You are simply wrong India dismissed the multipolar world after the demise of the Soviets and embraced a uni polar world where America would rule the world via proxies. India hopes to benefit by being a proxy to American design. These are not just my views that you Indians so much enjoy knocking but views that are shared by for example by a former diplomat and Ambassador of India who certainly has more experience of these matters certainly than you. I will search for the article an put it up here in the next 5 minutes
India: the US doormat into Asia?
- Thread starter lem34
- Start date
You are simply wrong India dismissed the multipolar world after the demise of the Soviets and embraced a uni polar world where America would rule the world via proxies. India hopes to benefit by being a proxy to American design. These are not just my views that you Indians so much enjoy knocking but views that are shared by for example by a former diplomat and Ambassador of India who certainly has more experience of these matters certainly than you. I will search for the article an put it up here in the next 5 minutes
former respected Indian ambassadors reading of the situation earlier in the thread:
Dai Bingguo heading for Islamabad
Francis Fukuyama wrote a sequel to his celebrated book The End of History and the Last Man (1992) no sooner than he realised that he was hopelessly wrong in his prediction that the global triumph of political and economic liberalism was at hand. He wrote: What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the crossing of a particular period of postwar history, but the end of history as such That is, the end point of mankinds ideological evolution and the universalization of Western democracy as the final form of human government. But in no time he realised his rush to judgment and he retracted with another book.
However, unlike the celebrated American neocon thinker, Indian foreign policy thinkers who were heavily influenced by his 1992 thesis are yet to retract. The Indian discourses through the 1990s drew heavily from Fukuyama to throw overboard the scope for reinventing or reinterpreting non-alignment in the post-Cold War setting and came to a rapid judgment that Russia belonged to the dustbin of history. Our discourses never really got updated despite Fukumayas own retraction.
Indeed, western commentators also fuelled the consequent sense of insecurity in Delhi through the 1990s by endorsing that India would never have a Russia option again and Boris Yeltsins Russia itself was inexorably becoming an ally of the west and, therefore, what alternative is there for India but to take to the New American Century project? Remember the drama of the Bill Clinton administration arm-twisting Yeltsin not to give to India the cryogentic engines?
In sum, India got entrapped in a unipolar predicament. The best elucidation of this self-invited predicament has been the masterly work titled Crossing the Rubicon by Raja Mohan, which was of course widely acclaimed in the US. While releasing the book at a function in Delhi, the then National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra even admitted that Indias main foreign policy challenge was somehow to engage the USs attention.
Russia, of course, went on to prove our pundits completely wrong. Russia remerged as a global player and the evidence of it is today spread (and is poised to expand) all across global theatres Libya, Syria, Iran, Central Asia, Afghanistan, etc.
Why I am underscoring all this is that I am strongly reminded of that sad chapter in the recent history of Indias foreign policy when I see the huge psywar being let loose on Pakistan currently when that country too is at a crossroads with regard to its future policy directions in a highly volatile external enviornment.
In Pakistans case, the psywar substitutes Russia with China. The USs Track II thesis is that China is hopelessly marooned in its own malaise so much so that it has no time, interest or resources to come to Pakistans aid, the two countries all-weather friendship notwithstanding. Let me cull out two fine pieces of this ongoing psywar.
One is the lengthy article featured by Americas prestigious flag-carrier Foreign Affairs magazine in early December titled Chinas Pakistan conundrum. Its argument is: China will not simply bail out Pakistan with loans, investment, and aid, as those watching the deterioration of US-Pakistani relations seem to expect. China will pursue politics, security, and geopolitical advantage regardless of Islamabads preferences. It puts forth the invidious argument that Chinas real use for Pakistan is only to box out New Delhi in Afghanistan and the broader region.
Alongside the argument is the highly-tendentious vector that is beyond easy verification, namely, that US and China are increasingly coordinating their policies toward Pakistan. Diplomacy is part dissimulation and we simply dont know whether the US and China are even anywhere near beginning to coordinate about coordinating their regional policies in South Asia, especially with regard to Pakistan (and Afghanistan). The odds are that while the US and China may have some limited convergent interests, conceivably, their strategic interests are most certainly in sharp conflict.
A milder version of this frontal attack by US pundits on Pakistans existential dilemma appears in Michael Krepons article last week titled Pakistans Patrons, which, curiously, counsels Islamabad to follow Indias foreign-policy footsteps and make up with the US. Krepon literally suggests that the Pakistanis are living in a fools paradise.
The obvious thrust of this psywar strikingly similar to what India was subjected to in the 1990s is that Pakistan has no option but to fall in line with the US regional strategies, as it has no real China option. The main difference between India and Pakistan is that the foreign policy elites in Islamabad unlike their Indian counterparts are not inclined to buy into the US argument with a willing suspension of disbelief. In a way, the Sino-Pakistan relationship is proving once again to be resilient. Pakistan is in no mood to get into a unipolar predicament, as the Indian elites willingly did in the 1990s.
Thus, the visit by the Chinese delegation led by State Councilor, Dai Bingguo to Islamabad at this point in time assumes much significance. Dai is one of the highest-ranking figures in the Chinese foreign-policy establishment and the fact he is leading a delegation that includes of senior Chinese military officials is very significant. Dai is scheduled to meet not only Pakistans political leadership at the highest level but also army chief Ashfaq Kayani and ISI head Ahmed Shuja Pasha.
Obviously, Beijing is making a big point through the timing of this visit as well, which, incidentally, is taking place at a time of great uncertainties in Pakistans internal affairs. When it comes to relations with China, it must be assumed that Pakistans civil and military leaderships are together.
Dai doesnt really have a US counterpart as he is ranked above the FM. Arguably, it would be secretary of state Hillary Clinton. If so, to what extent Dai coordinated his proposed visit with Clinton will be of particular interest. The future of the USs psywar on Pakistan is at stake.
The big question is whether this would be Dais last major trip to South Asia, as he is a key member of President Hu Jintaos team and China is moving into a period of transition at the leadership level. Dais visit to Delhi for the Special Representatives meet was called off at the last minute.
Posted in Diplomacy, Politics.
Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...k-russia-china-iran-cars-4.html#ixzz1yAe0e6ds
Dai Bingguo heading for Islamabad
Francis Fukuyama wrote a sequel to his celebrated book The End of History and the Last Man (1992) no sooner than he realised that he was hopelessly wrong in his prediction that the global triumph of political and economic liberalism was at hand. He wrote: What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the crossing of a particular period of postwar history, but the end of history as such That is, the end point of mankinds ideological evolution and the universalization of Western democracy as the final form of human government. But in no time he realised his rush to judgment and he retracted with another book.
However, unlike the celebrated American neocon thinker, Indian foreign policy thinkers who were heavily influenced by his 1992 thesis are yet to retract. The Indian discourses through the 1990s drew heavily from Fukuyama to throw overboard the scope for reinventing or reinterpreting non-alignment in the post-Cold War setting and came to a rapid judgment that Russia belonged to the dustbin of history. Our discourses never really got updated despite Fukumayas own retraction.
Indeed, western commentators also fuelled the consequent sense of insecurity in Delhi through the 1990s by endorsing that India would never have a Russia option again and Boris Yeltsins Russia itself was inexorably becoming an ally of the west and, therefore, what alternative is there for India but to take to the New American Century project? Remember the drama of the Bill Clinton administration arm-twisting Yeltsin not to give to India the cryogentic engines?
In sum, India got entrapped in a unipolar predicament. The best elucidation of this self-invited predicament has been the masterly work titled Crossing the Rubicon by Raja Mohan, which was of course widely acclaimed in the US. While releasing the book at a function in Delhi, the then National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra even admitted that Indias main foreign policy challenge was somehow to engage the USs attention.
Russia, of course, went on to prove our pundits completely wrong. Russia remerged as a global player and the evidence of it is today spread (and is poised to expand) all across global theatres Libya, Syria, Iran, Central Asia, Afghanistan, etc.
Why I am underscoring all this is that I am strongly reminded of that sad chapter in the recent history of Indias foreign policy when I see the huge psywar being let loose on Pakistan currently when that country too is at a crossroads with regard to its future policy directions in a highly volatile external enviornment.
In Pakistans case, the psywar substitutes Russia with China. The USs Track II thesis is that China is hopelessly marooned in its own malaise so much so that it has no time, interest or resources to come to Pakistans aid, the two countries all-weather friendship notwithstanding. Let me cull out two fine pieces of this ongoing psywar.
One is the lengthy article featured by Americas prestigious flag-carrier Foreign Affairs magazine in early December titled Chinas Pakistan conundrum. Its argument is: China will not simply bail out Pakistan with loans, investment, and aid, as those watching the deterioration of US-Pakistani relations seem to expect. China will pursue politics, security, and geopolitical advantage regardless of Islamabads preferences. It puts forth the invidious argument that Chinas real use for Pakistan is only to box out New Delhi in Afghanistan and the broader region.
Alongside the argument is the highly-tendentious vector that is beyond easy verification, namely, that US and China are increasingly coordinating their policies toward Pakistan. Diplomacy is part dissimulation and we simply dont know whether the US and China are even anywhere near beginning to coordinate about coordinating their regional policies in South Asia, especially with regard to Pakistan (and Afghanistan). The odds are that while the US and China may have some limited convergent interests, conceivably, their strategic interests are most certainly in sharp conflict.
A milder version of this frontal attack by US pundits on Pakistans existential dilemma appears in Michael Krepons article last week titled Pakistans Patrons, which, curiously, counsels Islamabad to follow Indias foreign-policy footsteps and make up with the US. Krepon literally suggests that the Pakistanis are living in a fools paradise.
The obvious thrust of this psywar strikingly similar to what India was subjected to in the 1990s is that Pakistan has no option but to fall in line with the US regional strategies, as it has no real China option. The main difference between India and Pakistan is that the foreign policy elites in Islamabad unlike their Indian counterparts are not inclined to buy into the US argument with a willing suspension of disbelief. In a way, the Sino-Pakistan relationship is proving once again to be resilient. Pakistan is in no mood to get into a unipolar predicament, as the Indian elites willingly did in the 1990s.
