What's new

When celebrating progress on NSG and MTCR, thank Manmohan Singh and the Indo-US nuclear deal

fsayed

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Messages
2,606
Reaction score
-2
Country
India
Location
India
The BJP opposed the Indo-US nuclear deal, tooth and nail. When he became Prime Minister, Narendra Modi hailed the Indo-US nuclear deal as the centerpiece of a new strategic partnership between the world's largest and oldest democracies. Now, it falls to him to reap two fruits of the nuclear deal: membership of the Nuclear Suppliers' Group and membership of the Missile Technology Control Regime. It would show statesmanship, were Modi to acknowledge the role of his predecessor Manmohan Singh , who staked his government on getting the deal through, in laying the ground for India's forthcoming diplomatic achievements.

The Indo-US nuclear deal was never primarily about nuclear energy, although that was how the deal had been pitched to the public. It was about liberating India from the technological denial regime to which it had been consigned after its nuclear tests. The US took the initiative because it wanted to create a strategic counterweight to China in the Asia-Pacific.

MUST READ: PM Modi embarks on whirlwind 5-nation tour

The world's four major technology control regimes are the Nuclear Suppliers' Group, the Missile Control Technology Regime, the Australian Group and the Wassenaar Arrangement. The names of the first two are a good guide to what these seek to regulate. The Australia group seeks to prevent the spread of chemical and biological weapons and control the sale and export of chemicals and their precursors that can be used for chemical/biological weapons.

The Wassenaar Arrangment seeks to regulate the export of conventional arms and dual use technologies, to deny regimes deemed inimical to global stability sensitive technologies that can be procured in the name of civilian use but can then be used to build nasty weapons.

If India were to remain constrained by the restrictions enforced by these technology control regimes, India could not build up the strategic capability to project power on a scale needed to become a credible counterweight to China. The US understood this, as did India's political leadership. This is why Manmohan Singh was determined to cash in on the Bush administration's enthusiasm to release India from technology denial and was willing to defy the UPA's crucial ally, the Left, and even risk losing a confidence vote in Parliament on the subject. While sections of the BJP were also perfectly aware of the implications of the nuclear deal, they chose to oppose the deal, hoping to trip the UPA government up as it struggled with infantile Left opposition to anything American.

The Chinese were well aware of the implications of the Indo-US nuclear deal, but were incapable of registering anything more than passive aggression in the face of determined US efforts to grant India the clean waiver required for a non-signatory to the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to gain quasi-membership of the nuclear club that the treaty entailed.

The Indo-US nuclear deal opened the gate for India to walk down the path to membership of these four technology control regimes. An embattled UPA2 and a world community struggling to contain the fallout of the financial crisis of 2008 did not have the energy needed to complete that membership process.
It is up to Indian diplomacy to complete the process of emancipating the country from technology denial initiated by the Indo-US deal on civil nuclear cooperation. Membership of MTCR is nearly in the bag. China remains the lone opposition to India's membership of NSG . The Great Wall could prove a hurdle low enough for India to cross, given the unanimous support India has from the rest of the major powers and the obvious lack of credibility China's argument for treating Pakistan on par with India has, given the track record of the two countries on matters that affect global security.

Once NSG and MTCR membership is in the bag, the Wassenaar Arrangement and the Australia Group should be relatively easy. Then, the rapprochement between India and the US that began
 
. .
One need to credit MMS too...... But We should also credit Modi and his govt to carry forward where MMS has left......Probably that is one good part of our foreign policy, which do not change with the govt's in centre........Political posture while in opposition is one thing, and every party in India is tuned to do one thing...... "Oppose everything the govt does", Find negative points in every project govt brings and talk only about that, and ignore the positive points...... BJP did that while in opposition, and now they are in power, and continue to do what is good for the nation.....
 
.
All successive govts except for Nehru and Indira have contributed into the US relationship. Point is whatever Ganguli has done with Indian Team and received due credit, but Dhoni will always be called as Indian captain who lifted world cup.
Modi is that Dhoni :D
 
.
All successive govts except for Nehru and Indira have contributed into the US relationship. Point is whatever Ganguli has done with Indian Team and received due credit, but Dhoni will always be called as Indian captain who lifted world cup.
Modi is that Dhoni :D
If you had read your history you would know we did not have great relations with the americans in those days . They did not like our policy of non alignment , or the fact we were close to the soviets,
We did approach the Americans during the 62 war and they refused military help to us , it was the Russians who stepped in giving us their latest mig 21 , tanks and subs(the foxtrot) they also strengthened our artillery systems which till then were solely depended on western systems.
One cannot judge history using todays standards.
 
Last edited:
.
Dr. Singh, was probably the best person in best position at worst time.
Coalition politics and virtual control with Madamji meant, he had little control over things and ultimately he could not control corruption and wrong doings inspite his intellect and administrative experience.
But we cannot forget the resolve to take on Communist parties during Indo US nuclear deal, where he even put his government at risk. The deal went through and CPI was pushed to brink of oblivion and relations with US has never been same. The deal has massive ramifications on Asian politics as well as we see today.
US and Indian relations have taken a 180 degree turn and far far cry from days of Indira Nixon bitterness. Dr. Singh can take pride in fact that he had a role to play in this change owing to warm chemistry he shared with Dubya.
 
