What's new

Obama’s duality encouraging Indian nuclear ambitions

Righteous_Fire

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
1,133
Reaction score
0
Obama’s duality encouraging Indian nuclear ambitions​



441f11caa44824581c78584dc9fcc76b.jpg




International community was greatly pleased on September 24 this year when following US President Barack Obama’s initiation, the UN Security Council passed a resolution, calling upon all countries outside the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) to join it as ‘non-nuclear weapons states’. But this euphoria ended within two days when Obama assured Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that the UNSC resolution is not directed against India and that his country would fulfill all obligations on the nuclear deal.


5ff98a8ed8c0d7ad8967adde03ecb495.jpg


Before this assurance, Indian high officials severely reacted saying that it “does not change its stand…there is no question of India joining the NPT. Nuclear weapons are an integral part of India’s national security.”


Meanwhile, one day after the UN resolution, US President Obama and the leaders of France and Britain warned Iran of dire consequences if it did not open its secret Iranian nuclear facility for inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Obama even threatened that failure by Tehran to give up its pursuit of nuclear weapons would lead to confrontation.


On the other side, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made it clear on September 25 that the new nuclear facility would not be operational for 18 months so Iran had not violated any requirements of the IAEA. However, Iranian leadership has repeatedly stated that its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.


Nevertheless, on the one hand, President Obama by moving away from the policies of Bush era which abandoned arms control has re-started it, while on the other; India is exempted from his nuclear approach.


Moreover, Obama-led some western rulers have been pressuring North Korea and particularly Iran to give up their nuclear programme, but such a policy is not applicable to Israel and especially India which are determined to further improve the capabilities of their atomic weapons.


Particularly, this duality of Obama is likely to encourage Indian nuclear ambitions which are unlimited and which will bring about dangerous consequences in South Asia and the whole world.


It is notable that earlier US President Barack Obama had recognised an inter-relationship among war against terrorism in Afghanistan, issue of Kashmir and arms race in South Asia.


In this context, on September 25, 2008, Obama, while accusing President Bush’s policies towards the two neighbours for letting “grave nuclear risks to grow in the region since 1998 nuclear tests,” offered it as part of his prospective policy by remarking that if elected, he would encourage India and Pakistan to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and resolve the Kashmir problem to reduce nuclear dangers in South Asia.


Now, by excluding New Delhi from his global disarmament goals, President Obama has deviated from his previous stand, thus emboldening Indian nuclear ambitions.


US self-contradictory approach could be judged from the fact that in July this year, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited India and finalized the defense agreement essential to allowing US companies to sell sophisticated arms to India as part of the pact of civil nuclear technology concluded during the Bush era.



It looks surprising that on the one side, some US-led western countries have been making strenuous efforts for world peace by lessening the dangers of nuclear proliferation, but on the other, they ignored New Delhi when it launched its first nuclear-powered submarine on July 27, 2009. In this regard, setting aside regional problems, and resolution of Indo-Pak issues - especially thorny dispute of Kashmir, Indian PM Singh called the inauguration of nuclear submarine - a “historic milestone in the country’s defence preparedness.” Singh further revealed: “We neither have any aggressive designs nor do we seek to threaten anyone.”


e0436850c3cdc2e50f241b04f57ae2e5.jpg


It becomes a big joke of the 21st century, reminding a maxim, “armed to the teeth, but no enemy”, if we take cognisance of India’s arms advances, and 34 per cent increase in its defence budget.


Indian aggressive designs could be assessed from the statement of its Defence Minister, Antony who stated in the Lok Sabha on July 20 that it was unfortunate that 70 per cent of defence equipment was still being imported, and now the government was working towards manufacturing state-of-the-art equipment indigenously. As a matter of fact, New Delhi with the support of US and Israel has presumed peace-loving Pakistan and China as their arch enemies.


In this respect, in May 1998, when India detonated five nuclear tests, the then Defence Minister George Fernandes had declared publicly that “China is India’s potential threat No. 1.”


7b6b5c0a3ef923167d607c9385b0abff.jpg


New Delhi which successfully tested missile, Agni-111 in May 2007, has been extending its range to target all Chinese cities. Besides, it was India which first conducted four atomic tests and forced Pakistan to follow the suit.



