![]() |
|
|||||||
|
Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board! The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today? |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 (permalink) | |
|
Banished
|
Has Bush forced a shift in US policy of regional containment in relation to India?
Without going into great detail, I would like to hear views of Americans on WAB as to what they think about the US Policy towards India in terms of regional containment and nuclear proliferation.
Since George Bush came into power in January 2001, there has been a huge shift in the foreign policy of United States towards India. Quote:
George Bush along with than National Security advisor underlined the strategic importance of India in an article in ("Promoting the National Interest", Foreign Affairs, 79 (January-February It (the US) should pay closer attention to India's role in the regional balance, There is a strong tendency cnceptually to connect India with Pakistan and to think only of Kashmir or the nuclear competition between the two states. But India is an element in China's calculation and it should be in America's too. India is not a great power yet, but it has the potential to emerge as one. Following these comments Bush dispatched Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage to India along with a few select countries to explain the NMD (National Missile Defence) system plan. Armitage's statements on his tour and after the tour showed high Importance by US for India which was a major shift from its previous policy stand. These few events are just a few from many happenings in the last four years but the most important of these statement could be considered when for the first time someone from the US went on record in saying Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Christina Rocca, welcomed "India's new global status" during her confirmation hearings in May 2001" "US welcomes India's New Global Status" Times of India May 18,2001. and the comments were picked up by Collin Powell who also reiterated Rocco's comments. Better was yet 2 come While the administration is keen on good relations with Pakistan, too, we have informed the Indians that India would be treated in its own right and not in reference to US ties with Pakistan. This was followed by appointment of Robert Blackwell and eminent strategic expert as the ambassdor to INdia. To me this seems to a break away from the traditional approach of containment through Pakistan and given that the break up of USSR no longer leaves the option of a tilt of India towards Communism surely has made some difference. Yet things are far from clear given that Hillary Clinton might run and may even get elected in next US elections and given Bill Clinton would be on her side would make a heck of diff? I look forward to all of your comments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Military Professional
Moderator |
Gautam,
To be honest, most Americans are not too familiar with US-Indo or US-Pakistani relations. The war against radical Islam and Iraq dominate the news. However, you didn't mention the strategic cooperation agreement that was signed this past summer. I believe that the average American doesn't see India as a threat, except maybe to the good health of their computer . Personally, I don't see India as a threat. With the rising aspirations of China, while not a threat in the immediate decade, it will be important to have both India and Pakistan as an ally. While I see a lot of duplicity in the US-Pakistani relationship, the alternative is worse. So, I think you'll see a continuing cooperation that increases between India and US.
__________________
"So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) | |
|
Banished
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) | |
|
Lord High Hullabalooster
Senior Contributor
|
Quote:
In my experience, within about 5 posts some jackknob from Pakistan will come in here flinging his poo and then some jackknob from India will respond in kind and before you know it there will be six pages of outrage over who raped whose elephant 1,200 years ago. And then it will morph into some useless poll about SU-5000s being better than F4U Corsairs, and why is Pakistan being forced to purchase Sopwith Camels when India has X-wings. Apologies, but that's my impression. -dale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) | |
|
WAB Bartender
Defense Professional
Military Professional |
Quote:
__________________
"The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it, and if one finds the prospect of a long war intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the possibility of victory." - George Orwell |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) | |
|
WAB Bartender
Defense Professional
Military Professional |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
Senior Contributor
|
The new U.S. approach to India is certainly an effort to establish a regional balance or foil to China. India has the population and the resources to equal China's power, but it still lags in military strenght and foreign investment, to name a few categories.
The U.S. is placing more of its bets with India because India has several advantages over Pakistan. India can command many more resources than Pakistan can will serve as a better counter to China. Also, large parts of the Pakistani population are hostile to the U.S., and Pakistan is, in general, less stable than India. The U.S. expects a better return on its investment from India. As an American, I have been watching the Indian-American relations with hope. One of the best ways to prevent war with China is to prove to them that it is not in their interest. If China sees a strong regional power like India arrayed against it, the CCP will stay peaceful. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) | |
|
Staff Emeritus
Chief Subversive |
I don't believe the average American really has a clue as to what India's all about, other than maybe elephants, the Taj Mahal, outsourced computer and tech-support jobs, and an infinite supply of corner grocery store managers.
As to my personal belief, I'm in line with Bulgaroctonus, in that we wish to use India against China as we used China against the Soviet Union, and that India seems less aggressive and politically controlling than China, and more ammicable and in line to US policies and goals. Quote:
Laughing too hard...Can't breath...send help...
__________________
The black flag is raised: Ban them all... Let the Admin sort them out. I know I'm going to have the last word... I have powers of deletion and lock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) | |
|
Banished
|
Quote:
If u r not interested than stay out, I am only trying 2 have a sensible conversation here. This ain't about India or Pak but I am only trying 2 get an average american's viewpoint on their preceptions about their foreign policy. Above all one thing I have learnt here is not 2 indulge so called India/Pak Patriots because it only feeds thier hollow ego |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 (permalink) |
|
Postmaster General
Military Professional
|
Dalem,
While you do have a point, yet you are goading the thread into a fight. Even if that happens, so what? It is for the discerning observer to shift wheat from the chaff. I do sift the wheat from the chaff when I find these Republican vs Democrat tripe that surface ever so often on this forum. The thread is an important issue to Indians and to the world. Is it to balance China or is there more to it? If so, what is the effect on the geo strategic equation and how will each player find their slot? These are important military and strategic issues. I concede that the average oaf will not understand and will take the thread off course. I am astonished to learn that the average American has no clue of international affairs. I just don't believe it to be true.
__________________
![]() "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination." I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to. HAKUNA MATATA Last edited by Ray : 12-07-2005 at 13:17 PM. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| India has sold its nuclear soul to the US | Asim Aquil | Political Discussions | 60 | 08-02-2008 01:37 AM |
| Indo-Pakistan Talks – Myths, Delusions and Fantasies!! | Ray | South Asian Defense Topics | 11 | 05-06-2007 21:25 PM |
| How clean is India? | Neo | Political Discussions | 163 | 05-03-2006 19:09 PM |
| Pakistan: The State of Denial | Ray | South Asian Defense Topics | 22 | 05-07-2005 08:47 AM |
| Dr. Henry Kissinger on Indo-US Relations | Hari_Om | The Western Alliance | 2 | 11-17-2004 00:05 AM |