India and the U.S. – strategic or symbolic partners?
With initial euphoria over last week’s U.S.-India talks on the wane, it may be time to take a long, hard look at what New Delhi actually gained from the first official “strategic dialogue” between the two sides.
The timing was just right as Washington implements its AfPak plan, the correct gestures were made and U.S. officials went out of their way to convince the Indian media all was fine between the world’s two biggest democracies.
And while it is true that India-U.S. relations are now at their best, the June 2 talks between U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and India’s Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna showed that though the two may have made progress on important but second-tier issues such as trade, agriculture and technology, there remains a disconnect on a strategic level.
Many in India seem worried the talks did not produce the deliverables New Delhi was looking for — even though President Obama has backed India’s $1.2 billion development initiatives in Afghanistan, Washington may not have been able to convince New Delhi it was balancing India’s interest in the war-torn country vital to its security.
Neither was there any talk of pushing Pakistan to go after the men India has persistently blamed for attacks on Indian cities, including Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafiz Saeed.
Of course there are things the United States wants India to do: ratify the nuclear liability bill to open India’s $150 billion nuclear power market to American firms, scale down its public support for Iran, open up the economy and expedite the award of contracts for 126 fighter jets in which U.S. companies are a strong contender for the multi-billion deal.
Both sides have acknowledged the lingering doubts they have about each other. Clinton admitted to unresolved problems as India frets that the Obama administration does not accord it the importance it received under the preceding government of George Bush.
from Pakistan: Now or Never?:
On U.S., India and Pakistan: maybe some transparency would help
According to the Wall Street Journal, "President Barack Obama issued a secret directive in December to intensify American diplomacy aimed at easing tensions between India and Pakistan, asserting that without détente between the two rivals, the administration's efforts to win Pakistani cooperation in Afghanistan would suffer. "
"The directive concluded that India must make resolving its tensions with Pakistan a priority for progress to be made on U.S. goals in the region, according to people familiar with its contents," it says.
It also says there is a debate within the U.S. administration over how far to push India to improve relations with Pakistan, with the Pentagon lobbying for more pressure on New Delhi and the State Department resisting, arguing this could backfire.
The idea that resolving tensions between India and Pakistan is central to stabilising Afghanistan is not new. Its importance rose up the agenda during Obama's election campaign in 2008. And it never really went away despite successful Indian lobbying to keep any reference to India or Kashmir out of the title given to U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke in January 2009. At the time, the truncated title was seen as not so much as a reflection of ground realities (Pakistan has always fixed its foreign and security policies in relation to India), but as a way of providing the space for discreet diplomacy to succeed where public pressure might fail.
What is new is the context. India is deeply sensitive to what it sees as Washington's favouritism towards Pakistan as it tries to find a way out of the stalemate in Afghanistan. As a result it has become "America's Wounded Ally" in the expression used by Indian analyst Sumit Ganguly in Newsweek, angry with Obama for turning his back on a blossoming relationship forged by his predecessors.
As a brief aside, this has happened before. Immediately after 9/11 India sought to capitalise on its then growing ties with the United States by offering the use of Indian bases for its campaign in Afghanistan only to see Washington turn instead to its old Cold War favourite Pakistan. At the time, an Indian analyst I knew rather graphically compared the sense of betrayal in New Delhi to that of a mistress whose lover goes back to his wife. His analogy may have accurately captured the emotional response at the time, but it was wrong in substance, since India and the United States went on to build an even stronger relationship, including signing a deal effectively recognising India as a nuclear power. The same may yet happen again despite all the current hand-wringing.
However, to return to the subject of the WSJ report, and the debate over how far Washington should go to push India and Pakistan into improving relations:
Ratee:
Door-door tak jab bacha rota hai to Rehman Malik kehta hai baita chup hoja nahin to RAW aa jaiga.
@26 Indian consulates in Afghanistan” Perhaps it is time Pakistan set up a “ministry of counting Indian consulates in Afghanistan”. The numbers change each day.
from Pakistan: Now or Never?:
India and Pakistan on the U.S. see-saw
Few who follow South Asia could miss the symbolism of two separate developments in the past week - in one Pakistan was cosying up to the United States in a new "strategic dialogue"; in the other India was complaining to Washington about its failure to provide access to David Headley, the Chicago man accused of helping to plan the 2008 attack on Mumbai.
