Forums
India and US - III - Printable Version

+- Forums (http://india-forum.com)
+-- Forum: Indian Politics, Business & Economy (http://india-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Strategic Security of India (http://india-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=18)
+--- Thread: India and US - III (/showthread.php?tid=652)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18


India and US - III - acharya - 06-30-2009

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/4934...l?elr=KArksUUUU

Check the comments

A holy Hindu home opens in Maple Grove

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Oh the funny.

This is still ever so hilarious. I mean really the least christians could do is have a fundamental understanding of the religions you bash so hatefully. People who worship cows? Seriously how ignorant can any one person be? Cow's aren't worshiped by the practicioners of hinduism, they are just seen as sacred, much like your special little cross. They worship a pantheon of gods. just so you know. Time and time again throughout history christianity has done nothing but attempt to hold mankind back. Remember a few thousand years ago when christians were killing people because they had this strange misguided belief that the earth was NOT the center of the earth? god that sure was funny. Or how about when they killed people because they were dumb enough to believe the planet was round? Glad they saved us from those crazies. See that's the difference between the crutch that is christianity vs every other crutch on earth. None of the others, with the possible exception of power(something well exhibited by the catholic church over the years), has caused mankind nearly as much pain and anguish. From the burning of anyone who disagreed with them in the middle ages, to conveniently ignoring the fact Hitler was slaughtering the vast majority of Europe's jews in the early 20th century, to today where the church seems perfectly fine with priests who like little boys. Please, if I were looking for a religion based on the principles of love and kindness the last place I would ever look is to Christianity.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->




India and US - III - Guest - 07-06-2009

Yesterday, I was watching "History of one dollar bill" on History channel. Looks like freemasons, founders of US and all Washington DC building, were practicing Vastu Shastra and Brahmanical rituals. Their deity looks like Brahma or Vishkarma. Check dollar bill. One circle contain chopped Pyramid and single eye on top. Pyramid is from Egypt and single eye of Brahma. Founders of US, all were from freemason club.
Freemason - secret society Ancient Arabic Order of Nobles of the Mystics Shrine (Shriners), which claimed to be decendents of the Illuminati.<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Candidates for regular <b>Freemasonry are required to declare a belief in a Supreme Being</b>.[28] However, the candidate is not asked to expand on, or explain, his interpretation of Supreme Being. The discussion of politics and religion is forbidden within a Masonic Lodge, in part so a Mason will not be placed in the situation of having to justify his personal interpretation.[29] Thus, <b>reference to the Supreme Being will mean the</b> Christian Trinity to a Christian Mason, Allah to a Muslim Mason, <b>Para Brahman to a Hindu Mason, </b>etc. And while most Freemasons would take the view that the term Supreme Being equates to God, others may hold a more complex or philosophical interpretation of the term.
<b>In the ritual, the Supreme Being is referred to as the Great Architect of the Universe, which alludes to the use of architectural symbolism within Freemasonry</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
we call it Brahma.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> certain Christian denominations have had high profile negative attitudes to Masonry, banning or discouraging their members from being Freemasons.
The denomination with the longest history of objection to Freemasonry is the Roman Catholic Church.<b> The objections raised by the Roman Catholic Church are based on the allegation that Masonry teaches a naturalistic deistic religion which is in conflict with Church doctrine</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


India and US - III - acharya - 07-07-2009

<b>Robert McNamara dies</b>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/0...t-mcnamara-dies
Former secretary of defence under John F Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson was the architect of the Vietnam war
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Robert McNamara, the architect of the Vietnam war who later made a public reversal on the conflict and said it should never have been fought, died today. He was 93 years old.

As secretary of defence under John F Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, McNamara was instrumental in pushing the US into war in Vietnam and managing the conflict, even as he acknowledged in private that he had doubts about America's ability to defeat the insurgent nationalists who had driven out the French.

McNamara left government in 1968, roughly midway through the war that would ultimately claim more than 58,000 American lives and more than one million Vietnamese lives. A former executive at Ford, he moved onto a successful 12-year run at the World Bank.

In his memoirs and a 2003 Oscar-winning documentary, The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S McNamara, McNamara described Vietnam as a mistake and said that he and others in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations never asked fundamental questions about its necessity and course.

Even four decades after the conflict, McNamara provoked bitter animosity among Vietnam veterans and the American left."He was a tortured soul and really symbolic of the whole Vietnam era," said David Lamb, a journalist who covered the conflict for UPI. "His flip flop obviously caused huge amounts of resentment amongst the people who had fought the war. Here the man who was the architect of the war comes out in the post-war years and said it was a battle that shouldn't have been fought."

Rick Weidman, who served as a medic in Vietnam in 1969, blasted McNamara for moving on to a lucrative career while Vietnam veterans were still suffering and dying from wounds and psychological trauma received in battle. "He went on to the World Bank and never said a damn thing, and made money on a book and never did a bloody thing for Vietnam vets," said Weidman, executive director for policy and government affairs for Vietnam Veterans of America.

