Public sentiment is a blend of skepticism and cautious optimism, highlighting pride in India's progress while expressing concern about dependence on the US and the implications for relations with China. While some commenters appreciate the strategic collaboration, there is a strong desire for India to maintain its independence.

India

United States

Reddit trolls weren’t joking when they say they will bring their kampung people over

[deleted]

jabbity

Chindiapore in the making. Rename of Singapore.

Also, there is an unspoken strategic concern here. Upgrading ties with India also balances against too much PRC infiltration into the body politics as well.

pizzapiejaialai

There are two 1 billion+ population economies in the world. If we shut ourselves off from them, we are only committing economic suicide.

India's international position has been pretty clear and consistent no? Looking out for itself without rocking the boat too much.

The US should aboslotely work on having good relations with india, but expecting a drastic change in its stance won't happen overnight..

Herzyr

The author doesn't really have a source for what goal US foreign policy is in regards to India. 

Ally is a very fungible word. If your interests and actions align with what I want then are you not an ally regardless of how we might feel about one another?

&amp;#x200B;

I would argue the US is more interested in making India a reliable trading partner than they are in trying to somehow convince India to join a military alliance.

They want India to be a competitor to China economically in order to weaken China's global economic power. Adding more strong trading partners to the region helps them already.

&amp;#x200B;

The idea that the US is looking for a mutual defense partnership with a nation on the other side of the world is rather silly on its face.

&amp;#x200B;

I'm sure Washington would love to have India as puppet, in the same way that any nation loves to puppeteer another, but all they NEED is for India to be a check on China's influence, which it will do out of its own self-interest. They don't need to foster any kind of attitude there.

Maladal

Clickbait title obscures the honestly sensible advice that India is never going to get as close to the US as its other long time allies, so it has to be realistic about what it can get from India. India wants partnership but not a full throated alliance against everything Chinese.

shivj80

I can see Europeans writing this about the United States in the 1930s. India is doing exactly what the US did until WW2:Focusing on its own development. Our own early leaders said things about alliances that are identical to what Nehru said about them.

If we're worried that an autocracy will dominate all of Asia, then strengthening that region's largest democracy, and helping Modi with his "build in India for the world" plan, then in a few years, India will have a direct economic interest in helping protect it's trade partners in Asia.

And *then* India will be far more interested in checking China.

That's why so much of this is economic. If we want India to compete with us as a security exporter, which we would like to do due to the distance between us and Asia and the costs involved in being the primary security exporter to Asia, then we need to help India grow into a position where it is in India's interests to start providing those security services.

OllieGarkey

India and America should be partners not allies its almost impossible for India to Accept orders from Washington they took freedom from the British not to again be mentally conlonoized by west, they wanna be independent and unlike China we respect everyone and want good Relations. Partnership with US will keep growing business is booming India soon might start buying American and is buying French made weapons. 
And as far as China is considered India sino direct hot war is kind of impossible fighting in large numbers in Himalayan borders wont work out well for both sides, if US is successful in convincing India that they can defeat China in a war I'm not sure India would want to get in or start a new front. 
I think both DC and Delhi in diplomatic community know this about each other it's just people who don't understand it

&gt; India's own unwillingness to return the favour outside of issues that directly impact it, stems from its refusal to be a junior partnership to a greater power

Pretty sure India being competent enough to distract China and continuously compete for Asian hegemony (as far as the US elite concern are concerned)  is the return of the so called favour? Besides who doesn't loathes being a junior partner

Full_Entrepreneur_72

Great article and great discussion. I will forgive the clickbaity title even. I have a few responses, but this is one of the most level-headed assessments of Indian-USA strategy I've seen recently.

The author draws a distinction between tactical support and logistical integration. This is an excellent frame of reference, but maybe misses some key goals. First, India's border skirmishes with China are basically all at the tactical level now. Indian forces getting limited intel, training in the rockies (?), and better cold weather gear from USA is a thing that immediately goes to good use. This is obviously transactional and even mercantile in nature, but still is building intangibles like Indian trust / knowledge of American capabilities (not American values necessarily). Maybe it turns out to be unimportant, but at least you can test out theory on real world problems.

This type of collaboration happens over (not to be disrespectful for the soldiers dying there) a relatively unimportant matter. The border shifting a few miles in any direction there doesn't matter so long as each nation as a good enough buffer zone. China won't be as triggered by this as it would for the USA selling weapons to Taiwan, or setting up new bases closer to the south china seas. It will make China more cautious on its Himalayan frontier without much cost. If the Baseball Bat Wars there heat up, India now has a conduit to advanced tech.

The author has a really important point that left unsaid. "USA needs to treat India with respect and careful consideration." India has its own security incentives, geopolitical context and homeland defense to worry about. They will not necessarily ally with the West against China. Their viewpoint must be understood, and expectations kept reasonably low while still striving for cooperation on key areas, the same as any other great power. It can't get away with nonsense like *not having an ambassador to India* for more than two years, for example.

India has a lot to offer but doesn’t actually want to offer it. The US should understand this is where they want to be and meet them there. India won’t be an ally and they don’t want mutual defense treaties. So keep all cooperation very limited and treat them the same way they treat us. Keep it transactional, do some trade and mostly leave them alone otherwise.

&gt; Yet New Delhi sees things differently. It does not harbor any innate allegiance toward preserving the liberal international order and retains an enduring aversion toward participating in mutual defense. It seeks to acquire advanced technologies from the United States to bolster its own economic and military capabilities and thus facilitate its rise as a great power capable of balancing China independently, but it does not presume that American assistance imposes any further obligations on itself. 

I mean.. yeah? I think most people in the US elite understands this. India has its own ambitions but those dovetail nicely with US intentions to contain China.

FWIW, I think the effort to build up India is partly eased by the fact that many in the West privately do not believe that India can ever become the superpower many folks in New Delhi fantasize publicly about. Which is why India never wanting to be a liberal democracy like the US isn't a major issue because they will never be a real threat like China is now.

India will never be a US ally. Ever. Full stop. 

The US shouldn't want them to be. Friendly as possible at a distance seems the best for both parties.

bkiantx

Finally some good Western idea about their relationship with India. They are absolutely right, India and the West are very much never going to be allies. The statement "Being an enemy of America is dangerous but being an ally is fatal" wether or not you agree with it has basically embedded itself in the Indian strategic culture. 

The West should not pursue India as an ally, our interests intersect at China and some other minor spots but certainly not enough to be allies. 

You may be wondering but why would an Indian like me be staunchly against the West wooing India as an ally ? Well, because in the long run its more healthy for public relations.

When India first bought oil from Russia it was not seen as a simple purchase but a Betrayal. There was significant delusion between how India saw its Geo-political allignment and how the West saw India's Geo-political allignment, which caused outrage in the West over this betrayal.

Yet so many other countries such as Indonesia,Vietnam and Many more countries bought a and purchased oil from Russia yet there was no such feelings towards them even though they were soft alligning with America against China. This was because to the public they were never in some alliance with America, they just shared strategic interests.

In the end, Its best for public relations of the West doesn't see India as an ally but as a friend of coincidence who just so don't happen to like China.

South-Midnight-750

I don't think India needs particular motivation from the US in order to be against China. They've had their own reasons for a long time and that's not going away. Better to be on their good side as they continue to grow, and to slowly supplant their reliance on Russia for their defense materiel.

UNisopod

Was the prequel to this article "America's bad bet on Pakistan"?

SensitiveSamurai

US thinks India is another France where its leaders preach about multipolarity but don't actually mean it. US needs to realize that when India preaches about multipolarity, they actually mean it. It's not a De Gaulle or Macron like soundbite.