Ever since the London conference on Afghanistan in January signalled an exit strategy which could include reconciliation with the Taliban, it has been clear that Pakistan's star has been rising in Washington while India's has been falling.
If the United States wants to force the Taliban to the negotiating table, it needs Pakistan's help. And Pakistan has shown by arresting Taliban commander Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar amongst others that it intends to keep control of any negotiations. In return for its cooperation, it expects Washington's help in securing Pakistan's own interests, including through a scaling back of India's involvement in Afghanistan.
By contrast, the relationship between India and the United States which blossomed under the Bush administration has been fading as Washington looks to China and Pakistan to help meet respectively its economic and security needs. An initial outpouring of sympathy and international support for India following the Mumbai attack - which led to intense pressure on Pakistan to crack down on the Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group blamed for the assault - has dissipated over time.
Nowadays the mantra in Washington is that India and Pakistan must talk to each other to resolve their differences. Pakistan, after initially cracking down on the Lashkar-e-Taiba, eased the pressure on the group in the second part of 2009. India suspects the Lashkar-e-Taiba is not only active again but may have been involved in last month's attack in Kabul which targeted Indian interests. If true, this would suggest that Lashkar-e-Taiba is acting in conformity with the interests of the Pakistan Army, which is deeply sensitive about India's growing presence in Afghanistan following the fall of the Pakistan-backed Taliban in 2001.
To rewind briefly, it has always been unclear how far the Pakistan Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency could go in dismantling the Punjab-based militant group it once nurtured to fight India in Kashmir. While few doubt it could shut down the Lashkar-e-Taiba if it chose to do so, the risk has been that action against an organisation which has been scrupulous in avoiding attacks within Pakistan itself would shatter it into splinter groups which would make common cause with al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban. A raid on the Pakistan Army's own headquarters last October highlighted just how vulnerable the country could be to an alliance between militants in its tribal areas bordering Afghanistan and those based in its heartland Punjab province.
So the debate amongst analysts has been whether relative inaction against the Lashkar-e-Taiba has been driven by self-preservation or a desire on the part of the ISI to retain the group's operational capacity to use it against India. Islamabad is convinced India's own intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW), is using Afghanistan as a base to destabilise Pakistan, particularly by funding separatists in its Baluchistan province. Any evidence of Lashkar-e-Taiba's involvement in the Kabul attack would therefore reinforce suspicions that the Pakistan Army is still using it as part of a proxy war between the two countries' intelligence agencies. (Both countries deny the accusations levelled at each other's intelligence agencies.)
This site seems to recieve a large ammount of visitors. How do you advertise it? It gives a nice unique spin on things. I guess having something useful or substantial to post about is the most important thing.
Third time’s the charm for Mukesh Ambani
(UPDATE: Reliance Industries has gained an overseas foothold by agreeing to pay $1.7 billion to form a joint venture with U.S.-based Atlas Energy. India’s largest-listed firm will pick up a 40 percent stake in Atlas’s operations in the booming Marcellus Shale)
The ruthless efficiency and smooth execution that marked Reliance Industries’ development of the world’s largest refining complex in western India and its vast gas fields off the country’s east coast has eluded the top-listed Indian firm during its recent attempts at overseas takeovers.
Nevertheless, Mukesh Ambani, the world’s fourth-wealthiest man and the chairman of Reliance, is known for his doggedness and is unlikely to backpedal on his overseas ambitions after being rebuffed by two overseas firms — bankrupt petrochemicals maker LyondellBasell and oil sands firm Value Creation.
A source tells us that Ambani now has his eyes set on the booming Marcellus Shale in the eastern United States, and wants to form a joint venture with Atlas Energy to develop the independent U.S. oil and gas firm’s operations in the gas project.
A deal could bring in more than $1 billion for Atlas, which will be a much smaller price than what Reliance was willing to pay for LyondellBasell, which was valued at about $14.5 billion by the Indian firm’s final offer. Lyondell rejected it saying the price was not high enough.