As an officer in the US army airforce during the second world war, McNamara, a graduate of Harvard Business School, applied statistical methods to the US bombing campaign in Japan. He greatly increased the efficiency and lethality of US air attacks, devastating the civilian populations of Japanese cities.

After the war he joined Ford, rising to become its president, when Kennedy tapped him as secretary of defence in 1961. At 44, he was only a year older than Kennedy, who brought him on to reform a military he believed had too much autonomy from the country's civilian leadership. McNamara was later criticised for applying his abstract thinking to management of the Vietnam war, ignoring the human and moral elements of the conflict. "McNamara treated everybody like they were a spare part on a Ford," Weidman said.

In his later years, McNamara sought to atone for his role and advocated a rethinking of the US and UK nuclear posture, advocating nuclear disarmament. He warned repeatedly that the world risked catastrophe if weapons of mass destruction were ever to be used in war.

In 2005 he criticised US and UK nuclear policy as "immoral, illegal and militarily unnecessary," calling it destructive of non-proliferation efforts. He said the US-led war in Iraq showed that the consequences of military action were unpredictable and that intelligence could be flawed.

His apparent change of heart won him the friendship of Bobby Muller, a marine corps officer who was paralysed by a gunshot wound in Vietnam.

"When I first came back, I wanted him executed as a war criminal, but several years ago now, I actually wound up getting to be friends with him," said Muller, who joined McNamara on the rostrum at speaking engagements.

"The fact that he finally stepped up with an informed voice, with a powerful voice based on the experiences of his life about war and particularly about nuclear weapons went a long way to make his life worth having been lived," Muller said.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


India and US - III - Guest - 07-07-2009

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Scientists Create GM Corn Which Prevents Human Conception</b>
Robin McKie
Science Editor
The Observer - London
September 9, 2001
Scientists have created the ultimate GM crop: contraceptive corn. Waiving fields of maize may one day save the world from overpopulation.

<b>The pregnancy prevention plants are the handiwork of the San Diego biotechnology company Epicyte, where researchers have discovered a rare class of human antibodies that attack sperm</b>.

By isolating the genes that regulate the manufacture of these antibodies, and by putting them in corn plants, the company has created tiny horticultural factories that make contraceptives.

"We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies," said Epicyte president Mitch Hein.

"We have also created corn plants that make antibodies against the herpes virus, so we should be able to make a plant-based jelly that not only prevents pregnancy but also blocks the spread of sexual disease."

<b>Contraceptive corn is based on research on the rare condition, immune infertility, in which a woman makes antibodies that attack sperm.

"Essentially, the antibodies are attracted to surface receptors on the sperm," said Hein. "They latch on and make each sperm so heavy it cannot move forward. It just shakes about as if it was doing the lambada."</b>

Normally, biologists use bacteria to grow human proteins. However, Epicyte decided to use corn because plants have cellular structures that are much more like those of humans, making them easier to manipulate.

The company, which says it will not grow the maize near other crops, says it plans to launch clinical trials of the corn in a few months.

** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. ** <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now we know which countries will be on target list.

Recently Scientists had realized that it may effected other crops also because of cross pollination.


India and US - III - acharya - 07-07-2009

Paul Milenkovic:

I believe Robert McNamara was one of the “Whiz Kids.”

There is a certain kind of symbiosis between the Military and the Corporation. What they have in common is the need to organize mass numbers of men (and more recently women) into a unitary organization to achieve a common purpose. For the Military, it is to bring enough force of arms to bear to achieve a political or diplomatic or existential purpose. For the Corporation, it is to bring enough resources to bear to achieve economies of scale.

A large organization that works effectively is a difficult undertaking. One way to do this is the hierarchical structure. General-Colonel-Major-Captain-Lieutenenant-Sargeant-Corporal-Private. President-Vice President-General Manager-Director-Manager-Supervisor-Group Leader-Engineer, or Supervisor-Foreman-Worker-Assistant.

Another way to do this is to tolerate some degree of waste — there may be an abundance of middle managers or of certain workers, and a lot of them may be drawing pay and eating Army food while doing crossword puzzles, but the point is that each woman and man has a particular job to do, and provided that job gets done with minimum distruption to the rest of the organization, the Army or the company functions as a well-oiled machine. Waste is just a cost of getting a large enough organization to paradoxically get the economies of scale.

The other aspect to the symbiosis is that war had become an industrial undertaking — think the dictum that amateurs discuss strategy, professionals worry about logistics. The South had the better generals, but the North had the industrial production to grind the South down. WW-II Germany also had the better generals and in many cases superior tanks and perhaps fighter aircraft; the United States had and to an extent the Soviet ally had the overwhelming advantage in industrial production to grind Germany down, provided the Allies had the will to spend the blood and treasure to do the grinding — the Germans thought that was a close thing though on the ultimate question of will, perhaps because of their misunderstanding of the United States and the German failure to read up on Oliver Cromwell, the New Model Army, the Americans mockingly called Red Necks after the scarves worn by the Cromwell faction, and the English Civil War.