In this connection, Islamabad which had announced to depend upon minimum nuclear deterrence has repeatedly offered New Delhi to jointly sign the NPT and CTBT. But India rejected these proposals as its nuclear ambitions are endless, and are being encouraged by America, including other European countries.


It is of particular attention that recently Indian top scientist Santhanam Rajagopala who was a director for the 1998 nuclear tests at Pokhran has claimed that the explosions were unsuccessful. Nevertheless, under the pretext of this false statement, India wants to conduct more experiments.


In this context, on August 28, Indian former chairman of Atomic Energy Commission, Iyengar told the BBC: “If India wants to declare itself as a nuclear power…you have all the means of designing a thermo-nuclear device which can go into a missile, which can be dropped from an aircraft or can be launched from a submarine, you need many more tests.”


Quite contrary to the anti-China remarks of Fernandes, he also indicated that India’s 1998 nuclear test was not a deterrent against China, but it was against Pakistan.


Interestingly, owing to its own duality regarding nuclear non-proliferation regime, Washington neglects Indian paradoxes in the matter as New Delhi is determined to fulfill it nuclear ambitions.


It is mentionable that after 9/11, both India and Israel which had openly jumped on Bush’s anti-terrorism enterprise are implementing a secret strategy against Pakistan and China. In this context, Indo-Israeli secret diplomacy could be noted from the interview of Israel’s ambassador to India, Mark Sofer published in the Indian weekly Outlook on February 18, 2008. Regarding India’s defence arrangements with Tel Aviv, Sofer had surprisingly disclosed: “We do have a defence relationship with India…with all due respect; the secret part will remain a secret.”


In this connection, India’s ‘The Tribune’ reported on September 10, 2003, Tel Aviv has “agreed to share its expertise with India in various fields such as anti-fidayeen operations, surveillance satellites, intelligence sharing and space exploration.” Before it, ‘Jerusalem Post’ had indicated about Israeli sale of the Arrow-II anti-ballistic missile defence system to India, disclosing that “the US was a collaborator in the project”.


‘The Post’ also explained: “Israel could be acquiring an element of strategic depth by setting up logistical bases in the Indian Ocean for its navy” On September 2, 2004, ‘Indian Express’ reported, Israeli “cooperation with the Indian Navy is seen as vital…Indian Navy plans to acquire 10 more Israeli Barak anti-missile defence systems in addition to the seven already procured for its major warships.” India has also approved the purchase of a $97 million Israeli electronic warfare system for ships including fiber optic gyros and micro-electro mechanical systems.


Besides recent purchases of arms, a few weeks ago, Chairman of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), G Madhavan Nair, verified that India’s Radar Imaging Satellite (RISAT), launched on April 20 has started sending images. The launch displayed the secret Indo-Israeli jointly developed Advanced Mission Computers and Advanced Telemetry System.


India has also been purchasing nuclear materials and its components from Germany, France and Russia. It is due to the double standard of Obama that India has initiated deadly nuclear arms in South Asia where majority of people are living below the poverty level, lacking basic facilities like fresh food and clean water. While yielding to acute poverty, every day, some persons commit suicide in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka etc. No doubt, besides other western countries, responsibility goes to Obama’s dual approach on nuclear disarmament, which has encouraged Indian nuclear ambitions.


Regrettably, such ambivalence will further entangle South Asia in a deadly arms race, thus endangering its neighbouring countries, Gulf States, and world peace.​



The Frontier Post
 
.
hi first of all great article. It clearly describes how a common man in Pakistan would feel about the way India is treated all over the world. :cheers:

But there are a lot of misunderstandings here

1. We have a unilateral moratorium on testing & "No First use Policy" India is a democracy and every thing happening here is transparent.
2. India is not involved in proliferation of Nuclear weapons so our track record is clean

That means even though we have not signed the NPT, the world knows that we have followed the rules of NPT to the book
The special treatment we are getting now is a result of an impeccable track record in Non-Proliferation i think we deserve it.