Analysts thought the exact opposite. They worried Reliance was overpaying for Lyondell, and were flummoxed about what synergies the company hoped to achieve by buying a bankrupt petrochemicals maker. In fact, investors in Reliance heaved a sigh of relief when the deal was called off.
Ambani seemed to have won even in defeat.
What does Nobel for Obama mean for India?
Obama has won the Nobel Peace prize.The citation commends him for calling for a nuclear-weapon free world, emphasising the role of international institutions and preferring dialogue.Less than a year into his presidency he has yet to implement much of his programme.”For the time being Obama’s just making proposals. But sometimes the Nobel committee awards the prize to encourage responsible action,” said Poland’s Lech Walesa, a Nobel Peace Laureate.What does it mean for India to have the most powerful man in the world honoured for his policies?The policies of the Obama administration are different from those of the George W. Bush era when multilateralism was seen as a liability.Bush’s ambassador to the U.N. was John R. Bolton whose scepticism towards multilateralism was well known.Yet Bush helped India get a crucial waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group and was described as the friendliest U.S. President India has had.Obama on the other hand has called for strengthening nuclear non-proliferation, prompting India to seek clarifications.Pratap Bhanu Mehta, president of the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, argues in a recent column that Indians find it more difficult to deal with those who they think of as American liberals than the conservatives.Will we now see a more forceful and active Obama on issues like non-proliferation that India is wary of ?
if obama can able to resolve the tibet freedom then he is great and india also can sign for nuclear weapon it is the first china who need to stop a mind of occupying other nations and make dictator rules.
Nobel for an Indian?
Venkatraman Ramakrishnan has been awarded the chemistry Nobel this year.
He joins a select club of scientists recognised by the Nobel foundation.
But Ramakrishnan joins an even more exclusive group — Indians (by birth) who received such recognition.
The country still awaits a second entry in the most exclusive group — an Indian who gets a Nobel staying and working in India.
So far only C.V. Raman, the founder-member of this club, qualifies.
In the days to come, Indians around the world, especially those in the country, will derive vicarious pleasure from another Indian (at least by birth) earning the top honour.
The Times of India listed India’s Nobel connections on their website, a list which includes British surgeon Ronald Ross and poet Rudyard Kipling — both born in India.
As said earlier, scientists are also human being, they need good salary for their safety and fun and they need big research grant. The day India govt will do this (remember moneywise it’s big, comparable to the industrialised countries), I bet, within 10 years from then, India will get it’s own noble.
What Afghanistan’s vote means for India
India and Pakistan, with their competitive strategic interest in Afghanistan, are keenly watching the war-battered nation’s election this week, the second since the Taliban were overthrown in 2001.
The front-runner of that vote is incumbent President Hamid Karzai who is facing a stiff challenge from his former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah and former Finance Minister Ashraf Ghani. There are more than two dozen other candidates.
While a successful vote could mean a step toward achieving basic political and military stability in Afghanistan, its outcome holds crucial geopolitical significance for India and Pakistan.
Conventional wisdom is that a victory for Karzai will help India. Karzai has lived and studied in India, cultivated a strong relationship with New Delhi and spoken out angrily against Pakistan, especially during the years it was ruled by Pervez Musharraf.
Abdullah and Ghani too have India connections — while the former lived there, Ghani was once posted in New Delhi with the World Bank.
So in that sense, Pakistan should have no serious good option, and the various candidates who offer any potential to project its influence in Afghanistan, Islamabad should be more or less a supporter of them, says Daniel Markey, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Markey says Pakistan may tend to prefer Karzai simply because he is “known quantity” and his relations with the civilian government in Islamabad are better than before.
Of course, India wants a stable Afghanistan, without the Taliban, that brings peace and stability to the Afghans. They have been unwitting victims of Pakistan, the Soviet Union and America’s geo-political game. Strangely each one with a radically different ideology from the other, drove the country to ruin. Some people, especially within Pakistan, might feel India is contnuing where they left off, but that is certainly not true. It is important that the world supports the people of Afghanistan in developing her internal systems so that it emerges as a strongly democratic country. This is as important as defeating, or nullifying the Taliban’s presence.