What I think happened is that Mr. McNamara as a Whiz Kid was part of a group of Young Gun (OK, another metaphor) operations research people, a fancy term for the study of how to reduce waste in large organizations and make them even more effective as an Army, more profitable as a business. These Whiz Kids helped win WW-II by streamlining wartime production — the Sherman tank was an inferior design to the German Tiger, but we overwhelmed the Germans not only with an abundance of tanks, but with an abundance of artillery shells (and the P-47 fighter bomber). The Germans regarded the “extravagant” use of Arty as “unfair”, but as they say, C’est la guerre!

On his laurels of being a WW-II Whiz Kid, McNamara was recruited by the Ford family to run their auto company. On the laurels of being a Ford CEO, he was recruited to run the Defense Department. To say that the “architect of the Edsel” was the “architect of the Vietnam War” is a gross oversimplification in pursuit of talking points against a man who served his country under a Democratic Party Presidential Administration.

If anything, Mr. McNamara was the architect of the Ford Falcon, which perhaps gives one the greatest insight into his Spartan and utilitarian thinking regarding both things military and things civilian.
So the man who gave us the Ford Falcon also gave us the Minuteman Missile, which kept the peace to this day. The Minuteman was a Ford Falcon of atomic delivery systems — no frills, on budget, bare bones transportation of a nuclear munition. Compare that with the accessory-laden overchromed MX Peacekeeper boondogle under Reagan some 20 years later. I just saw a restored a Falcon with a For Sale sign — they won’t let me have a surplus Minuteman warhead, but my wife might let my own a Falcon to contemplate a thing built on the same principles of economy of function.

A woman lawyer, one time neighbor, friend of my Mom, liberal anti-war Democrat, once suggested to me that Mr. McNamara has a lot to answer for to the many women who sent their sons off to never return, especially in light of his mea culpa some years back about admitting to Vietnam being a mistake. Maybe that was the liberal Democrat in Mr. McNamara talking, but it didn’t get him any respect from liberal Democrats or anyone else.

Maybe the mistake to which he was confessing was that overwhelming industrial might is not the sure fire path to victory as it was claimed for the American Civil War and for WW-II — in Vietnam we had met a foe who had bested us in the will department under the circumstances in question. Would my mom’s friend have admitted that she too was part of the equation of victory vs stalemate vs defeat, and would she and others in the anti-war contingent look the Gold Star moms in the eyes for her influence on how things turned out?

For whatever his failings, I want to remember Robert McNamara as a patriotic American who served his country in two wars, for one of which he receive accolades, one for which he received scorn, but he did what was right in protecting America to the best of his considerable intellectual abilities, and for that I honor him.


India and US - III - acharya - 07-07-2009

<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Jul 6 2009, 09:16 AM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Jul 6 2009, 09:16 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Scientists Create GM Corn Which Prevents Human Conception</b>
Robin McKie
Science Editor
The Observer - London
September 9, 2001
Scientists have created the ultimate GM crop: contraceptive corn. Waiving fields of maize may one day save the world from overpopulation.
  <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now we know which countries will be on target list.

Recently Scientists had realized that it may effected other crops also because of cross pollination.
[right][snapback]99509[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlhVm8mo9xs




India and US - III - Capt M Kumar - 07-14-2009

<!--emo&:argue--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/argue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='argue.gif' /><!--endemo--> Asked for his comments by the India/South Asia Bureau Chief of The Straits Times of Singapore, Mr B Raman, the Indian security affairs analyst, said:

QUOTE:
It will be essentially an"ego-massaging" visit. India’s inflated ego
was hurt when she went to China first in February and spoke in very
positive terms about China. She has already embarked on an exercise
to introduce correctives.

2.Whatever she might say to please India, the reality is that Pakistan
and China are more important to the US at present than India. Pakistan
is important for preventing another 9/11 in US homeland and for
preventing a catastrophic act of terrorism involving the use of
weapons of mass destruction material and China for its economic
recovery.

3.Comparatively, India’s utility to the US is limited. At the same
time,the US cannot ignore India because of its size, its democracy,
its economic potential in another 10 years if not now and the
vigorous Indian-origin community in the US which is politically more
active than the Chinese-origin community.

4.We can expect from her positive statements and gestures, but one
cannot say definitely how sincerely-meant they would be. Indians have
a weakness for flattery and tend to indulge in wishful-thinking.

5.We have no culture of strategic-thinking and laser-sharp analysis
based on cruel facts and figures..But we have a long-ingrained culture
of wishful-thinking. All Hillary Clinton has to do is to make a few
statements describing India as a great power, praising Mahatma Gandhi,
highlighting the impact of Gandhiji on Martin Luther King and Barack
Obama, India’s IT genius etc, Indians wil be quite happy for some
months till the next disappointment comes.

6.Americans understand India better than they understand Pakistan and
its jihadi hordes. Pakistanis understand the US better than Indians.

7.Hype and flattery will be the defining characteristics of her visit.
Indian ego will remain tickled for some months.

8. Ultimately, our people will continue to die at the hands of jihadi
terrorists. Pakistan will continue to use terrorism against India to
change the status quo in Jammu & Kashmir. Americans will continue to
link terrorism with Kashmir.

9. I have always considered skepticism to be an essential component of
a good analysis.I have always been a skeptic vis-a-vis the US.


India and US - III - Guest - 07-20-2009

<!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>
India should behave like major world power: NYT</b>

Sat, Jul 18 07:29 PM

New York, July 18 (IANS) President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton should 'encourage' India to behave like a 'vital partner in building a stable world' that they want it to be, an influential US daily said Saturday.

'India wants to be seen as a major world power. For that to happen, it will have to drop its pretensions to nonalignment and stake out strong and constructive positions,' the New York Times said in an editorial on Clinton's visit to India.

'President Obama and Clinton say they consider India a vital partner in building a stable world. Now they have to encourage India to behave like one,' it said.

The <b>India-US civil nuclear deal 'was supposed to be the start of a beautiful new friendship,' the Times said suggesting an agenda for Clinton ranging from a bilateral investment treaty, to climate change, Doha trade talks, to non-proliferation with 'primary focus' on Pakistan</b>.

'The two democracies can do a lot to deepen their relationship, including negotiating an investment treaty,' it said. 'But it is time for India to take more responsibility internationally.

'It needs to do more to revive the world trade talks it helped torpedo last year and - as a major contributor to global warming - <b>to join the developed countries in cutting greenhouse gas emissions. And it needs to do a lot more to constrain its arms race with Pakistan and global proliferation</b>.

<b>'The primary focus must be Pakistan</b>,' the Times said welcoming the <b>resumption of India-Pakistan dialogue interrupted after the November Mumbai attacks by Pakistani-based extremists</b>.

'Clinton needs to assure India that Washington will keep pressing Pakistan to prosecute suspects linked to the Mumbai attacks and to shut down the Lashkar-e-Taiba group of extremists.

'Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his party have a strong mandate after the May elections. And the country has weathered the global recession better than most. That means that it has no excuses not to do more,' the Times said.

<i>Indo Asian News Service </i>


India and US - III - acharya - 07-20-2009

Der Spiegel, Germany

The Mute Star: Hillary Clinton

http://watchingamerica.com/News/31659/the-...W_ORIGINAL_TEXT



By Gregor Peter Schmitz
The president treats his former rival like a Saudi wife.
Translated By Alex Brewer
16 July 2009
Edited by Patricia Simoni

Germany - Der Spiegel - Original Article (German)

She should have become the strong woman in Barack Obama’s cabinet, but instead she has been mocked as a weak secretary of state. With her keynote address, she tried for a new beginning – and was countered coldly by the White House. In her speech, though, she had a clear message for Europeans.

Her rich, blue pantsuit shines; the podium is at the Council on Foreign Relations, located at one of the finest addresses in the United States Capitol; the seating arrangements are precisely planned, as if for a campaign event.

Academics wait in the crowd with media bigwigs, international businesspeople, the foreign policy elite in Washington. Top diplomats and U.S. emissaries, officially her inferiors, must take a spot near Clinton. However, in the past months they have often stolen the show from the secretary of state. Richard Holbrooke, for example, responsible for Pakistan and Afghanistan and a giant in both stature and ego, now looks up to Clinton like a well-behaved schoolboy. The host wants to know if any of Clinton’s staff members want to ask a question. Clinton laughs sharply and says, “They’d better not.”

Today “Madam Secretary” should be the only one speaking or giving a speech. Not simply a speech, but the speech. Clinton has been in office six months, high time for a keynote address. “She wants to show her vision for foreign policy,” promises her spokeswoman. Expected is nothing less than a framework for Obama’s global course.

Or perhaps a speech to raise her market value within the administration? The U.S. media has already pegged her as a weak secretary of state. They point out the international trips the president has made while Clinton has to stay at home. And that ambassadorships from Europe to Asia went to big Obama donors, rather than her confidants. And that Clinton had to break her elbow before coming back into the media limelight.

''It’s time for Barack Obama to let Hillary Clinton take off her burqa,'' scoffs Tina Brown, star columnist of the web site, ''The Daily Beast.'' The president treats his former rival like a Saudi wife.

“It’s kind of like my elbow – It’s getting better every day,” says Clinton during her speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. She is speaking about foreign policy, of course. Perhaps she should also express her hope for a larger role in the administration.

She is trying for it: For 34 minutes, Clinton fleet-footedly covers the big picture, from Iran, the fight against weapons of mass destruction, the dialogue with the Arab world, more aid for development and “smart power” – America should exert its power resolutely, also reasonably and amiable, in conjunction with allies. “We need a new mindset about how America will use its power,” sums up the secretary of state.

It is a proper foreign policy manifesto, perfectly delivered. If the president was standing up front, he could not have done it better.

There is only one blemish: Almost no one is watching or hearing Clinton.

