US breathes life into a new cold war

[Developereo]

Its not insecurity , its more like real politik .Pakistan gets jittery thinking about India -Afghan relations and Indo-US relations .

China gets jittery about India-US and India- Jap relations , same thing for India. It is the truth I won't deny it but all i am saying is it does not apply to India alone but to almost every country in the world.

About the second part , No, why should India be happy about USA's presence in east asia or South-east Asia , it doesn't help us in any way . Don't put words in my mouth just to make your point valid which it clearly is not .

About the third part yes i am not in favour of any anti West Asian unity but yes in terms of economy , trade and other stuff it is a very good idea which i hope materializes because this bloc mentality in terms of military can take the World into a third world war which atleast i don't wish to see , I don't know about you. Neither do i think it is possible because we have way too many issues with each other. Look at south Asia , East Asia ,Middle -East etc.I hope we are in agreement on this .

That is precisely my point. All countries look out for their own self-interests and any of the rising Asian stars will sooner cut a deal with the West if it serves their interests better. There is no 'Asian brotherhood' against the West.

 

[Developereo]

Your rants about Sri Lanka and others choosing China over India is again like stuck up record when I have already mentioned that India is eating what she can digest. I can go in details about each and every south Asian country and its relationship with India and China. But I will keep that discussion for some new enthusiast for future not for you who understand things better than others but has opted an agenda today to bash India for some reason, knowingly.

Where did I say that anyone is 'choosing China over India'. I specifically agreed with your point about balance. Smaller countries always try to keep a balance between bigger countries. I said the south Asian countries invited China as a hedge against Indian domination of the region.

The matter about Sri Lanka is indicative. What on earth gives India the right to dictate to Sri Lanka how to organize their internal police force? The fact that Sri Lanka found the voice to push back is significant.

It’s a one sided love and such love is going to make you more isolated in future. China’s advice to Pakistan is something more to do with getting in terms with India. I am sure you are aware of it but your compulsion of defeating Indian assertions has hampered your rational thinking, I think.

This is the standard Indian narrative: China's relationships are all one sided. China is using smaller countries, etc. etc.

You guys can keep believing whatever suits you. As for China's advice to Pakistan, it was diplomatic speak for playing the game a little smarter and not expecting China to keep bailing Pakistan out of tough diplomatic spots.

Nobody invited anyone. Wake up this is a multi-polar world. See, even your president is learning quite quick; travelling up to Baltic Sea to crack some deals.

International relationships are all by invitation and mutual consent. Otherwise, it is called a conquest or puppetry.

 

[Vinod2070]

The fact that you put it in bold implies that you think this is some hotshot point. Sadly for you, it is not.

Pakistan's status as a major non-NATO ally is with respect to the war against terrorists. This "alliance" is not directed against another Asian country.

You were also part of CEATO and CENTO earlier. And they were directed against something.

The major Non Nato ally status is in a way a continuation of that relationship.

As for the reference to the Soviet era, there was no Asian alliance and India/Pakistan were locked in a proxy USSR-US conflict,

You may want to try and equate India with Pakistan but India was not USSR's ally against the West or USA. Our relations actually started improving them during that period.

There was no parity then and no parity now.

Feel free to keep throwing words at me until you can come up with actual rebuttals.

They are quite an accurate description.

It's called common sense, and bringing a reality check to the "let's hold hands around a campfire and sing Kumbaya" nonsense in this thread.

Russia sees itself as a European, not an Asian, country. The original article itself makes it clear that Russia is pushing the gas pipeline to keep Turkmen gas out of Europe, where it would dilute Russia's bargaining power.

As for India, it is only playing nice with China so it can convince it to stay out of south Asia.

China may try to forge some sort of Asian unity but it has some unfinished business in the east.

It is looking at things from a particular perspective that suits your worldview (or rather wishing for it to be a certain way).

That is fine by me.

Doesn't make it true.

 

[Vinod2070]

Also, the Asian unity doesn't necessarily have to be anti West, at least for all constituents.

