarines Deal from France too. over 300% price hike has been taken place to date, with 4 years + delay to date, considering the best scenario of its delivery from 2016+, while full tech transfer will never be a possibility......

while Im mainly fan of China, whose submarines are of no comparison to the Western ones, but they have their technologies by themselves. and considering successful induction of Akula 2 recently, we find only Russia providing the Submarines, which are of the comparison to European ones, with full tech transfer over the period of time too :thumb:

i mean, you would either build arms by yourself like China, or go for the 100% tech transfer deals only, to help your domestic submarine projects too

 

[hello_10]

Well I have read that thread earlier, But don't think there is anything much for India, since India can't control it, its all upto Russia(i.e. putting china in front of west), and even if we have to, then put them like a Goat not making them bear which sooner or later will comeback to byte us. For Russia it might be a good thing, but not for India. Well keeping all this border issue and no progress in mind, would it still make a better choice to promote Chinese as a third or fourth lang?

you have to deal with two sides/ aspects of world politics, "one about the border conflicts and the second one about the geo-political issues...." here, you do need to put China on the front to deal the geo-political issues against the West........


Rise of China Provides Enormous Benefits to Developing Countries

Economic Aspect

First i would like to discuss the economic aspects of Rise of China..... i remember, there was a time in early 90s when India used to pay very high price for those 'used' Western machines which China sells for very low price now, check, as they could do this but you couldn't yet, to the extent China has done so. there was an Act of US, i forgot the name, which was for the purpose to apply on all those countries which may do research on the US's/West's technologies, the technologies which US got by using Indian High Qualified professionals itself........ similarly many other High Tech Products which China sells for very low price, so now US/West simply don't care of those techs which has been properly spread in world at a very low price by China. so now its available for the rest of the world also to do research on those High Tech Products now.....

I mean, "more the China goes forward on the areas of High Tech Products, more advance technologies they will produce and sell/export for a very low price, better it will be for the rest of the Newly Industrialized nations like India, Brazil, Thailand, Malaysia, Philippines, Mexico etc too as they will then have 'easy' availability of those techs"


Military Aspects

but I understand your concerns with China but we have to deal with 'Grey Areas' where the things are mixed up. one day I compare India with China with the wonders they have. out of the seven wonders of the world, Indian wonder is Taj Mahal which was made by an Indian king with his love with his wife, using talent of Indian born people, of course. and the China has 'Wall of China' which is sign of their defense preparation . the difference between two wonders of two biggest neighbors of Asian, one Taj Mahal sign of Love and one Wall of China, sign of best defense preparation

but I tell you one more comparison between India and China with rest of the world as below:

List of regions by past GDP (PPP) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

here you can see, Indian GDP was the highest till 16th century and was on the top in the list by 18th century also with around 27.5% share of world's GDP. here you find, China always shared top two position with India and made India on the second position in 17th century also, please check the table. and by the 19th and 20th centuries, both of these two big boys came to the bottom and now again going up. and take my words, China will always share with India on the top two positions of the biggest economies of the world, or, both of these two countries will come down together making Western Champions on top, similar to British Raj in 19th and 20th centuries

we are aware of every threat from China but dont you think Russia hasn't fought wars with China in past????? but Russia is Champion in Power Politics, the knowledge of power which Indians lacks by a big margin. in threat of China, you won't surrender your sovereignty to those Western Leaders who are worried to maintain life style of their under high school passed population 'anyhow'. just answer, "why did US/West included China in list of NPT's 5 recognized nuclear powers who may make as many nukes as they want but they always forced India to sign NPT, with having enslaved Japan/Korea type big neighbors of China?" they have kept China in Asia with a big power who may threaten enough to its great neighbors like India, Japan, Korea etc and then US/West may force them all to sign NPT. similarly how they have Veto Powers in UN to control every activities of UN, having enslaved UN this way. and then they want rest of the world to follow this UN, the so called World Government

also check my post#2 of this thread, "The 3 Steps of Western Democracy"

also post#9, to find out, why India too won't come on the US's target in future???

