India, US to hold larger joint military exercises

Hindustan Times ^

[milestogo]

India, US to hold larger joint military exercises

Press Trust of India
New Delhi, December 10

India and United States have agreed to hold joint exercises on a bigger scale next year as part of measures to enhance military to military level cooperation between the two countries.

The decision to have larger scale exercises was taken at the eighth meeting of Indo-US army executive steering group which met at Southern Army Command headquarters at Pune on Tuesday and Wednesday, an army spokesman in New Delhi.

Prior to the actual deliberations, the visiting US army delegation led by Lt Gen James L Campbell, Commanding General, US Pacific Command, had an extensive briefing on defusing of improvised explosive devices, which are being used extensively by rebels in Iraq.

The delegation also visited the country's premier defence training institution, the Indian Military Academy.

The spokesman said the steering group reviewed the interaction between the armies of the two countries during the current year besides training cooperation events in 2004 and a way forward for 2005.

The Indian side at the talks was led by Director General of Military Operations Lt Gen B S Takhar

[WilliamofCarmichael]

India is a leader in the Non Aligned Movement (NAM) of about 140 U.N. members. India is of course with us on the war to combat radical Islamic terrorism. But just what is India's goal beyond that? Of course Her interests are Her own, but as a leader of the "developing" nations how does India feeeeel about their interest v. the U.S.?

It doesn't take much googling to find the many stories of Russia and India strategic interest and there are stories of Russia, India, and China forming alliances to oppose the world's only superpower, us.

I am concerned about our national security. To wit,

Key Indians interviewed in the report said, "America's reluctance to engage in focused technology transfer is a deal killer in the effort to construct an enduring strategic relationship." Indians placed technology transfer as the 'touchstone' of the new found strategic relationship and 'everything revolves around a strong US commitment to share its technologies so that India can advance'.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/apr/22josy.htm

"The article is based upon 'Indo-US Military Relations: Expectations and Perceptions,' a classified US defence department document in rediff.com's possession."

Yes, let's cooperate in the war against radical Islamic terrorism. Of course, there's nothing we can do about Her ho's in American corporations transferring critical technology for profit but we should not transfer military technology directly.

[Cronos]

India or Russia having a meaningful alliance with China? Ha! That would be like the pact between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany -- both the democratic countries are fearful of their belligerent, communist neighbour and they happily don't border on each other. So, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, plus they do manage to contain China quite effectively. They're also getting pally with Vietnam, another country with no reason to trust China. They can't afford to be too overtly antagonistic to China so they may have a few diplomatic gestures to keep the peace.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE: Inida's diplomatic gestures to keep the peace with China.

It is of course in both countries' interest to keep the peace. But along with Russia they share another interest, what to do about the world's only superpower, us.

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/holnus/00006103001.htm

The Hindu, December 6, 2003, "India to be major regional power by 2015 "

"There is a possibility that China, India and Russia may form "a de facto geo-strategic alliance in an attempt to counterbalance U.S. and Western influence," the 59-page unclassified document has claimed." They are talking about the recent, US National Intelligence Council projection for 2015.

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/12/03122003175928.asp

A Radio Free Europe news summary quotes "Jane's Foreign Report," to wit, "Jane's" says there is "an evolving alliance," in particular between Russia, China, and India -- "all nuclear powers, all grappling with Islamic extremism and all deeply concerned about what they see as the unilateralism of the U.S.A. and its doctrine of pre-emption through the use of massive forces and, if necessary, nuclear weapons."

The U.S. "doctrine of pre-emption" is a little misleading. The emerging alliance existed long before President Bush.

I did not make it up. The above are just two of the several current news items returned by google news. google web search returns almost 300,000 hits.

Here is an Asia Times article from last July, "Russia-China-India: An axis of denials," by Sergei Blagov. Mr. Blagov speculates that the alliance may be more "symbolic" than concrete but is nevertheless intended to counter the world's only superpower, us. Mr. Blagov writes, Russia and China have already solved their border disputes, while China and India are still divided by a mere chunk of barren terrain and grant of asylum to the Dalai Lama and a few thousand followers.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/EG03Ag03.html

That is just one of 300,000 hits -- many of course may not be germane. I have followed this over the past few years, many more hits document attempts, primarily by Russia, to form an actual alliance.

Do you have reliable references that state absolutely not will India, China, and Russia form any kind of alliance?

India headed the "non-aligned" nations during the Cold War (yes, I know the Cold War is over) that backed the USSR exclusively. India's voting record in the U.N. as head of NAM matches Her Cold War record. IMO, like Mexico India is our friend when they want something from us. Do you have reliable sources showing India has ever made any concessions to us as a friendly gesture without conditions? There may be, I'm guessing not.

Their war with China was in the Mao era. Things have changed and no doubt India will not remain friendly with China as the two emerge as "superpowers" after they have kicked us out of the Far East.

Sorry for the long post but I don't know a short response to, "Ha!" when there is so much evidence that proves it is not amusing. IMO our national security and well-being are at stake. Yes, all three are welcomed partners to fight radical Islam (assuming we can trust China) but beyond that?

[Cronos]

Asia times is a pro-chicom rag. The Indian gripe with China would also include China's containment stretegy -- whereby the chicoms supply weapons, nukes included to Pakistan to 'keep India in it's place'. The Chinese also like to poo-poo India's ambitions to become a global power so that they don't have a threat to their south. India's rhetoric is now directed as anti-China as that's it's competitior and rival. There won't be any meaningful alliance between these two rivals.

[Cronos]

Besies, the two would have different spheres of interest -- China would be more interested in it's Eastern flank while India views the Indian ocean as it's own sphere of interest -- with it's numerous migrants (colonies) on the East coast of Africa, and the patrolling of the Malacca straits it is pretty much on the way. South East Asia would be a neutral area while Central Asia would see a lot of jockeying for power. In Central Asia, the Indians and Russians would be allied for commercial reasons as well as to contain China.

Saying that, India is not a threat to the US and they've changed their voting pattern in the UN to being more realpolitik. We need an ally in the region who can balance China and also keep the Islamics in check.

[Cronos]

And the fight against radicalIslam won't be over so quickly. It's going to take decades at the very least, so let's not risk defeat by holding back on our potential allies in this.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

All good points and yes I agree that the radical Islam threat could last for decades. Regarding any country, trust but verify.