It can be just to improve cooperation and co-ordination among themselves and to align their interests in a cooperative framework on issues of mutual concern.

It doesn't have to be win-lose. It can be win-win.

Not sure why the mere thought should scare away some!

 

[Developereo]

You may want to try and equate India with Pakistan but India was not USSR's ally against the West or USA. Our relations actually started improving them during that period.

I seem to remember some Indians claiming that the USN sent some aircraft carrier or such in 1971, but it backed off after the USSR threatened to intervene on India's behalf.

 

[Developereo]

Also, the Asian unity doesn't necessarily have to be anti West, at least for all constituents.

It can be just to improve cooperation and co-ordination among themselves and to align their interests in a cooperative framework on issues of mutual concern.

It doesn't have to be win-lose. It can be win-win.

Not sure why the mere thought should scare away some!

Because we are adults here who understand the complexities of real life.

Economic cooperation is fine and worth pursuing but, in a world of limited resources, there will be contention sooner or later. And the title of this thread is cold war. The writer understands the reality that some may wish to brush under the rug in a feel-good, let's hold hands and live in a make-believe world mindset.

We can open a thread about ending world hunder and poverty and, like beauty pageant contestants, issue lofty proclamations, but they won't have much connection with reality.

 

[Vinod2070]

I seem to remember some Indians claiming that the USN sent some aircraft carrier or such in 1971, but it backed off after the USSR threatened to intervene on India's behalf.

USA sent the 7th fleet to the Arabian sea and Soviets had a submarine tail it.

It was not necessarily on India's behalf. They had their cold war games of which we were no part.

India did sign a treaty with the Soviets just before 1971 though. That came handy at the time to keep US and China in check.

India had socialist leanings for decades and therefor a sympathy for USSR and communism rather than the "Western imperialism/capitalism". It was still not an alliance in the sense of we fighting capitalism with them.

India was a founding member of NAM because we didn't want to chose sides and fight a war which was not ours.

 

[justanobserver]

USA sent the 7th fleet to the Arabian sea and Soviets had a submarine tail it.

It was not necessarily on India's behalf. They had their cold war games of which we were no part.

Also, India was not informed of the sub fleet beforehand.

 

[Vinod2070]

Because we are adults here who understand the complexities of real life.

Economic cooperation is fine and worth pursuing but, in a world of limited resources, there will be contention sooner or later. And the title of this thread is cold war. The writer understands the reality that some may wish to brush under the rug in a feel-good, let's hold hands and live in a make-believe world mindset.

We can open a thread about ending world hunder and poverty and, like beauty pageant contestants, issue lofty proclamations, but they won't have much connection with reality.

That is what the Europeans also thought. They had two world wars and finally found that cooperation leads to greater prosperity and security.

Germany looted so much from Russia after initial rapid victories. A later assessment found that they could have gained more with just normal trade!

Your post is an example of old pre world war mindsets. A mindset that promotes conflict and looks at everyone else as an adversary.

The facts on the ground prove that trade and cooperation helps all and can gain more for everyone.

Any resources will eventually run out, we have to come up with a sustainable development model in any case. A war for resources will only delay the inevitable.

 

[Developereo]

Actually, the whole rationale behind the EU was for France and Germany to gain some measure of importance in a world dominated by the US and Russia. It was cooperation, yes, but set against the backdrop of established players. You can argue that the same motivations will pull the Asian countries together as a bloc against the West, but the chances are slim. For reasons already discussed.

 

[Vinod2070]

^^ It is now getting into making predictions.

At least some won't look at it necessarily in terms of being against anyone. It may be like ASEAN that has done so well and is not against any entity as such.

Germany and France are the drivers of the Euro project. Other Europeans are also important to the project though.

They have proven that hundreds of years of animosity can be put aside for a better future

A good model to follow for Asia.

We don't have as much bloody history and enmities going that far for the most part. We have not killed millions of each others' people and the countries are all on talking terms and engaging in trade already.