US close to signing deals with India in defence, communications: Pacific Command

[raktaka]

These agreements are not temporal in nature. IT does not have a natural expiry date.

Given that these agreements binds India forever to the US, it must be avoided at all cost.

The USA are an economic-military empire pretty much as Rome was at its peak.
They are very good at it and enact rules to maintain their status and position.
They thus logically marry the carrot and the stick.

Example, if you want to use GPS for military purposes, you have to sign in to the
set of rules and regulations that comes along. That in turn makes you dependent.
Hence Glonass, BeiDou and Galileo came about to provide an out to US hegemony.

But if you want to fight alongside America, you need NAVSTAR ( GPS is a generic term )
so that comms can synchronize ... and you sign CISMOA & BECA.

Let's be clear : If any other nation enjoyed the same all encompassing technological
domination that America does right now, they'd probably act the exact same way!
This can also be seen in patents and IP addresses and the likes. It explains why all
those interested in selling mil stuff to them end up setting a local production plant ...
so the finished product is entirely covered by American rules including Intellectual property!

It also ( partially ) explains the difference in attitude between France and the UK re-
garding alliance with Washington. In order to avoid becoming an American subsidiary,
you'll have to be very careful and keep your best stuff at home.

This said, signing those agreements, as bad as they may seem, is indeed necessary
to a full cooperation with the US. And at that point, it is essential to decide if the trade
is valid for your specific nation. Some countries signed with closed eyes and being
helpless by themselves are glad they did. It infeudates you, sure, but many ( say half of
NATO and Europe ) trust the protection thus gained to make a good deal of sense.

In this regard, India is now at a crossroads as Knight outlined. I have a personal opinion
towards his point 4 that is mitigated by my nation's past governments' lack of vision that
relates to strategic as in recent discussions and MoUs with Delhi but can't fully express.
The good news is that you guys have a whole lotta options right now.

Make the best decisions for your own reasons, be quick to decide and don't look back.
It really is an internal discussion for Bharatis, almost out of place here in PakistanDF.

Good luck and good day all, Tay.

P.S. About the GPS, there is a civilian side to it but that too is monitored ( see Snowden ).

Maybe you can answer this.

Do these agreements have an one sided Exit clause ?

 

[Hellfire]

1. Technology Aspect - If India doesn't sign this agreements it will hit a brick wall sooner or later. On political spectrum there will be pleasantries and lot of talk about US - India Strategic Partnership but on ground there will no trail blazing improvements such as joint partnership in balance altering projects. Such projects are necessary if India seeks to gain an edge over China - As of now China has access to pretty much everything Russia has and gets sensitive tech not available from Russia through other sources and means..

The main issue in the above statement is the fact that the US has been pretty unpredictable in its behavior in the past .. there is a historical baggage that India carries and rightly so .. look at the present scenario .. transfer of US financed F-16s to Pakistan to use in WoT ... yeah right .. F-16s are going to be used to hit a squad/stick worth of jihadis hiding in a few well spread huts right? When such actions are undertaken by US in arming a nation against Indian security ... obviously the issue of cutting edge technology remains on back burner

And as for tech from Russia ... we cant get our own act together .. if we were to, we would be getting the same ... but no ... we refuse that ... the kickbacks have had the system ...!!!

2. Geo- Politics - India keeps harping about US tilt towards Pakistan. India should note that as of now it hasn't offered US anything which would off-set the gains influence on Pakistan brings to US. These agreements would be a step forward in that direction and show US alignment of Indian Foreign Policy when it coves US and it's adversaries

The only gain US has is reduction in level of violence in Afghanistan in order to prevent it being labelled a complete failure in a string of failures of intervention over the past decade and a half starting from Iraq to present scenario in Egypt-Libya-Syria ... policy failure (or is it?) serially ... and to justify the loss of lives in Afghanistan in trying to 'stabilize' Afghanistan and the billions of dollars wasted in that barren country fighting a war that from day one everyone (except of course US) knew that it wont win in short term (and short term in any counter insurgency is 1-2 decades)! In face of full evidence being available to US about Pakistan using the Haqqanis and working diligently to subvert every American effort in Afghanistan ... the desperation of US to avoid a tag of failure on Afghanistan intervention is apparent in these maneuvers.... so your contention is self serving at best ...!