i would welcome questions from other DFI members on my posts #2, #9, including on this post :thumb:

 

[hello_10]

Three Steps of Western Democracy:

we first have to address the 'bottom-line" facts behind SU-India alignment during Cold War, which was then supported by all the NAM members. that is the "Neo-Colonialism", as explained below, which formed the basis of formation of NAM......

many people here are are often confused with communism and democracy. but they are lost with the bottom-line facts behind NAM, the "Neo-Colonism". sometimes they don't understand that if there is a dispute in Vietnam's area Oil then its not because Chinese communists are not trying for their own pockets and Indian Democratic Champions are trying for Democratic people of whole world..... but, whether communists or democratic, all are trying for the good of their own civilians only ......

I try to explain it in a simple way for the young people, in few points as below:

1st, Developing countries dont want P5s as 'Police' of the world who would keep Nuclear Weapons and do whatever they want to do in World, regardless any right or wrong. as, if a country has nuclear weapons then it can't be attacked but it can do whatever it wants to do with rest of the world. and NAM countries strongly opposed this condition of 'democracy'

2nd, US/West want us to accept UN as "World Government" whose every system is a slave of US/West itself. P5s, the winners of WW2, want to keep Veto Power to block/stop any movement of UN, whenever P5s want. mean they have the Supreme Status in UN and then they want rest of the world to follow UN????? sorry, we dont want this type of "World Government"

3rd, US/West are right to interfere in the internal matters of other countries, to break it down on cultural level/financial level, under their White/Christian/Western belief, with a sense that they just dont recognize 'State' of a developing country. and with that, they want to buy all the corrupts of developing countries, as obviously poor countries would have high corruption. and then they blame the developing countries itself that they in fact deserve to be 'Ruled', as this is how they are corrupts/wrong etc?????? like how I asked one American member one day, AA on Indian Defence Forum, "do you know anything 'good' about India" and he couldn't answer . as, Western Nationals are told only wrong about a developing country like India, poor/corrupts/wrong/high crime rates etc......

and the similar other things which can be read in different articles. we may just go through the concept of Neo-Colonialism, what it means and how it became the basis of NAM...........

Russia's Multipolar World Vs US's World Government

Efforts for establishing a "BALANCE" in world

Further to the above discussion, today i was making a clear difference between my side with Russia, against the US's World Government, which wants to rule the world, but it doesn't share the "Equal Voting Rights" with those rest of the world including Indians, on whom the leaders of those 310million US's civilians want to 'Rule'......

the government of US, backed by EU, want to form that World Government which doesn't have "equal" voting rights with Indians in their parliamentary election, but they want to have every interference in India, to serve those US's civilians who have their leaders like Mr B.Obama......

and at the same time we have Russia on the other side, which favor Multi-Polar World, and support India and China both. we find Indian members making noise when Russia is going to sell its best Su35 aircraft to China, while the same type of noise we hear from Chinese members also when Russia not only sell its best arms to India, but it also comes with full technology transfer to India.........

and its all about dealing with two sides of politics of world. one about the US's World Government, which doesn't share "equal" voting rights in their general election by rest of the world like India, while the Russia on other side which favor 'equal' rights for Every Government on the world platform......

and one day i also reminded that, even if China and Vietnam have conflicts on oil search, then its not because Chinese communists are trying for their own pockets while Indians are trying for the democratic people of whole world. but whether China or Vietnam+India, both of these groups are trying to secure best stake in that area for good of their own people, who elected their leaders in these 3 countries to secure common interests of the people belonging to their countries.........

here, i also remember my one talk with few senior Russians in Sydney, when one senior once said that, "we would learn Chinese language, Mandarin, now." and i asked with surprise, "Chinese language?" and he said, "yes Chinese." and it again gave me a straight meaning from my Chinese friends from Malaysia+Singapore, that, "English is sign of our colonization..."

