What's new

Growing U.S.-India military ties pose threat to Islamabad

arp2041

BANNED
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
10,406
Reaction score
-9
Country
India
Location
India
The situation arising from the recent exchange of fire on the Line of Control (LoC) – a military border between the Indian and Pakistani controlled parts of the former state of Jammu and Kashmir – is unlike similar incidents in the past as it was followed by an unusual threat from Indian Air Chief Marshal NAK Brown who stated India could consider ‘other options’ if violations on LoC by Pakistan continued.

Indian Defense minister AK Anthony has also declared the killing of two Indian soldiers on LoC as ‘the turning point’ in the bilateral relations with Pakistan. This sudden change of attitude by Pakistan’s most favored nation is not merely due to the influence of Hindu extremists over Delhi but shows something else is brewing.

Analyzing the events of military and strategic importance in Asia in the recent past, particularly in Pakistan’s neighborhood, shows that Washington is redesigning its strategy in Asia and Asia Pacific, assigning a pivotal role to Delhi. The U.S. policy making institutions have already redefined their interests in the region giving Delhi a major role and are now devising the modus operandi for securing their interests, especially those at the sea trade routes.

In view of the growing challenges vis-à-vis withdrawing forces safely from Afghanistan in 2014 and rebuilding the depleting economy, Washington wants a strong ally in the region capable of assuming the role of regional policeman on its call, something which Delhi has always desired. The strategic importance of an American military partnership with India has been underlined by different U.S. think tanks in the recent past. Former U.S. undersecretary of state for South Asia, Karl Inderfurth, said a U.S.-India military partnership would be ideal for maintaining the balance of power in the region in Washington’s favor.

China’s influence

"To limit China’s influence in the region, U.S. has embarked upon the strategy to promote India as its major military partner in Asia and south east Asia"
- Mansoor Jafar

U.S. think tanks have indicated a situation where many Asian countries, either opposed to or feeling threatened by U.S. policies, could see China’s fast emergence as an economic and military power as a sign that they should look to the Asian power for protection. Such an eventuality could prove disastrous for U.S. interests and influence in South Asia and the Asia Pacific.

To avoid such an eventuality, promoting military partnership with India has become a U.S. priority. Besides, Delhi has become one of major buyer of U.S. arms and ammunition in the world over the last two decades. Growing the military friendship with India serves as an energy drink for U.S. arms producers who are ready to go the extra mile to convince Washington to cement military ties with India at all costs.

To limit China’s influence in the region, the U.S. has embarked upon the strategy to promote India as its major military partner in Asia and south east Asia. Washington is trying to rearrange a military alliance comprising India, south Korea, Japan, Australia and Singapore to make enemies feel its undeniable presence in the region, and friends receive a strong message against giving up her American ties.

To achieve the same objectives, the U.S. held joint naval exercises in the Indian ocean in 2007 with India, Australia, Japan and Singapore to give a clear message to China. The friendly naval relations between Delhi and Washington were established after the Tsunami relief operations in late 2004 and both countries entered into a new strategic defense framework agreement in 2005.

Strategic importance

Delhi is fully aware of its strategic importance for Washington’s redesigned interests in the region and also knows that the U.S. would remain unable to achieve them without India’s active partnership. Therefore, Delhi is trying to continue with its doctrine of having an independent foreign policy, but this practice is becoming increasingly unacceptable for Washington, especially under the present situation. In addition to that, Delhi wants Washington to reciprocate the protection of strategic interests. That is, if Delhi protects U.S. interests in Asia, then in return, Washington must protect India’s regional policies, particularly those governing its relations with Pakistan, and help implement them in letter and spirit.

U.S.-China relations in Asia do not point towards a new cold war, since the ground realities have been changed due to technological advancement. U.S.-China relations and the associated Indian role and ambitions require the neighbors and other stake holders to keep a close eye on the entire situation.

The majority of Pakistani people want friendly relations with India but consider the frequent hostile gestures and threatening ambitions of their larger neighbor as the main hurdle. Islamabad has to maintain its regional importance under the present scenario for its own security concerns and at the same time should not unnecessarily distance itself from the United States. Maintaining close friendly ties with China can provide a useful cover to Islamabad for countering the possible rise in a U.S.-sponsored Indian hegemony in the region.

Growing U.S.-India military ties pose threat to Islamabad | idrw.org
 
.
Can anyone list recent US-Indian military purchases? and future predicted purchases?
 
.
Can anyone list recent US-Indian military purchases? and future predicted purchases?

P-8Is (total 8) = $2.1 billion (+ 4 follow on order will be placed, estimates are for total of 24+ P-8Is in the long term).

C-17 (total 10) = $4.1 billion (+ 6 follow on order, order can be increased further).

Contract for 99 GE-F414 engines for Tejas mk 2 = $600 million.

6 C-130J = $ 962 million (6 more to be inducted).

22 Apache = $1.4 billioin (long term inductions can mean a total of 80+ Apaches with 40 each in IA & IAF).

15 Chinooks = $ 2 billion.

INS Jalashwa = $48 million.

Close to $ 12 billions of deals signed in last 5-6 years.
 
.
Apart from Indo-US ties, if we can have a Indo-China ties too then we can make sure their will be no clashes between US-China, China-India atleast in south asian region.
 
.
P-8Is (total 8) = $2.1 billion (+ 4 follow on order will be placed, estimates are for total of 24+ P-8Is in the long term).

C-17 (total 10) = $4.1 billion (+ 6 follow on order, order can be increased further).

Contract for 99 GE-F414 engines for Tejas mk 2 = $600 million.

