US has made a strategic bet on India, says US official

[jhungary]

There is a day USA will be kicked out of Asia once for all.your post is Discomposing ones

You are not supposed to belong here, get back where you come from

lol, try and make us, we aren't going anywhere...........Don't just say ONE DAY you will kick us out

Don't make me wait 100 years for that ONE DAY

 

[zaxcollix]

India should make a strategic bet on itself and try to resolve boundary dispute with China in the next 5-7 years.

Once that is done, all hostilities will melt away and we can starting building up relations with china from where Nehru destroyed it.

American foreign policy is far to smart, experienced, rich and driven for India to handle. India would be better off keeping away from it till we can build up capability to engage it on equal terms.

 

[Srinivas]

Yeah - true - US was sitting in South Asia for the past 65 years and contributing to all the major issues. I could only laugh at some insinuations made here.

The past History of US engaging in Middle east and Afghanistan what I have said is true.

 

[Sashan]

The past History of US engaging in Middle east and Afghanistan what I have said is true.

For a middle-east and Afghanistan, I can equally point out Germany, Japan and South Korea which have benefitted from engagement with US. So it depends on what type of country India is - Germany, Japan or SK like countries which came from the total destruction post-world war and Korean war in their engagement with US due to Marshall's plan and other plans or is India like Afghanistan and middle-east.

As for Afghanistan, it was ruined since the day USSR went into it. So no point blaming US.

 

[Srinivas]

For a middle-east and Afghanistan, I can equally point out Germany, Japan and South Korea which have benefitted from engagement with US. So it depends on what type of country India is - Germany, Japan or SK like countries which came from the total destruction post-world war and Korean war in their engagement with US due to Marshall's plan and other plans or is India like Afghanistan and middle-east.

As for Afghanistan, it was ruined since the day USSR went into it. So no point blaming US.

Japan,Germany and south korea also donot have independent policies and India is different and India has potential so no need to follow US.

 

[Sashan]

Japan,Germany and south korea also donot have independent policies and India is different and India has potential so no need to follow US.

How about China which itself was in US camp till it started pulling ahead economically? Mate - it is not one shoe fit all. The partnership code is different for different countries.

 

[arbit]

All this talk about betting strategically is not necessarily a bad thing. Its up to us how we handle the relationship. There is no need to become another Pakistan, Japan or South Korea, when we can remain who we are.

Think about it, the benefits far outweigh the strings. Tech transfer, support in international fora, and most importantly don't forget that an enemy's enemy is a friend. Combine this with solid belief that our politicos are too sissy to take sides AND you get a pretty decent Foreign Policy.

We can get stronger and get allies. Both Russia and US on our side. I am all for it.

 

[sancho]

So basically, you're trying to say that China should make concessions to all neighbors in order to keep U,S away??

No, but to respect international laws and borders and not to make up you own maps, or sea lanes. To learn what foreign politics means and not to learn from the mistakes the Soviet Union made, by thinking only because they had a lot of weapons, they could do what they like.
The fact is, easing unnecessary tensions with neighbors and improving foreign relations would have been more beneficiary for China, especially wrt to countering the US and their influence in Asia or the global stage. You should have been focusing on leading the BRICS as a counterpart to the west and strengthening your stand in Asia, to really be the global superpower you want to be in future. That would have been the right policy for China, but also for Asia!

 

[sancho]

in Chinese claimed water. Remember, Chinese territorial claims have not changed since 1949, and the SCS claims have not changed since the 1920s.

And that's the problem, because that are claims only by China, not by international laws or regulations, just like the borderlines they draw in their maps, but that doesn't give them any legitimacy!

In my opinion, it is the US that started the whole thing, but sponsoring the anti-China activity in these countries. Today, China is the only potential adversary of the United States. China has no choice but to respond

Nobody says that China shouldn't respond, but they should do it in a smarter way and not by doing exactly what the US wants! China is creating more alliances with African and S. American countries than with Asian neighbors, that alone should make clear that something is wrong in their policies and by failing in Asia, they don't get stronger, but weaker compared to the US, since they use this to for alliances in Chinas backyard!

Between China and India there is no fundamental dispute, because India has always inspired to be a power and not dependent on neither the US nor the former USSR. Therefore, even with large area of border dispute, you rarely see either side provoking the other, except a few India media outlets that feeds on fake news the CIA is making...

That's not correct, because the although the border issues are relatively small and the political/economical relations are strong there is no big issue so far. The problem however is China militarising the Tibet area, which poses a direct threat to Indian sovereignty. That and the a US trying to push us against China is a problem for our relations in future. That's why our defence policy is mainly focused on China today and this could have been avoided, if China would have their cards right with regard to India as an neighbor, as an Asian power and as a BRICS partner.

 

[SinoChallenger]

latest world estimate of chinese nukes is ~240 and not 3000 . truly unfortunate , your boasting skills are slashed less than 1/10 th maybe lesser . don't puff up your chest 10 times what you got !

Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance | Arms Control Association

Bret Stephens: How Many Nukes Does China Have? - WSJ.com

China

 

[ironman1]

Bret Stephens: How Many Nukes Does China Have? - WSJ.com

China

your article doesn't prove anything , and i hope you must have read it ( except the heading ) before posting .

 

[SinoChallenger]

your article doesn't prove anything , and i hope you must have read it ( except the heading ) before posting .

Feeling so inferior you need to delude yourself?

China is in the midst of a major nuclear modernization effort that includes building a new generation of intercontinental ballistic missiles reportedly capable of delivering multiple warheads. It fields an estimated force of nearly 1,300 tactical and theater missile systems that can be tipped with either a nuclear or a conventional warhead—the ambiguity itself giving China immense strategic leverage in the event of war.

Mr. Karber also suspects China may have up to five missiles for every one of its mobile launcher vehicles. If so, those "reloads" would go far to explain the discrepancy between China's observed number of mobile launchers—one of the reasons for thinking China has a relatively small number of missiles—and Mr. Karber's suspicions about the true size of its arsenal.

 

[ironman1]

Feeling so inferior you need to delude yourself?

you mean since you have 1300 missiles , you ought to have 3000 nukes ?? don't wallow in inferiority complex that u have to stress ur brain with these 1300~3000 correlation or u might just deplete ur neurons . oh wait u r the sinochallanged !

 

[Srinivas]

How about China which itself was in US camp till it started pulling ahead economically? Mate - it is not one shoe fit all. The partnership code is different for different countries.

Things are quite different today mate, If peace prevails for another 6 to 7 years India and China will become stronger where as US and west will decline. This is the same reason the urgency shown by US to shift towards Asia.

India and China have their differences but US is an all together a different animal and they will do what ever it takes to destabilize Asia. If you think US will support India against China you are mistaken. They will pit India against China and at the same time they will destroy India, which will make US and west domination intact.

Germany and Japan are once powerful countries which challenged US during second world war and after second world war US kept them intact with its domination over those countries.

Bangladesh is the key for any external power to destabilize S.Asia, Destabilize that nation and support militancy and then export that militancy through the porous border of India .

The more US or any country engages with BD, which has no significance interms of trade or economic to the west, the more India have to be careful.

Those who are thinking US will give tech transfer and other support, Have a look at today's Pakistan and think twice, the major non NATO ally and a partner in WOT is suffering with instability due to US war.
US never gives any tech with out any restrictions, when the their need is over they will hit you with sanctions. India should never become anti china because of US.
Let those two major powers battle with each other and let peace prevail in south Asia, so that India will become a major economic and military power. Until then India should follow defensive strategy to check mate anybody who is meddling in South Asia.

 

[Tshering22]

Asia is a pathetic place......Asian are utilized to kill each other

And pray tell me why is it that in past one year it has become increasingly so?

Do you really expect cooperation when there are territorial hostilities?

Even seen that among western nations after WW2? Never.

That's the reason why they are united--- because they solved their problems without bringing egos into the picture.