Thus, the visit by the Chinese delegation led by State Councilor, Dai Bingguo to Islamabad at this point in time assumes much significance. Dai is one of the highest-ranking figures in the Chinese foreign-policy establishment and the fact he is leading a delegation that includes of senior Chinese military officials is very significant. Dai is scheduled to meet not only Pakistans political leadership at the highest level but also army chief Ashfaq Kayani and ISI head Ahmed Shuja Pasha.
Obviously, Beijing is making a big point through the timing of this visit as well, which, incidentally, is taking place at a time of great uncertainties in Pakistans internal affairs. When it comes to relations with China, it must be assumed that Pakistans civil and military leaderships are together.
Dai doesnt really have a US counterpart as he is ranked above the FM. Arguably, it would be secretary of state Hillary Clinton. If so, to what extent Dai coordinated his proposed visit with Clinton will be of particular interest. The future of the USs psywar on Pakistan is at stake.
The big question is whether this would be Dais last major trip to South Asia, as he is a key member of President Hu Jintaos team and China is moving into a period of transition at the leadership level. Dais visit to Delhi for the Special Representatives meet was called off at the last minute.
Posted in Diplomacy, Politics.
Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...k-russia-china-iran-cars-4.html#ixzz1yAe0e6ds
You are behaving like a primitive AI program mashing and churning key words from the internet to make sentences. Dude read articles and sometimes your own sentences before posting them. Anyway, the Soviet Union collapsed in the early 90s. Which of India's actions in the last 20 years have shown us embracing a uni-polar world? We have had close military ties with all nations, and most so with Russia. Do you know even now Indian Navy officers travel to Russia for joint training, Air Force officers travel to Germany and France and a very tiny percentage go to the US. Also, look at our recent defence acquisitions to see how equal-opportunity we are. Our relations with Russia are for the ages and we are testing waters with the US still. This is not to say we are US-averse, just that we follow an independent policy based on India first. Not like Pakistan where you want to be a proxy - either for US, Iran, China or whoever bids the most and want to live on their achievements and handouts.
Next, if you mean we are pro-US because we gave up on Nehru's socialism and embraced capitalism, then China is a US proxy since 1978, do you agree? Anyway, it is as much rhetoric as ridculous.
Lastly, I don't care what ambassadors and ex-ambassadors say. If all ex-US ambassadors are to be believed, Pakistan is the epicenter of global terrorism and playing double games with its closest ally. Agree again?
why do you think the Indian diplomats who said Americans are thinking Indians are doormats were being sarcastic mate
SamranAli
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2011
- Messages
- 2,309
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Kids and non serious are not allowed.
I do not know why Indian forum members will not address the serious matter in hand about India being treated as door mats according to their diplomats.
I mean lets discuss it without personal insults please. Insults will not change facts nor add gravitas to any argument you wish to make
I mean lets discuss it without personal insults please. Insults will not change facts nor add gravitas to any argument you wish to make
curioususer
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 6, 2012
- Messages
- 709
- Reaction score
- 0
if you wanted a serious discussion you should have posted in indian defence sub forum.
NALANDA
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2010
- Messages
- 771
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
Aryan Dude
You need help with english comprehension and some lesson on humor. I suggest you take helpfrom your school English Teacher tonmorrow. Just take this article to your english teacher and ask the teacher to explain the article, context and what Indian Diplomat meant.
In hinglish it means " American Diplomat Panetta India ka Chutiya kaatne aaya and Indian Diplomat laughed amongst them and deciphered what he actually meant".
It does not mean India is Doormat/***** / Sanitary Napkin /cheap fuk etc like a neighboring country by even the wildest imagination.......
Aryan ...you are very funny indeed. But keep up the good work. You bring smile to many of our face.
Personal insults? You are insulting yourself everytime you quote the article and prove that you either didn't read past the title or didn't understand it. If you come pre-insulted, whose fault is that?
kingkobra
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2010
- Messages
- 2,780
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Doormat? who India?
no i don't think so since we have never needed a patron nor we have US drones flying over our heads.
sorry pakistan the doormat is.....well you know who the mirror is right next to you..
no i don't think so since we have never needed a patron nor we have US drones flying over our heads.
sorry pakistan the doormat is.....well you know who the mirror is right next to you..
Shahin Vatani
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2012
- Messages
- 2,025
- Reaction score
- 0
Please Pakistanis and Indians stop fighting. Instead of looking at your differences look at your over 3000 years of shared culture and try to build better bonds, if not for yourself then for the future generations of Pakistanis and Indians.
SOHEIL
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2011
- Messages
- 15,796
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
curioususer
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 6, 2012
- Messages
- 709
- Reaction score
- 0
no matter how much we try, they won't allow it to happen. that is their nature, god alone can help.
notsuperstitious
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2009
- Messages
- 10,473
- Reaction score
- -15
Dude this thread is bad as it is, pls don't get the pakistanis started on how we have no shared history, genetics, color, language, food, muscles (not shared muscles, only muscles) etc etc etc.
Every time I try to talk about it they all gang up saying i want to be a pakistani. Like seriously.
Similar threads
- Article
