What's new

Why India came back to the negotiating table

Firstly, the older Congress hands (who happen to be leading the ruling coalition government) are either kicking the bucket or retiring. The younger ones replacing them don't share their same pre-dominantly Gandhian viewpoint. The likes of Purohit are in jail but the likes of Modi are still capable of forming the government at the center. To believe that the response of a Modi govt. would be as self-restrained as that of a Manmohan govt. is not rooted in logic.

It would be an absolutely wonderful day. And I mean this from the bottom of my heart. An absolutely momentous, wonderful day, when Modi comes to power in India. One of two things will happen a) India and Pakistan will both be completely destroyed or b) Modi will be unable to walk the talk and will emerge from this politically castrated.

No reward for guessing the right answer.
 
I think both countries will try to get out of them in a way that lays the blame on the other party. Outright rejection would be too easily used by India. It'll be a little more complicated than that.
Dont convert this into tu-tu mein-mein! It is proven beyond doubt LeT (in Pakistani soil - another banned outfit by Pakistan before Mumbai attacks) was responsible for this.

A strategic of just placing blame with no evidence (aka crazy ideologically backed TTP backed by a secular rooted India) is not like the issue I pointed out to you. So dont just say blaiming each other.

One party here is saying with a reason, and other has proof but will provide at APPROPRIATE time when the same evidence was rejected by another ruling member(Punjab government )

Really? Seeing the vast majority of your military resources parked on your western border would have the rest of the world believe otherwise.

It is like this dude! India had 5 wars - 1 war with China and hence some troops there and 4 wars with Pakistan and hence more troops there. What is so difficult to understand. Other than wet dreams of some fellows, the next war with India would be from Pakistan.

This is meaningless. America *owes* China about $800BN which is not that far below India's $1100B GDP. So what does that prove? Can China use this debt to cause America to bomb India? Or abandon economic relations with it?

Not every country does things just because of ideology. Economic implications and future benefits are calculated. Just China has 800b$ of American debt, what does that mean in context to India? If China starts a war with India, it has a risk of losing business permanently and India firms tilting into US camp, which I think would be a great advantage.

Just like I said, losing 60b$ trade growing at high teens is a wonderful opportunity for gaining very little strategically.

Please see things in context. China continues to support Pakistan on every issue, and this is not linked to trade between India or China. Not to mention that on the subject of trade, China will have the upper hand. Indian industry is not sufficiently developed to compete with China.

Anyway, not to get derailed on economic issues, China sees India as a regional player that is working its way into the hands of powers that would like to see China contained. And it is irrelevant whether you or I believe this, because the Chinese do and their military strategy and development, combined with their recent more aggressive posture toward India, is proof positive of this. They will present India with strategic challenges, such as control of the Indian ocean, for which they are now developing a network of Naval bases in Sri Lanka, Gwadar and elsewhere. Trade will not cause China to forfeit its other interests viz India. They will also continue to pursue other diplomatic initiatives against India, such as the issue of the border, blocking of aid to India at international fora (they just pulled off one of these moves recently), using their influence in Africa and South Asia to foil Indian diplomatic/military objectives etc. etc.

Your point in case has little bearing to reality. In all wars of Pakistan and India after Sino-Indian war, 1965, 1971 and as recent as Kargil, China didnot attack India. So other than the wet dream, it is nothing else.

China wants to get to Middle-east, Africa to secure energy resources (just like India) and for that it needs hub in Indian ocean. An attack on India would blockade which India can do at cheaper cost than China which will have to send its noisy submarines to Indian ocean.

I specifically didnot want to convert it into India-China war capabilities. But any common sense comparison, would show:
* Indian airforce capabilities better than China.
* Indian naval forces better grade than Chinese.
* Chinese army at better grade than Indian.
* Chinese nuclear/missile capabilities way-way better than Indian.

At this rate, India-China war would cost either parties a lot of damage, albeit India might be lose more than China in an all-out war. Unlike Pakistan's case, China has never implied of all-out war, and Unlike Pakistan( :bounce:), it does feel it needs Radio Pakistan from New Delhi and Pakistan flag in Red fort. So I really consider them sane in their expectations. Only a country that got sliced into two could claim a victory as grand this!


I don't understand this logic. Because by this coin, how can India afford to look towards China while it faces a supposed military threat from Pakistan - a threat that could wipe out the entire sub continent? You can't have it both ways. If you're going to make China-US comparisons and cast India as a possible factor, I can make the exact same India-China comparison and place Pakistan as an even stronger player in that dynamic.

