India poses no missile threat: NATO

[nang2]

Its not cannot but wont reach Nato countries as we have similar views for the world and we have no intention to fire missiles towards any nato country.

World view is over rated. Nazis had similar sociology root with Communism. Nazi Germany and Soviet still went into deadly war, while Soviet and US/UK worked as allies though with vast different world views.

it means NATO members trust India. i.e have no reason to be threatened .India due to its non alignment policy has one of the most stable relationships with both the mid west and western countries .

Also apart from usa we can reach all other NATO members .(not taking submarines into account of course )

Politicians never trust politicians. They only "trust" those who have no means to threat their power spheres. That being said, it is simply rhetorical in the talk of threats or friendship to suite their need of political maneuvers. Vietnam dumped China in favor of Soviet despite Chinese support in their war against France and USA. North Korea did the same thing. USA dumped Taiwan when China's support against Soviet was needed. Only friends can betray friends. When Soviet was weaken, USA quickly turned the pressure on China. Remember how fast USA posted sanction on India?

I would say, make the best use of any political friendship you can get but don't get carried away. More importantly, never expect it will last. As a country, if they don't see you as a "threat", you are probably not powerful yet.

 

[nang2]

You seems to have a varied point of view .

There are no allies /friendship its just common interests . business is business that's how the world has always worked . To do business with someone you need trust , India happens to have earned the trust by maintaining a common interest for a long time.

If China gave up their claim of Kashmir and AP , India will unconditionally side with China regardless of their past , because its good business .

You are right. Business is about what you can get. Trust only exists if you also get something beneficial to you, not just promises. Even promises need tangible collateral. Sure, India would put on a friendly face if China gave up Aksai Chin. But what next? Give up sovereignty claim on Tibet? Give up any close relationship with Nepal? Give up bilateral cooperation with Sri Lanka? Give up military support for Pakistan? Desire is never ending. If China has to give up something at India's request, then the friendly Indian face must be something worthwhile.

 

[wiseone2]

But have a history of breaking a nation.

The Punjabi Muslim and Urdu immigrants can take credit for breaking Pakistan apart.

If you are referring to 1971 keep in mind Yahya Khan and his generals were running an illegal regime. The Awami league won a clear majority to form a government and were prevented from forming their government.