Still_There3603

India has historically not participated in military alliances. And the way these things work, America will be in the driver's seat and will use it to poke Russia and China. Now from India's POV poking China is okay, but India cannot be seen to smite Russia. Russia is India's reliable UNSC veto and needs to counterbalance to Russia going fully into China's orbit. 

US should not even have such expectations from India. America's attempts to "spread freedom dust everywhere" and Indian weariness to it is a different problem altogether

furiousmouth

Well put. This is kind of stating and rehashing the obvious. India needs to look out for its own interests, just as the US looks out for its own.

houstonrice

I think India and America has a lot to offer to each other. India doesn’t follow any expansionist policy nor does it has any policy or plan which may threaten USA’s interest. Even in long term I don’t see any potential reason of conflict both countries could have. Only historical reason both countries have been on odds was because of Pakistan, which issue doesn’t exist in modern times. So rather than becoming an ally a mutually beneficial relationship is better. Even in future decades down the line I could see this partnership becoming something where both countries could partner to develop new technology and improve global security. You don’t have to be ally’s when you can be partners.

blah_bleh-bleh

SS: The US' increased co-operation with India under the assumption that partnership will cuase India to join its crusade against China is misplaced.


Despite increased co-operation in defense, American involvement in India's defense industry has limits and is unlikely to grow significantly. 

India's own unwillingness to return the favour outside of issues that directly impact it, stems from its refusal to be a junior partnership to a greater power and its relative weakness to Beijing make it adversial to direct conflict with Beijing outside of a direct conflict.


While America should continue its partnership with India, Biden's attempts to turn India into an ally are mistaken, and the relationship will remain assymetrical for the foreseeable future.

Nomustang

“Erosion of democracy”???? India is probably more democratic than the US. West just wants to slander ruling party because they are scared of them

solarblade60

Is US ready to go to war with Pakistan for us? No.

India in a way already helps US + allies in SCS by keeping China occupied at its western front. China would not be able to commit as much resources as it would've wanted because it has to keep it's western borders tight. So it's not nothing. Just don't expect us to be another Ukraine.

And we all know that US will not get involved militarily if a proper conflict breaks out at Ind-China border. Although chances of it happening is very slim.

7sfx

Yes_cummander

US policy toward China is conspiracy theory laden and just crazy. I don't blame India or anyone else (Macron) for wanting nothing to do with it.

Ok-Button-1819

"Even as this partnership has grown by leaps and bounds, there remains an unbridgeable gap between the two countries, given India’s consistent desire to avoid\\ becoming the junior partner—or even a confederate—of any great power." Summary - India is the largest nation state in the world 1.45 bn people going to 1.7 bn people by 2060- it will dwarf both China and the US in some decades in terms of population. You bet your bollocks it doesn't want to be a junior partner anywhere. It's not. It's a civilizational state 4000 years old since the Indus Valley. It will never be a flunky to ANY other country.

It is all about the rupees, right now.

They will take everything they can get., as far as you let them.

If you look at things through that lens, its actually pretty predictable what India will do in any given situation.

I think there's a tacit implication that the U.S. wants India to be the junior partner (perhaps the main, but still junior partner among an alliance) against China... much the way the U.K. was the junior partner (but MAIN partner among an alliance) against the Soviet Union in the 1950's.  To be clear, that's continued with Russia, and the U.K. faded as a primary partner as NATO grew and the U.K.'s military strength faded post-WWII.  It's also an oversimplification of the situation, clearly there is no existing formal Pacific alliance, although that's probably on the American wish-list...

Regardless, the American position is not analogous to being anti-Soviet as it was during the Cold War.  I don't think the U.S. wants to lead NATO any moreso than it wants to lead a Pacific treaty organization.  What the U.S. wants is to create a regional military and economic competition between Russia and EU/NATO, and China and India/AUS/Philippines/Vietnam/etc.  And then stay the hell out, stepping on the scale only when it suits American interests (with a clear favorite on both sides, but perhaps not always).  America doesn't want to see China destroyed the way it feared the Soviets... a peaceful, contained, and restrained China is NOT something America fears.  China as it was 20 years ago... aside from a bit of economic neutering, that's something America is happy to live with I believe.