And a nuclear submarine is in accordance with our policy of no first use so nothing to worry its just a second strike capability:cheers:
 
.
As far as Israel is concerned, India is a very tolerant multi ethnic country, with co existence being the basis of our society for centuries. In fact we are tolerant to people of all cast and creed:cheers:

A very large number of Jews do reside in India & this has become there home for centuries so its natural that Israel finds a natural ally in India & India finds one in Israel :)

And above all that any relationship is good if its good for the welfare of a nation & its national interest :coffee:
 
.
Moreover, Obama-led some western rulers have been pressuring North Korea and particularly Iran to give up their nuclear programme, but such a policy is not applicable to Israel and especially India which are determined to further improve the capabilities of their atomic weapons.
read... such a policy is not applicable to Israel, India and especially Pakistan.
Particularly, this duality of Obama is likely to encourage Indian nuclear ambitions which are unlimited and which will bring about dangerous consequences in South Asia and the whole world.
read Indian and Pakistani nuclear ambitions

Now, by excluding New Delhi from his global disarmament goals, President Obama has deviated from his previous stand, thus emboldening Indian nuclear ambitions.
Again include pakistan here too..

As a matter of fact, New Delhi with the support of US and Israel has presumed peace-loving Pakistan and China as their arch enemies.
"Peace-loving Pakistan" is not entirely true.

In this connection, Islamabad which had announced to depend upon minimum nuclear deterrence has repeatedly offered New Delhi to jointly sign the NPT and CTBT. But India rejected these proposals as its nuclear ambitions are endless, and are being encouraged by America, including other European countries.
Why should India trust Pakistan? to remind you India imposed a self ban on any nuclear tests in future and also declared its "no first use policy".

It is of particular attention that recently Indian top scientist Santhanam Rajagopala who was a director for the 1998 nuclear tests at Pokhran has claimed that the explosions were unsuccessful. Nevertheless, under the pretext of this false statement, India wants to conduct more experiments.
Indian govt never approved Mr. Santhanam's statements. it was Mr.Santhanam who wanted more tests.

In this connection, India’s ‘The Tribune’ reported on September 10, 2003, Tel Aviv has “agreed to share its expertise with India in various fields such as anti-fidayeen operations, surveillance satellites, intelligence sharing and space exploration.” Before it, ‘Jerusalem Post’ had indicated about Israeli sale of the Arrow-II anti-ballistic missile defence system to India, disclosing that “the US was a collaborator in the project”.
India badly needs such stuff. Mumbai incident is a clear indicator for that.

India has also been purchasing nuclear materials and its components from Germany, France and Russia. It is due to the double standard of Obama that India has initiated deadly nuclear arms in South Asia where majority of people are living below the poverty level, lacking basic facilities like fresh food and clean water. While yielding to acute poverty, every day, some persons commit suicide in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka etc. No doubt, besides other western countries, responsibility goes to Obama’s dual approach on nuclear disarmament, which has encouraged Indian nuclear ambitions.

Regrettably, such ambivalence will further entangle South Asia in a deadly arms race, thus endangering its neighbouring countries, Gulf States, and world peace.[/LEFT][/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]


The red part is pure BS. the nuclear materials were purchased under IAEA safegaurds. they were never for making bombs.


All in all looks like a article written by a pakistani. :blah:
 
.
hi first of all great article. It clearly describes how a common man in Pakistan would feel about the way India is treated all over the world. :cheers:

But there are a lot of misunderstandings here

1. We have a unilateral moratorium on testing & "No First use Policy" India is a democracy and every thing happening here is transparent.
2. India is not involved in proliferation of Nuclear weapons so our track record is clean

That means even though we have not signed the NPT, the world knows that we have followed the rules of NPT to the book
The special treatment we are getting now is a result of an impeccable track record in Non-Proliferation i think we deserve it.

And a nuclear submarine is in accordance with our policy of no first use so nothing to worry its just a second strike capability:cheers:

All policies and tactics go into the dustbin as soon as soon as the first bullet is fired :rolleyes:
 
.
Firstly, let me put it straight as to why the Americans treat India differently -

1) India has never taken part in nuclear proliferation and has never broken any IAEA rules. The CIRUS reactor which supplied weapons-grade plutonium for India's first test was not safeguarded by IAEA rules. Contrast this AQ Khan's nuclear Walmart.

2) India has never threatened to use nuclear weapons against any country. Contrast this with Musharaff's open threats of nuclear war with India.

3) India is officially committed to nuclear non-first use policy. Pakistan has not declared this stance.

4) India has opened several of its nuclear reactors to IAEA inspections.

Lastly, why single out the United States? Why not also accuse France, UK and Russia for "duality"? Even Canada, which for decades banished India because of the CIRUS reactor incident, is keen to re-open nuclear trade with India.
 
.
My my did we expect something different from Obama? Talk about being naive.
 
.
All policies and tactics go into the dustbin as soon as soon as the first bullet is fired :rolleyes:

A common misunderstanding...you cannot just decide one day that your NFU policy is now a nuclear weapon fighting strategy. It does not work like that. A first strike policy requires a no of steps including adding delivery systems and dedicated nuclear warfare divisions.India has no capability to fight a nuclear war and does not seem to take any steps to do so..her nuclear policy is very similar with China. China has around 250 nukes which serves as deterrence against the 12,000 nukes of the US.

India is convinced that she cannot be overwhelmed by potential enemies using conventional warfare so has no need to waste money on a nuclear warfare arm.
 
.
It clearly describes how a common man in Pakistan would feel about the way India is treated all over the world.

It sure does, however, it is not the good treatment in other fields that worries us, development such as that would bring development to India's own people and to the region, a mutually good thing for all. It is however, the double standards in the nuclear field, and other linear minded military developments that threaten to destabilize the whole region.

Remember, in any Arms race in South Asia, the burden of origin is going to be on India, as, no sane person can ever blame smaller and weaker economies like Pakistan or Sri Lanka for buying multi billion dollar weapon systems. It always originates from India, and to keep their own independence, the smaller states, then have to pursue and maintain the minimum deterrence requirement.

India is a democracy and every thing happening here is transparent.

Yes, so it would seem, and in many fields, things are transparent, however, all such fields are un important and non threatening, whereas the article clearly states, how secretive and non transparent the dealing are between India and "OTHERS" in some very threatening fields!!.

The special treatment we are getting now is a result of an impeccable track record in Non-Proliferation i think we deserve it.

Anyone with a good heart would like to assume the same, however, the reality is, Realpolitik!!, not that India has been very good. Our dear Uncle never wastes his charms on others without a reason. The reasons India is getting importance, will, in the long run be dangerous for its own self!!!. After being used against next door giants, the results will not be good for anyone in the whole region. Whether India, China or Pakistan.

A very large number of Jews do reside in India & this has become there home for centuries so its natural that Israel finds a natural ally in India & India finds one in Israel

Yes, Indeed, and this can be one logical answer to this "Special" relationship. However, DNA proven descendants of the original tribes also reside in Ethiopia and other African countries, why not the special treatment there, infact, why not any treatment with them at all, let alone, some kind of a special relationship.!!!. The truth however is that, India is losing both its capital and its noble democratic foundations by letting others plane and carry out "THEIR" strategic desires on its soil.


And above all that any relationship is good if its good for the welfare of a nation & its national interest

As Indians might think that, this is good for India, but there should also exist in their thought process, the reasons behind these new found "loves", to engage with it NOW, at this moment in time.

read... such a policy is not applicable to Israel, India and especially Pakistan.

read Indian and Pakistani nuclear ambitions

Again include pakistan here too..

Indeed, I agree, however, a few simple questions also come to mind, such as:

  • Who Nuclearized the sub continent - India or Pakistan ?.
  • Who conducted the first nuclear explosions - India or Pakistan ?.
  • Who first carried out plans for delivery systems of the nuclear weapons - India or Pakistan?.

We had to save our own necks after being dragged into this new nuclear arms race, it was not Pakistan who started all this, it was India......

"Peace-loving Pakistan" is not entirely true.

Rejecting our efforts for peace in the sub continent and the world in just one sentence like that, is sad to say the least!!! :disagree:

Why should India trust Pakistan?

In nuclear terms only, not only should Pakistan trust India but India should also trust Pakistan, we are nuclear states now, like it or not, and it is going to stay that way. without trust, if one nukes the other, it itself shall die in the fallout after wards. And that is the actual reality of nuclear weapons

Indian govt never approved Mr. Santhanam's statements.

This is commendable, however, actual steps to prove this to be so, are a necessity, not just rhetoric.

India badly needs such stuff. Mumbai incident is a clear indicator for that.

Your comment is logical for all the fields cited, except that it fails in parts such as, India needs this stuff after Mumbai incident like, "Anti Ballistic missiles, missile technology, etc. etc. ".

The red part is pure BS. the nuclear materials were purchased under IAEA safegaurds. they were never for making bombs.

:rolleyes:

All in all looks like a article written by a pakistani.

Can that be a reason to reject it out rightly without serious discussion???. :disagree:
 
.
Everyone forgets for a long time ie till the early 90's India had no relations with Israel. Diplomatic relations were only established in 91 or 92. Then why is Israel so close now..simple,the Israelis the masters of diplomacy did a very smart thing. During the Kargil way when India was frankly unprepared to fight a war in the mountains,the Israelis took their own equipment from the field and rushed it to the Indians,Israeli technicians flew into India to modify the Mirage 2000 for high altitude bombing operations etc. India did not forget and today,Israel gets 1 billion dollars(and growing) a year from India in defense business.
 
Last edited:
.
Everyone forgets for a long time ie till the early 90's India had no relations with Israel. Diplomatic relations were only established in 91 or 92. Then why is Israel so close now..simple,the Israelis the masters of diplomacy did a very smart thing. During the Kargil way when India was frankly unprepared to fight a war in the mountains,the Israelis took their own equipment from the field and rushed it to the Indians,Israeli technicians flew into India to modify the Mirage 2000 for high altitude bombing operations etc. India did not forget and today,Israel gets 1 billion dollars(and growing) a year from India in defense business.

I completely agree, part of this artificial sweetness that exists currently between the two, is because, India has a lot of buck it can hand out. But, more than that, it is not just the money, there is this strategic factor that exists as well....... whether you take it to the North of India, or you take it to the West of India.......... :agree:
 
.
Everyone forgets for a long time ie till the early 90's India had no relations with Israel. Diplomatic relations were only established in 91 or 92. Then why is Israel so close now..simple,the Israelis the masters of diplomacy did a very smart thing. During the Kargil way when India was frankly unprepared to fight a war in the mountains,the Israelis took their own equipment from the field and rushed it to the Indians,Israeli technicians flew into India to modify the Mirage 2000 for high altitude bombing operations etc. India did not forget and today,Israel gets 1 billion dollars(and growing) a year from India in defense business.

I will never forget what Israel did for India, a friend in need is a friend indeed. We gain a lot by having ties with Israel, we will gain further. We were late but this was best decision.
 
.
Firstly, let me put it straight as to why the Americans treat India differently -

1) India has never taken part in nuclear proliferation and has never broken any IAEA rules. The CIRUS reactor which supplied weapons-grade plutonium for India's first test was not safeguarded by IAEA rules. Contrast this AQ Khan's nuclear Walmart.
What about all the countries in the West that had people and organizations supplying his 'nuclear walmart'? Many of those are in the NSG .. SO double standards, no?

2) India has never threatened to use nuclear weapons against any country. Contrast this with Musharaff's open threats of nuclear war with India.
The threats of nuclear war are in response to Indian aggression, not out of the blue 'we'll toss nukes on India if we feel like it', so it is a defensive policy, one that is also embraced by Israel through its possession of nukes. Think about it, none of Israel's immediate enemies have nukes, so when will Israel use them? First Use, in case of aggression from the Arabs that threatens to overwhelm them, correct? Same basic idea as Pakistan's.

In addition, Russia has stated that it has the right to use Nukes even if nukes are not used against it.

3) India is officially committed to nuclear non-first use policy. Pakistan has not declared this stance.

See above - not a good reason for double standards and discrimination.
4) India has opened several of its nuclear reactors to IAEA inspections.

Barring the Khushab complex (which right now has one functioning reactor), Pakistan's reactors are under IAEA safeguards as well.
Lastly, why single out the United States? Why not also accuse France, UK and Russia for "duality"? Even Canada, which for decades banished India because of the CIRUS reactor incident, is keen to re-open nuclear trade with India.
The US led nuclear deal is what opened the doors for India, and it was US pressure on some of the European members of the NSG that allowed for the NSG vote to go in India's favor.

That the US can bring about this influence is reality.
 
.
It sure does, however, it is not the good treatment in other fields that worries us, development such as that would bring development to India's own people and to the region, a mutually good thing for all. It is however, the double standards in the nuclear field, and other linear minded military developments that threaten to destabilize the whole region.