Whoever is flipping through the U.S. cable channels during the hour of her speech sees live pictures from a press conference about the murder of a couple with 17 kids. Or hears from the Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, who has to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Worse yet: they see President Obama, who stands before the cameras at almost at the same time as Clinton. He has just announced that that his health care reform plan has stalled; he is speaking with nurses behind the Rose Garden of the White House.

The television stations bring him in live: Obama instead of Clinton. For a few minutes, it is as if it were the primary all over again, as both rivals compete on polling day for a TV appearance.

The president’s speech was arranged hastily. “Things like this are arranged,” carps a Washington insider. Maybe that was the plan all along. “Hillary Loses Air War to Obama,” writes the New York Daily News.

Is Clinton being degraded to some sort of administration mascot?
<b>
That has to be painful for Clinton. And how. She is said to have worked on the speech for six weeks, her helpers assisted with a public relations offensive. They had spokespeople of other officials praise Clinton’s loyalty and influence in the administration. They reminded everyone how popular the secretary of state is with U.S. citizens, even more so than the president. However logical her reluctance at the beginning of the term was, the president has still outshone her; as a freshly elected U.S. senator, Clinton was also just as inconspicuously initiated.</b>

However, there are 100 U.S. senators, only one secretary of state – and only one Hillary Clinton. Should she be downgraded to an administration mascot, responsible for Haiti and world food events? That was the area about which Clinton, when asked about her role, chimed in.

The speech at the Council on Foreign Relations shows how disappointing that would be, because Clinton’s background encompasses everything needed for U.S. foreign relations. Principles, yes, but no ideology. “Smart power” with a clever view to the changing world.

Europeans should have been listening closely and learning. Many diplomats in Europe believe that Clinton stands closer to Europe than Obama, because she knows the continent better from her years in the White House, and because the commander in chief, as the first president in a globalized world, exercises little patience for the old-fashioned ritual of trans-Atlantic partnership.

Clinton is more patient with Europe. But then, again, she also says, “We are both a trans-Atlantic and a trans-Pacific nation.” She emphasizes, “Our approach to foreign policy must reflect the world as it is, not as it used to be. It does not make sense to adapt a 19th century concert of powers, or a 20th century balance of power strategy.”

That sounds like a very cool look at the world map. Who can America help most with the current global challenge? Where do the greatest dangers lurk? In Clinton’s office too, as her keynote address reminds us, the answers to these types of questions depend increasingly less on Europe. Anne-Marie Slaughter, Clinton’s lead planner, helped write the speech. Earlier, the academic Slaughter was, above all, an expert on Europe; then she spent a year in China. That seems like a career move.
<span style='color:blue'>
On Friday of this week, Clinton is traveling to India, and soon to Pakistan. At the end of July, she and Timothy Geithner are holding a two-day summit with top governmental officials from China. <span style='color:red'>The agenda sounds as if the future of the world is being debated between Beijing and Washington.</span></span>

G-20 and G-2 instead of G-8 and the European Union. <b>The global shift in weight that Clinton is talking about is much larger than the question, "Who appears more often on TV, Clinton or Obama?"
</b>
Of course, foreign policy politician Clinton is still a politician. Eight times in her speech, she called Obama the “right president.” But she will also coolly analyze the PR disaster around her speech and fight for her influence. She just hired a new advisor, Sidney Blumenthal. He worked in her husband’s White House and for her campaign.

Blumenthal was responsible for the office’s attacks – most recently, against Barack Obama.





India and US - III - Capt M Kumar - 07-20-2009

<!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Advani, leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha, expressed optimism about the future of India-US relations and voiced concern over alleged use of terrorism by Pakistan against India, party sources said.

Clinton recalled her husband Bill Clinton's landmark visit to India in 2000 that opened doors for transformation of relations between the two countries when a BJP-led government was in power.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.as...=3112697&page=1


India and US - III - ramana - 07-20-2009

Indo-US joint Statement

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->India –US Joint Statement

 
20/07/2009
 

External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today committed to building an enhanced India- U.S. strategic partnership that seeks to advance solutions to the defining challenges of our time.

They agreed to strengthen the existing bilateral relationships and mechanisms for cooperation between the Government of Republic of India and the Government of the United States of America, while leveraging the strong foundation of economic and social linkages between our respective people, private sectors, and institutions. Recognizing the new heights achieved in the India - U.S. relationship over the last two Indian and U.S. Administrations, they committed to pursuing a third and transformative phase of the relationship that will enhance global prosperity and stability in the 21st century.

Minister Krishna and Secretary Clinton will chair an “India-U.S. Strategic Dialogue” that meets once annually in alternate capitals. This dialogue will focus on a wide range of bilateral, global, and regional issues of shared interest and common concern, continuing programmes currently under implementation and taking mutually beneficial initiatives that complement Indian and U.S. development, security and economic interests.



Secretary Clinton looks forward to welcoming Minister Krishna for the first round of the Strategic Dialogue in Washington, D.C. in the coming year.

ADVANCING COMMON SECURITY INTERESTS

Recognizing the shared common desire to increase mutual security against the common threats posed by international terrorism, Minister Krishna and Secretary Clinton reaffirmed the commitment of both Governments to build on recent increased coordination in counter-terrorism. Secretary Clinton invited Home Minister Chidambaram to visit Washington in the near future. External Affairs Minister Krishna and Secretary Clinton also reaffirmed their commitment to early adoption of a UN Comprehensive Convention against International Terrorism which would strengthen the framework for global cooperation.

DEFENCE CO-OPERATION

Noting the enhanced co-operation in defence under the Defence Co-operation Framework Agreement of 2005, External Affairs Minister and Secretary Clinton reiterated the commitment of both Governments to pursue mutually beneficial cooperation in the field of defence. External Affairs Minister Krishna announced that both sides had reached agreement on End Use Monitoring for U.S. defense articles.

SEEKING A WORLD WITHOUT NUCLEAR WEAPONS



India and the United States share a vision of a world free of nuclear weapons. With this goal in sight, Minister Krishna and Secretary Clinton agreed to move ahead in the Conference on Disarmament towards a non-discriminatory, internationally and effectively verifiable Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty. India and the United States will also cooperate to prevent nuclear terrorism and address the challenges of global nuclear proliferation. A high-level bilateral dialogue will be established to enhance cooperation on these issues.

CIVIL NUCLEAR CO-OPERATION

Building on the success of the India –U.S. Civil Nuclear Initiative, on July 21, India and the United States will begin consultations on reprocessing arrangements and procedures, as provided in Article 6 (iii) of the 123 Agreement for Peaceful Nuclear Cooperation between India and the United States.

GLOBAL INSTITUTIONS

Secretary Clinton affirmed that multilateral organizations and groupings should reflect the world of the 21st century in order to maintain long-term credibility, relevance and effectiveness, and both Minister Krishna and Secretary Clinton expressed their interest in exchanging views on new configurations of the UN Security Council, the G-8, and the G-20.



PURSUING SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT

As members of the G-20, India and the United States have pledged to work together with other major economies to foster a sustainable recovery from the global economic crisis through a commitment to open trade and investment policies. Minister Krishna and Secretary Clinton reaffirmed the commitment of both Governments to facilitating a pathway forward on the WTO Doha Round.

They pledged to co-operate to not only preserve the economic synergies between the two countries that have grown over the years, but also to increase and diversify bilateral economic relations and expand trade and investment flows. The two sides noted that negotiations for a Bilateral Investment Treaty would be scheduled in New Delhi in August 2009. They resolved to harness the ingenuity and entrepreneurship of the private sectors of both countries with a newly-configured CEO Forum that will meet later this year.

EDUCATION



External Affairs Minister Krishna and Secretary of State Clinton affirmed the importance of expanding educational cooperation through exchanges and institutional collaboration, and agreed on the need to expand the role of the private sector in strengthening this collaboration.

SPACE, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION

Recognizing the great potential in India-U.S. science and technology collaboration, the two sides have concluded a Science and Technology Endowment Agreement, and signed a Technology Safeguards Agreement that will permit the launch of civil or non-commercial satellites containing U.S. components on Indian space launch vehicles. Both sides welcomed India’s participation in the FutureGen Project for the construction of the first commercial scale fully integrated carbon capture and sequestration project and India’s participation in the Integrated Ocean Development Project, an international endeavour for enhancing the understanding of Earth and Ocean dynamics and addressing the challenges of climate change.

HIGH TECHNOLOGY CO-OPERATION



Noting the high potential that exists due to the complementarities in the knowledge and innovation-based economies of the two countries, it was agreed that the agenda and the initiatives in the bilateral High Technology Cooperation Dialogue should continue, with the objective of facilitating smoother trade in high technology between the two economies reflecting the present strategic nature of the India-U.S. relationship.

It was also agreed that working groups would be formed to focus on new areas of common interest in nano-technology, civil nuclear technology, civil aviation and licensing issues in defence, strategic and civil nuclear trade.

ENERGY SECURITY, ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Minister Krishna and Secretary Clinton pledged to intensify collaboration on energy security and climate change. Efforts will focus on increasing energy efficiency, renewable energy, and clean energy technologies through the India-U.S. Energy Dialogue and a Global Climate Change Dialogue.

Both sides also agreed to launch a process of bilateral scientific and technological collaboration to support the development, deployment and transfer of transformative and innovative technologies in areas of mutual interest including solar and other renewable energy, clean coal and energy efficiency, and other relevant areas.



India and the U.S. affirmed their commitment to work together with other countries, including through the Major Economies Forum, for positive results in the UNFCCC Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen in December 2009.

GLOBAL ISSUES

The two sides noted the valuable engagement between both Governments on global issues of common concern such as strengthening democracy and capacity building in democratic institutions as co-founders of the UN Democracy Fund.

The two sides agreed to develop a Women’s Empowerment Forum (WEF) to exchange lessons and best practices on women’s empowerment and development and consider ways to empower women in the region and beyond.

CONCLUSION

Minister Krishna and Secretary Clinton reaffirmed that the excellent relations between India and the United States rests on the bedrock of kinship, commerce and educational ties between the Indian and American people.

Secretary Clinton thanked External Affairs Minister and the people of India for their warm reception and hospitality.

New Delhi
July 20, 2009

<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


India and US - III - Capt M Kumar - 07-21-2009

Indian readers will be shocked that 11-year-old Malia Obama, who was wearing a simple T-shirt with a peace sign on it, was lambasted as “a bunch of ghetto thugs” and “ghetto street trash”. The language became progressively more graphic. A photograph of Ms Michelle Obama was captioned, “To entertain her daughter, Michelle Obama loves to make monkey sounds.” No political party or leader of consequence, no major commentator, condemned this abuse of America’s first-ever Afro-American First Family, in supposedly ‘post-racial’ America.

http://www.dailypioneer.com/190509/US-unequal-to-India.html


India and US - III - Guest - 07-21-2009

<b>India And U.S. Agree On Defense Pact</b>

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The agreement "will pave the way for greater defense cooperation'" U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said during a joint news conference with Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna.

Indian officials had been objecting to the EUM requirement under the U.S. Arms Export Control Act of 1996, which requires monitoring the use of defense equipment and technology sold to other countries.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


India and US - III - Capt M Kumar - 07-21-2009

<!--emo&:cool--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/specool.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='specool.gif' /><!--endemo--> The leader of Opposition stressed that he and his party “are in favour of good relations with the US but any action against this consensus will not get the country’s support.” Mr Advani said that there is a concern in the country over this turn of events and the matter has been raised in Parliament. He also expressed unhappiness over the reference to Balochistan in the joint statement, saying it puts India “in the dock: on disruptive activities in the region. “The statement has named Balochistan as if we are doing something there...as if we are in the dock,” Mr Advani told Ms Clinton.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/4801097.cms


India and US - III - dhu - 07-21-2009

<b>End-user pact is straight, in national interest: Krishna</b>

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Government on Tuesday rejected Opposition charges of comprising national security and sovereignty by going in for the End-user Monitoring Agreement for US defence purchases, declaring that "every thing is very straight."

"Question of bartering of our freedom and sovereignty does not arise. What was being done at the high-end defence purchases is being done now. End-use clause was incorporated earlier," External Affairs Minister S M Krishna told the Lok Sabha, even as almost the entire Opposition, including the BJP and the Left parties, walked out of the House in protest.

Leading the walk-out, Leader of the Opposition L K Advani said the Opposition was dissatisfied with the suo-motu statement, as it failed to address the concerns expressed by members and the move would "send a wrong message" across the country.

Departing from the convention of not giving clarifications on statements in the Lok Sabha, Krishna said he was surprised by the kind of interpretation being given by the Opposition parties to the bilateral understanding and there was "nothing extraordinary" in it. "We are conscious of what we are doing," he added.

"We tried to generalise it (EUMA) for high-end purchases with the US. Everything is very straight. We have done it in the interest of the country," he said.In his suo-motu statement on US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit to India, Krishna said, "We have agreed on the end-use monitoring arrangements that will henceforth be referred to in letters of acceptance for Indian procurement of US defence technology and equipment.

"This systematises ad hoc arrangements for individual defence procurements from the USA entered into by previous governments," he added, even as he tabled a copy of the Indo-US joint statement made by him and Clinton yesterday.

Krishna said Clinton's visit has helped to "broaden and deepen" the bilateral relationship and to set the terms of future engagement with India and US.

He said India had also agreed on a new bilateral dialogue architecture within which discussions will continue between the two countries on a wide range of issues.

The minister said India and the US have concluded two important agreements during the visit, one on creation of a Science and Technology Endowment Board and another, a Technical Safeguards Agreement, which will permit the launch of civil or non-commercial satellites containing US components on Indian space launch vehicles.

"During the visit, we held productive and constructive discussion on global issues, situation in our region, and on how to enhance our bilateral partnership," he added. Soon after Krishna's statement, Advani expressed anguish over the Minister not addressing the concerns of the House with regard to EUMA.

Advani also called for amendments to the Constitution to ensure important agreements signed by the country are brought to Parliament for ratification, as is the practice in countries like the US.

<b>He said it was unimaginable that an outsider would monitor the use of defence equipment bought by India.</b>

Supporting Advani, his party colleague Sushma Swaraj said besides the Opposition, the officials and CAG were opposed to such agreements and called for scrapping EUMA.

"We are in favour of friendship with US, but not for bullying by them," she added.

Former Foreign Minister and BJP leader Yashwant Sinha wanted to know from Krishna whether US equipment purchased from third party would also be subject to inspections under EUMA.

"We have a right to know what has been agreed with a foreign government. This statement is not worth the paper on which it is written," Sinha added.

Calling EUMA as a surrender to the US, CPI-M leader Basudeb Acharia said, "We did not want this statement. We demand a clarification."

