India - US Tariff and Relations | News + Updates

[Rationale]

How do you explain Dalai Lama and Tibet? Not to mention BrahMos deliveries in the Pacific and threatening the Malaca straits by hawkish Indian officials?

Dalai Lama has been in India since the 1950s. India has given him asylum on humanitarian grounds but does not support separatism in Tibet.

India will stop selling Brahmos to the Phillipines if China stops selling arms to Pakistan.

Malacca Straits are far from India. India has no treaty obligations there. There are hawks and doves in all countries. Many Chinese officials also make hawkish statements on India. Talk is cheap and not a casus belli.

 

[El Sidd]

Dalai Lama has been in India since the 1950s. India has given him asylum on humanitarian grounds but does not support separatism in Tibet.

India will stop selling Brahmos to the Phillipines if China stops selling arms to Pakistan.

Malacca Straits are far from India. India has no treaty obligations there. There are hawks and doves in all countries. Many Chinese officials also make hawkish statements on India. Talk is cheap and not a casus belli.

Dalai Lama, Sheikh Häsine, Baloch separatisits and LTTE all seem to enjoy such Indian humanitarian endeavours.

Pakistan welcomes any step that stops unwarranted war mongering and arms race in the region and beyond. You can put forward such demands to China like you put on the US arms sold to Pakistan.

Casus belli is water terrorism and blackmail.

 

[Rationale]

You can put forward such demands to China like you put on the US arms sold to Pakistan.

If India asks China to stop selling arms to Pakistan, then China will ask India to stop selling arms to Phillipines. Anyway, India does not mind Pakistan spending more money on arms instead of development and spiralling deeper into a debt trap. Never distrub your enemy when he is making a mistake. Also, arms purchases are important for the Pakistan military to maintain its power base and a military or military imposed government in Pakistan leads to disaffection and insurgency in Pakistan. As a result, the Pakistan army has fewer resources to trouble India. So, Chinese weapon sales to Pakistan are not really against long term Indian strategic interests.

 

[El Sidd]

If India asks China to stop selling arms to Pakistan, then China will ask India to stop selling arms to Phillipines. Anyway, India does not mind Pakistan spending more money on arms instead of development and spiralling deeper into a debt trap. Never distrub your enemy when he is making a mistake. Also, arms purchases are important for the Pakistan military to maintain its power base and a military or military imposed government in Pakistan leads to disaffection and insurgency in Pakistan. As a result, the Pakistan army has fewer resources to trouble India. So, Chinese weapon sales to Pakistan are not really against long term Indian strategic interests.

Happy that Pakistan is out of the equation. It would be constructive and productive if India can invest herself fully in One China policy and stop interfering in internal Chinese matters.

 

[r3alist]

Preserving the independence of Taiwan or territorial disputes of other so -called American allies is not a strategic imperative for India.

This is the American conclusion too

Pakistan is too weak to launch and win a war against India.

Since you mention Pakistan, the Chinese military equipment and overall capability effectively rendered your airforce obsolete. That was very old technology, imagine the new toys. China will be more than happy to validate it's military prowess via Pakistan with India taking the hits.

Imagine the potential sales

there is no reason for India to get involved in an arms race

Hence this is why you are not trying to have a good air force? Clarification welcome.

 

[r3alist]

deter China from taking Indian territory

So why did you not do anything about the territory they already hold

 

[Rationale]

Happy that Pakistan is out of the equation. It would be constructive and productive if India can invest herself fully in One China policy and stop interfering in internal Chinese matters.

India always had a One China policy, even when the PRC was not a member of the UN . In fact, in 1959, Ayub Khan, who was firmly in the US camp, had offered India a joint defence pact against China, which India had rejected.

 

[Rationale]

Since you mention Pakistan, the Chinese military equipment and overall capability effectively rendered your airforce obsolete

So, why didnt the Pakistan Air Force retaliate by striking targets inside India ? If our air force is obsolete, why did Pakistan not obtain achieve complete air dominance that would have allowed the Pakistani Army to take Kashmir ?

 

[El Sidd]

India always had a One China policy, even when the PRC was not a member of the UN . In fact, in 1959, Ayub Khan, who was firmly in the US camp, had offered India a joint defence pact against China, which India had rejected.

The joint defence pact was not aimed against China. Indias forward policy imposed the 1962 war on China.

 

[r3alist]

So, why didnt the Pakistan Air Force retaliate by striking targets inside India ? If our air force is obsolete, why did Pakistan not obtain achieve complete air dominance that would have allowed the Pakistani Army to take Kashmir ?

This has been a very active debate on the forum, not taking Kashmir per se. Just that the advantage was potentially not pressed home sufficiently


So let's get back to the topic, modi looks up to China, literally, Pakistan has the same Chinese technology that India is afraid to confront.

The Chinese of course will not forget the last 20 years of hostility from India.


And the Americans want some real commitment to American global leadership from India

So since you cannot obtain technological parity, or strategic stability independently, without China or USA helping out, you either decide to challenge both at a cost, or choose one side also at the cost

 

[r3alist]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Rationale]

India and EU moving closer

As Trump rebuffs India, the EU nudges closer

The EU's concerted push to strengthen ties with India coincides with a collapse of bilateral relations between New Delhi and Washington. #EuropeNews

www.euronews.com

India asks Germany for help in search for EU free trade deal

Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said in Delhi that while others, like the US, erected trade barriers, Germany and India should lower them. His Indian counterpart said "we're counting on your support" in EU trade talks.

www.dw.com

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

India and EU moving closer

As Trump rebuffs India, the EU nudges closer

The EU's concerted push to strengthen ties with India coincides with a collapse of bilateral relations between New Delhi and Washington. #EuropeNews

www.euronews.com

India asks Germany for help in search for EU free trade deal

Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said in Delhi that while others, like the US, erected trade barriers, Germany and India should lower them. His Indian counterpart said "we're counting on your support" in EU trade talks.

www.dw.com

India should lay down for a bit. EU is slave of USA as long as Russia threat is there. Next you know EU is forced to sanction India.

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

USA you need to hit India where it hurts, services. Then dravidian nadu will demand separation. And if you decide to reduce H1b visas to 20k per country then Indians would themselves divide in 20 countries. India is no Russia or China, it has huge fault lines that can easily be exploited. Smaller India will better managed.

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

This is next level humiliation. Now you know if trade deal is reached then what India had to do.