India too large a country to be boxed into any alliance: PM Read more: India too lar

[ek_indian]

What I feel, it is message for USA. And a master storke one!!

There is a growing realization that India is following USA line too much. Some of our own allies are not too happy with this. So this must be an indication in this regard. However this also means India is not joining SCO soon. There is no immediate need to do it.

There are some disadvantage for joining one camp as it is perceived hostility by rival camps. We already have some example though our neighbours. Being a ccountry with "independent" foreign relations, it is a policy matter as well.

P.S. --> I might be completely wrong in my analysis. But this is what I think.

 

[AR]

man this time i am voting 4 congress if manmohan again becomes pm/

well if he is projected to become again our prime minister, i wll surely vote for congress... I like him more than Rahul Gandhi

 

[Kinetic]

What I feel, it is message for USA. And a master storke one!!

There is a growing realization that India is following USA line too much. Some of our own allies are not too happy with this. So this must be an indication in this regard. However this also means India is not joining SCO soon. There is no immediate need to do it.

There are some disadvantage for joining one camp as it is perceived hostility by rival camps. We already have some example though our neighbours. Being a ccountry with "independent" foreign relations, it is a policy matter as well.

P.S. --> I might be completely wrong in my analysis. But this is what I think.

You made some good points.

But I think its quite clear that who will be our adversary in future or with whom we may need to fight a war. Though our friend like Russia still not very friendly with USA, they are not adversaries or enemnies either. So if we can concentrate on country-specific block or strategic alliance in future it will meet the requirements of all the partnering countries. If anyone mess up with any other country rather than the 'specific one', we should not bother. The alliance should strictly follow this rule.

On the other hand if we don't go for a block than it will result much more casualties in a war , the enemy can use full force on us and we cannot share the technological resources of the best militaries. Also if in the war we manage to win over the enemy, still countries like USA, Japan will gain from it. So its better to fight the war jointly.

I also think a strategic alliance will also reduce the chances of war and such sudden assertiveness from China.

 

[ek_indian]

You made some good points.

But I think its quite clear that who will be our adversary in future or with whom we may need to fight a war. Though our friend like Russia still not very friendly with USA, they are not adversaries or enemnies either. So if we can concentrate on country-specific block or strategic alliance in future it will meet the requirements of all the partnering countries. If anyone mess up with others, we should not bother. The alliance should strictly follow this rule.

On the other hand if we don't go for a block than it will result much more casualties in a war , the enemy can use full force on us and we cannot share the technological resources of the best militaries. Also if in the war we manage to win over the enemy, still countries like USA will gain from it. So its better to fight the war jointly.

I also think a strategic alliance will also reduce the chances of war and such sudden assertiveness from China.

Very true. However to much "bhai-bhai" can be interpreted otherwise. We can see hostile nations/ciscumstances for ourselves but not for others. So we must avoid a situation one we should find ourselves in tight spot. One recent example is Israel-Turkey incident.

Also, not joining any camp formally does not mean we should not have good relations with others. When we are already doing a pretty good job with Russia, Iran, USA, KSA, Israel etc. there is absolutely no need to join anyone. Left ones might feel betrayed and it is certainly not good option.

Added: I don't feel there is any possibility of war wwith China. Several "players" are already looking for a chance to subotage asian growth and all responsible countries understand it well.

 

[Kinetic]

Very true. However to much "bhai-bhai" can be interpreted otherwise. We can see hostile nations/ciscumstances for ourselves but not for others. So we must avoid a situation one we should find ourselves in tight spot. One recent example is Israel-Turkey incident.

Also, not joining any camp formally does not mean we should not have good relations with others. When we are already doing a pretty good job with Russia, Iran, USA, KSA, Israel etc. there is absolutely no need to join anyone. Left ones might feel betrayed and it is certainly not good option.

Rite.

Added: I don't feel there is any possibility of war wwith China. Several "players" are already looking for a chance to subotage asian growth and all responsible countries understand it well.

True but we don't see China thinking similar way. When Asia, specially big countries like China and India are developing, even trying to find peaceful way of solving border dispute such sudden steps were not only unnecessary and also led to rethink our policies. They are doing same with Japan and south china sea.

A normal relationship between India-China is very very needed for both countries. I thought both countries were mature enough not to mess up things like China did regarding visa and kashmir. Later they even retracted from their initial position. Result? Nothing.

 

[sudhir007]

Sorry bhai, Abdul Kalam was never PM of India. He was the President, when Vajpaye was PM.

But there is no doubt in any Indian's mind that he is a great man. a real patriot who contributed so much to our nation. We are fortunate to have such great people as Abdul Kalam and Manmohan Singh as our countrymen.

