India welcomes US 'Asia pivot'

[notsuperstitious]

I think I read a story that China wants to have a open channel for Indian Chinese on these border issues, but Indians had either reservations, or couldn't come up with a decision.

Maybe the Chinese government took it the wrong way and thinks Indians purposely did this because of designs on Chinese controlled territory.

Wild guess.

As to the others, If the Philippines and Vietnam had been Bangladesh and Sri lanka, would India sit still and do nothing? You guys complain when we arm Pakistan, but the US' weapons are much more potent and it's forces can more than reach China.

You say we surround India? We don't have any military bases, while US has dozens in Japan and Korea alone.

You guys say that we provoked India, the US is moving B2s and F-22s to Korea, don't tell me those are needed in a Korean war, maybe B-2s , but F-22?

So you can see why we don't want America in Asia, but more importantly, China's present is India's tomorrow.

We are claiming the seas, one because it is profitable, two and perhaps most importantly, if it's not under Chinese authority, don't pretend it won't be under America's.

We would rather **** off all these smaller nations, than to get America in our backyard.

@anon45
Guam has always been in Asia, and Hawaii always close, if China had still been weak, would the US still use 60% of force in Asia? If not, then what is this move in response to if not China? You are not going to say pirates are you?

Your wild guess does not help. In India people are going to take this very negatively. India having designs on chinese controlled land? I and you know thats rather rich isn't it?

If we can't agree that china's move seems like provocation from the viewpoint of even pro-china indians, then lets just agree to disagree.

 

[Kaniska]

There's a saying in China when the lips are gone so will the teeth.

India supporting US in Asia to contain China seems fine on the surface, but what happens when you want them to leave?

China, while seeming aggressive, is the only force in Asia capable of driving the US out, because of its military, but most importantly economy.

US is an outside force, they can do what they want and if **** hits the fan, they can leave. We are asians, if things don't turn out good we are screwed.

Vietnam, Philippines have a short memory, I hope India is not the same way, especially since India is in no danger what so ever.

Everything whatever you quote is absolutely right..But China and its aggressive attacking policy towards its neighour does not leave any room for anyone so as to not to support US Pivot policy...If you ask me personally, i would like to see China and Asia should get united to have a bigger economic power...But on the other hand...if you have seen recent reports, China is attacking and sending its military to Indian area and provoking aggressive situation all around India....So although India would love to stay neitral and independent, but it seems China is hell bent on being war with India and other South East Asian countries like Japan and other nations..

 

[Hope4btr]

Other then Australia no one will support USA role in Asia in the long run. Rest of countries are using USA as a counter balance against China in a very calculated manner it doesn't mean they are Allies in the NATO sense.

Your judgement on this matter is accurate. Its like a chess game for short time leverage. And only to maintain a status quo in future, Indian navy is expanding vigorously. In this process, US in future cannot have a hegemony in the region due to the presence of powerful navies like that of India and China. The plans looks good, lets see what fruits it would bear in a decades time.

 

[Genesis]

Your judgement on this matter is accurate. Its like a chess game for short time leverage. And only to maintain a status quo in future, Indian navy is expanding vigorously. In this process, US in future cannot have a hegemony in the region due to the presence of powerful navies like that of India and China. The plans looks good, lets see what fruits it would bear in a decades time.

oh I'm not saying, the Asian countries aren't using US, but usually smaller countries using larger ones only works IF there is a countering force.

So IF China "falls" that would be gone, US would have full reign over the Asian Seas, then are you just going to tell US to leave?

 

[Hope4btr]

oh I'm not saying, the Asian countries aren't using US, but usually smaller countries using larger ones only works IF there is a countering force.

So IF China "falls" that would be gone, US would have full reign over the Asian Seas, then are you just going to tell US to leave?

China has a good army and airforce, but it still lags in the Naval department. There is a huge tech gap and Ops gap to be filled to counter US navy. Unlike Pakistan, India is not reliant on US, its a strategic move to counter the Chinese naval influence for a while and not destroy it. Its a game not to destroy but compete. See, India and China are too big a nation to destroy and our navies are huge. So, complete US hegemony is not possible unless we stop expanding.

 

[Genesis]

China has a good army and airforce, but it still lags in the Naval department. There is a huge tech gap and Ops gap to be filled to counter US navy. Unlike Pakistan, India is not reliant on US, its a strategic move to counter the Chinese naval influence for a while and not destroy it. Its a game not to destroy but compete. See, India and China are too big a nation to destroy and our navies are huge. So, complete US hegemony is not possible unless we stop expanding.

So the goal here as you say is just to compete? To achieve parity?

That is not a smart move, because while it may take quite a while to achieve something of equal status naval wise on the world stage for China US, it would take about 10 years to achieve the ability to deny access for US in S and E China seas. In fact with the new missiles, the new satellites, and new naval forces, it's happening a bit now. China is pumping out new vessels like it's going out of style, and in terms of some ships, like the Type 52s, it is going out of style.