India-China trade start will almost nil and insignificant to amazing 60b$ and if the research reports are any bet, they would exceed 100b$ in 2012.

So just like I said before, any intelligent country would calculate its profits and losses before they would initiate the war!

You are probably speaking out of passion and out of only hope Pakistan has left! India survived when China, US and Pakistan were all against it. Other than Soviet Union, there was no support from any European power either. Trends have changed, with almost all major powers firmly in Indian court, if I were Pakistan, I won't try my luck too hard.

If the only deterrent you claim is that Pakistan will send nuclear missiles, it can only work so many times. One country cannot send terrorists continuously and then claim if they are attack they would respond with nuclear weapons. This cannot possibly be working till eternity.

You misunderstood me. I wasn't suggesting that India should participate in these initiatives to benefit from them. I was pointing to a few things Pakistan is doing to develop our relations further with some of the countries you named. And I was further pointing out that our geographic position makes us indispensable to a lot of these initiatives. That said, I think it is great that India decided to not participate in the defunct IPI pipeline and that the project is now morphing into the IP(C) pipeline. From Pakistan's perspective, this will tie China, Iran and Pakistan together far more closely at the expense of India. So it is a victory that just fell in our lap.


Ok.
 
Dont convert this into tu-tu mein-mein!

I wasn't trying to, but you just did.

You have now flown off the handle, claiming that Indian military capabilities are superior to China's, that China will place economic "benefit" of trade with India over its far more important strategic objectives etc.

This is no longer a discussion now, so no point going down this road any further. Once again, let India do what it can and we will do what we can. Let's wait and see who is able to cause the other more harm.
 
Pakistanis make too much of their friendship with China. At critical junctures the Chinese have not backed the Pakistanis - in any of the wars or in Kargil. Also, one mustn't confuse trade-deficit with trade volume - Indian deficit to China is $10 billion and even that has set alarm bells ringing - while the American deficit is $800 billion which is why the Chinese THINK they have the Americans by the balls.

Pakistan want to challenge India in South Asia, India wants to challenge China in rest of Asia, China wants to challenge USA in the world and USA wants no competition. All of these nations are trying to do just that through a series of alliances - if Pakistan believes China is an all weather friend - they are in for a big surprise. China will brook no opposition in its quest for a bi-polar world - if that means trampling Pakistani hopes - then so be it.
 
if Pakistan believes China is an all weather friend - they are in for a big surprise. China will brook no opposition in its quest for a bi-polar world - if that means trampling Pakistani hopes - then so be it.

For now what you are saying is mere speculative talk, and what is happening on the ground flies in the face of this speculation. So, since you are not a spokesperson of the Chinese foreign ministry, please allow us the large bags of salt we carry in our hands as we consume the above theory.
 
Its nothing else another game which India is playing with Pak. A big politics under the table with hidden motives is there.
 
For now what you are saying is mere speculative talk, and what is happening on the ground flies in the face of this speculation. So, since you are not a spokesperson of the Chinese foreign ministry, please allow us the large bags of salt we carry in our hands as we consume the above theory.

Perhaps you missed the point while asking for the salt from the Americans. That China has routinely failed to meet Pakistani expectations from them is a fact not speculation -

1. Pakistan acted as the mediator between Nixon and China for the two countries to recognize each other in 1970. Despite delusions - did China come to aid Pakistan in 1971?

2. 1999 - Kargil. The Chinese reaction was not one of support to Pakistan but insistence that Pakistan withdraw its troops to pre-conflict positions.
 
Perhaps you missed the point while asking for the salt from the Americans. That China has routinely failed to meet Pakistani expectations from them is a fact not speculation -

Whaaa? Salt from the Americans? That doesn't even make any sense. But then neither do you.

What is the essence of your argument here? That China will support India in preference to Pakistan? Well, dream on. There is nothing I can do to cure your delusions. China has supported us on everything we asked for their support on.

Coming to the completely irrelevant examples you are giving, there was a certain point after which West Pakistan accepted that the best long term outcome for everyone was to allow East Pakistan to become Bangladesh. There was absolutely no sense to ask China to do anything to reverse this. After this point we ensured that Bangladesh would emerge as an independent, strongly muslim country which would not be an Indian ally. That is exactly what happened. We wish them best of luck...

Kargil? You are forgetting the fact that China airlifted almost two squadrons of fighters to Pakistan in the midst of heightened tensions with India in '02. One can literally list dozens of examples here, but your basic thrust questioning China's support for Pakistan is just so devoid of logic and fact that I don't quite know whether it will do any good.

Please continue to believe whatever it is that puts a smile on your face.
 
Pakistan should isolate India in return. Cancel the 128 daily flights that go over Pakistan. Remember the last time it happened it crippled the Indian Airline industry. You need us for everything, but I guess its an ego booster in India to talk tough and act soft.

We're still waiting for India's 'decisive action'. Don't ignore us so much.

You will do well to remember that while Indian flights had to take a 45 minute detour to avoid pakistan, PIA actually had to temporarily suspend a number of flights going towards south east asia and Australia..

http://www.defence.pk/forums/land-forces/45642-meeting-indias-military-challenge-2.html#post645333
 
You will do well to remember that while Indian flights had to take a 45 minute detour to avoid pakistan, PIA actually had to temporarily suspend a number of flights going towards south east asia and Australia..

http://www.defence.pk/forums/land-forces/45642-meeting-indias-military-challenge-2.html#post645333

You mean the two flights PIA cancelled which they were losing money on anyway? The ones that took their sweet long time to be resumed even after both sides allowed overflight rights?

If you look at the map, you'll see that it's not much of a detour for PIA to fly over China for those two flights if it needs/wants to. They go via Bangkok.

145-200 flights x 45 minute detour = X

2 flights x 1 hr detour? = Y

I would think that X >> Y
 
Whaaa? Salt from the Americans? That doesn't even make any sense. But then neither do you.

I understand it must be difficult for you to grasp - something to do with salt and soil - but oh well...
What is the essence of your argument here? That China will support India in preference to Pakistan? Well, dream on. There is nothing I can do to cure your delusions. China has supported us on everything we asked for their support on.

No - the essence of my argument is that China will support the country or cause which suits China at that point of time.

1950 - China-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance and Mutual Assistance

1960 - Sino-Soviet split and China becomes part of Non-Aligned Movement

After championing the cause of Communism - China attacked communist Vietnam and supported the Pol Pot let Khmer Rouge in 78-79 while the Vietnamese have tacit support from USSR

1971 - cozying up to the USA
2000s - you think the Yanks and the Chinese are cozy?

Coming to the completely irrelevant examples you are giving, there was a certain point after which West Pakistan accepted that the best long term outcome for everyone was to allow East Pakistan to become Bangladesh. There was absolutely no sense to ask China to do anything to reverse this. After this point we ensured that Bangladesh would emerge as an independent, strongly muslim country which would not be an Indian ally. That is exactly what happened. We wish them best of luck...

LOL - when was that certain point? Was that before or after Pakistan signed The Treaty of Surrender? You insured an "an independent, strongly(sic) muslim country"??? LOL....yes - and I am the Prince of Patiala.



Please continue to believe whatever it is that puts a smile on your face.

Gee - thanks. Ditto.
 
I don't think China needs proxies against India. It is taking India on directly in the Indian ocean, on the northern border and in international fora by blocking India access to aid.
It certainly does.. Not because of lack of capability but because of efficiency. China can more efficiently occupy India by propping up Pakistan as a counter balance than trying to waste its energies by directly engaging India..

And Pakistan is not singularly *dependent* on China. It is most definitely a relationship that has withstood the test of time for five decades and will continue to go from strength to strength as Pakistan and China share regional and international perceptions almost to a T. That said, Pakistan has excellent relations with countries as diverse as Turkey, Ukraine, South Africa, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Iran etc. etc. On that last one in particular, despite Indian maneuvering, why did Iran agree to eject India from the IPI and still continue building the pipeline? Not due to a stellar success of Indian diplomacy, I would guess.
Its a number vs volume game. You can list 10 countries that Pakistan engages diplomatically but compare the help/support/partnership received from all of them put together against the same from China and you will see my point.

btw, India backed out of IPI pipeline despite multiple overtures from Iran and even Pakistan..Reasons best known to GoI but the visible ones are the Indo US Nuke deal and India's reluctance to be dependent on Pakistan for energy needs

Iran?Pakistan?India gas pipeline - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pakistan offers pledges on IPI pipeline - upiasia.com


Afghanistan is another element of Pakistan's foreign policy that hasn't involved China much. We have navigated our relations with the west in a positive way, in my opinion. We don't always see eye to eye, but we have positioned ourselves effectively, to mutual benefit, and have participated - and continue to participate - in various alliances with the West over the past 60 years. Yes, we have those periods now and then where we call each other names - but the French and the Americans do that to each other all the time too - it doesn't change the fact that high level cooperation exists between Pakistan and all the major western players. In fact, the whole undercurrent of this thread is that India is giving in to US pressure in returning to the negotiating table with Pakistan.
Not really true. The existing state of relation with west is no longer a tiff between lovers if the public reaction in Pakistan is anything to go by.. But instead of trying to argue on how good or bad it is, we will do better to see the trend of that relation over last 30 years or so and you would agree that the relationship with US atleast is on a downward trend both trade and military exchange wise. Here I am discounting the WOT reimbursements as they are just that.. reimbursements..


Now, short of questioning our intent in these relationships - which is a pointless subjective discussion - I think they highlight your assertion regarding Pakistan being solely dependent on China to be false.

Some of the most significant projects going on in Pakistan today, such as the UAE/Pakistan Khalifa refinery ($1.5B project - will add 30% to Pakistan's refining capacity), the expansion of the Pak-Arab refinery, rail modernization and highway projects with Turkey etc. etc. and the list goes on, are with countries other than China. The ruling family of UAE has God-knows-how-many palatial residences in Pakistan, a country they have always considered a second home. How many do they have in India? Almost all the armed forces in the middle east, save Iraq and Egypt, have had Pakistani trainers and even officers directly commanding their troops. The Indonesians were the ones who offered to send a naval flotilla to help Pakistan in 1965 and our relations continue to be very strong with them. So, please, let's not make assertions that fly in the face of reality.

TL

Please understand that I am not trying to say that China is the only country Pakistan deals with. Its the level of dependence that is the variable.. Look at it this way.. Take out the relationship of Egypt or SA or Indonesia or even USA from Pakistan's side and assess the impact. Now do that with China and see what happens. Not that I am saying that this will happen now or later. But my point was and is that a such a large dependence on a single country never boads well for long term growth of any country..Thats why India was in a bad shape for a few years when USSR split. but at that time, India's old pseudo Non Aligned posture helped it to dig itself out of the hole..

It is a massive underestimation if you honestly believe that Pakistan's diplomacy has yielded excellent relations only with China.

Never said that and dont mean to either. Its not only China but majorly China. Have a look at this forum. When Indians talk about their economic growth, most of the Pakistanis counter it by comparing it with China instead of Pakistan's postive points. When a chinese member makes fun of Indian poverty, the Pakistani members join into the fun without realizing that the same poverty (even if a little better as most claim) and dismal state of people exist in their country as well.. Sounds so much like the earstwhile WARSAW where USSR was the king and all others were pseudo client states.. I am not callling Pakistan a client state here.. Its just that the unabashed awe and dependence on China is so visible as it was with US in 1960s.


Over and out for now.. will continue the discussion tomorrow if you want..
 
You mean the two flights PIA cancelled which they were losing money on anyway? The ones that took their sweet long time to be resumed even after both sides allowed overflight rights?

If you look at the map, you'll see that it's not much of a detour for PIA to fly over China for those two flights if it needs/wants to. They go via Bangkok.

145-200 flights x 45 minute detour = X

2 flights x 1 hr detour? = Y

I would think that X >> Y


Considering hte respective sizes of the 2 countries, who do you think needs to take a bigger detour..?? Dont assume all flights take off from Islamabad..

Also what does the x>>Y show.. That the loss to India was greater?? So was our absorbtion capacity..

Look at it this way.. Total annual loss to AI on closure of Pak space was Rs 50 crore = $12 million(mostly govt subsidized)
2003 revenue of the airline $1.5 billion

The crux of the matter is that AI was able to take the hit and still not discontinue any flights where as PIA did..There can be excuses about sectors already being non profitable etc but then AI also had such sectors in Europe and they were not discontinued..

This is one place where size does matter.. Talking about the army buildup on both sides in 2002 . Now the cost of that buildup for both countries was approx $1.4 billion. Now that was 2% of Pakistan's gdp that year and hence severly impacted its other programs in its budget. India being almost 10 times larger economically at that time was able to absorb that hit (0.2% of GDP) much more easily.

As they say that in a pi***ng contest the dude who has drunk more water wins.. (I changed to qoute a bit due to my fear of the moderators:azn:)

over and out
 
Nobody knows if there'd be a war between Pakistan and India or between China and India. If the war happens to involve both Pakistan and China it'd be like a party to screw the third. Lots of people look forward to it...
:pakistan::china:
 

Back
Top Bottom