While CPI leader Gurudas Dasgupta expressed fears that the agreement would permit US to inspect India's defence establishments, SP leader Mulayam Singh Yadav asked if US was India's master (Kya America hamara malik hai?).Sharad Yadav (JD-U) accused the government of mortgaging the country's sovereignty by signing EUMA and alleged that this was a surrender just as the joint statement with Pakistan in Egypt, which
mentions Balochistan, thereby opening a Pandora's Box.

M Thambidurai (AIADMK), opposing EUMA, said the US should be friends and not dictate terms to India. "We should not pledge our sovereignty," he said, asking the government to withdraw from the agreement.

Bharatuhari Mahtab (BJD) said Krishna's statement hid more than what it revealed, and failed to address the members' concerns.

Earlier, raising the issue during Zero Hour, <b>Yashwant Sinha</b> said the agreement was a matter of "grave concern", as it would give the US right to physically inspect equipment sold by it to India.
<b>
"The US will have the right to visit Indian military bases to verify if the equipment, meant for both civilian and military use, were being used for the purpose for which it was sold," he said, charging that the government had succumbed to the US pressure.</b>

Amid cries of "shame, shame" from Opposition benches, Sinha wanted the government to lay the EUMA text on the table of the House and if the pact was not yet ratified, it should not be done.

Giving in to Opposition demands, Leader of the House Pranab Mukherjee had assured them that government would make a statement on EUMA in the House later in the day. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


India and US - III - dhu - 07-23-2009

<b>End-Use Monitoring Agreement (EUMA): A Backgrounder</b>
by Brahma Chellaney


India and US - III - dhu - 07-24-2009

<b>India now firmly under US thumb</b>
S Rajagopalan
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->‘End-user pact brings it into non-proliferation mainstream’

The United States has termed the just-concluded end-user monitoring arrangement a “landmark” pact that brings India into the mainstream of nuclear non-proliferation.

“It’s a very significant agreement,” State Department deputy spokesman Robert Wood said, without going into details of the pact and precisely how the verification process would be gone about.

<b>“We’re very proud and we believe that this agreement between the US and India is important in our overall global non-proliferation efforts, and we believe that this agreement has brought India into the nuclear non-proliferation mainstream,” </b>he said.

Asked about the strong reaction of Opposition parties in India who have termed the pact “a sell-out to the US”, Wood commented: <b>“India made a conscious decision to sign this agreement. India has said it’s in its best interests. We certainly think it’s in the interest of the United States.”</b>

“We think it’s an overall good agreement. And we will need to implement the agreement, and those activities are already underway,” he said. Meanwhile, the Department of Commerce has begun a review of its entire export control system, designed to reduce the export licensing burden on US companies, such as the first Validated End User (VEU) that was announced for India earlier this year.

“The VEU programme was designed to facilitate high technology trade in India and China by enabling certain items to be transferred without individual export licences. But much more needs to be done,” Commerce Secretary Gary Locke told the Washington International Trade Association on Wednesday.

Locke said the US export control system must adapt to the country’s changing security needs without inhibiting the competitiveness of American companies and institutions. “That competitiveness is critical to our economic and national security,” he said.

The ongoing review will focus on improving the system by targeting controls at those state and non-state actors who would seek to harm US, while ensuring that the traditional control lists keep pace with technological developments.

The review has followed the report by a panel headed by former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft, concluding that the US’s Cold War era export control system has constrained the country’s commercial and military capabilities from expanding into new fields. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


India and US - III - Capt M Kumar - 07-25-2009

<!--emo&:blow--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blow.gif' /><!--endemo--> In its bid to appease Islamabad’s ruling elite, Washington risks alienating the Indian people. But New Delhi’s discomfort with President Obama goes beyond Pakistan. If his appointment of Representative Ellen Tauscher, a trenchant critic of the US-India civilian nuclear accord, to undersecretary of state for arms control and international affairs raised serious doubts in India about its full implementation, his choice of Tim Roemer, an Indiana congressman not particularly known for his knowledge of India, as ambassador to New Delhi looked like a snub - when contrasted with his pick for China, the high-profile Governor Jon Huntsman.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editoria...ienating_india/


India and US - III - ramana - 07-26-2009

Do we have a list of people that met Hillary Clinton in Mumbai? Business and politicians and eminent people.


India and US - III - Guest - 07-28-2009

<b>Hilary Clinton's Visit to India</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Q4: Why is the relationship with India important to the United States?

A4: <b>India has the largest navy in the Indian Ocean and the fourth-largest army in the world. It is one of the two rising powers in Asia. From the U.S. perspective, it is important that no single country have undisputed dominance of this huge area, and the United States needs to work with all its major players-Japan, China, and India. In this region, India's interests largely dovetail with those of the United States.</b>

In the next few years, India and China will be the major sources of economic growth in the world. This will not only shape the global financial debate; it also makes India a critical market for Americans as they struggle to fix their own economy. <b>Without India, the United States cannot address the major global issues on its agenda</b>.

Finally, India is a country with nuclear weapons in a troublesome neighborhood. U.S. policy toward India in the past few years has been led by its hopes for a more stable region and world, but we can't ignore the downside risks.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->