I know He is not PM Im just saying he is a great person his contribution
for the country could not be count. As a scientist his work or as president he make remarkable work As MM Singh as a economist or as a F. Minister and now as PM. These person is ideal for very Indian. what they done for making our country powerful.

 

[Nomenclature]

Rite.



True but we don't see China thinking similar way. When Asia, specially big countries like China and India are developing, even trying to find peaceful way of solving border dispute such sudden steps were not only unnecessary and also led to rethink our policies. They are doing same with Japan and south china sea.

A normal relationship between India-China is very very needed for both countries. I thought both countries were mature enough not to mess up things like China did regarding visa and kashmir. Later they even retracted from their initial position. Result? Nothing.

We have always been trying to solve the territorial dispute the peaceful way. We've already solved most of our land disputes with our neighbors peacefully and in regular talks over our maritime disputes.

With Japan we're discussing joint-development over the disputed area (recently suspended because decided to arrest some Chinese fishermen) and with South China Sea, a code of conduct recently went into effect and we're always open to more talks in that area as long as it's bilateral.

The fact is we have a proven track record of peacefully solving territorial disputes while some of those countries we have a dispute do not. Japan for example has dispute with all three of its Asian neighbors and haven't been able to solve any of them. I wonder what's India's record on this.

 

[Hafizzz]

He is anawesome statesman...
Wow..

Singh is King after all..

Singh is "King" ? Sanjay Jha disagrees :

Why Singh is not King!: Rediff.com India News

 

[RAHUL INDIAN]

We have always been trying to solve the territorial dispute the peaceful way. We've already solved most of our land disputes with our neighbors peacefully and in regular talks over our maritime disputes.

With Japan we're discussing joint-development over the disputed area (recently suspended because decided to arrest some Chinese fishermen) and with South China Sea, a code of conduct recently went into effect and we're always open to more talks in that area as long as it's bilateral.

The fact is we have a proven track record of peacefully solving territorial disputes while some of those countries we have a dispute do not. Japan for example has dispute with all three of its Asian neighbors and haven't been able to solve any of them. I wonder what's India's record on this.

China has more disputes then anyone else and more serious disputes then anyone else with a threat of military conflict looming large all the while with a lot of neighbours.

 

[ganimi kawa]

Going through this speech by mms with a fine lens and presuming that every word in his speech is carefully selected with full awareness about its implications; there are some very interesting points to ponder.

1. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today said it is too large a country to be "boxed" into any alliance or regional arrangements.

This is clearly a message to the countries trying to force India into a regional alliance ( boxing into!) Given the current geopolitical scenario in S Asia, I think that country most certainly is America!

Also the tone of this message is not direct, hence I believe it to be even more serious! If mms would have gone nahead and said something like "America, you can't bully us!" most of us would have thought that as a political gimmik. Given the typical anglophillic posturing by our PM I think this time he means business!

2.While underlining the need to maintain "healthy relations" with all major powers, Singh however made it clear the country's strategic autonomy would be preserved as it is an "article of faith for us".

Again looks like a message aimed at american western elite!

3."This must seep into our defence and foreign policy planning as never before. This is a palpable desire on the part of the countries of this region to enhance cooperation with us which we must reciprocate," he added.

Interesting line for those who believe India is working in a vaccume in SE Asia. Now it looks like we have plenty of friends there.

 

[Urbanized Greyhound]

for such a vision MMS must act accordingly......when he says

India too large a country to be boxed into any alliance

perhaps he means India is not instantly compelled to join a strategic block like NATO or SCO .......if this is to be achieved then the only means viable is to form a substantial defence relationship with Israel like countries ......our bad that such countries are quite few ....Japan may be one.....but mainly countries like Australia , South Korea are quite under U.S military influence and so the question of them overtly aiding India against an external threat ....when the U.S is reluctant.... does not arise....

but as far as Russia is concerned ....we are and will remain for the foresee able future " brothers in arms" .....but Russia is no U.S.S.R...to sent a nuke sub to tail... if hypothetically a Chinese nuke sub enters the Bay of Bengal.....this is current geopolitical reality...and all that we currently have to counter this ( without linking our selves with a U.S military alliance)....is sad to say our own defense budget......

 

[Dash]

I also think a strategic alliance will also reduce the chances of war and such sudden assertiveness from China.

However, if you jon NATO lets say, you are actually damaging the peace measures in Asia. Now Russians wont even like this. There are implications on both sides.

What we need now is strengthen our internal matters, security and develope as a country.