3. Negatives - As such the three foundation do not come with any impositions. It does not mandate and bind India to take part in defence of US and it's allies or vice-versa. The only issue is that Russia may have concerns but I think even they are overstated as Russian protocols differ significantly from Indian ones and even the hardware is heavily customized. The only issue which remains is the trust factor. Remember these agreement go both ways. The risk of leakages are even more profound on Indian side. It is way more likely that US information is leaked to Russia and than Indian information being leaked to Pakistan.

In conclusion - I don't think there is any significant issue preventing India from signing these agreements. Most of the concerns are related to optics and signalling.

True here .. Indians are generally idiotic .. I have to agree to the intellectual and intelligence deficit in majority of my nationals ...!!!

 

[surya kiran]

LSA
This agreement has been signed by the US with multiple countries. It has been signed with Afghanistan and Sri Lanka. Pakistan in 2012, refused to sign the LSA as in, and suggested an amended agreement which would allow it more control over what can and could be done. Simply, they wanted a guarantee that, it would not be used to undermine the territorial sovereignty of Pakistan. Till date, this has not been signed.

What could bases in India probably provide the US with? Is it possible, that after its exit from Afghanistan this could be revoked? Would an assertive Afghanistan ask the US to leave? As far as Sri Lanka goes, it can provide for fuel and logisitics to the US. But, in a scenario where the US and China are in a deadlock will it want to be caught in the middle?

The above scenario could result in a situation, where the US does not have a base in close proximity to the theatre of operations. CIS is out. Afghanistan could come under Russian influence. SL will not want to be involved in a catch 22. This brings the choice to India. Mind you, India is not a 'natural' choice. It is more out of a process of elimination.

What is in it for the Americans? Simple. A country which can provide a base of operations for forays into the SCS, far away from the action. And, importantly, a country which has a long standing border dispute with China. Add to that, the ME is on our western sea board. India thus is in the centre of two areas of operations for the Americans. While discussing this, it is important to note that this agreement does not allow for setting up a base for American military operations. Neither does it mean, they are going to have a military base here. They will base weapons here. They will base spare parts here. ANC will be of special mention here. With it directly over looking the Malacca straits, you can expect at-least one listening ship of the USN hovering around here.

What is in it for us?
1. Spare parts - Indian arms inventory of US produce is/will be limited to the Chinook, Apache, C-17, C-130 and P8I. Where will we use this? War games, humanitarian response and actual war. Now, this agreement does not cover lethal ammunition. It covers only spare parts, fuel, food, medical supplies and items which can be replaced due to wear and tear. It also covers repairs. Now, if we are to sign this agreement, it will improve our spares situation. In war games, it will ease commercials and logistics. During humanitarian missions, it will ensure quicker response and better co-ordination. But, this agreement is for defence forces. Defence forces fight wars. In the event of a conflict in the ME or in the SCS, the US Armed forces will be provided with berthing and repair facilities in India. During a war India is involved in, will the US provide an iron clad guarantee that the USN will provide the same in high seas to IN warships? If India, tests a space weapon ( I am no longer discussing nuclear weapons) or an ICBM will the US still adhere to its agreements? These need to be answered.

2. Long range patrols - With the IOR declared an area of interest, USN ships can increase the footprint of the IN. USN bases can help in the same. Both, in the IOR and SCS.

3. Joint Military Exercises - The IN has been practising hard with the USN in war games. LSA will enable the IAF and IA be deputed for longer periods of time to the US for war gaming and the same goes vice versa. While, the IA is trained in low-intensity conflicts, it lacks a full blown war experience. And nobody has it better than the Americans. Same goes for the IAF. More exercises to hone skills with the undisputed king of the air, the USAF.

A few days back, a US Admiral made a comment of joint patrol of the SCS. I think, this is a given. It is a matter of few years. IN ships will patrol the SCS, along with the USN and JMSF. All this will require basing requirements and spare parts exchange.

In the above scenarios, what do we do? Should we sign the LSA? In my opinion, we should keeping the following in mind:

1. We will not interfere in a US conflict using Indian forces. We will not provide basing facilities for operations against the Russians or Iranians.
2. The LSA is for our forces to be fighting fit and increase their training regime with the US Armed Forces.
3. The LSA will not allow the US Armed Forces to setup a military base, permanent or temporary on Indian soil.
4. Any US military professional engaging in violence or breaking Indian laws, will be answerable to Indian courts and law enforcement.
Will write about the other 2 tomorrow.

US information is leaked to Russia and than Indian information being leaked to Pakistan.

We have never been worried about Indian information leaking to Pakistan. Its the US we are worried about, my friend. Its just like you chaps says, In God we Trust. All others need to be verified.

Do these agreements have an one sided Exit clause ?

Yes.

 

[jetray]

The US argues that the CISMOA and BECA would enable technology transfer and seamless communication between the military systems of the two countries.

Great this intrusive thing will ensure greater penetration of US intelligence into indian military. We are just shooting ourselves in foot in guise of getting better technology.

 

[Abingdonboy]

It would be helpful if you all folks can put in some views.. Bcz it needs to be understood what real tangible benefits India will draw from these foundation agreements.

Well, the US claims that these agreements are mutually beneficial- I agree BUT there is one side that is likely to benefit more than the other side intially (ie the US). In the long term the benefits may be more equally distributed as India rises and thus the LSA allows IN/IAF assets to take advantadge of the US's global Military presence (clearly right now this is of limited utility to India) and BECA allows the GoI to spread its tenticles to places it has never had much need to in the past.

CISMOA is a dud as far as India is concerned from what I have heard as the Indian Govt will always strip foreign origin equipment of their comms gear and fit secured Indian comm equipment only.

However, if the US is really making the signing of these agreements a condition on the sale of high-end stuff such as EMALS or the E-2D then the real benefits of signing them do not come from these agreements themselves but the traction they will provide in the entire Indo-US co-op effort. Until then, the US side will continue to see them as "roadblocks", impeding deeper ties.

Or is this government making a mistake?

That is for the GoI to decide, personally I think if the GoI signs them then we should trust that the requsite precautions have been taken and that these deals have been altered/watered down sufficently so as to be acceptable to continue India's strategic autonomy. Such decsions will only be cleared by the highest echelons- PM, NSA and DM and I do trust them to make decsions with India's strategic interests in mind.

Had this been reported under UPA I would have no such faith and that is the sad sad truth.

Is USA showing us carrot of technology transfer by asking us to sign CISMOA and BECA but we do know most things in terms of weapons and technology are not transferable due to US Laws..

I'm not sure about the ToT part (because they simply will never do so) but they are certainly using these deals as the condition (you can call it carrot) for the sale of specific technology such as EMALS (and God knows what else).

Will they make an exception to accommodate India?

We all know the answer to this- not a chance.

The US won't even sell the F-22 to their closest allies (Japan, UK or Aus), what chance does India- a nation most in the US poltical/diplomatic/strategic class are still deeply wary of- have in securing their highest end kit?

As you have pointed out bro, they are bound by law to not make any such ToT available to anyone.

What about our geo political alignment and most importantly about our Foreign Policy and Military relationship say with Russia?

It will not change much IMO. As I have said, if they are signed I am confident they will be sufficently watered down so as to be congruent with India's historic and continued commitment to strategic autonomy.

the Russians have been aware of this possibility for a while now (ie it won't come entirely out of the blue for them) and whilst they may be annoyed, India is far too important from their point of view for them to allow this to dramatically alter relations.

When India orders FGFAs and EMALS I would say it is further evidence that India can balance ties to an absurdly significant degree.

 

[Taygibay]

Do these agreements have an one sided Exit clause ?

Surya already answered you but honestly Raktaka, all either side needs is a transgression to make
these void de facto so, you know, not too much of a problem save possible lingering lawsuits.

Good day to you & all, Tay

 

[dadeechi]

Yes you said and seems you may be correct too.
But answer this.

What benefit does India get out of THIS ( This in CAPs because its too big. Its simply an unofficial agreement that we have taken up sides , and will fight for them )

Do we get any TOT ? Do we get billion of dollars of worth weapons ? Do we get the Americans, not to back Pakistan ? Do we get the access to basic American techs without American interference? Do we get unrestricted access to Israeli defence techs ?

Non of the answer is YES.

And please don't count me Civillian and Space sector benefits.

ToT? No. But there would be local manufacturing and/or assembly in India provided 100% FDI is allowed.

So why is India entering into such agreements. Here are some theories

Optimist:

Indian government has realized that Made in India is a pipe dream at this point of time. India needs to learn to crawl and walk before it can run. Hence they have changed the strategy from Made in India to Make in India (MII). MII not only brings FDI but also generates Jobs and improves the skills of the workforce. This workforce could then be absorbed by the Indian MIC to move up the value chain.


Realist:

India is under tremendous pressure from US to give something in return to balance the impact of India joining SCO.

Read this news that I posted

Non-alignment to multi-alignment

Hence India joining SCO, BRICS, AIIB is being balanced with India-US-Japan-Australian cooperation and signing of these foundational agreements as part of DTTI.

Negative response may mean

1) Loss of IT jobs and Industry
2) Loss of cooperation from Israel (Note Phalcon radar system was denied to China due to US objections)
3) Huge propping up of Pakistan's capability against India (8 F-16s was just a sample of things to come)
4) Increase in insurgency and NGO activity
5) Economic Sabotage (Note Dr. Raghuram Rajan has been vociferously critical about the incumbent government since day 1. The key to country's economy lies in the hands of RBI governor not FM. Conspiracy theorists say that RBI governor is just a representative of IMF/World bank in India.)


Pessimist:

The incumbent government is intentionally moving India towards the west at a rapid pace due their ideological leanings (Conspiracy theorists say that they are doing west's bidding). Even BJP did not dream of capturing a majority. They are very certain that come 2019 they would again go back to the single largest party status and as a pariah party. So they have been rushing to complete all the agreements that have been either rejected or stalled by the Congress led governments ( Congress governments have been traditionally closer to USSR/Russia and conspiracy theorists say that they are just representatives of Russia in India). The incumbent government has reversed the policies/stand on major issues like

1) Drug patents/IP agreement- This was done with few days of taking office
2) Increasing FDI in strategic sectors up to 100%
3) Climate change agreement

US Foundational agreements and DTTI are just continuation of that policy shift.

 

[nang2]

Teaser news

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

I think posters before me have covered the motivations and incentives pretty well.

1. Technology Aspect - If India doesn't sign this agreements it will hit a brick wall sooner or later. On political spectrum there will be pleasantries and lot of talk about US - India Strategic Partnership but on ground there will no trail blazing improvements such as joint partnership in balance altering projects. Such projects are necessary if India seeks to gain an edge over China - As of now China has access to pretty much everything Russia has and gets sensitive tech not available from Russia through other sources and means.

2. Geo- Politics - India keeps harping about US tilt towards Pakistan. India should note that as of now it hasn't offered US anything which would off-set the gains influence on Pakistan brings to US. These agreements would be a step forward in that direction and show US alignment of Indian Foreign Policy when it coves US and it's adversaries

3. Negatives - As such the three foundation do not come with any impositions. It does not mandate and bind India to take part in defence of US and it's allies or vice-versa. The only issue is that Russia may have concerns but I think even they are overstated as Russian protocols differ significantly from Indian ones and even the hardware is heavily customized. The only issue which remains is the trust factor. Remember these agreement go both ways. The risk of leakages are even more profound on Indian side. It is way more likely that US information is leaked to Russia and than Indian information being leaked to Pakistan.

In conclusion - I don't think there is any significant issue preventing India from signing these agreements. Most of the concerns are related to optics and signalling.

The thing is are we allowed to use products developed under joint development for some other indigenous products?
Are sensitive technologies be shared? I know for a reason, every tech transfer has to hit US Congress. Will it worth it for India?

Though I agree leakage in Communications on Indian side is more than US side.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

ToT? No. But there would be local manufacturing and/or assembly in India provided 100% FDI is allowed.

So why is India entering into such agreements. Here are some theories

Optimist:

Indian government has realized that Made is a pipe dream at this point of time. India needs to learn to crawl and walk before it can run. Hence they have changed the strategy from Made in India to Make in India (MII). MII not only brings FDI but also generates Jobs and improves the skills of the workforce. This workforce could then be absorbed by the Indian MIC to move up the value chain.


Realist:

India is under tremendous pressure from US to give something in return to balance the impact of India joining SCO.

Read this news that I posted

Non-alignment to multi-alignment

Hence India joining SCO, BRICS, AIIB is being balanced with India-US-Japan-Australian cooperation and signing of these foundational agreements as part of DTTI.

Negative response may mean

1) Loss of IT jobs and Industry
2) Loss of cooperation from Israel (Note Phalcon radar system was denied to China due to US objections)
3) Huge propping up of Pakistan's capability against India (8 F-16s was just a sample of things to come)
4) Increase in insurgency and NGO activity
5) Economic Sabotage (Note Dr. Raghuram Rajan has been vociferously critical about the incumbent government since day 1. The key to country's economy lies in the hands of RBI governor not FM. Conspiracy theorists say that RBI governor is just a representative of IMF/World bank in India.)


Pessimist:

The incumbent government is intentionally moving India towards the west at a rapid pace due their ideological leanings (Conspiracy theorists say that they are doing west's bidding). Even BJP did not dream of capturing a majority. There are very certain that come 2019 they would again go back to the single largest party status and as a pariah party. So they have been rushing to complete all the agreements that have been either rejected or stalled by the Congress led governments ( Congress governments have been traditionally closer to USSR/Russia and conspiracy theorists say that they are just representatives of Russia in India). The incumbent government has reversed the policies/stand on major issues like

1) Drug patents/IP agreement- This was done with few days of taking office
2) Increasing FDI in strategic sectors up to 100%
3) Climate change agreement

US Foundational agreements and DTTI are just continuation of that policy shift.

Still no concrete benefits to India .

Leave apart the political reason, you explained it earlier a few times and I got it then.
I only want to know your perspective on " what does India gain ?"

Localised production ? Of what? F16?
Do we need F16s?
Hell they don't part with their old sensors from Jalashwa, and they will grant India local production ?

We will be doing a grave injustice to India and her future generations if we singned up our Armed forces for use for USs interests!

 

[southpaw]

Question arises :-

1. Are we looking as China as an enemy in future, than the potential threat.

China portrays itself as a potential threat right now. If china wants to be perceived as an enemy it can do that overnight. But can we prepare for imminent war overnight? Will we be able to strike a diplomatic pact with the US overnight?

In modern warfare, territories change hands in the matter of a few days. With nuclear parity, whoever goes to the negotiating table with more territory wins. China's policy is clear, it just inches its territory outwards as long as it is not met with physical resistance. They can stage some border 'incident' as a pretext for war (This has happened everytime a stronger player wanted to take more territory). Before the world leaders finish discussing whose fault it is China would have met its objectives and occupied a lot of indian territory.

2. Are we looking forward as the member of the US lead Nato in their future adventure.

I don't believe we will be as naive as Pakistan in that regard because Pakistan is a small country ruled by a few powerful people who can be bought wholesale. I believe in Indian democracy to do its job.

3. Are we are ready to leave Russia as main weapon partner, who have provided us deep partnership not in Space tech, Arihant, Brahmos, but also in 5th Gen PAKFA/FGFA which nobody provides us. Or we ready to forget the no hold bar export of the SU-30MKI, when the exported fighter plane was half generation ahead of the own airforce.

No we dont leave anyone. We just tell our Russian friends, 'Look ,we love you and we are grateful for everything you have done and are doing. We are not ditching you just because we are buying US weaponry. With China striking such aggressive postures we need all the security we can get.'

4. Do we want to join the club of UK, Germany, France and Israel.

We have managed to dance around the superpowers without joining either side throughout the cold war. No reason to change that.

5. Do we consider US as the sole Thanedaar for the safety of all the democracy of the world.

Like it or not, they are the sole superpower right now. They have been the only nation with active prolonged war experience in the last 60 years. India can't close its eyes and pretend that it is not the case.

6. Does the Nuclear Deal, Permanent Membership, EMAL, F-35, Aegis attracts us so much that we are now ready to leave our stance of standing neutral and not joining any alliance.

We need to convince china it would be a bad idea to mess with us. That is how you deal with bullies, make them believe we are strong and we can hurt them back if they mess with us. Like someone said above, we need to get some edge in technology against the chinese. We can't compete with them in quantity and hence we are trying to get western technology to get some edge in quality.

7. Last but not the least, does India don't have the guts and confidence to become the global superpower both economical and military with its own policies, where it could lay an example rather follow the footstep of the country, who don't have a long history, because its inhabitants are now overshadows by some of the whites settlers from the shadow and now who is going to teach us the benefits of the YOGA and NEEM and export us Basmati Rice.[/QUOTE]

Rhetorical questions make great speeches. I'm afraid you have to factor in reality somewhere in the equation. It is not about what we can become, it is about what we are right now. Illusions of grandeur won't help you when sh*t hits the fan. I hate to say this, Pakistan is more grounded in reality than India in this regard.

 

[dadeechi]

Still no concrete benefits to India .

Leave apart the political reason, you explained it earlier a few times and I got it then.
I only want to know your perspective on " what does India gain ?"

Localised production ? Of what? F16?
Do we need F16s?
Hell they don't part with their old sensors from Jalashwa, and they will grant India local production ?

We will be doing a grave injustice to India and her future generations if we singned up our Armed forces for use for USs interests!

Does it matter what you or me think?