Indian voters – spoilt for choice?
With 8071 candidates contesting 543 seats – that’s an average of 15 candidates for each seat — the 400 million Indian voters who chose to vote sure looked spoilt for choice.
But were they?
Though democracy means choosing who our rulers are going to be, many say there is a crucial missing link in Indian democracy — the lack of inner-party democracy.
This results in the lack of people’s participation especially in choosing candidates, unlike the U.S. where primaries are held by political parties to elect candidates.
Rahul Gandhi says he is trying to make reforms.
At a recent press conference, commenting on his position within the ruling Congress party he said, “It is undemocratic and it is a reality.”
“The Indian political system tends to be related to who you know, who your brother is, who your sister is, and it’s in every single party, in the BJP it exists, in the Congress it exists, that’s a fact of life, that’s the reflection of a closed system.”
ELECTION RESULTS 2009
INTERPRETATIONS OF JANTA’S VERDICT
I.BIG NO TO CRIMINALS
These results have been remarkable in many regards. First and foremost, most politically significant aspect of all, we must congratulate the electorate for cleansing the system effectively. Almost all the Mafia/goonda element has been wiped clean by the voters in this election –
Atique Ahmad(Apna Dal)from Phoolpur,
Mukhtar Ansari(BSP) from Varansi,
Afzal Ansari (SP)from Ghazipur,
Mitrasen(BSP) from Faizabad,
D.P.Yadav(BSP) from Badaun,
Arun Kumar Shukla(Anna-BSP)from Unnao.
Akshay Pratap Sigh(Gopal Ji-sp)from Pratapgarh also lost .
Congress was saved from embarrassment as Ranjeeta Ranjan(Wife of Pappu Yadav)and Shanti Priya(Mother of Pappu Yadav) contesting from Supaul and Purniya -with full congress support- respectively both lost and along with Sadhu Yadav.Hena Shaheb(W/o Shahbuddin)contesting on RJD ticket also lost from Sewan.
Lessons (if they are willing to learn)-
A.We do not want criminals in the parliament. We have cleansed the system once ,keep it clean now by not giving them tickets in future.
B. Ms. Mayawati do not take us for fools, there is no way that you can get away with enrolling all the big time criminals for parliamentary elections. How ignorant can a person try to be, telling that BSP could not get the expected number of seats because people were scared that BSP will later start negotiating with BJP-bring something more audacious ,anybody. Truth is staring in your eyes, you are not willing to look at it and expecting everybody else to close their eyes also.
C.If a systematic effort is made to make people understand ,they do understand. All the Corporate and Media houses are to be congratulated for their all out efforts to keep the system clean. What is most encouraging is that such efforts were made for the first time, were spontaneous, motivated by a sincere desire to clean the system and they proved to be so effective.
II.BLACK-MAILERS/BROKERS/ARM-TWISTERS KINDLY EXCUSE
How many King Makers/Prime-ministers in waiting had to eat their words-Lalu Prasad and Ramvilas Paswan duo,Mayawati,Sharad Pawar,Mulayam Singh-Amar Singh Duo,Jayalalitha,Prakash Karat in particular and Left parties in general. These are people /parties with loudest ambitions and most unveiled threats and demands. People of this country have had enough of them. I found the fate of RJD/LJP in Bihar funniest along with SP in UP. Congress did the right thing by calling their bluff-when your closest allies suddenly leave you in the lurch and you have to slug it out all alone, do it with all the heart and there is an old saying(as Lalu,Paswan and Mulayam must have learnt the hard way)-Luck favours the brave. People have started understanding that these are all small time leaders with truncated visions ,doing politics of/for one particular caste or region without the capacity to realize the ill-effects of what they are doing, how much fragmented the society is becoming due to all their social-engineering or Madndal- Kamandal experiments and most importantly they do not have any ideology or vision at all except for a fierce desire to keep clinging to the seat of power for making as much money as they can. Thank god their next generations are much better and educated and seem to understand that politics is about the nation(As In Bharat that is India) and not about their own clan,region,language and so forth….