and yes, neither English is home language of India nor US Dollar is Indian currency, but if we may have Yuan as a world currency and Mandarin as a world language for the next 20 years, say, then it will definitely help of maintain a "BALANCE" in this world, which is quite important :thumb:

=> Nam's Relevance in the Emerging Multipolar World and India - Mainstream Weekly

=> Neocolonialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

=> IIMs' tryst with Chinese: Mandarin emerges as popular course at B-schools - Economic Times

 

[hello_10]

double post

 

[hello_10]

.
Indian Strategy to Limit Growing CAD

=> http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/economy-infrastructure/53739-india-sick-man-asia.html#post781194

The Stock Exchange is following the trend of rupees fall, with a sense to invest it again when it gets established. right now foreign investors are selling their shares at 63 rupees per dollar, and they would back when it would reach 66/71 rupees per USD, say......

Rupees is comparable to Japanese Yen, and its still overvalued that Yen???????
Exchange Rates - X-Rates

we also have a news as below, check :ranger:
=> Despite touching 60, rupee still 17.6% overvalued: Nomura - The Times of India


=> RBI would fix Rupee Level at 71, the only way to Keep CAD Under Control

you can't import more than $500billion/ year till 2015/18, considering the worst scenario

India won't be able to export more than $300/$400billion by 2015/18, as the European Markets are finished except few like Germany. and there is a limit US may borrow debt to support world market.

with the above 2 points, we do know that India is having $300billion export since 2011, and it would be almost same this year also, then its because first European markets are on free fall, being bankrupted one by one, hence the export couldn't increase. and at the same time US did borrow debt during last 3 years, which supported the world economies to an extent. but there is a limit, the US may borrow debt to maintain its $2.0trillion+ import from other countries, while the EU28 economies haven't reached their lowest yet . too many Austerity there but still debt is increasing and its around 92.5% to GDP of Eurozone to date. and its also considering the fact that Germany and few other european economies could reduce their debt during last few years while there is no control on the fall of other European economies, stating this 'two way' European future.......

and here, China has been blamed for keeping its currency lower to gain on the export side and hence their Import stands at $1.95trillion and Export at $2.1 trillion by the last financial year, registering a Trade Surplus this way by a margin of around $150 billion. while on the other side, Indian rupees was estimated to be over valued by 17.6% at 60/USD? then, is there any surprise why trade deficit of India stood at around 66% to its export, hence bring CAD to so high level this way???? (export of India at $300billion and import at $500billion by 2011 to 2013)

=> Despite touching 60, rupee still 17.6% overvalued: Nomura - The Times of India

your CAD worries is directly related to your importing power, which is because of Over Valued Indian Rupees. and you need to depreciate Indian Rupees to the level where it may make the imported products "expansive enough to be imported". :thumb:


Short Time Pain will Bring Long Term Benefits

here, we find, Indian companies have been struggling due to the imported Chinese products, due to "under valued Yuan". and if India produce the same products domestically, it will first provide more jobs to the Indian workers, hence increasing both, the direct and indirect taxes this way. then why is there any reason to keep importing those products which may be produced domestically, and its not possible until you make the imported products, to be expansive enough to be imported? (the short term pain of higher petrol/diesel prices will finally benefit India in future. )

the world is changing and there is a limit, the US can borrow the debt to maintain their current $2.0trillion+ import. and there is no sign that fall of European economies has reached its bottom

India needs to prepare itself considering the circumstances of 2018/20+ when its 90% trade would occur within Asia only. as China will have got a major share of High Tech export business till then, and oil/gas/metal import will come from Asia itself, with reliance on Japan/Singapore for those high tech products which India or China will not be able to produce till 2020. there is no meaning to ignore this biggest threat, when 90% Indian trade will have got limited to Asia only by 2018/20+, and India would prepare itself for those circumstances from today.

