What's new

Modi's Policy Blunders & India's Superpower Delusions

RiazHaq

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
6,611
Reaction score
70
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Haq's Musings: India's Superpower Delusions: Modi's Flawed Policies

"If you (India) want to run with the big dogs, you have to stop pissing with the puppies".
Robert Blackwill, Ex US Ambassador to India

Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Top Foreign Policy Advisor Ajit Doval

What Mr. Blackwill said about India back in 2006 still rings true with Modi's foreign policy team's poor handling of Nepal. In a piece titled "Has Narendra Modi's foreign policy bubble burst", a BBC report summed up the situation in the following words:

"For many in India, Narendra Modi is seen as the country's best brand ambassador. That's quite apparent from his many overseas visits in his first 16 months in office - he has generated plenty of interest, airtime and drawn adulation from the extensive Indian diaspora. But that may not be enough in sustaining relationships in the neighbourhood, as he is fast finding out."

India's Regional Ties:

There seems to be emerging consensus that Prime Modi's "Neighborhood First" policy he announced at the time of his inauguration last year appears to be on the verge of collapse.

The Hindu Nationalists' foreign policy spearheaded by former RAW Chief Ajit Doval is causing rapid deterioration of India's relations with most of its neighbors ranging in size from China and Pakistan to Maldives and Nepal. Written during Prime Minister Modi's recent US visit, including a large reception given by Indian Americans in Silicon Valley, an opinion piece by policy analyst Jyoti Malhotra concludes as follows: "So as the prime minister charms America, flanked by his two key aides Ajit Doval and S Jaishankar, the thought surfaces: Let him also spare a thought for India’s crisis-ridden neighbourhood".

India's Biggest Policy Blunder:

India threw away its substantial conventional military edge over Pakistan when the Hindu Nationalist government of Atal Bihari Vajapayee decided to carry out its nuclear tests in 1998. It gave Pakistan the justification it needed to go nuclear a few weeks later, thereby achieving balance of terror with its much larger neighbor with a huge conventional military.

Indian analyst Krishna Kant explains his country's policymakers blunder as follows: "Nuclear weapons have reduced Pakistan defense cost while we (India) have been forced to spend tens of billions of dollars to acquire latest military hardware in a bid to retain the edge. Its shows in the defence budget of the two countries since 1999 nuclear blasts. All through 1980s and 90s, Pakistan was spending around a third of its government budget and 5-6% of its GDP on defence, or about twice the corresponding ratios for India. After going nuclear, Pakistan’s defence spending decelerated and its share in GDP is expected to be decline to around 2.5% in the current fiscal year, slightly ahead of India’s 2%. This is releasing resources for Pakistan to invest in productive sectors such as infrastructure and social services, something they couldn’t do when they were competing with India to maintain parity in conventional weapons."

Ajit Doval's Rhetoric Against Pakistan:

Kant argues that the Hindu Nationalists blunders in the past have severely limited Indias's policy options vis-a-vis Pakistan. Here's how how he concluded his Op Ed in Business Standard: "In this environment, a hard talk by Mr Doval followed by a high-decibel drama by the government on the National Security Advisor’s talk between the two countries seems nothing more than a show for the gallery. The audience may be applauding right now, but claps may turn to boos as the public realises the inconsistencies in the script and the pain it inflicts on the hero."

Summary:

Hindu Nationalists' superpower delusions have led them to policies that are hurting India's position in South Asia region and the world. No amount of hard talk by Ajit Doval can change this fact. Former Indian Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh has recently said: "India and Pakistan need sustained engagement to realise the vast potential of benefits of liberalisation of trade and investment in the South Asian region." Modi and Doval need listen to Mr. Singh. India's best bet is to engage with Pakistan as well as other neighbors on a sustained basis to deal with the realities as they exist.

Related Link:

Haq's Musings

Modi's Pakistan Policy

Modi in Silicon Valley

Rise of the Sangh Parivar

India's Israel Envy: What If Modi Attacks Pakistan

Jaswant Singh on India's Foreign Policy's "Strategic Confinement"

Ex RAW Agent Document's India's Successes in Pakistan


Haq's Musings: India's Superpower Delusions: Modi's Flawed Policies
 
.
Pakistan is not center of universe for us. Our defense procurement is for our power projection across the world both in the present and in the near extended future.

There could be no bigger delusion than thinking that our foreign policy to be Pakistan centrist.
 
.
Pakistan is not center of universe for us. Our defense procurement is for our power projection across the world both in the present and in the near extended future.

There could be no bigger delusion than thinking that our foreign policy to be Pakistan centrist.