Americans are increasingly isolationist... tired of leading an ungrateful world that doesn't agree with their definition of rule of law, sovereignty, and free trade (insofar as it benefits the U.S.).  So let's set up two power competitions, in Europe and the Pacific, and benefit from being somewhat outside of both.  We just need China to drop the illusion that it's going to be a competition directly with the U.S. as if they can be a true rival... and Europe needs to arise from their security dependence on the U.S. (which they're in the process of doing, while the threat of Russia also fades before our eyes).

I think India is taking a gamble, for now, being independent of this competition lets them play all sides the way the U.S. would probably like to.  That works great right until the moment it doesn't.  Will China and Pakistan stay restrained forever?

disco_biscuit

Their relationship has come a long way  though, India and USA are almost allies now, which would be shocking to anyone in 1971 when USA sent it’s nuclear seventh fleet to threaten India when it finally  stopped the Hindu and Bengali Muslim genocide in east Pakistan, now Bangladesh. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_genocide

humtum6767

It's not a bad bet, it's not a bargain that the United States is expecting.  Just because it's India does not mean that it can be had for cheap.

hansulu3

The article is poorly written and the author is not well informed.
Quad is something that did not vote up recently. Quad was formed in the 2007 and was disbanded in 2008. It may have been re activated in the recent times but it has existed for some time now. He should have mentioned this clearly. More over his perspective of indo-american relations during the cold War is stunted.

inquisitive_doc

Well, ultimately the US dream is to use India like they are using Ukraine to weaken and counter China at a very low cost compared to what it would cost then if they do it directly. Based on the cheer destruction we witness in the ongoing Russo-Ukraine war, that will be suicidal for India with an uncertain outcome.  So, the west should not really be surprised of the Indian position. 

I believe, pushing India to a neutral position would already be a win rather than seeing them joining the Chinese clan like Russia...

Sadly, what I see in media recently shows a growing impatience of the west vis à vis the Indians which might lead to a really bad outcome in the not so far future as the chances of having another war nut in the Whitehouse grows...

dEnissay

Sadly we will not become vessel states like NATO to America. 

We have our own mind and will make decisions which benifits us more. It's like China is trying to attack us. And the last time China attacked us in 1962 America denied to help us. Problem between America and China is their problem not ours

QuittingP_rn

From what I understood I think so. Because Azerbaijan and turkey support Pakistan on the Kashmir issue. And Armenia is also in need of weapons which India has a lot of. I hope it turns into a long and prosperous partnership.

Ill-Strategy-8901

BzhizhkMard

I read the article and it was interesting, although I would put in doubt some of the points brought up. For one, one of the major points the author brings towards India being 'colder' with Armenia is that they didn't show much of an outward reaction to the Artsakh war in September in contrast to their responses in 2020. 
Now, I don't know much about how they responded back then, but them not issuing any statements of this nature isn't altogether too strange I'd say.

India's not a very present player in foreign politics, and only very recently have they begun to unfurl their wings across the continent. Add the fact that, to be frank, they wouldn't really care about Artsakh as a whole, just means to me that this is a non-issue overall.

The biggest point of contention that I can see there being the case is India's concern about Syunik and Azerbaijan's response to it and them potentially invading it. For their INTSC project they *have* expressed more interest in getting the shipments done and undertaken through Armenia, especially with the recent agreements between AM-IR with access to their ports, but I'm not too sure if we'll be the only route up north to Russia that way, or if there'll be two routes like that going both through us and Azerbaijan up to Russia. They do want to form one with us to go through Georgia and into Europe, however, and the recent conflict within Israel put a lot of countries off from the G20 summit trade route discussion they had this year, so that's a point in our favour.

If we keep up our efforts up at the rate we've been with India over the next few years, we'll hopefully manage to score one route through Iran and into us, then Georgia, and into Europe, and if we get really lucky we'll hopefully have another through us and into Russia as well. By that point we could definitely hold a special relationship with India as well, just like Greece has with them at this point.

Hope Pashinyan doesn't do something embarrassing like conceding this route to Azerbaijan instead, Jesus Christ...

Nemo_of_the_People

I'm from India. Good luck Armenia, we love you guys fighting against islamists who want you annihilated. We understand what it means to have neighbours that will destroy you at any given chance. And we admire your resilience against genocide. We as Indians have suffered throughout history. 

We also have one of the oldest Christian communities in the world just like you guys, so that also adds to the solidarity, even though most people in India are Hindu like myself.

Electronic_Drawing80

I think Armenia is a beneficiary of a strategic partnership between France and India.

India manufactures a lot of soviet-style weapon systems, ammunition, as well as cheap and solid alternatives to a lot of those weapons. India is simply a natural alternative to importing weapons from Russia, who has proven to be a hostile state.

There is something to be speculated regarding why India was so quick to start arming Armenia, and I think this has to do with efforts by France to find reliable arms supply for Armenia, since Western Europe has limited production capacity.

GuthlacDoomer

I think maybe armenia can docus on its relationship with india france and israel. 

India france are already very close partners, greece and india have already started co-operating maybe soon it would be turned into close cooperation. 
Maybe it can be a counter to turkey azerbaijan, I am not considering pakistan as its pretty much useless except for supplying terrorists or man for higher.
Pakistan would be countered by india as they are already our neighbours .
It would also depend on the chess played by armenia with russia, as russia wouldn’t appreciate france and Armenia’s growing relationship.

ShadowAtomix

No they are not, largely because Armenia is simply too small and unimportant from India's point of view. Let's be realistic here: small countries EVERYWHERE struggle with this issue. Look at the Baltics - they are similar in size as Armenia and they are permanently worried that Russia will invade them. And for good reason: if Putin invades Ukraine, he considers smaller countries to be easier victims than Ukraine. The guy acts like Hitler in 1938.

Russia and India recently had another deal agreement in regards to supply of weapons. There is also a steady stream of cheap oil/gas from Russia going into India. So, let's be realistic: Armenia as a small country needs to analyse the larger picture. India will ALWAYS prioritize e. g. Russia simply because Russia has more resources than Armenia has.

Armenia's only real chance here is to make the country as ideal as possible in regards to its economy. Everything else will not work. All "strategic" partners may abandon Armenia for outside factors. Armenia has to rely on self-resilience. That has been pointed out again and again and again, mind you.

I also think Armenia should look at production of chips and drones within Armenia. Perhaps with state funding initially (but to ensure that this becomes viable without state-supplied funds too).

shevy-java

People don't realize we haven't moved away from Russia at all. The ones supplying us weapons now are Putin's allies, Modi of India is Putins friend. Apart from them it's France, but France hasn't offered us anything significant.

hayvaynar

Time for the weekly India-Armenia love post ig

Frequent-Fig-9515

People in r/azerbaij tend to believe that its actually they who are entering strategic partnerships with India. Pretty crazy huh

Namaskara u/Admirable-Letter-187, thank you for your submission. Please ensure it follows the subreddit rules and contributes to meaningful discussions.

Please consider crossposting, sharing, and inviting others to help grow this community.

Let's get organised to fight propaganda, Join RWC: https://discord.gg/6VAh8kYchc

Yato Dharmastato Jayaḥ


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BJPSupremacy) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

India is not alone to withstand the bankrupt blackmailing dwarf...

Rough-Quiet-1954

India and the US are enhancing defense collaboration through a 2+2 dialogue, focusing on co-production and operational coordination amidst geopolitical tensions.

India-US Defense and Strategic Partnership

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want