My guesstimate of the maximalist American position
Hi,I am attempting to guess what the maximalist US position on the Indo-US nuclear deal might be.
Here is what I could come up with:
1) The US believes it dominates the World. India by consequence should submit to the US by allowing its ideas a "right of way". By imposing unacceptable ideas on India and then forcing India to negotiate for their removal the US makes India confront the issue of their dominance and ultimately accept it. Please understand the mere act of allowing the US to make such imposing demands on India's behaviour itself can be construed to be an acceptance of their dominance. By ritually emasculating the democratically elected leader of the Government of India, the US brings India - as a whole - to a position of subservience.
2) Containing any expansion of India's weapons making capacity or capability is vital to reduce belligerence in India's elite. The delicately set table of the high powers of the world is not prepared to recieve another major player. India must be made to sit at the little table. If India becomes bigger than it is seen right now, America - heretofore the only nation that could rightfully lay claim to being the greatest democracy will have fallen by the wayside.
3) Irrespective of whether India accepts US demands on its behaviour in the nuclear weapons arena, US firms must be given access to India's energy market. Ensuring a presence of US firms on the Indian energy market will allow the US to maintain its cross subsidising scheme in the global energy market. This in turn will allow the US to defray the costs of maintaining its own highly inefficient and polluting national economy. The US posture on India's nuclear weapons can be deliberately hardened if need be to secure concessions for US firms in India's energy sector. Pakistan's current utility lies only in its ability to frustrate India's solo attempts to access the carbon energy resources of West and Central Asia.
4) Indian access to the US market constitutes an element of strong leverage with the US. India is not the first country to have a major stake in the US economy, Japan, China and Saudi Arabia have their stakes too, why should India be given leverage when these other "play by the book" powers don't have it? India should never be in a position to use this leverage to America's disadvantage. Keeping the Indian IT giants and the "outsourcing" buddies in the US in constant fear of being shut down by legislative means is a logical way to minimise the risk of them turning against the US itself.
5) The Indian economy is service sector driven and still largely agricultural, it is unprepared for a confrontation with a first world state as it lacks the industrial and mineral resources necessary for such a conflict. Goading India into a confrontation against even a pseudo first world power like China is likely to create sufficient economic strain to permit considerable maneouver room for US policy. Precipitating such conflicts, i.e. ones India is unprepared for, is a good way to keep the Indians off balance. Leveraging US information dominance in certain sectors is the key to making such a thing happen.
I do not know if this is a correct view of things, I may even be completely wrong about this. But it is time this came out into the open. There seems little sense in keeping this to whispers in back offices.
Like the man said, "Voldemort is back"
posted by maverick @ 3:01 PM
5 Comments:
too many posts these days Maverick!
Ah! Whats goin on?
hi m
correct if i am wrong, it is absolutely imperative for us to maintain peace around our borders.That way GOI enunciation of "peace in the subcontinent" must be encouraged.what do you think
Hi avidnewsreader,
There is work to be done so I am doing it.
Hi Anonymous,
I am working on a similar post for views in India on the deal. I will be a summary of my own posts here.
I do not know how exactly the GoI wants to run this and thankfully no one from there has told me. Honestly I don't want to be told, it makes life much easier when you don't know or want to know. So my post will only contain general statements of my own point of view.
I can make a guess about what the GoI want, but that is something best left to the Great Indian Press. The job of saying what the GoI wants is that of the designated secretary. I have no role to play there.
Hi Maverick,
Your writing style is incredibly familiar. If you're who I think you are, then I'm an old friend - whose article you've linked in one of your posts.
There's an interesting thing about the US decision making class that's worth stating explictly for your readers:
That there are two types of them. If you're who I think you are, then you used to characterise them as Show Ponies and Attack Dogs.
The Attack Dogs don't bark. Ever. They're only there to bite. Negroponte types. The all dancing, all singing Show Ponies like Krepon are the ones who make all the noise and movement. But it's the attack dogs you gotta watch.
Kinda like how the US just sent 3 carriers to the Gulf. Everone oohs and ahhs about that. But that's a show pony trick. We'll know when the shits going to hit the fan, not because of the carriers, but when the *air-to-air refuellers* take off from Europe and the US and move to forward bases.
Same thing with the US' current attitude to the deal. What they're doing is moving the carriers and making a lot of noise.
But what I'm not seeing is the equivalent of the air-to-air refuellers beginning to move.
No movement on the financial front like downgraded credit ratings etc., - crucial in todays India, they learned that point after Pok II. Nothing from the usual suspects in the think tanks. No funny stuff from the Japanese or Euro banks - nothing.
I maybe missing something, or they may have decided on different punishment tactics - or they're bankrupt on any serious "punish India" move.
Can't say which it is. But they're making so much noise, that they're painting themselves into a corner of having to do something to us - and then things will get really nasty. Because I don't think they've factored in the attitudes of this new DCH generation of ours and the pressure they'll bring to bear on GoI to respond.
Those mangoes may be as good as it gets if the US screws this up.
Hi Anonymous,
Anonymity has many rewards, so I choose it. I can however be reached at the usual place.
Somehow the US has to be told that pushing too hard at this point is counter productive.
This mess we are in has been caused by the show ponies and unleashing the attack dogs or giving the ponies any more air time will only make matters worse.
The Americans have met all sorts in their jouney as a "nation". We are unlike the others, we do not seek to conquer them or even diminish them in any way. We believe in "live and let live".
The Inca style ritual slaughter that seems to accompany every American foreign policy action is too "heavy" for us. We are a mild people with mild lives and we can't deal with the high octance, the high sugar and daisycutter lifestyle that the Americans cherish.
This dog and pony show is very boring to us, it even puts us off.
The DCH (and their allies The-Young-At-Heart) are the biggest problem. There are 600 million of them. That is well over the strength of 90% of the world's nations. This isn't just an attitude problem - this is a physical problem.
So far the DCH have been pro-US, after all how could they not be? they love Baywatch and who doesn't think it is fashionable to diss Nehru and NAM.
The Young-At-Heart have seen the 80s, they know about Super 301 and how an Indian PM had to ask an American Vice President if there was any CIA conspiracy to kill in India.
I feel the Young-At-Heart are the key and I don't know how well they can communicate with the DCH, but if they can do a good job of it, then they can swing this the way they please.
I think it is vital the standard of debate on these matters be kept high at disreputable forums where the Young-At-Heart loiter and at all times the idea of the energy crisis be driven home to them so that they communicate it to the DCH.
Post a Comment
<< Home