The move for Asian countries exclude Allies and India, or non participants must be to either eliminate Chinese "threat" now, because once the US is gone, there will be no more bargaining chips on the table. Or to negotiate while the US is still here.

Just to have US here and making no moves is stupid, as it just pisses China off and then does nothing for you now or once US is gone.

So tell me how is this a smart move?

 

[Shardul.....the lion]

Well, aggressive neighbor bully does not leave smaller nations any options....to get beaten or bring in biggest bully in town who luckily hates neighbourhood bully.

Keeping US more close as compared to China is India's advantage and aggressive CHina helps India is same direction...

 

[Hope4btr]

This pivot is not only aimed at China. It's also aimed at containing India in the long term. Whatever the US does in Asia, is aimed at keeping any Asian challenger to its hegemony.
India will find out what a ruthless power the United States really is. When India becomes a big economic power and is close to surpassing American power, watch the US form alliances with India's neighbours to contain India.

I completely agree with you. Foreign policies are always based on short term benefits. And everyone in Indian administration knows this. Today they are allies, tomorrow they will be enemies. I somehow believe that in my lifetime, we would witness a Indo-Sino alliance in future to counter NATO. This is diplomacy my friend. There are no permanent enemies or friends here, just strategic interest.

 

[Zero_wing]

Well its just normal to do so i mean its their own fault for thinking using @$$ instead using their heads

 

[Hope4btr]

So the goal here as you say is just to compete? To achieve parity?

That is not a smart move, because while it may take quite a while to achieve something of equal status naval wise on the world stage for China US, it would take about 10 years to achieve the ability to deny access for US in S and E China seas. In fact with the new missiles, the new satellites, and new naval forces, it's happening a bit now. China is pumping out new vessels like it's going out of style, and in terms of some ships, like the Type 52s, it is going out of style.

The move for Asian countries exclude Allies and India, or non participants must be to either eliminate Chinese "threat" now, because once the US is gone, there will be no more bargaining chips on the table. Or to negotiate while the US is still here.

Just to have US here and making no moves is stupid, as it just pisses China off and then does nothing for you now or once US is gone.

So tell me how is this a smart move?

You are missing the point. China is not just a chip on the table. It will never be off the table, not with their growth rate. You are bound to grow and no one is stopping China from doing so. Its a move to narrow Chinese sphere of influence. India is making a move to catch up. See, India is growing too but its atleast 10 yr behind China. So, US restricts the Chinese influence till India develops and starts exerting its influence. The only folly would be to let US have bases in Indian sphere. If India can do so, then in the end US would only find itself sitting on the sidewalks of Asia.

 

[acid rain]

So the goal here as you say is just to compete? To achieve parity?

That is not a smart move, because while it may take quite a while to achieve something of equal status naval wise on the world stage for China US, it would take about 10 years to achieve the ability to deny access for US in S and E China seas. In fact with the new missiles, the new satellites, and new naval forces, it's happening a bit now. China is pumping out new vessels like it's going out of style, and in terms of some ships, like the Type 52s, it is going out of style.

The move for Asian countries exclude Allies and India, or non participants must be to either eliminate Chinese "threat" now, because once the US is gone, there will be no more bargaining chips on the table. Or to negotiate while the US is still here.

Just to have US here and making no moves is stupid, as it just pisses China off and then does nothing for you now or once US is gone.

So tell me how is this a smart move?

Its not the US or allies or India which will make the first move, its china which will do it - something will surely give in all these beligerent moves that chinas making against other countries for eg.

this latest conflict between India china can snowball into war.

chinas conflict with japan can become ugly.

all the land and sea takeovers chinas bullying of veitnam and philipinnes can become war.

NK targets SK and surely china jumps in and so does US.

the others are remote but china has little force projection but anyway here it is - israel and US attacks Iran or US and arabs attack Syria - china will not enter there directly but will cheerlead Russia - but losses there will cut short your influence in that region.


Among all your wars the ugliest will be with India and Japan - you will need to bring in all your resources to those conflicts and leave all your other conflict areas open for takeover by whoevers on your border at that time.

 

[Anony]

So the goal here as you say is just to compete? To achieve parity?

That is not a smart move, because while it may take quite a while to achieve something of equal status naval wise on the world stage for China US, it would take about 10 years to achieve the ability to deny access for US in S and E China seas. In fact with the new missiles, the new satellites, and new naval forces, it's happening a bit now. China is pumping out new vessels like it's going out of style, and in terms of some ships, like the Type 52s, it is going out of style.

The move for Asian countries exclude Allies and India, or non participants must be to either eliminate Chinese "threat" now, because once the US is gone, there will be no more bargaining chips on the table. Or to negotiate while the US is still here.

Just to have US here and making no moves is stupid, as it just pisses China off and then does nothing for you now or once US is gone.

So tell me how is this a smart move?

US Look East is more towards S & E China Sea than Indian Ocean. What I wanna mean USN ships will not patrol Indian Ocean in large number. And since USN ships will be present in South China Sea or in Vietnamese water, IN will not be worried about these Chinese naval bases in Srilanka and Gwadar Port.

Moreover India wants US in the region , so that a full scale war scenario with China never comes up. It's because India may match China in water and air, but have no plan for those 300-400 IRBMs which China has. Surely half of that is for use against India. And India in near future will have some 20 IRBMs. So 20 for 200. No match.

May be by 2025, situation will change with Agni III, Agni IV and Agni V in full fledged production. So 2025 is distant future when India will no more want USN ships in Asia. Till then, welcome decision.

 

[Genesis]

You are missing the point. China is not just a chip on the table. It will never be off the table, not with their growth rate. You are bound to grow and no one is stopping China from doing so. Its a move to narrow Chinese sphere of influence. India is making a move to catch up. See, India is growing too but its atleast 10 yr behind China. So, US restricts the Chinese influence till India develops and starts exerting its influence. The only folly would be to let US have bases in Indian sphere. If India can do so, then in the end US would only find itself sitting on the sidewalks of Asia.

yea, I think you misunderstood my point, I mean the US is the chip, if Philippines and Vietnam don't go to war along their US "Allies" then they never will, at least, not to win.

If they don't go to war, then negotiate while the US is still in Asia and they can have some leverage.

But they aren't doing anything, they are waiting, and I am not sure for what. China is waiting to build up strength to deny America access to Asia.

As to your Indian point, sure it's logical China's slowing growth, would give the initiative to India to catch up, but here's the problem.

From my understanding, India growth this year is actually still lower than China? lower than about 7%. Though I may be wrong there are conflicting reports here and there.

Also, US may not have a base in India, but in order to have access to Indian Ocean, the US has tons of options. The drones in Pakistan don't have to hit Pakistan targets, and don't even have to be drones. Also since India is using America to achieve parity with China, who's to say China won't supply US in a containment policy towards India,, once US decide it's no longer viable to stand off with China.
@acid rain
The south China sea tension is over, China is already the de facto ruler of those islands and the seas, barring US interference and US won't do anything as long as there isn't a war.

The second phase of officially controlling it, will be later.

Japan, will not go to war, North Korean tension is easing the Sino Japan tension weirdly enough.

India China is nothing, no war will be fought, India can't get mass troops there, while China won't want to. The best of the best Chinese troops are by the Sea anyways, so, officially the border with Indians are the army, they may as well be militia, the way they are trained and armed.

A Korean war with US China not likely, back in the first one, China was a small power, and thus it's entry is not seen as a global war, this time it's different.

 

[acid rain]

@acid rain
The south China sea tension is over, China is already the de facto ruler of those islands and the seas, barring US interference and US won't do anything as long as there isn't a war.

The second phase of officially controlling it, will be later.

Japan, will not go to war, North Korean tension is easing the Sino Japan tension weirdly enough.

India China is nothing, no war will be fought, India can't get mass troops there, while China won't want to. The best of the best Chinese troops are by the Sea anyways, so, officially the border with Indians are the army, they may as well be militia, the way they are trained and armed.

A Korean war with US China not likely, back in the first one, China was a small power, and thus it's entry is not seen as a global war, this time it's different.

So you have declared yourselves rulers of SCS LOL, thats delusional - I am sure just like a few chinese fishing boats bumping into each other in the SCS, the 20 odd chinese soldiers in Indian territory have declared you victory over India, I am also sure those few chinese fishing boats going near senkaku islands have got you victory against Japan too.

Dont forget the viets and phills regularly arresting your fishermen and taking over thosee fishing boats are denying Chinese army its victory, bullying will not take you far and as for NK, King Kong Un is as lunatic as the CCP and will go to war or atleast bring war onto himself.

As for India china war is always on - its just the question of when, China has been arming and trying to encircle India and Indias doing the same, CCP has a war panned out against India surely and I hope it does not happen for at least a decade till we have our long range missiles in place.

As for chinese japanese wars - wait for the US to finish with Afghanistan and regroup in South East Asia, NK and Japanese wars will be on.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

oh I'm not saying, the Asian countries aren't using US, but usually smaller countries using larger ones only works IF there is a countering force.

So IF China "falls" that would be gone, US would have full reign over the Asian Seas, then are you just going to tell US to leave?

so what you want the smaller countries in asia to do instead ?? watch their seas and lands be captured and taken away by china, just because US shouldnt be allowed to entry in Asia ?? they dont know whats going to happen in the long run when US doesnt want to leave..but the way China is behaving now, they surely seem to be worried about their interests as a nation.