Remember, in any Arms race in South Asia, the burden of origin is going to be on India, as, no sane person can ever blame smaller and weaker economies like Pakistan or Sri Lanka for buying multi billion dollar weapon systems. It always originates from India, and to keep their own independence, the smaller states, then have to pursue and maintain the minimum deterrence requirement.

Play the victim card if you must, but leave the others out of it. Today, India and Sri Lanka have excellent relations. India has donated BILLIONS. We could have easily exacerbated the situation in Sri Lanka instead we went there and built refugee camps. We set up schools, donated medicines. It is Pakistan that is on a collision course with India and itself. Pakistani 'tribals/freedom fighters' have been running amok since 1947. India did not cross the LoC in '65 or '99. You can keep believing that India is the big bad bully, but the reality is that all our neighbors are forging closer ties with us.

Yes, so it would seem, and in many fields, things are transparent, however, all such fields are un important and non threatening, whereas the article clearly states, how secretive and non transparent the dealing are between India and "OTHERS" in some very threatening fields!!.

I wonder what India and these other states may have in common....

Hmm..maybe innocent men, women and children are torn to bits by brainwashed animals emanating from your soil?

Maybe so many states are ready to cooperate with us because we have stability, transparency and accountability in so many places that you find 'unimportant'.

Anyone with a good heart would like to assume the same, however, the reality is, Realpolitik!!, not that India has been very good. Our dear Uncle never wastes his charms on others without a reason. The reasons India is getting importance, will, in the long run be dangerous for its own self!!!. After being used against next door giants, the results will not be good for anyone in the whole region. Whether India, China or Pakistan.

India isn't going to let itself get pushed around. Its a two way street here, if they want something from us, then we'd ask for something from them. Diplomacy is the one thing India is decent at. Pakistan is far more vulnerable to American interference than India will ever be.

Yes, Indeed, and this can be one logical answer to this "Special" relationship. However, DNA proven descendants of the original tribes also reside in Ethiopia and other African countries, why not the special treatment there, infact, why not any treatment with them at all, let alone, some kind of a special relationship.!!!. The truth however is that, India is losing both its capital and its noble democratic foundations by letting others plane and carry out "THEIR" strategic desires on its soil.


See above.

As Indians might think that, this is good for India, but there should also exist in their thought process, the reasons behind these new found "loves", to engage with it NOW, at this moment in time.

Its all about strategic convergence, we'll be their friends as long as they remain ours and as long as it makes sense.

Indeed, I agree, however, a few simple questions also come to mind, such as:

  • Who Nuclearized the sub continent - India or Pakistan ?.
  • Who conducted the first nuclear explosions - India or Pakistan ?.
  • Who first carried out plans for delivery systems of the nuclear weapons - India or Pakistan?.

We had to save our own necks after being dragged into this new nuclear arms race, it was not Pakistan who started all this, it was India......

India nuclearized the sub continent alright, but who started a WAR after they acquired nuclear weapons? India could have started a war in '75 but did we?

Rejecting our efforts for peace in the sub continent and the world in just one sentence like that, is sad to say the least!!! :disagree:

Did I miss something here, or has the LeT been wiped out?

In nuclear terms only, not only should Pakistan trust India but India should also trust Pakistan, we are nuclear states now, like it or not, and it is going to stay that way. without trust, if one nukes the other, it itself shall die in the fallout after wards. And that is the actual reality of nuclear weapons

Who should India trust in Pakistan? :hitwall:


Your comment is logical for all the fields cited, except that it fails in parts such as, India needs this stuff after Mumbai incident like, "Anti Ballistic missiles, missile technology, etc. etc. ".

Yes, we do but not only because of Mumbai. Once again, India thinks beyond south asia.


:D

Can that be a reason to reject it out rightly without serious discussion???. :disagree:

if one goes over board with the bias, then yes.
 
.
The West doesn't support India because of democracy, non-proliferation, transparency or any of that fake bullsh*t.

All you need to understand that relationship is to note that the West's love for India grew directly in proportion to China's rise on the world stage. All the other diplomatic bombast is strictly for the birds, and it's quite fascinating to watch the gullible Indians lap it up.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom