Pakistan looking towards Russia: Report

[Pakistani shaheens]

Pakistan looking towards Russia: Report

WASHINGTON - As the United States forges closer ties to India, Pakistan is turning towards Russia, a leading American newspaper reported, calling the move "a budding partnership that could eventually shift historic alliances in South Asia."
In recent months, The Washington Post noted, Pakistani military and political leaders have reached out to Moscow, seeking to warm ties that have been frosty since the Cold War. In November, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu visited Islamabad and signed a military cooperation agreement with Pakistan, which is now hoping to finalise plans to buy three dozen Russian Mi-35 helicopters and more closely coordinate efforts to counter terrorism and narcotics.
Pakistan also wants Russian assistance to stabilise chronic energy shortages, the Post said in a dispatch from Islamabad.
"The moves come as Pakistani leaders grow increasingly nervous that their traditional alliances could erode, if not crumble, in the coming years," the newspaper said, obviously referring to the warming Washington-Delhi ties. "For much of its history, Pakistan has been an ally of the United States, while Russia had stronger ties to India, even backing it during that country’s 1971 war with Pakistan. But now that most NATO troops have left next-door Afghanistan — and the Pakistani army is straining to overcome militants on its western border — officials here fear that the United States’ regional interest is tilting toward India, Pakistan’s eastern neighbour and archrival."
“Of course we are concerned,” one unnamed senior Pakistani military leader was quoted as saying. “The balance of power is being tipped toward India, and that is not good, and it’s been done with the help of the Western world. That is why we are looking at various markets, because conventional [military] parity is the only recipe for peace and stability."
Pakistan’s efforts to kindle ties with Moscow come as relations between the West and Russia continue to worsen, which may prompt it to look for new trading partners in Asia, according to the Post. Pakistanis are also worried the Indian army is moving toward dominance in the conventional arms race, the dispatch said.
Those concerns were "magnified" this week when US President Barack Obama and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi vowed to strengthen cooperation on defence and energy matters, and they announced a deal that they said should smooth the way for American companies to invest in Indian civilian nuclear plants.
“To be very honest, we think Obama has gone one step too far,” Maria Sultan, chairwoman of the Islamabad-based South Asian Strategic Stability Institute, was quoted as saying.
In another sign of the unease, the Post noted Pakistan’s Army chief Gen Raheel Sharif travelled to China last weekend to solidify long-standing military and economic ties between the two countries. China is Pakistan’s largest arms supplier, having sold or transferred it nearly $4 billion in weapons since 2006, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), which monitors arms sales.
The United States, with about $2.5 billion in arms sales to Pakistan over the past nine years, is the country’s second-largest arms supplier. In December, Congress also authorised $1 billion in additional funds to Pakistan for its continued support of counter-terrorism operations. But it is unclear how much American aid will flow to Pakistan in the coming years.
Tasnim Aslam, spokeswoman for Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said Pakistan doesn’t want to “put all of its eggs in one basket.” “It’s a multi-polar world, and it’s in our interest to engage all the poles and forge relationships,” said Aslam.
Noting Secretary of State John Kerry had a productive visit to Islamabad two weeks ago, Aslam said Washington shouldn’t read too much into Pakistan’s outreach to President Putin. But some Pakistani lawmakers offered a more pointed view of Pakistan’s rapprochement with Russia.
“Pakistan’s historical mistake after its inception was to establish close ties with the United States but to ignore the Russians,” Haji Muhammad Adeel, a lawmaker who chairs the Senate’s foreign relations committee, was quoted as saying. “We went to war with Russia in Afghanistan, and that brought us gifts of terrorism, extremism and drugs. Now Pakistan is trying to forge friendly ties with Russia to correct the mistakes of the past.”
"Despite that outreach, it remains unclear whether Pakistan’s efforts to bolster ties with Russia will pay off," the report commented.

Pakistan looking towards Russia: Report

 

[WAJsal]

You don't need any reports to figure that out .

 

[Pakistani shaheens]

You don't need any reports to figure that out .

But we do need such reports for those who don't understand.

 

[root]

Will Russia forgive Pakistan for snatching their Super power Status?Regardless of that it is time to correct past mistakes.

 

[Cortana]

well india will taste the fruite of friendship with teh America very soon . but it is indeed a very good news for pakistan to develop relation with russia .

 

[Zarvan]

Pakistan looking towards Russia: Report
View attachment 188266
WASHINGTON - As the United States forges closer ties to India, Pakistan is turning towards Russia, a leading American newspaper reported, calling the move "a budding partnership that could eventually shift historic alliances in South Asia."
In recent months, The Washington Post noted, Pakistani military and political leaders have reached out to Moscow, seeking to warm ties that have been frosty since the Cold War. In November, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu visited Islamabad and signed a military cooperation agreement with Pakistan, which is now hoping to finalise plans to buy three dozen Russian Mi-35 helicopters and more closely coordinate efforts to counter terrorism and narcotics.
Pakistan also wants Russian assistance to stabilise chronic energy shortages, the Post said in a dispatch from Islamabad.
"The moves come as Pakistani leaders grow increasingly nervous that their traditional alliances could erode, if not crumble, in the coming years," the newspaper said, obviously referring to the warming Washington-Delhi ties. "For much of its history, Pakistan has been an ally of the United States, while Russia had stronger ties to India, even backing it during that country’s 1971 war with Pakistan. But now that most NATO troops have left next-door Afghanistan — and the Pakistani army is straining to overcome militants on its western border — officials here fear that the United States’ regional interest is tilting toward India, Pakistan’s eastern neighbour and archrival."
“Of course we are concerned,” one unnamed senior Pakistani military leader was quoted as saying. “The balance of power is being tipped toward India, and that is not good, and it’s been done with the help of the Western world. That is why we are looking at various markets, because conventional [military] parity is the only recipe for peace and stability."
Pakistan’s efforts to kindle ties with Moscow come as relations between the West and Russia continue to worsen, which may prompt it to look for new trading partners in Asia, according to the Post. Pakistanis are also worried the Indian army is moving toward dominance in the conventional arms race, the dispatch said.
Those concerns were "magnified" this week when US President Barack Obama and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi vowed to strengthen cooperation on defence and energy matters, and they announced a deal that they said should smooth the way for American companies to invest in Indian civilian nuclear plants.
“To be very honest, we think Obama has gone one step too far,” Maria Sultan, chairwoman of the Islamabad-based South Asian Strategic Stability Institute, was quoted as saying.
In another sign of the unease, the Post noted Pakistan’s Army chief Gen Raheel Sharif travelled to China last weekend to solidify long-standing military and economic ties between the two countries. China is Pakistan’s largest arms supplier, having sold or transferred it nearly $4 billion in weapons since 2006, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), which monitors arms sales.
The United States, with about $2.5 billion in arms sales to Pakistan over the past nine years, is the country’s second-largest arms supplier. In December, Congress also authorised $1 billion in additional funds to Pakistan for its continued support of counter-terrorism operations. But it is unclear how much American aid will flow to Pakistan in the coming years.
Tasnim Aslam, spokeswoman for Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said Pakistan doesn’t want to “put all of its eggs in one basket.” “It’s a multi-polar world, and it’s in our interest to engage all the poles and forge relationships,” said Aslam.
Noting Secretary of State John Kerry had a productive visit to Islamabad two weeks ago, Aslam said Washington shouldn’t read too much into Pakistan’s outreach to President Putin. But some Pakistani lawmakers offered a more pointed view of Pakistan’s rapprochement with Russia.
“Pakistan’s historical mistake after its inception was to establish close ties with the United States but to ignore the Russians,” Haji Muhammad Adeel, a lawmaker who chairs the Senate’s foreign relations committee, was quoted as saying. “We went to war with Russia in Afghanistan, and that brought us gifts of terrorism, extremism and drugs. Now Pakistan is trying to forge friendly ties with Russia to correct the mistakes of the past.”
"Despite that outreach, it remains unclear whether Pakistan’s efforts to bolster ties with Russia will pay off," the report commented.

Pakistan looking towards Russia: Report

Russia is not only selling MI 35 but has also offered MI 28 and 3 different Air Defence systems

 

[13 komaun]

What's new Pak has been looking towards others since its beginning,question is do other nations looks towards it.

 

[Pakistani shaheens]

Will Russia forgive Pakistan for snatching their Super power Status?

It's not fair to say that it was solely Pakistan who played its part to break USSR, that subject is very complex, many regional countries along with USA paved the path for disintegration of Soviet. Pakistan's role in this episode was very small. But look Soviets also help india breaking East Pakistan. So I think the scores are all level we don't need to dig up 4-5 decades old dead stories.

That was past, today is the present and if we are to ensure better future for our next generations then we need to come out from that decades old stories and should embark on the fresh beginning.

And I think this is the exact thing that Russians and Pakistanis are doing. And it's good thing and there is a famous quote regarding it that- "the journey of thousands of miles starts with a single step"- and I think this is actually that very step which will going to break the ice berg between these two countries.

It's in the benefit of both countries to set strong ties.

 

[root]

It's not fair to say that it was solely Pakistan who played its part to break USSR, that subject is very complex, many regional countries along with USA paved the path for disintegration of Soviet. Pakistan's role in this episode was very small. But look Soviets also help india breaking East Pakistan. So I think the scores are all level we don't need to dig up 4-5 decades old dead stories.

That was past, today is the present and if we are to ensure better future for our next generations then we need to come out from that decades old stories and should embark on the fresh beginning.

And I think this is the exact thing that Russians and Pakistanis are doing. And it's good thing as it will and there is a famous quote is that "the journey of thousands of miles starts with a single step" and I think this is actually that step which will break the ice berg between these two countries.

It's in the benefit of both countries to set strong ties.

Lets hope both countries forget what happened in the past and look for future.

 

[EL LOBO]

that is good news...

 

[VelocuR]

Just read this interesting articles below, I don't think Pakistan should look at Russia.

M. K. Bhadrakumar - Obama Hustles Modi, Did He Succeed?
Melkulangara BHADRAKUMAR | 30.01.2015 | 00:00

The three-day state visit by the United States President Barack Obama to India has been extraordinarily rich in political symbolism. It followed an initiative by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to invite Obama to be the chief guest at India’s national day celebrations on January 26.

Modi himself had visited Washington only four months ago and Obama’s acceptance of the invitation also signified an unprecedented second visit by an incumbent American president to India.

With the dust settling down on the colorful visit, stocktaking begins. There are three templates to consider – one, how to decipher the political symbolism as such; two, what has been the substantive outcome of the visit and what lies ahead for the India-US relations; and, three, how the upgrade of the relationship impacts the power dynamic in Asia-Pacific.

Without doubt, New Delhi and Washington have signaled a political resolve to re-energize the relationship, which has been under the weather in the past 2 to 3 years. Looking back, the high expectations raised by the former prime minister Manmohan Singh to Washington in 2009 and Obama’s return visit in 2010 could not be fulfilled, which took the shine off the India-US relationship.

Essentially, the Obama administration was waiting till the political uncertainties in India cleared up after the April-May 2014 election. Modi himself went the extra league during his September visit to underscore that he not only carried no ill will, but was eager to energize the ties with the US. And Washington has estimated that it can do business with Modi whom it not only sees as ‘pro-reform’ like his predecessor but also as someone who would make a more meaningful, effective and resolute interlocutor than Manmohan Singh.

For Modi, a lavish display of friendship with ‘Barack’ holds advantages in domestic politics. Obama, who has a reputation for being aloof, is willing to play along. Meanwhile, for Obama, whose presidency is under relentless attack at home, resuscitation of the US-Indian relationship is a foreign-policy legacy. The Modi-Obama bonding is a match made in heaven.

Having said that, Obama’s visit failed to produce a substantive outcome. He made no commitments regarding US investments. No accord could be reached on climate change (which was apparently a priority). The India-US defence agreement has been renewed for another ten-year period but no flagship project was announced on co-production or joint development of military technology. Nor did India sign any new contracts for American weaponry.

A significant outcome devolves upon the «breakthrough» in finding a formula that could remove the discord between the two governments over India’s nuclear liability law. But there is no clarity whether the understanding reached at the governmental level (details of which haven’t been divulged) would stand scrutiny in a court of law or even prompt the American companies to shed their inhibitions over the Indian law (which, they say, does not conform to the international covenants on liability in nuclear commerce.)

In short, the balance sheet is poor, but the media hype is that this has been a ‘transformative’ visit. The truly transformative visits in the relationship have been two – visit by Bill Clinton in March 2000, auguring a historic course correction in the US’ unfriendly cold-war era policies, and by George W. Bush in March 2006 against the backdrop of the US-India civil nuclear cooperation agreement, which promised a paradigm shift in the strategic ties. In comparison, Obama’s visit falls in a category by itself – an earnest joint effort to salvage the relationship and put it on a forward-looking trajectory.

How far Modi and Obama succeeded, time only will tell. The Indians are notorious for praising their leaders’ ‘personal chemistry’ with western statesmen, blithely overlooking that convergence of interests is the bedrock of inter-state relationships. The sustainability of the excellent climate in the India-US relations will depend on the follow-up. What can be said for the present is that there is enormous interest on both sides to do this, but, equally, there is a sense of déjà vu among dispassionate onlookers.

The heart of the matter is that the sort of market access that the US is demanding and the high Indian expectations regarding American investments are unrealistic in a near term. The testimonies by the IMF and World Bank that India is on a high growth path exceeding China’s within a year or two must add up – and there is no empirical evidence. Systemic issues are many, and the international economic environment is not encouraging. The recovery of the US economy has not stabilized.

Delhi claims that «investor perception about India has reversed dramatically after years of stagnation» – to quote the Finance Minister Arun Jaitley. But Jaitley also candidly admitted that such optimism is «tempered with caution» as regards the government’s ability to deliver.

Regional tensions and fatcats

The only foreign-policy statement to come out of Obama’s visit has been a ‘joint strategic vision statement’ regarding Asia-Pacific and the Indian Ocean. Interestingly, the statement had nothing to say regarding Pakistan, which is an obsessive foreign-policy issue for the Hindu nationalists who mentor the Modi government. Obama said not a word regarding Pakistan or its alleged support for terrorism, which is a big departure from his 2010 visit to India. Profound differences remain between the two countries regarding Pakistan, the most vexatious regional issue in Modi’s foreign-policy calculus at the moment.

The ‘joint strategic statement’ turned out to be a rehash of the positions articulated in the joint statement issued after Modi’s visit to Washington and it, once again, contains a tendentious reference to the South China Sea. The American side has given the spin that the Obama-Modi talks on regional issues heavily focused on China’s ‘assertive’ policies.

The pro-American analysts in the Indian media have rushed to the conclusion that under Modi, India is veering round to «an eventual amalgamation of India’s Act East (policies in south east Asia) and the US’ Asia pivot». Their preposterous thesis is that Modi is jettisoning India’s inhibition about the US’ containment strategy against China.

Indeed, the US objective has always been to recruit India in its containment strategy against China. The idea of a ‘quadripartite alliance’ between the US, Japan, Australia and India is at least a decade old, dating from the high noon of the neocon ideology in the George W Bush presidency. Obama’s former defence secretary Leon Panetta once famously named India as a ‘lynchpin’ in the US’ rebalance strategy in Asia.

However, the moment Obama and the spin doctors in his entourage took off for home, Indian officials scrambled to do fire-fighting, distancing themselves from their «strategic misinterpretation» of the joint strategic vision statement. According to them, Modi made it clear to Obama that India’s independent foreign policies would not allow any «third power» (read US) to forge a common front against China.

Delhi is anxious that the Americans and their lobbyists in India do not choreograph Modi’s forthcoming visit to China. A senior Indian diplomat briefed the media that Indian External Affairs Minister is leaving for China on Friday and on her return, the National Security Advisor will also travel to Beijing to prepare for Modi’s visit. The diplomat has been quoted as saying, «President Xi is keen to host him [Modi] in his hometown Xian».

Why are the Americans spreading such «strategic misinterpretation» of Modi’s thinking on China? Washington seems acutely conscious that the US cannot match China as an investor in Modi’s ‘Make in India’ project. The US’ big worry is that if the proposed railway project by China in India involving $32 billion goes through (on top of the offer made by China during Xi’s visit to India in September on a $20 billion investment plan to set up industrial parks), the Sino-Indian relationship would profoundly transform.

The heart of the matter is that Modi’s development agenda (on which his mandate in the 2014 election rests) focuses on the infrastructure and manufacturing sectors, since they only hold big potential to generate jobs for India’s millions of unemployed youth – and it is China that makes an ideal partner, given its vast experience in these sectors.

On the other hand, the bottom line has always been that the verve and swagger of the India-US ‘strategic partnership’ needs as fodder an incessant supply of Sino-Indian tensions. Such tensions vitiate the regional security environment and create acute anxieties in the Indian mind and in turn would provide the ideal business climate for the fatcats in the US military-industrial complex. It is a vicious cycle.

The great American fear today is that Modi might break this cycle and put India-China relations on a predictable footing. From the Chinese commentaries on Obama’s visit, Beijing is aware of the American attempt to hustle Modi towards the US’ rebalance strategy in Asia. And Delhi is hastening to clarify that proximity to the US will not translate as alliance against China. An element of strategic ambiguity has appeared. Much will now depend on the outcome of Modi’s forthcoming visit to China.

Obama Hustles Modi, Did He Succeed?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

India sends foreign minister to China after Obama visit

Agence France-Presse, New Delhi | World | Wed, January 28 2015, 4:38 PM

India's foreign minister will travel to China this weekend, New Delhi said on Wednesday, a day after Barack Obama ended a visit aimed at renewing US ties with the South Asian country.

Sushma Swaraj will go to Beijing on Sunday to "discuss bilateral, regional and global issues of concern to both sides" with her Chinese counterpart Wang Yi, India's government said in a statement.

They will also hold three-way talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, the statement said.

The announcement followed a high-profile visit to New Delhi by the US president aimed at cementing ties between the two countries, which share an interest in curbing China's growing regional influence.

Although neither side mentioned China by name during Obama's three-day visit, the US president welcomed what he called a "greater role for India in the Asia Pacific" and said freedom of navigation in the region must be upheld.

Beijing claims sovereignty over large swathes of the South China Sea, home to maritime lanes that are vital to global trade.

India's new Prime Minister Narendra Modi is widely seen as taking a more assertive line on China than the previous government.

But experts say Modi will be careful not to alienate neighboring China, whose investment he desperately needs as he tries to boost India's economy.

Obama and Modi took pains to demonstrate their personal rapport during the US president's visit. But China's state news agency Xinhua has said it was a "superficial rapprochement", pointing to persistent differences on issues such as climate change.

India sends foreign minister to China after Obama visit

 

[root]

I will leave it for our foreign policy makers to decide what is best for the interest of Pakistan and lets hope they do their job well.

 

[Pakistani shaheens]

Just read this interesting articles below, I don't think Pakistan should look at Russia.

M. K. Bhadrakumar - Obama Hustles Modi, Did He Succeed?
Melkulangara BHADRAKUMAR | 30.01.2015 | 00:00

The three-day state visit by the United States President Barack Obama to India has been extraordinarily rich in political symbolism. It followed an initiative by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to invite Obama to be the chief guest at India’s national day celebrations on January 26.

Modi himself had visited Washington only four months ago and Obama’s acceptance of the invitation also signified an unprecedented second visit by an incumbent American president to India.

With the dust settling down on the colorful visit, stocktaking begins. There are three templates to consider – one, how to decipher the political symbolism as such; two, what has been the substantive outcome of the visit and what lies ahead for the India-US relations; and, three, how the upgrade of the relationship impacts the power dynamic in Asia-Pacific.

Without doubt, New Delhi and Washington have signaled a political resolve to re-energize the relationship, which has been under the weather in the past 2 to 3 years. Looking back, the high expectations raised by the former prime minister Manmohan Singh to Washington in 2009 and Obama’s return visit in 2010 could not be fulfilled, which took the shine off the India-US relationship.

Essentially, the Obama administration was waiting till the political uncertainties in India cleared up after the April-May 2014 election. Modi himself went the extra league during his September visit to underscore that he not only carried no ill will, but was eager to energize the ties with the US. And Washington has estimated that it can do business with Modi whom it not only sees as ‘pro-reform’ like his predecessor but also as someone who would make a more meaningful, effective and resolute interlocutor than Manmohan Singh.

For Modi, a lavish display of friendship with ‘Barack’ holds advantages in domestic politics. Obama, who has a reputation for being aloof, is willing to play along. Meanwhile, for Obama, whose presidency is under relentless attack at home, resuscitation of the US-Indian relationship is a foreign-policy legacy. The Modi-Obama bonding is a match made in heaven.

Having said that, Obama’s visit failed to produce a substantive outcome. He made no commitments regarding US investments. No accord could be reached on climate change (which was apparently a priority). The India-US defence agreement has been renewed for another ten-year period but no flagship project was announced on co-production or joint development of military technology. Nor did India sign any new contracts for American weaponry.

A significant outcome devolves upon the «breakthrough» in finding a formula that could remove the discord between the two governments over India’s nuclear liability law. But there is no clarity whether the understanding reached at the governmental level (details of which haven’t been divulged) would stand scrutiny in a court of law or even prompt the American companies to shed their inhibitions over the Indian law (which, they say, does not conform to the international covenants on liability in nuclear commerce.)

In short, the balance sheet is poor, but the media hype is that this has been a ‘transformative’ visit. The truly transformative visits in the relationship have been two – visit by Bill Clinton in March 2000, auguring a historic course correction in the US’ unfriendly cold-war era policies, and by George W. Bush in March 2006 against the backdrop of the US-India civil nuclear cooperation agreement, which promised a paradigm shift in the strategic ties. In comparison, Obama’s visit falls in a category by itself – an earnest joint effort to salvage the relationship and put it on a forward-looking trajectory.

How far Modi and Obama succeeded, time only will tell. The Indians are notorious for praising their leaders’ ‘personal chemistry’ with western statesmen, blithely overlooking that convergence of interests is the bedrock of inter-state relationships. The sustainability of the excellent climate in the India-US relations will depend on the follow-up. What can be said for the present is that there is enormous interest on both sides to do this, but, equally, there is a sense of déjà vu among dispassionate onlookers.

The heart of the matter is that the sort of market access that the US is demanding and the high Indian expectations regarding American investments are unrealistic in a near term. The testimonies by the IMF and World Bank that India is on a high growth path exceeding China’s within a year or two must add up – and there is no empirical evidence. Systemic issues are many, and the international economic environment is not encouraging. The recovery of the US economy has not stabilized.

Delhi claims that «investor perception about India has reversed dramatically after years of stagnation» – to quote the Finance Minister Arun Jaitley. But Jaitley also candidly admitted that such optimism is «tempered with caution» as regards the government’s ability to deliver.

Regional tensions and fatcats

The only foreign-policy statement to come out of Obama’s visit has been a ‘joint strategic vision statement’ regarding Asia-Pacific and the Indian Ocean. Interestingly, the statement had nothing to say regarding Pakistan, which is an obsessive foreign-policy issue for the Hindu nationalists who mentor the Modi government. Obama said not a word regarding Pakistan or its alleged support for terrorism, which is a big departure from his 2010 visit to India. Profound differences remain between the two countries regarding Pakistan, the most vexatious regional issue in Modi’s foreign-policy calculus at the moment.

The ‘joint strategic statement’ turned out to be a rehash of the positions articulated in the joint statement issued after Modi’s visit to Washington and it, once again, contains a tendentious reference to the South China Sea. The American side has given the spin that the Obama-Modi talks on regional issues heavily focused on China’s ‘assertive’ policies.

The pro-American analysts in the Indian media have rushed to the conclusion that under Modi, India is veering round to «an eventual amalgamation of India’s Act East (policies in south east Asia) and the US’ Asia pivot». Their preposterous thesis is that Modi is jettisoning India’s inhibition about the US’ containment strategy against China.

Indeed, the US objective has always been to recruit India in its containment strategy against China. The idea of a ‘quadripartite alliance’ between the US, Japan, Australia and India is at least a decade old, dating from the high noon of the neocon ideology in the George W Bush presidency. Obama’s former defence secretary Leon Panetta once famously named India as a ‘lynchpin’ in the US’ rebalance strategy in Asia.

However, the moment Obama and the spin doctors in his entourage took off for home, Indian officials scrambled to do fire-fighting, distancing themselves from their «strategic misinterpretation» of the joint strategic vision statement. According to them, Modi made it clear to Obama that India’s independent foreign policies would not allow any «third power» (read US) to forge a common front against China.

Delhi is anxious that the Americans and their lobbyists in India do not choreograph Modi’s forthcoming visit to China. A senior Indian diplomat briefed the media that Indian External Affairs Minister is leaving for China on Friday and on her return, the National Security Advisor will also travel to Beijing to prepare for Modi’s visit. The diplomat has been quoted as saying, «President Xi is keen to host him [Modi] in his hometown Xian».

Why are the Americans spreading such «strategic misinterpretation» of Modi’s thinking on China? Washington seems acutely conscious that the US cannot match China as an investor in Modi’s ‘Make in India’ project. The US’ big worry is that if the proposed railway project by China in India involving $32 billion goes through (on top of the offer made by China during Xi’s visit to India in September on a $20 billion investment plan to set up industrial parks), the Sino-Indian relationship would profoundly transform.

The heart of the matter is that Modi’s development agenda (on which his mandate in the 2014 election rests) focuses on the infrastructure and manufacturing sectors, since they only hold big potential to generate jobs for India’s millions of unemployed youth – and it is China that makes an ideal partner, given its vast experience in these sectors.

On the other hand, the bottom line has always been that the verve and swagger of the India-US ‘strategic partnership’ needs as fodder an incessant supply of Sino-Indian tensions. Such tensions vitiate the regional security environment and create acute anxieties in the Indian mind and in turn would provide the ideal business climate for the fatcats in the US military-industrial complex. It is a vicious cycle.

The great American fear today is that Modi might break this cycle and put India-China relations on a predictable footing. From the Chinese commentaries on Obama’s visit, Beijing is aware of the American attempt to hustle Modi towards the US’ rebalance strategy in Asia. And Delhi is hastening to clarify that proximity to the US will not translate as alliance against China. An element of strategic ambiguity has appeared. Much will now depend on the outcome of Modi’s forthcoming visit to China.

Obama Hustles Modi, Did He Succeed?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

India sends foreign minister to China after Obama visit

Agence France-Presse, New Delhi | World | Wed, January 28 2015, 4:38 PM

India's foreign minister will travel to China this weekend, New Delhi said on Wednesday, a day after Barack Obama ended a visit aimed at renewing US ties with the South Asian country.

Sushma Swaraj will go to Beijing on Sunday to "discuss bilateral, regional and global issues of concern to both sides" with her Chinese counterpart Wang Yi, India's government said in a statement.

They will also hold three-way talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, the statement said.

The announcement followed a high-profile visit to New Delhi by the US president aimed at cementing ties between the two countries, which share an interest in curbing China's growing regional influence.

Although neither side mentioned China by name during Obama's three-day visit, the US president welcomed what he called a "greater role for India in the Asia Pacific" and said freedom of navigation in the region must be upheld.

Beijing claims sovereignty over large swathes of the South China Sea, home to maritime lanes that are vital to global trade.

India's new Prime Minister Narendra Modi is widely seen as taking a more assertive line on China than the previous government.

But experts say Modi will be careful not to alienate neighboring China, whose investment he desperately needs as he tries to boost India's economy.

Obama and Modi took pains to demonstrate their personal rapport during the US president's visit. But China's state news agency Xinhua has said it was a "superficial rapprochement", pointing to persistent differences on issues such as climate change.

India sends foreign minister to China after Obama visit

Yes sir I fully agree with you in this regards that Pakistan do holds importance for US but still we should also be improving our relations with other countries as well. The world does not ends in U.S, there is a big world out there. We should be improving our relations with all others countries equally.
It is not merely about the Obama visit to India rather it's more about our own interest and our bilateral relationship with Russia.
It's always good to have more cards in our hand rather than playing one card over and over again.

 

[Echo_419]

But we do need such reports for those who don't understand.

Who are these ignorant people?

 

[SrNair]

Just read this interesting articles below, I don't think Pakistan should look at Russia.

M. K. Bhadrakumar - Obama Hustles Modi, Did He Succeed?
Melkulangara BHADRAKUMAR | 30.01.2015 | 00:00

The three-day state visit by the United States President Barack Obama to India has been extraordinarily rich in political symbolism. It followed an initiative by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to invite Obama to be the chief guest at India’s national day celebrations on January 26.

Modi himself had visited Washington only four months ago and Obama’s acceptance of the invitation also signified an unprecedented second visit by an incumbent American president to India.

With the dust settling down on the colorful visit, stocktaking begins. There are three templates to consider – one, how to decipher the political symbolism as such; two, what has been the substantive outcome of the visit and what lies ahead for the India-US relations; and, three, how the upgrade of the relationship impacts the power dynamic in Asia-Pacific.

Without doubt, New Delhi and Washington have signaled a political resolve to re-energize the relationship, which has been under the weather in the past 2 to 3 years. Looking back, the high expectations raised by the former prime minister Manmohan Singh to Washington in 2009 and Obama’s return visit in 2010 could not be fulfilled, which took the shine off the India-US relationship.

Essentially, the Obama administration was waiting till the political uncertainties in India cleared up after the April-May 2014 election. Modi himself went the extra league during his September visit to underscore that he not only carried no ill will, but was eager to energize the ties with the US. And Washington has estimated that it can do business with Modi whom it not only sees as ‘pro-reform’ like his predecessor but also as someone who would make a more meaningful, effective and resolute interlocutor than Manmohan Singh.

For Modi, a lavish display of friendship with ‘Barack’ holds advantages in domestic politics. Obama, who has a reputation for being aloof, is willing to play along. Meanwhile, for Obama, whose presidency is under relentless attack at home, resuscitation of the US-Indian relationship is a foreign-policy legacy. The Modi-Obama bonding is a match made in heaven.

Having said that, Obama’s visit failed to produce a substantive outcome. He made no commitments regarding US investments. No accord could be reached on climate change (which was apparently a priority). The India-US defence agreement has been renewed for another ten-year period but no flagship project was announced on co-production or joint development of military technology. Nor did India sign any new contracts for American weaponry.

A significant outcome devolves upon the «breakthrough» in finding a formula that could remove the discord between the two governments over India’s nuclear liability law. But there is no clarity whether the understanding reached at the governmental level (details of which haven’t been divulged) would stand scrutiny in a court of law or even prompt the American companies to shed their inhibitions over the Indian law (which, they say, does not conform to the international covenants on liability in nuclear commerce.)

In short, the balance sheet is poor, but the media hype is that this has been a ‘transformative’ visit. The truly transformative visits in the relationship have been two – visit by Bill Clinton in March 2000, auguring a historic course correction in the US’ unfriendly cold-war era policies, and by George W. Bush in March 2006 against the backdrop of the US-India civil nuclear cooperation agreement, which promised a paradigm shift in the strategic ties. In comparison, Obama’s visit falls in a category by itself – an earnest joint effort to salvage the relationship and put it on a forward-looking trajectory.

How far Modi and Obama succeeded, time only will tell. The Indians are notorious for praising their leaders’ ‘personal chemistry’ with western statesmen, blithely overlooking that convergence of interests is the bedrock of inter-state relationships. The sustainability of the excellent climate in the India-US relations will depend on the follow-up. What can be said for the present is that there is enormous interest on both sides to do this, but, equally, there is a sense of déjà vu among dispassionate onlookers.

The heart of the matter is that the sort of market access that the US is demanding and the high Indian expectations regarding American investments are unrealistic in a near term. The testimonies by the IMF and World Bank that India is on a high growth path exceeding China’s within a year or two must add up – and there is no empirical evidence. Systemic issues are many, and the international economic environment is not encouraging. The recovery of the US economy has not stabilized.

Delhi claims that «investor perception about India has reversed dramatically after years of stagnation» – to quote the Finance Minister Arun Jaitley. But Jaitley also candidly admitted that such optimism is «tempered with caution» as regards the government’s ability to deliver.

Regional tensions and fatcats

The only foreign-policy statement to come out of Obama’s visit has been a ‘joint strategic vision statement’ regarding Asia-Pacific and the Indian Ocean. Interestingly, the statement had nothing to say regarding Pakistan, which is an obsessive foreign-policy issue for the Hindu nationalists who mentor the Modi government. Obama said not a word regarding Pakistan or its alleged support for terrorism, which is a big departure from his 2010 visit to India. Profound differences remain between the two countries regarding Pakistan, the most vexatious regional issue in Modi’s foreign-policy calculus at the moment.

The ‘joint strategic statement’ turned out to be a rehash of the positions articulated in the joint statement issued after Modi’s visit to Washington and it, once again, contains a tendentious reference to the South China Sea. The American side has given the spin that the Obama-Modi talks on regional issues heavily focused on China’s ‘assertive’ policies.

The pro-American analysts in the Indian media have rushed to the conclusion that under Modi, India is veering round to «an eventual amalgamation of India’s Act East (policies in south east Asia) and the US’ Asia pivot». Their preposterous thesis is that Modi is jettisoning India’s inhibition about the US’ containment strategy against China.

Indeed, the US objective has always been to recruit India in its containment strategy against China. The idea of a ‘quadripartite alliance’ between the US, Japan, Australia and India is at least a decade old, dating from the high noon of the neocon ideology in the George W Bush presidency. Obama’s former defence secretary Leon Panetta once famously named India as a ‘lynchpin’ in the US’ rebalance strategy in Asia.

However, the moment Obama and the spin doctors in his entourage took off for home, Indian officials scrambled to do fire-fighting, distancing themselves from their «strategic misinterpretation» of the joint strategic vision statement. According to them, Modi made it clear to Obama that India’s independent foreign policies would not allow any «third power» (read US) to forge a common front against China.

Delhi is anxious that the Americans and their lobbyists in India do not choreograph Modi’s forthcoming visit to China. A senior Indian diplomat briefed the media that Indian External Affairs Minister is leaving for China on Friday and on her return, the National Security Advisor will also travel to Beijing to prepare for Modi’s visit. The diplomat has been quoted as saying, «President Xi is keen to host him [Modi] in his hometown Xian».

Why are the Americans spreading such «strategic misinterpretation» of Modi’s thinking on China? Washington seems acutely conscious that the US cannot match China as an investor in Modi’s ‘Make in India’ project. The US’ big worry is that if the proposed railway project by China in India involving $32 billion goes through (on top of the offer made by China during Xi’s visit to India in September on a $20 billion investment plan to set up industrial parks), the Sino-Indian relationship would profoundly transform.

The heart of the matter is that Modi’s development agenda (on which his mandate in the 2014 election rests) focuses on the infrastructure and manufacturing sectors, since they only hold big potential to generate jobs for India’s millions of unemployed youth – and it is China that makes an ideal partner, given its vast experience in these sectors.

On the other hand, the bottom line has always been that the verve and swagger of the India-US ‘strategic partnership’ needs as fodder an incessant supply of Sino-Indian tensions. Such tensions vitiate the regional security environment and create acute anxieties in the Indian mind and in turn would provide the ideal business climate for the fatcats in the US military-industrial complex. It is a vicious cycle.

The great American fear today is that Modi might break this cycle and put India-China relations on a predictable footing. From the Chinese commentaries on Obama’s visit, Beijing is aware of the American attempt to hustle Modi towards the US’ rebalance strategy in Asia. And Delhi is hastening to clarify that proximity to the US will not translate as alliance against China. An element of strategic ambiguity has appeared. Much will now depend on the outcome of Modi’s forthcoming visit to China.

Obama Hustles Modi, Did He Succeed?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

India sends foreign minister to China after Obama visit

Agence France-Presse, New Delhi | World | Wed, January 28 2015, 4:38 PM

India's foreign minister will travel to China this weekend, New Delhi said on Wednesday, a day after Barack Obama ended a visit aimed at renewing US ties with the South Asian country.

Sushma Swaraj will go to Beijing on Sunday to "discuss bilateral, regional and global issues of concern to both sides" with her Chinese counterpart Wang Yi, India's government said in a statement.

They will also hold three-way talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, the statement said.

The announcement followed a high-profile visit to New Delhi by the US president aimed at cementing ties between the two countries, which share an interest in curbing China's growing regional influence.

Although neither side mentioned China by name during Obama's three-day visit, the US president welcomed what he called a "greater role for India in the Asia Pacific" and said freedom of navigation in the region must be upheld.

Beijing claims sovereignty over large swathes of the South China Sea, home to maritime lanes that are vital to global trade.

India's new Prime Minister Narendra Modi is widely seen as taking a more assertive line on China than the previous government.

But experts say Modi will be careful not to alienate neighboring China, whose investment he desperately needs as he tries to boost India's economy.

Obama and Modi took pains to demonstrate their personal rapport during the US president's visit. But China's state news agency Xinhua has said it was a "superficial rapprochement", pointing to persistent differences on issues such as climate change.

India sends foreign minister to China after Obama visit

MK Bhadrakumar is an age old anti US diplomat during Coldwar.Now others dont even give a shit about his opinion

On topic :They are looking towards Russia .For what ?
Money .They are under severe sanctions .Now weapons .Yes you can get weapons from Russia but only for readycash ,again because of sanctions.What about China ?Did they have that comfortability when their traditional one and only market is slipping towards Russia.
Finally Can they afford a relation with Pakistan by avoiding India ?AFAIK the visit of Russians to Pakistan was for pressurizing India for more deals and money.And they got that .We signed 100+ billion$ deal with Russia .
But an unexpected trouble is now haunting them.Repeated demands of Pakistan