III.GOOD GOVERNENCE HAS FINALLY STARTED PAYING IN OUR COUNTRY ALSO
Chief ministers of Delhi,MP,Andhra Pradesh,Gujrat,Chhattisgarh and most notably Bihar and Orrissa have reaped rich harvest for all their good works and also some of the policies at the central level have paid handsomely for Congress overall(Agricultural Loan Waiver Scheme and NREGA in particular and being able to contain free fall of economy in general).I hope one day they will all learn that governance only can lead them to the seat of power, even more importantly, people will learn to vote on the basis of policies and governance only keeping aside the usual divisive issues that are created to confuse and befool them.
IV.DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF ONE
All the big ,grown up leaders, political stalwarts in their own eyes ,who were laughing openly at Rahul Gandhi or watching him with bemused expressions and calling him Kal Ka Chhokra, must understand that if your conscience is clean, you can talk to your audience maintaining eye contact all the time(i.e. you do not have any guilt inside),you have faith in what you are doing, you do not have any intentions of grabbing power by hook or crook rather you are willing to refuse what may be duly yours, then illiterate population of this country has a uncanny ability to somehow judge it all. Emergence of Rahul Gandhi is a remarkable phenomenon, it is very clear that he is a political novice, but at the same time and even more forcefully are conveyed his intentions and his basic thought process, the bondage with the audience is instant and spontaneous they seem to understand that this young man is speaking from the core of his heart for their sake and has come to them with an open mind and clear vision. They could see that his vision is not clouded by Religion, caste, language or political or financial gains and they responded in the only way they could have responded (By casting their votes in his favour).This was a natural chemistry between a straight forward person full of youthful energy and a population fed up with convoluted politicians. Almost similar traits were displayed by Priyanka during her campaigns.
V. DO NOT MAKE THE MISTAKE OF CALLING A SOFT SPOKEN AND DECENT PERSON A WEAK PERSON
I have a feeling that calling Manmohan Singh a weak Prime minister might not have gone well with any soft spoken ,well behaved ,decent person. How can you call him weak-He managed to run his government without any major hiccups DESPITE Left support for full tenure, he did not release any terrorists in response to attack on Mumbai, he went ahead with Indo-Ameriacn nuclear deal despite severe arm twisting by Left, he managed the economic crisis well without any major tangible effects till date. Yet, suddenly everybody from BJP to his own allies start calling him weak. Despite their ideologies, many well meaning persons will vote in favour of congress just to prove his detractors wrong.
So, in my opinion this is clear verdict in favour of a stable Congress government, expunging the criminals, excluding any scope of arm-twisting and was influenced by sound judgement and a few good decisions of the Mamohan Singh Government with remarable contribution from sensible politicking of Gandhi Family and a clean image of Manmohan singh. At the same time,good governance at state level was also rewarded in general and people have given a vedict more complex and mature than reasonably expected.
Many cheers to this verdict.
Regards,
Vikasendu.
http://vikasendu.blogspot.com/
P.S.-These elections are important for another reason also, cutting across all the party lines, tickets were given to many young politicians in these elections and a very healthy percentage of young MPs will be visible in the Parliament this time-there must be more than a hundred MPs who are 45 years or less in age (87 already and I am still counting)most notable among these being Rahul Gabdhi,Varun Gandhi,Jyortiaditya Sindia,Priya Dutta,Akhilesh Yadav,Jayant Singh,Milind Deora,Supriya Sule,P.Venugopal,Kumar P.,Dayanidhi Maran,Sarika Singh(Only 29 years),Kunwar Jitin Prasad,Dhanajay Singh,Sanjay Nirupam,Ajay Makan,Sandeep Dikshit,Ravneet Singh,Dev Ji Patel,Sachin Pilot,Jitendra Singh,Meenakshi Natrajan,Shruti Chaudhary,Ashok Kumar,Deepender Singh,Naveen Jindal,Ashok Tanwar etc..etc….The list is really a long and impressive one. If somehow they are given a chance to form and run the government cutting across party lines………………IF ONLY……………..
Obama in the White House – will he deliver?
Barack Obama takes over as the 44th U.S. President riding the optimism of millions of people and inheriting a recession and two wars that will test his skills.
Hopes are high the 47-year-old can conjure up a rescue that will jolt the world’s biggest economy back to life and contain the financial crisis ravaging global markets.
As far as India is concerned, there are apprehensions the Obama administration may place curbs on its outsourcing industry, ban any future nuclear tests and resurrect the Kashmir question.
Some have already questioned Obama’s reported plans to appoint a South Asia envoy.
And the Asia Society has laid out a blueprint for an expanded India-U.S. relationship.
What can India expect from the new Obama administration? Will the first African-American to become U.S. president usher in a new era for the country and for U.S-India relations?
May be too many pulls and pushes, too many lobbyists, too much too soon. Wish all this wont make him “One of the Same”.
If he had proceeded an inquiry on the earlier admin on lapses, omissions & commissions he may have made them realize their folly and he could have got the time to concentrate on shaping a new future. May be as ordinary world citizen we cannot know the depth of dungeons & dragons in the powerline map.
from Pakistan: Now or Never?:
Brinkmanship in South Asia
Pakistan said two Indian Air Force planes violated Pakistani airspace on Saturday, one along the Line of Control in Kashmir and the other near Lahore in Pakistan proper. Pakistani officials said Pakistani jets on patrol chased the Indians away and that the Indian Air Force, upon being contacted later, told them it had happened accidentally.
The Indian Air Force, though, has told the media that none of its planes had violated Pakistani airspace. There has been no official response from the Indian government.
What is really going on here? Is it a case of nerves jangling, or perhaps the Pakistani establishment is building up war hysteria against a foe they know all too well the country will unite against? Or, on the flip side, the Pakistanis are right and the intrusions by the Indian jets did take place? Was New Delhi making an aggressive display, part of the "controlled escalation" that some people have talked about to force Pakistan to act for the Mumbai attacks?
[Indian Su-30 fighter jets.Reuters pic}]
These are dangerous times to be making "inadvertent" violations into each other's territory. You would think if you were flying close to the Line of Control in Kashmir or near the international border in Punjab at this time of heightened tensions, you would be even more careful.
But two violations on the same day, both as some in the Pakistan press have pointed out near camps of the Lashkar-e-Taiba and you begin to think this has to be taken seriously and not dismissed outright.
Stratfor said given the tensions between the two nuclear neighbors after the Mumbai attack, and the details of the intrusions, it is unlikely that these incidents were accidental.
TRUTH UNFOLDED:
Ajmal Amir Kasab, an accused in the Mumbai carnage was originally arrested in Nepal and kidnapped by Indian intelligence agencies. Nepal had arrested Ajmal Kasab before 2006 and handed him over to India. It should be noted that there was no visa requirement for Indian nationals and they could visit Nepal even without a passport. Kathmandu had become a hub of Indian intelligence agencies which freely operated there and faced no resistance from law-enforcement agencies even if they chose to kidnap somebody for taking him to their country. source http://www.dawn.com
India continues to lag behind in the world politics, despite its claim to democracy. How many democracies are hanging on to a territory with military force whose people do not accept Indian’s jurisdictions over them. Is there a hope for self determination for Kashmiris in the Indian democracy? Indian democracy had an love affair with the communist Soviet Union and at the same time acquired the membership of the non aligned countries who by no means were democracies.
India has warm ties with the muslim states and military ties with Israel, the arch-enemy of the muslim States. Let us forget its relations with its neighbours who equally have the colonial past. India needs to undertakes structural changes in its domestic institutions as well as develop an independent foreign policy. There is a Seat reserved for India in the world arena but India on account of its domestic policies is very reluctant to claim this seat. The change in the world order is in motion, India needs to become a Nation which can contribute for the welfare of not only its own citizens but the rest of the people in the world.
My advice would be to get rid of the economist and elect a visionary Statesman. Does India have someone like the Chinese President or the Brasilian or even the Turkish equivalent to confront the imposter Obamas “yes We can” of this world. I am surec they have one and needs to come up front now and tell the world what the new Indian leader can do for the world.
Rex Minor