Last edited:
.
If you had read your history you would know we did not have great relations with the americans in those days . They did not like our policy of non alignment , or the fact we were close to the soviets,
We did approach the Americans during the 62 war and they refused military help to us , it was the Russians who stepped in giving us their latest mig 21 , tanks and subs(the foxtrot) they also strengthened our artillery systems which till then were solely depended on western systems.
One cannot judge history using todays standards.

While each can put their points, we need to keep in mind that it was US who was big supporter of India till 1955 post that it lapped up PAK. It was snub from socialist Nehru to US which created this drift. Indian as an approach are more closure to US than Russia because of trade mentality and open culture.

Regarding MiG and others stuff, once US is not on your side in great game India had to reach out to USSR for help. Keep in mind it was US who helped India in 1962 instead of USSR against China. I would like to make Nehru responsible for drift with US post 1947 squarely.
 
.
While each can put their points, we need to keep in mind that it was US who was big supporter of India till 1955 post that it lapped up PAK. It was snub from socialist Nehru to US which created this drift. Indian as an approach are more closure to US than Russia because of trade mentality and open culture.

Regarding MiG and others stuff, once US is not on your side in great game India had to reach out to USSR for help. Keep in mind it was US who helped India in 1962 instead of USSR against China. I would like to make Nehru responsible for drift with US post 1947 squarely.

American disdain for India started as early as 1953 during the Korean War, where India was seen as a "Communist Appeaser" for aggressively supporting the Chinese at UN.
 
. .
The primary credit should go PVN who opened up the economy, established relations with Israel, Vetoed CTBT and prepared the ground for the Pokhran-II .

Next it goes to Vajpayee government which has carried out the tests and initiated the Jaswant-Talbott talks.

MMS gets credit for 123 agreement in spite of the strong opposition from the communists while Modi gets credit for resurrecting the dead US-India nuclear deal by diluting the liability clause.

If you had read your history you would know we did not have great relations with the americans in those days . They did not like our policy of non alignment , or the fact we were close to the soviets,
We did approach the Americans during the 62 war and they refused military help to us , it was the Russians who stepped in giving us their latest mig 21 , tanks and subs(the foxtrot) they also strengthened our artillery systems which till then were solely depended on western systems.
One cannot judge history using todays standards.

Only people who lived in those times would understand this.
 
.
The primary credit should go PVN who opened up the economy, established relations with Israel, Vetoed CTBT and prepared the ground for the Pokhran-II .

Next it goes to Vajpayee government which has carried out the tests and initiated the Jaswant-Talbott talks.

MMS gets credit for 123 agreement in spite of the strong opposition from the communists while Modi gets credit for resurrecting the dead US-India nuclear deal by diluting the liability clause.



Only people who lived in those times would understand this.
Not necessarily mate , i was born in the 70s . The only difference is that i read books not articles from the net. (i also had the advantage of having a father who was an officer in the army.
The trouble with people today is that they try to judge history by today's standards., now those things may not have even been prevalent in those days.

While each can put their points, we need to keep in mind that it was US who was big supporter of India till 1955 post that it lapped up PAK. It was snub from socialist Nehru to US which created this drift. Indian as an approach are more closure to US than Russia because of trade mentality and open culture.

Regarding MiG and others stuff, once US is not on your side in great game India had to reach out to USSR for help. Keep in mind it was US who helped India in 1962 instead of USSR against China. I would like to make Nehru responsible for drift with US post 1947 squarely.
May i suggest you spend some time reading "History of modern India" "Indian army after independence " you might get a better insight into things.
 
.
Dr. Singh, was probably the best person in best position at worst time.
Coalition politics and virtual control with Madamji meant, he had little control over things and ultimately he could not control corruption and wrong doings inspite his intellect and administrative experience.
But we cannot forget the resolve to take on Communist parties during Indo US nuclear deal, where he even put his government at risk. The deal went through and CPI was pushed to brink of oblivion and relations with US has never been same. The deal has massive ramifications on Asian politics as well as we see today.
US and Indian relations have taken a 180 degree turn and far far cry from days of Indira Nixon bitterness. Dr. Singh can take pride in fact that he had a role to play in this change owing to warm chemistry he shared either Dubya.

Manmohan Singh was a good technocrat with poor political and leadership skills, US nuclear deal was the first time when he showed some spine and stood his ground. Unfortunately that was also the last time when he showed some spine.
 
.
Not necessarily mate , i was born in the 70s . The only difference is that i read books not articles from the net. (i also had the advantage of having a father who was an officer in the army.
The trouble with people today is that they try to judge history by today's standards., now those things may not have even been prevalent in those days


There are two distinct eras in Independent India

The era before liberalization in 1990s and the era of liberalization since 1990s.

No matter how many books one reads, it would be difficult for the newer generations to understand the pains of the old era.
 
.
There are two distinct eras in Independent India

The era before liberalization in 1990s and the era of liberalization since 1990s.

No matter how many books one reads, it would be difficult for the newer generations to understand the pains of the old era.
The simplicity of the olden days is something i miss , then i look at my mobiles and realize that it was just a passing phase:)
 
.
68771134.jpg


13419029_1771758263055256_7545511684870974933_n.jpg
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom