What's new

US fear stopped indian armed action in Maldiveis

Major Shaitan Singh

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
3,550
Reaction score
43
Country
India
Location
India
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, apprehensive about a negative reaction in Washington and reluctant to intervene in a neighbour's political affairs, stopped Indian armed forces from entering Maldives during the coup that toppled President Mohammed Nasheed on Tuesday. Indian intervention would have saved the secular government of President Nasheed. The coup against him is believed to have been instigated by anti-Indian Islamic fundamentalist forces, among them elements in Pakistan. The government adopted the path of least resistance, unlike in November 1988, when former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi ordered Operation Cactus to stall a coup that would have similarly hurt Indian interests. Indian Air Force mounted special operations then to help the government. India air and naval forces were ready for a similar intervention, but were stopped at the last minute by Delhi. Rajiv Gandhi did not worry about Washington's reaction.

The arguments that favoured caution against intervention included the view that the situation in Maldives was not really a coup, but internal instability within the ruling party, although Nasheed was removed at gunpoint. There were also questions about "assisting whom, against whom". There has been violence and unrest in Maldives since President Nasheed resigned and the new regime headed by Dr Mohamed Waheed, took over. Mr Nasheed has mobilised the pro-democracy groups in the island, and come on the streets. Dr Waheed is believed to have the support of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

The United States has described the situation in Maldives as "fluid", and the circumstances under which change of power took place as "murky", while Britain has demanded an investigation into the circumstances that led to Nasheed's resignation. India has also adopted a similar soft approach, although External Affairs officials are now spreading word that the new government has promised that it will not harbour or encourage those hostile to India. There are three interlocutor teams in Maldives at the moment, from the US, UK and India.

A strategic expert told this newspaper, "Police forces and armed forces worked together in Maldives earlier, but now they have separated. The police led the protest against Nasheed, and the military advised him to resign. [As far as the legislature was concerned] there was a coalition in Maldives, and Nasheed had the maximum elected representatives from his party — Maldives Democratic Party, so when he resigned all his legislators also resigned with him. The idea was to have fresh elections, which didn't happen, and the Vice President took over." Waheed does not have any elected representatives with him.

US fear stopped Indian armed action in Maldives
 
.
woow !! In 1988 when India was under soviet umbrella then it was alright with US and now when we are allies, INDIA was apprehensive of US. Give me a break !!

THe only reason is, GoI has a positive image in maldive and didnt want to loose it b participating in an internal process.
 
.
BS.


Another attempt to demonize Dr Manmohan Singh. Direct military intervention intervention in a bloodless transition would have some negative impact on India's relation with Maldives and over all international stand. But if required India will use force to save Maldives from internal and external forces like it did in 1988.
 
.
BS.


Anither attempt to demonize Dr Manmohan Singh. Direct military intervention intervention in a bloodless transition would have some negative impact on India's relation with Maldives and over all international stand. But if required India will use force to save Maldives from internal and external forces like it did in 1988.
There was no question of intervention this time compared to the 1988.... I dont how come what ever we do these days people start comparing and a US implication comes....
 
.
We just need to make sure that it did not fall under our enemies. Thats it.We do have nothing there more strategic.
 
.
in 1988 terrorist took over right but this time it was an inner rebellion like in libya then why would india involve itself makes little sense
 
.
There was no question of intervention this time compared to the 1988.... I dont how come what ever we do these days people start comparing and a US implication comes....

Some guys have no job, so they have to waste their time somewhere and criticizing every move (good or bad) by the govt is the best way.


Oh the writer of the conspiracy theory is famous SUMAN SHARMA. She still did not came out with the Arihant photo she promised in 2009. lol
 
.
Women and there geopolitical psychoanalysis...who the frak is Suman Sharma?
 
. .
This seems like an article written with vested interests and the situation was FAR more complicated then 1988. Despite the fact the disposed president was democratically elected it has been proven he grossly abused his power and violated the Male constitution on numerous occasions. Additionally the situation is an internal struggle but in 1988 it was a threat from external forces that prompted action. Indian military intervention would have been incredibly messy in practice, once Indian forces had ended the fighting between the two sides they would be facing military and police members who many had been trained in India and India would be in a long drawn out peacekeeping mission that could turn ugle. Not to mention India was already wary of Nasheed cosing up to China.
 
.
If it was US fear India wouldnt have been trolling with Iran. I doubt they fear US looking at Iran. US is still pissing on that:thinktank:
 
.
It is idiotic to think of 'fear'.... USA is firmly backing Indian Initiative to form the National unity government along with China and commonwealth states to keep radical Islamists at bay.
 
. . . .
Back
Top Bottom