6 C-130J = $ 962 million (6 more to be inducted).

22 Apache = $1.4 billioin (long term inductions can mean a total of 80+ Apaches with 40 each in IA & IAF).

15 Chinooks = $ 2 billion.

INS Jalashwa = $48 million.

Close to $ 12 billions of deals signed in last 5-6 years.

Buddy you didnt mention the Honeywell's F125IN Engine orders and 145 BAE Systems M777 ultra-light howitzers.:)
 
. . .
P-8Is (total 8) = $2.1 billion (+ 4 follow on order will be placed, estimates are for total of 24+ P-8Is in the long term).

C-17 (total 10) = $4.1 billion (+ 6 follow on order, order can be increased further).

Contract for 99 GE-F414 engines for Tejas mk 2 = $600 million.

6 C-130J = $ 962 million (6 more to be inducted).

22 Apache = $1.4 billioin (long term inductions can mean a total of 80+ Apaches with 40 each in IA & IAF).

15 Chinooks = $ 2 billion.

INS Jalashwa = $48 million.

Close to $ 12 billions of deals signed in last 5-6 years.

Thanks for this bud, and do you know how much military purchases in $$ were between US and Pakistan through out history?
 
.
Thanks for this bud, and do you know how much military purchases in $$ were between US and Pakistan through out history?

Difficult to quantify, since many purchases were not exactly "purchases", but more like handouts. Or military assistance, as they call it. The P3-C Orions for example. Most stuff that pak gets from the US these days are not paid for in dollars, but in blood, or other favors.
 
.
It is imperative that we do not procure large amounts from uncle, It has constantly weaponized and aided pakistan against India, everything from Aim120's to donating nearly 600 Apc's as EDA to at a point transferring an entire fleet of naval vessels.

We as Indians need the always remember who came for our aid when the 7th fleet was knocking on our door! Learn to distinguish friends and businessmen.
 
.
no it doesnt

Looks like it's ur personal opinion. why was ur government crying after us india nuclear deal and was asking for a similar treatment. of course our ties pose a threat to ur country.
 
.
Difficult to quantify, since many purchases were not exactly "purchases", but more like handouts. Or military assistance, as they call it. The P3-C Orions for example. Most stuff that pak gets from the US these days are not paid for in dollars, but in blood, or other favors.

Weapons & equipment bought under foreign aid agreements has 100s of strings attached.

US has exclusive control over such weapon systems, including F-16C and P-3C, since the Pakistanis
bought it with American money. Equipment bought under such agreements cannot even be considered as
being owned by Pak Military, since its not even clear how much control they exercise over that
system. More like stuff from lend-lease agreements...the F-16s will need to be returned to US whenever
Uncle Sam says so.
 
.
P-8Is (total 8) = $2.1 billion (+ 4 follow on order will be placed, estimates are for total of 24+ P-8Is in the long term).

C-17 (total 10) = $4.1 billion (+ 6 follow on order, order can be increased further).

Contract for 99 GE-F414 engines for Tejas mk 2 = $600 million.

6 C-130J = $ 962 million (6 more to be inducted).

22 Apache = $1.4 billioin (long term inductions can mean a total of 80+ Apaches with 40 each in IA & IAF).

15 Chinooks = $ 2 billion.

INS Jalashwa = $48 million.

Close to $ 12 billions of deals signed in last 5-6 years.
Add to the list M777 ULHs and S-70B helos for IN (deal to be announced next FY)- worth around $1.5BN there are also many deals that are not a that publicised so add another $1-2BN on top.

Weapons & equipment bought under foreign aid agreements has 100s of strings attached.

US has exclusive control over such weapon systems, including F-16C and P-3C, since the Pakistanis
bought it with American money. Equipment bought under such agreements cannot even be considered as
being owned by Pak Military, since its not even clear how much control they exercise over that
system. More like stuff from lend-lease agreements...the F-16s will need to be returned to US whenever
Uncle Sam says so.
I've seen on a Pak TV debate a retd senior PAF officer claim the F-16s were only given to Pakistan when Pakistan explicitly agreed not to use the planes against India. I don't know if such restrictions still exist though or the exact nature of the agreement ie self defence is fine but not to be used in offensive ops.
 
.
doesnt really make a difference; this article would hold much more traction from 2001-2008 period. Now with NATO intevitably calling it quits and with an increasingly assertive China -- i don't even see anything concerning about rising US-indo cooperation.

i've not been in DC long enough to be considered an expert -- but i've gone to enough seminars and lectures (typical for this city) and while there is more sympathy for india nowdays than Pakistan --- everyone knows that antagonizing Pakistan would go counter to US own interests. Dont take my word for it, General Stanley McChrystal himself said it


as for the F-16s -- it's been discussed in painful detail. When they need to be used against india, they will be used. No problem. And it's irrelevant anyways since the backbone of PAF will be JF Thunders (in the medium-long run)

Can anyone list recent US-Indian military purchases? and future predicted purchases?

off the top of my head


P-8s (navy)
C130s, C17s (iaf/army)
apache gunships (army)
possible deal for e-2 hawkeyes (navy)
 
.
I've seen on a Pak TV debate a retd senior PAF officer claim the F-16s were only given to Pakistan when Pakistan explicitly agreed not to use the planes against India. I don't know if such restrictions still exist though or the exact nature of the agreement ie self defence is fine but not to be used in offensive ops.
Dear, you really think in case of full scale hostilities, PAF will give a damn about "restrictions". If you own a stick and sword, logic dictates use the better weapon.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom