Posted on 06/06/2012 8:49:59 PM PDT by Olog-hai
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta urged India on Wednesday to build a closer military relationship with the United States, but Indian leaders appeared more interested in buying U.S. weapons than in aligning strategically with Washington.
Senior Indian officials made it clear in two days of talks that they will continue to set their own course on U.S. national security priorities, including isolating Iran and building up Afghanistan's military forces, sometimes in tandem with Washington and sometimes not.
Panetta is visiting Asia this week to bolster military ties as the Obama administration, wary ofChina's growing clout in the region, seeks to reassert America's presence in the Pacific after a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Pentagon chief described enhanced defense cooperation with India as "a linchpin" of the new strategy. But India has charted an independent foreign policy for decades, and its response was decidedly cool.
Panetta held meetings with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Defense Minister A.K. Antony, National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon and other government officials. But he did not hold a joint news conference with his Indian counterpart, as he usually does when he visits friendly countries.
"We'll never be an alliance partner with the U.S.," said Lalit Mansingh, an analyst and a former Indian ambassador to Washington. "The limit is a partnership." …
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
And why should they...considering how the U.S. treats its allies?
Instead of “rebuild(ing) America’s image around the world”, they tear it down, and not even methodically—with a wrecking ball.
When we swing so wlidly every four to eight years?
We need Obama out, and his taste in the mouths of Americans needs to lead us to a 12-16 or more year stability and true fight for liberty before anyone is going to risk it like India.
I hope we do...because in the long term I believe India is a much better fit for us than the likes of Pakistan...we just need to figure out a way to take care of those nukes.
Let me see.....we have a lying, backstabbing muzzie for a president....not sure why the Indians don’t trust us...
then Obama came along
.
The first thing he did was insult the Indians -- calling up every other world leader before calling the Indian PM
He then went to India and got the wookie to do her war dance there, but the Indians - while first enamored - got a bit ticked off when they realised he just talked bull**** and were surprised that a world leader reads from a teleprompter
Congratulations, Obama -- you really did bring change...
Pakistan is definitely not a fit for the USA. Most of the Pakistani population see’s the US as the enemy, not an ally.
It’s not just Obama or Clinton. Truth is we’ve pretty well much have **cked India over since the Muslim / Hindu states split apart. As a result India has enjoyed closer relations with Russia then they have with the U.S.
If you examine the equipment of India’s army, navy and air force, you may be surprised to see of the equipment they don’t build for themselves, most comes from Russia/USSR.
That you, Obama?
I’ve been following the Indian arms issue for well over 15 years...closer to twenty. Been to India myself back in the late 1990s. Everywhere I went (Bombay, Madrass, Bangalore, New Delhi) the Indians asked me when the US was going to take its blinders off and stop forcing the Indians (in essence) to stop having to deal with the Russians to get decent hardware to face off the Chinese and Pakistan.
Lately it has started to turn around. They are buying C-17s from us. They are buying the new C-130s from us. M777 Howitzers, Javelin Missiles, Harpoon missiles, P-8 Poseidon aircraft, and E-2D Hawkeye Aircraft.
The Indians are now many billions of doallrs into US hardware and it is good for them and us.
I just hope we can continue the trend. A close partnership with them would lead to the best counter wieght solution to both China and Pakistan available.
But to get there, we have to get the Obama admionstration out of the White House...and keep a GOP lead HOuse, Senate and White House for a number of years.
Don’t embarrass yourself further and go read some current history books.
Absolutely - if/when we get BHO out, they’ll feel differently. But right now, they’re very wise - they know he supports their Islamic enemy(s) and being a more strategic ally of ours will not benefit them.
Who can blame them?
I’m actually impressed on what they build for themselves. They’re only a decade or two away from total military independence.
What they really need though are A/A and A/G aircraft.
I think Israel provides them with some electronic innerds for some of the equipment they build, like Missles, Ships and Subs.
India is forced to tread lightly, being stuck between Russia and China.
Plus, after the way we sold Israel down the river, we cannot be viewed as the most reliable ally on Planet Earth.
Even with GW Bush, India couldn’t be forced to partake in wars begun by the US under false pretenses (I liked Bush, but the Iraq war was an absolute hoax). They are the largest democracy in the world, and as such headed the non-aligned countries because they have to respond to their constituents.
Actually, the only issue, IMHO, with the Iraq war was the issue of WMDs. we did not need that reason to go to war with Iraq. Hussein had willfully, and blatntly violated the terms of the cease fire after Kuwait time and time again. That was reason enough.
In addition, though he may not have been involved directly with the 911 attack, he harbored Al Quida and many other terrorists, and for years he had paid terrorists and their families to kill our ally’s civilians.
Finally, with Afghanistan and Iraq, and with the Indian Ocean and the bases to the north, Bush had surrounded Iran and was tightening the noose around them, which to this day is very important except that Obama is letting them off the hook.
So, with Iran we ended a dictator’s reign who had been violating the cease fire we had with him, we freed tens of millions of people, we established a fly trap in the which we killed tens of thousands of terrorists, many of them Al Quida who flocked there to fight us, and we had a stategic position to counter Iran. All of it good and all of it in the US best interest.
Sadly, IMHO, we did not prosecute it harshly enough viz a viz places like Fallujah (there was not need to clear that city with dead and wounded Marines, we should have made an abject example of it, offered 72 hours for people to leave and then leveled the entire place with B-52 carpet bombing), and as regards the Iranian Guard who had come into the country and helped organize and kill American forces...we should have taken the war to them at that time IMHO.
Anyhow, India was not needed for any of that IMHO. Giving them a larger role in a pacified Afghanistan would have made much more sense and send the right message to Pakistan.
Either way, the US and India should be partners in the Indian Ocean area and there in SW Asia.
They could be treated like Poland.
I still wonder however.. first I remember the Cold War "non aligned nations" headed by India that seemed to me to always back the U.S.S.R. I recall that India would not let us establish "listening posts" on India soil to monitor the Soviets and Pakistan did let us put those posts in their country. But that was then and this is now.
Then there are the conditions that the U.S. must meet to gain India's support.. as described by this news article from a few years ago.
U.S. Tech Holds Key to Indian Bases The Rediff Special/Josy Joseph in New Delhi
The author asks, "If the Americans were to enjoy access to Indian military bases, what will India expect in return?"
The article is based upon "Indo-US Military Relations: Expectations and Perceptions," a classified US defense department document in rediff.com's possession.
The U.S. defense department document "states that India would consider technology transfer as an 'important component' for a robust military relationship between the two countries."
This is about mutual defense and "friendship." The various countries where we [the U.S.] have "enjoyed" access to military bases have not demanded technology transfers for us shouldering most of the cost of their defense.
Key Indians interviewed in the report said, "America's reluctance to engage in focused technology transfer is a deal killer in the effort to construct an enduring strategic relationship." Indians placed technology transfer as the 'touchstone' of the new found strategic relationship and 'everything revolves around a strong US commitment to share its technologies so that India can advance'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.