 

[hello_10]

Indian Military's Strategy on the Border for unusual murders

=> http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...an-army-destroys-five-pakistani-out-post.html

There is no law on the border, LOC, and it must be understood to both the sides

sir, when you fight an open war then you know its for the purpose, either to defend or to put the military on the aggression for a certain reason. but when a side of border wait for the patrolling people of other side to attack on the back then you forget that it is meant for nothing, except the fact that the certain families of those few have lost the man feeding them.......

there is no law which stop you to come to other side for a distance and score few, nor the same is applied on the Indian side too. and there must always be an understanding between the militaries employed on the border that, "in case of any coward attack and if Pakistani side then dont take proper action, including formal apology, then it would only mean that Indian side would then respond."

I mean, just hand over Pakistan to other countries if you can't control it. as, whenever Pakistani military allow any type of coward attack to just behead or kill few, it would then mean for losing few of Pakistan side too. its a common understanding between two sides, who are heavily armed and no law stop them to fire. it must always be understood by the Pakistani military that when you open fire, you do know that few of your own team will be killed in response. military of both the sides are working for salaries only, and any type of killing few on back etc would mean that you lost few of your own team too :thumb:


=>

sir i don't favor wars but there would always be an understanding between the Indian and Pakistani troops on the border. that is, "if even one Indian troops lose his life on the border, then i must result is scoring at least one pakistani military man on the same border. and if you lose 30 this year then at least 30 you gotto score on the Pakistani side to always help them understand that, whenever they kill one Indian military personal, it will then result is a certain fate of one of their own team." :thumb:

the number must always be balanced, and it must always be confirmed to the Pakistani side, whenever they try for any coward attack on the Indian military :thumb:

 

[hello_10]

Western nations use Pakistan as an arm against India, like how pakistan served its purpose since 1947, as guided by the Britain/US/West, including during Cold War by full support of Western arms for Pakistan. when we talk to a pakistani nationalist, he/she would only be concered with good of pakistan while the people like Mr Musharraf are of the purpose to help the Western nations first, and then try for the Good of Pakistan along with it, if possible.......

=> Three Sides of World Politics: there are three type of people/sides in world in 'Power Game', the 1st one who is defending itself and the 2nd one the aggressor and then we find a third side, the 'Beneficiary' of any type of war/conflicts etc. and I would say that Pakistan has been aggressor with India since they lost East Pakistan in 1971, by terrorism in Punjab in early 80s, then it switched to Pakistan's support to militancy in Kashmir in between 1989 to 2007, and India only defended itself since 1972. while the 3rd side, British/US always try to get benefit out of any type of conflict between India and Pakistan by keeping Pakistan's rulers in their pocket. and since India qualified with China among the BRIC, the new big powers of world, India is now on the target of Western War Champions, similar to China and Russia. and here, you can't ignore 'Role' of US/UK in any type of conflict India may face, either from Pakistan or China . you always need to understand that if US can't control India then you are on their target, same as China and Russia op:

my posts about China has a simple logic that, "if India may defend itself from the China's military power, then more the China will rise, better it will be for India by all means." and we do see that Indian military has developed its strength too, and doing so, being ranked at 4th military power of the world at present. India's military strength is being discussed in my thread as below :thumb:

=> http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...ighest-military-expenditure-7.html#post781514


with that, my post as below also says something in this regard :ranger:

Rise of China and US, with India factor

I have voted the 3rd option, "The United States in its backyard", considering the facts that, if Indian Military is capable enough to defend itself from China, then more China rises, more US will go down which will benefit the whole world this way :thumb:

=> with the fact that more powerful the Chinese Military, more Military build up will be done in India itself, and the time China will have brought US to its feet/ shoes, US will suddenly find India also a similar powerful country, close to China itself

my theory is based on the facts that, "only external threats unite the nation."

"only a powerful neighbor help us prepare a powerful military."

"only war threats/ or direct wars prepare Army Personals, otherwise they may lose their war effectiveness."

"Rise of a Neighbor Country, militarily/economically, will finally result in similar developments in India too, this way."

(like how historians clearly say that even if Indian Economy was 9 times bigger that British till the 18th century, bigger than Whole European Economy itself, but so rich CHina/India lost to West as West had better arms, more wars they used to fight, better they were in fighting from back etc.....:thumb:

 

[hello_10]

Can Emerging and Developed Economies be Friends?

China and US can never be friends, only enemies they can be of each others, why, I explained many times as below. here I would like to ask other strategic think tank of this forum, how the same isn't true in case of India??????

1st, China wants to have every technology which US has, and superior to US also, which will bring US to the level of Africa , if it will get happen, which looks like going to happen within 5 to 10 years from now. as, if US will have lost production lines of High Tech Products to China and if China will then introduce these products in world at much cheaper prices, then how US/EU will maintain earning? it will bring US to stone age, if it will ever happen, and China is determined to have all the techs of US, with higher than US also, and US wants to resist these efforts. only Indian High Qualified professionals US have, which may help US have high techs in future, in competition with China....

2nd, China wants to have higher techs in defense arms which may help them win over any enemy including US/West, and Western nations definitely dont want this, including EU. US wants to put missiles in space and when China also wants to do the same, West has a problem. US want to form a 'World Government', which would govern the whole world including China, and China doesn't want this to happen when a White/Christian/Western government start governing China and other developing nations.

3rd, in western view, CHinese has been an inferior race for a long period of time while Chinese wants to prove it a superior race, the superior Chinese culture than the Western ones. hence, there is a clear cultural clash between West and CHina.

4th, US/West believe in 'grading' of nationality, with putting Western on higher place and Asians on lower national identity/grade, which is a clear clash between 'Chinese Proud' for being a Chinese and American proud to be an American.........

India also has the same clashes with US/West but India is blessed with CHina who first take an attempt on these above '4' Western aggressions...

my post as below also says something. its mainly intended to find out, "to what extent India and the US/West be closed friends?" :thumb:

=> http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...dia-potential-us-ally-rival-2.html#post649714

Whether Married or Singles, both cry

US is that big shiit for India that India can't either ignore it, nor even accept to be a Western ally too . being a friend with US means for being a friend of a society of the world, which does have a social structure and enough influence on the world due to its strong links with Europe too, the majority of US who have European identity..... and hence it again comes with a serious shiits associated with the Identity Difference, cultural clashes etc. and hence a threat to come on the condition to get recognized as either an enemy of that society, similar to Muslims, or become part of their all the rights and wrongs they ever did in past, or, they want to continue doing in future too due to their religious/racial feeling etc., which is mainly intended to maintain inflow of money from developing countries in either way

I think India would try to become a good friend of US+West only. similar to a friend in need, a friend indeed, with a condition to leave the table whenever it face any problem due to its friendship with US/West. friendship doesn't mean that India would start participating with US in their wars, neither India would become part of their efforts to fix their conflicts with Middle East/Muslims etc. and also there must not be any reason, why India would become an arm or Christianity against Islam, nor there be any condition imposed on India that it has to get involved with the failures of Western society too, to help them maintain prosperity in either way. there would always be an opportunity to leave the table, whenever its required, with a promise to help US/West too in tough circumstances , as a responsible society of world

but things aren't as easy as I said as above. US/West simply believes in power excessive to get their work done/get prosperity in either way, and hence there can't be any proper talks between these two societies of the world until Indian Society comes in the position to defend itself from US first :thumb:

 

[hello_10]

.
Indian Strategy to Limit Growing CAD

=> http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/economy-infrastructure/53739-india-sick-man-asia.html#post781194

The Stock Exchange is following the trend of rupees fall, with a sense to invest it again when it gets established. right now foreign investors are selling their shares at 63 rupees per dollar, and they would back when it would reach 66/71 rupees per USD, say......

Rupees is comparable to Japanese Yen, and its still overvalued that Yen???????
Exchange Rates - X-Rates

we also have a news as below, check :ranger:
=> Despite touching 60, rupee still 17.6% overvalued: Nomura - The Times of India


=> RBI would fix Rupee Level at 71, the only way to Keep CAD Under Control

you can't import more than $500billion/ year till 2015/18, considering the worst scenario

India won't be able to export more than $300/$400billion by 2015/18, as the European Markets are finished except few like Germany. and there is a limit US may borrow debt to support world market.

with the above 2 points, we do know that India is having $300billion export since 2011, and it would be almost same this year also, then its because first European markets are on free fall, being bankrupted one by one, hence the export couldn't increase. and at the same time US did borrow debt during last 3 years, which supported the world economies to an extent. but there is a limit, the US may borrow debt to maintain its $2.0trillion+ import from other countries, while the EU28 economies haven't reached their lowest yet . too many Austerity there but still debt is increasing and its around 92.5% to GDP of Eurozone to date. and its also considering the fact that Germany and few other european economies could reduce their debt during last few years while there is no control on the fall of other European economies, stating this 'two way' European future.......

and here, China has been blamed for keeping its currency lower to gain on the export side and hence their Import stands at $1.95trillion and Export at $2.1 trillion by the last financial year, registering a Trade Surplus this way by a margin of around $150 billion. while on the other side, Indian rupees was estimated to be over valued by 17.6% at 60/USD? then, is there any surprise why trade deficit of India stood at around 66% to its export, hence bring CAD to so high level this way???? (export of India at $300billion and import at $500billion by 2011 to 2013)

=> Despite touching 60, rupee still 17.6% overvalued: Nomura - The Times of India

your CAD worries is directly related to your importing power, which is because of Over Valued Indian Rupees. and you need to depreciate Indian Rupees to the level where it may make the imported products "expansive enough to be imported".


Short Time Pain will Bring Long Term Benefits

here, we find, Indian companies have been struggling due to the imported Chinese products, due to "under valued Yuan". and if India produce the same products domestically, it will first provide more jobs to the Indian workers, hence increasing both, the direct and indirect taxes this way. then why is there any reason to keep importing those products which may be produced domestically, and its not possible until you make the imported products, to be expansive enough to be imported? (the short term pain of higher petrol/diesel prices will finally benefit India in future. )

the world is changing and there is a limit, the US can borrow the debt to maintain their current $2.0trillion+ import. and there is no sign that fall of European economies has reached its bottom

India needs to prepare itself considering the circumstances of 2018/20+ when its 90% trade would occur within Asia only. as China will have got a major share of High Tech export business till then, and oil/gas/metal import will come from Asia itself, with reliance on Japan/Singapore for those high tech products which India or China will not be able to produce till 2020. there is no meaning to ignore this biggest threat, when 90% Indian trade will have got limited to Asia only by 2018/20+, and India would prepare itself for those circumstances from today.

as discussed above, now India needs to do much more to have more SEZs. we hope its number to be thrice by 2020, to meet the industrial growth target. we want at least 500+ SEZs by 2020......... India can't achieve its target to bring the manufacturing share to be around 25% of GDP target until we have "Structural Reform of Indian Economy", and having more SEZs is the first step in this regard :thumb:

=> SEZ units hit tax hurdles for domestic supplies | Business Line

 

[hello_10]

as discussed above, to prepare for the circumstances at 2020+, India does need a type of "Structural Reform" considering industrial production growth. India already have a range of Institutions, for high to low level skills, with new infrastructure projects like express way/ ports/ airport etc, along with reaching Youth Literacy rate closed to 90% soon. its filled with highly competent professionals, at a low salary, and only hurdle in this direction for having more SEZs....

and we have been getting news that acquiring farmers lands has been the main issue in this regard. and here we find an Asian country like Singapore to be a type SEZ as a whole country, then why this big country like India has so much problems in acquiring lands for SEZs? we had this type of problems in 50s and 60s also when the government wanted to lay down roads and there used to be much resistances from the same type of farmers demands. then why can't India acquire the prime lands by 'forceful' methods, as it were adopted before also, for the key infrastructure projects in 50s to 80s? i mean, if a land of farmer cost 1.0 lacs per 1000 square feet then just through 3.0 lacs for those lands and get it????? and if there is more resistance then just through 5.0lacs+, 5 times, for the same type of land?????

such a big country like India, which is even export of food grains but it face problems for acquiring lands because of farmers?, i always doubt why???????

 

[hello_10]

.

Preparing for 2020+, when 90% Trade of India would occur within Asia only

Considering oil/gas/metal imports from Asia Pecific itself, along with High Tech Products import from China or Japan/Singapore itself. those High Tech products which India won't be able to produce even by 2020+

First these so called Western Industrialized Economies have lost their industries to China, and at the same time they are losing rest of the industries with the pace that we hope soon they will will get their industries back, just a big economic fall is required, hopefully by the end 2020. and it will be the time when per capita income of US/EU will fall below to China, hence making production cost cheap in their home nation this way....... but the main worries are, they have very high debt now and in case of getting back the industries, it will result in very high inflation which would be hard for them to bear. (as more the inflation, more you pay interests on your National Debt.) lets see what exactly we will see in our time.

these ranking are based on linearity, with a sense of continuity, while the OECD economies have high probability to face the type of recession Russia faced during 90s, while Russia did have enough oil/gas to support its economy, but how the same will support EU's economies which are being bankrupted one by one?????. if per capita income of the countries like Indonesia, India is $4000 at PPP then it means for growth in future, and if its around $35,000+ for the OECD economies then it would mean that they do need to have those superior technologies which will keep them on this level otherwise they will fall . and china and other emerging nations are set to outperform these so called Industrialized nations, who may soon get their industries back, hopefully by 2020/25.........

I discussed the news as below, you would also have a look on the high tech business of china w.r.t. to OECD economies. all these new wars in the different parts of the world, ended with Iraq and it then switched to Afghanistan, again in Libya and it then switched to Syria right now, all are funded by US/NATO as their very last efforts to get something done in this world, before the world get completely changed.

=> High-technology exports (current US$) | Data | Table

and apart from reading these predictions for the next 40 years, have a look on the same list of High Tech business. high tech export by US decreased from $220billion in 2008 to $145billion by 2011, within just 3 years, while that of China increased from $340billion to $457billion during the same period of 3 years only. your table shows the Western prediction for the next 40 years while the facts of just last 3 years in this list looks too poor

I have habit of reading western ranking stating, "indian women ranked below pakistani women as they don't sit on the nude beaches, similar to western women." "indian kids on the second last rank by UN, as they dont take drugs from schooling, including mass sex since 13-14 year age too." "india is more violent than US with 'staggering' 799 deaths by guns last years while the same score was well above 11,000 in US by guns last year." bla bla
Bluffs of Superiority, based on publicity of greatness, without any credibility or proper educational background

UK's economy is still 3.0% below to its 2008 level, Euro-zone is below 2% to its 2008 level. and US's is around 2.5% higher since then, only, with 4% population growth rate since too, but during this period, US's debt is now well above 106% to GDP to date, while the National Debt to Revenue ratio is well closed to 700% itself. and the above prediction by 2050, based on linearity, with a sense of continuity, is also nothing but a bluff, the western nations want to live in, the longer it is possible for them, until they face a real fall which will bring per capita income of US/EU to fall below China, hence helping them get industrialized again this way :thumb:

(by 2012, US's national debt was at around $16.4trillion while Revenue was at around $2.45 trillion only, hence ratio at 670%, even if US is a developed country hence having tax on low income group also. while the total National Debt of Eurozone is now closed to 93% to date.)

The euro zone posts horrible GDP numbers – Quartz