The thing is are we allowed to use products developed under joint development for some other indigenous products?
Are sensitive technologies be shared? I know for a reason, every tech transfer has to hit US Congress. Will it worth it for India?

Though I agree leakage in Communications on Indian side is more than US side.

There won't be any ToT. Just MII with 100% FDI.

2. Are we looking forward as the member of the US lead Nato in their future adventure.

I don't believe we will be as naive as Pakistan in that regard because Pakistan is a small country ruled by a few powerful people who can be bought wholesale. I believe in Indian democracy to do its job.
.

I won't be so sure that Indian establishment is better than Pakistan...

 

[jetray]

Negative response may mean

1) Loss of IT jobs and Industry
2) Loss of cooperation from Israel (Note Phalcon radar system was denied to China due to US objections)
3) Huge propping up of Pakistan's capability against India (8 F-16s was just a sample of things to come)
4) Increase in insurgency and NGO activity
5) Economic Sabotage (Note Dr. Raghuram Rajan has been vociferously critical about the incumbent government since day 1. The key to country's economy lies in the hands of RBI governor not FM. Conspiracy theorists say that RBI governor is just a representative of IMF/World bank in India.)

You are right ,US will try all these and more. But what other alternative does US have?
With increase in chinese economy and trade several other smaller countries will simply fall in line.
vietnam,malaysia, indonesia will benefit more from china than US in the future. So that leaves the big country India,japan,russia,iran...etc
Of which only iran and india can do some damage together. As such agreement or no agreement India is in a better position.

Say agreement does not go thru, then over a period of time China will grow more stronger without a counter weight against it virtually pushing US out of of SCS and surrounding areas. If India joins chinese camp (unlikely but we can play both sides) then , US stands with no big allies in the Asia. As such India & Iran (they will come around) are the only choices for US against china/russia.

 

[Pulsar]

The two sides have not only agreed in principle to transform from mere buyer-seller defence relationship to joint research, co-development and production of high end defence equipment, but have also signed a “Joint Strategic Vision for the Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean Region” (January 25, 2015).

Source: US close to signing deals with India in defence, communications: Pacific Command

But in spite of all what's said, the US is still hesitant to give nuclear propulsion technology for India's new aircraft carrier, INS Vishal. It would be advantage US if they do so. After all, at some future point in time, the IN and USN would be operating together to dominate sea lanes not only in the IOR and the Pacific, but also the South China Sea.

 

[southpaw]

You are right ,US will try all these and more. But what other alternative does US have?
With increase in chinese economy and trade several other smaller countries will simply fall in line.
vietnam,malaysia, indonesia will benefit more from china than US in the future. So that leaves the big country India,japan,russia,iran...etc
Of which only iran and india can do some damage together. As such agreement or no agreement India is in a better position.

Say agreement does not go thru, then over a period of time China will grow more stronger without a counter weight against it virtually pushing US out of of SCS and surrounding areas. If India joins chinese camp (unlikely but we can play both sides) then , US stands with no big allies in the Asia. As such India & Iran (they will come around) are the only choices for US against china/russia.

Good argument, but has a big flaw. You are assuming US will continue to try to be the world police at any cost. The public opinion in the US is changing, regarding them being the world police. Obama won, promising to wind down wars. His tactic is to support the opposition without entering the war themselves. That is his strategy with China too. I don't think Hillary/Sanders(his most likely successors) would disagree with him. US is emerging as the biggest oil producer in the world, so they are not dependent on Oil for energy security. Entire world is transitioning to Solar power or will in a few decades. They are realizing the policing business is not really bringing any good return on investment. They want do do trade and not war. Afterall they are businessmen first.

As China rises, at some point of time in the near future, the amount of money they spend in military in this region won't be worth the trade benefits they get. Being the capitalists that they are, they would just cede the superpower status to China or enter into a power sharing agreement with China, rather than implode their economy like the soviet union trying to compete in a far corner of the world. If such a situation arises, who has more to lose? India or US? For US, worst case is loss of a few billion dollars, maybe another great depression where they restructure their economy to focus more on the european and domestic market.

Where does it leave us? For India, her territorial integrity is at stake. We would be China's bitch just like Pakistan is now only ranked lower than Pakistan. I am sure that is a future I would readily trade for allying with US. In fact, India should be more proactively trying to secure the Japan-Australia-US alliance in terms beneficial to us, before it is too late. China is one problem that is not going to go away just by waiting. China is the one that is doing the waiting game. Waiting for the US power to wane, their Economy to surpass US. Now is the time to act for India.