Then why your PM cannot stop blabbering about Pakistan at every occasion. He was blabbering about PK at Bangladeshi visit, Sri Lanka, USA, UK... Obsessed freak.
 
. .
Then why your PM cannot stop blabbering about Pakistan at every occasion. He was blabbering about PK at Bangladeshi visit, Sri Lanka, USA, UK... Obsessed freak.

Yes, he was talking about terrorism (among many other things you choose to ignore) emanating from Pakistan targeted at India. He was speaking on domestic issues from cleanliness, hygiene, GDP growth, policies stagnation and of course terrorism with largely domestic audience.

So when it comes to terrorism, there's only one country that does in India, hence the mention of your country.

Look at Nawaz, everywhere he goes he just keeps blabbering about Kashmir. Just plain vapid, nothing inspirational either to Pakistanis or to the world at large. It seems that entire Pakistan's existence starts and ends with Kashmir and India.
 
. .
And mummy the Modi monster said blah blah and Mummy. doval also blah blah. :cray:Supa dupa mummy modi said supa dupa..go make him stand in the corner...please mommy
typical riASS huck butthurt.
 
.
India threw away its substantial conventional military edge over Pakistan when the Hindu Nationalist government of Atal Bihari Vajapayee decided to carry out its nuclear tests in 1998. It gave Pakistan the justification it needed to go nuclear a few weeks later, thereby achieving balance of terror with its much larger neighbor with a huge conventional military.


Does this imply that had Pokhran II not taken place Pak would not have had the nuclear capability ? No.

Pak always had it, it was brought to the fore in 1998. India knew it all along.

Next, what makes the author feel that India does all that it does keeping Pakistan in mind ? India is the only state with two hostile nuclear capable neighbours both of whom have territorial aspirations over Indian territory & have fought wars over it.

In any case India went nuclear in 1974 so 1998 is of no consequence.

Pak may consider itself to be a Zipper of Pan Eurasian Integration , it does not concen India. However an open Zipper is a concern even for those around .

Then why your PM cannot stop blabbering about Pakistan at every occasion. He was blabbering about PK at Bangladeshi visit, Sri Lanka, USA, UK... Obsessed freak.

One is a larger danger that would manifest in a decade or two, another is a smaller irritant that bugs everyday - whch one needs immediate tackling ?
 
.
hSukstt.jpg


That's how obsessed you seem.
 
.
Does this imply that had Pokhran II not taken place Pak would not have had the nuclear capability ? No.

Pak always had it, it was brought to the fore in 1998. India knew it all along.

There are dozens of "nuclear threshold" states in the world...many European and East Asian nations can build a bomb on short notice. Pakistan was also a nuclear threshold state in 1998.

But there's a big difference between a "nuclear threshold" state and an actual nuclear-armed state.

Had India not become a declared nuclear state, Pakistan would not have either, nor would it have built a large nuclear arsenal of warheads and missiles that it has since 1998.

Haq's Musings: Gen Kidwai on Pakistan's 2nd Strike Capability and Nuclear Triad
 
. .
There are dozens of "nuclear threshold" states in the world...many European and East Asian nations can build a bomb on short notice. Pakistan was also a nuclear threshold state in 1998.

But there's a big difference between a "nuclear threshold" state and an actual nuclear-armed state.

Had India not become a declared nuclear state, Pakistan would not have either, nor would it have built a large nuclear arsenal of warheads and missiles that it has since 1998.

Haq's Musings: Gen Kidwai on Pakistan's 2nd Strike Capability and Nuclear Triad

WELL SIR.... like an ex indian general said "you can't fight USA without the bomb".... going nuclear isnt about pakistan... we have hostile China.. more importantly USA was hostile in those decades too....
 
. .
Then why your PM cannot stop blabbering about Pakistan at every occasion. He was blabbering about PK at Bangladeshi visit, Sri Lanka, USA, UK... Obsessed freak.

well i think he did not even mention pakistan in his recent UN speech. u can check that on the internet.
 
.
There are dozens of "nuclear threshold" states in the world...many European and East Asian nations can build a bomb on short notice. Pakistan was also a nuclear threshold state in 1998.

But there's a big difference between a "nuclear threshold" state and an actual nuclear-armed state.

Had India not become a declared nuclear state, Pakistan would not have either, nor would it have built a large nuclear arsenal of warheads and missiles that it has since 1998.

Haq's Musings: Gen Kidwai on Pakistan's 2nd Strike Capability and Nuclear Triad

Appreciate your POV , though I feel differently.

The bottom line is India was already a Nuke state post 74 - declared or otherwise did not matter.

It does not matter to India what Pak builds or does not build. India like any other nation plans for itself. Pak is needlessly interjecting itself in the Indian scheme of things.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom