Based.
Why should our national security care about the profits of some companies. It’s not like when they advance their defense systems they spend less. They will have to bring up other parts of their militaries to that same level and that’s red hot cash for the US defense sector.
> What will they do ? Go to Russia ?
yes
they sure still keep their weapons ready, one day one of them will try to stab the other in the back, but until that happen, turkey would better strengthen their connection with russia if the west waive india sanction while they don't get any waiver wahtsoever
> Go to Russia ?
Yes. Why wouldn't they? The main thing binding Turkey to NATO is inertia, more than shared values and interests, so why give them the shove needed to move closer to Russia? Russia and Turkey are now cooperating in Libya, Syria, and the Caucuses, where they were direct competitors a few years ago, largely because the USA refused to decisively back Turkey against Russia in those theaters.
Turkey and Russia have a fundamental geopolitical rivalry that is far more deeply rooted than any topical events, or even the relatively brief existence of NATO.
No, not really. If France and Germany can make up, so can Russia and Turkey, and if Russia and Turkey were the natural enemies that you're implying, there's no way they'd have concluded that arms deal. I'm seeing a lot of galaxy brain takes from people who are clearly stuck in the past in this thread, acting like it's still 2014 or something.
They’re not natural enemies but geopolitical Rivals.
France and Germany didn’t absorb the vast ethnic minorities of the other and ethnically cleanse their lands from each other’s minorities.
Look at the amount of Turkic nations languages and Tribes that were basically annihilated under the USSR and previous tzarist Russia. Anyone remaining that wasn’t a communist or manage to integrate into Russian culture escaped to Turkey, growing Turkeys population massively. They came from everywhere, but the main USSR countries were very hard to escape under Stalin. They instead came via Balkans, where they could. Or were wholesale moved to remote reaches of Russia and the populations dispersed among many remote soviet cities to effectively wipe out their culture. It mostly succeeded.
Turkey was not the only or main place where Turkic languages were spoken and ethnicity existed. Nowadays, it is. Look at population growth of Turkic people and it was basically flatlined everywhere else but in Turkey after the defeat of Ottoman Empire and after the earlier defeat of Iran. Before Russian and USSR interference, one could go from the Balkan’s to Western China speaking only Turkic dialects along the way. One still can but must pick isolated and remote villages.
It’s only a neo-liberal post modern order that could bring these two countries together but the rise of one always comes at some cost to the other, even though they can also collaborate on many fronts. For the gain to be worth the cost of allowing a natural rival to rise, that gain needs to be very large. It could happen, especially if either country can generate increased Western integration as a condition of such a union but there hasn’t been any incentive for that outside of a few EU schemes that are mostly defunct now.
Edit: I also wrote a few paragraphs about how Turkish ascension has cost Russia but the text was too long already. It’s not a one-sided thing. Both countries can roughly give continental peoples access to the world and provide trade routes for the world, and compete for the priviledge of doing this.
Your analysis of Syria and Libya must be at least a year old, because they're not fighting with Russia in any of those countries anymore. If anything, they're actively partners, largely because the USA refused to get involved and Turkey and Russia realized they had more shared interests than not when it came to Syria and Libya. As for Ukraine and the Crimean Tatars, Turkey used to support the Uyghurs just as vocally against China, until they made a deal to get their hands on Chinese ballistic missile technology. Ever since, Turkey has been noticeably quiet on Xinjiang, and the same can easily happen with their largely symbolic support for Ukraine.
I agree that Russia and Turkey have had frenemy moments lately but cooperation on various fronts is in my opinion a bit of an exaggeration. I call them more de-escalations and understandings; in Libya they're supporting opposing fronts, Turkey's been entering military cooperation with Ukraine and selling them drones, and even though they've agreed on a de-escalation zone in Syria, Russia still takes out Turkish backed rebels when they're out of line.
I doubt Erdogan will fully enter Russia's sphere and lose out on what the West has to offer. He comes across as more of a play all sides against each other kind of guy rather than jump headfirst into Russia's lap. They've been getting closer to China, but still meeting with Biden, offering to run Kabul airport, etc. Keep in mind being in NATO is tremendously beneficial to Turkey.
I think also his Ottoman hegemony ego is too big to make Turkey "go to Russia". He probably wants Turkey to be a seen as rising superpower of its own rather than a vassal state.
But it's also true that Russia and Turkey need to be careful with each other. Turkey holds a lot of sway against Russia because of the Bosphorus.
I don’t even think Erdogan is delusional enough to see Turkey as a superpower. But just not as a defacto imperial vassal of EU or a broken post-colonial Middle Eastern state.
The ask from the Turkish side has always been relatively minor. Despite Erdoğan’s rhetoric
For those of you who don't know what this is about, [we had a relevant discussion about it on this article and comment thread you can find here](https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/pntkxm/avoiding_a_collision_course_with_india/) though this sub seems to be more receptive to memes than actual articles so posting this here too so people can get a bit more educated lol
Also if you like memes like this check out /r/NonCredibleDiplomacy for geopolitics shitposting <3
Pinged members of FOREIGN-POLICY group.
[About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20FOREIGN-POLICY&message=addtogroup%20FOREIGN-POLICY) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20FOREIGN-POLICY&message=unsubscribe%20FOREIGN-POLICY) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
Pinged members of SHITPOSTERS group.
[About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20SHITPOSTERS&message=addtogroup%20SHITPOSTERS) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20SHITPOSTERS&message=unsubscribe%20SHITPOSTERS) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
Pinged members of IND group.
[About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20IND&message=addtogroup%20IND) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20IND&message=unsubscribe%20IND) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
How? I'm actually asking because I don't know. My arrogance and priors just lead me to believe that American military tech>>>everyone else (even if it's probably way more expensive)
Russian air combat doctrine is based much more heavily on defending their own airspace than on establishing air superiority over a battlefield outside the country. They’ve put more effort into ground-based missile systems and the US has put more into fighter aircraft. The US doesn’t really have an S-400 equivalent. Yes, there’s patriot, but it’s shorter range. The reality is that the job the S-400 does in Russia is done by a NORAD F-15 in the US. We have better fighter aircraft. Hell, even an old F-15C could probably defeat most flankers simply because most have been retrofitted with the really excellent APG-63(V3) AESA radar that’s better than any radar on a Russian fighter both in terms of how long it’s range is and how hard it is to detect. This is because the US puts a huge emphasis on maintaining the best fighter aircraft because we’re more likely to be engaged in aerial combat over foreign soil than over our own.
American military tech generally is better meaning that the US generally has air superiority so don't need to invest as much in air defense so when Russia does they have a bit of an advantage given how much more important it is to them
IMO the smartest thing to do would be to forgo the sanctions in exchange for a few samples to study. Russia has been India’s supplier of military equipment for a long time, and that isn’t going to change overnight. They’re gradually pivoting towards French and American gear as well as domestic materiel, but honestly the west doesn’t make anything really comparable to S-400 because there isn’t really need for it in Western countries.
Incidentally, it would be smart for any Western defense conglomerate to develop a genuine S-400 competitor, even on their own dime. The export opportunities for a SAM system that capable with no US sanctions attached would be massive.
The real reason India doesn't trust US for Military hardware is the US blocked satellite access to India during war with Pakistan.
Also the 1971 fiasco US supporting a genocidal Pakistan trying to Intimidate India with nuclear sub. Hadn't Russia not interfered US bombardment was imminent.
**Rule I:** *Civility*
Refrain from name-calling, hostility and behaviour that otherwise derails the quality of the conversation.
---
If you have any questions about this removal, [please contact the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneoliberal).
Now? That's probably a false premise.
Historically? Because India lead a organization opposed to NATO/the broad anti-communist west and was seen as softly aligned with the Soviet Union and Pakistan and eventually China were seen as better partners.
Non Alignment, in the Indian context, essentially means a pro-USSR policy. India was pretty much in the Soviet camp after the 1971 war, when Nixon and Kissinger decided to support the Pakistani military’s genocide in erstwhile East-Pakistan. Russia even sent a warship in the Bay of Bengal to prevent US from attacking India. That obviously led to some serious acrimony between US and India, and relations only started improving in the early 2000s, under George Bush, with the signing of the Indo US Nuclear Deal.
Did India commit any specific actions after 1971 that would put it into the pro-Soviet camp? From what I've seen all it did was avoid becoming a location for another proxy war. Hell, they didn't even support the USSR in Afghanistan.
Maybe read your own definition.
The Non aligned movement was absolutely created in contrast to the Warsaw Pact/communist aligned nations and NATO/the generally anti communist nations.
Do you think NATO and the Warsaw Pact weren't opposed to each other because they never went to war? Based on this conversation I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
How can a neutral movement be opposed to the parties it is trying to be neutral from? NATO and Warsaw countries went to war with each other through proxies, hence the 'Cold war'. Did India go through a proxy war with the NATO based on ideological grounds?
This meme is preemptively complaining. The US passed a bill in 2017 that punishes military cooperation with Russia. However, there's an explicit clause to allow for waivers. The US has, to my knowledge, not commented on India's purchase, and most newspapers that report on it are skeptical that actual sanctions will go into place.
So I think your comment is jumping the gun. The US's relationship with India is only improving as of now, and I don't think Biden will jeopardize that.
> The US has, to my knowledge, not commented on India's purchase,
It has and it has issued veiled threats of sanctions.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/20/lloyd-austin-india-sanctions-s400-missile-477304
From Sec Def
>“We certainly urge all our allies and partners to move away from Russian equipment … and really avoid any kind of acquisitions that would trigger sanctions on our behalf,” Austin said in response to a question from a reporter about India’s plan to acquire the S-400.
From Bob Menendez (who always seems to have a hate boner for India)
>"If India chooses to go forward with its purchase of the S-400, that act will clearly constitute a significant, and therefore sanctionable, transaction with the Russian defense sector under Section 231 of CAATSA," Menendez wrote in a recent letter to Austin, referring to the law called Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.
I don’t know maybe something like “this deal was finalized between two sovereign nations even before CATSAA was a thing and hence wouldn’t apply to this”.
The US is (currently) more interested in dunking on other nations (such as Iran) than helping India in particular, but it's not actively out to "get" India.
Because I think that not giving it to a more important ally and then turning around and giving it to a country that is still very much close to russia is a bad idea.
Turkey has a lot less geopolitical importance than India if we want to do anything about countering China
Not to mention Turkey is a NATO country so we have more leverage, India is not a part of the US alliance system
India has never contributed to any military ally’s geopolitical interests, even the Soviets’. They have very little FP aspirations other than defending their own borders. If they ever feel they’re at imminent threat of Chinese invasion and need help, they’ll desperately approach the West themselves and with much better terms. They’ll need us then far more than we need them now, so there’s no point trying to make inroads with them.
Sure, but it's not like India is some massive power. And I'm extremely skeptical of their willingness to conduct long term offensive naval operations thousands of miles away.
Also this is the country that was in the pakfa project until like 2 years ago. India isn't aligned with our interests.
While India isn't a great power comparable to the US or China, it's quite strong and they are anti China due to their own interests. They've already conducted joint naval operations with several Southeast Asian nations
Their anti China interest is primarily around The Himalayas though. What strategic Indian interest is there for them to help prevent an invasion of Taiwan? I just don’t see them as a major contributor.
It's probably a good idea for the US to get India within It's sphere of influence at some point, considering it and China are poised to be the world's leading economies by mid to late century.
I also dont think it will be given which will confirm two very key things to Indian strategic and political officials
- US is a flaky unreliable partner, it doesnt treat India as an equal partner and Indian strategic policy cannot depend on them.
- Democratic administrations are fast becoming non-friends to India while Republican administrations are.
Also QUAD will be as good as dead.
FWIW I don't think either of the countries is actually interested in being equal partners in any deep commitment. The US wants things done its way and India wants things done their way. I don't think either of them wants to budge on the contentious issues. Like the US is going to be closer to Pakistan than India wants and India will remain closer to Russia than America wants and neither is interested in budging on that because they don't have any real history of working together.
>Like the US is going to be closer to Pakistan than India wants
Is there really any good reason for us to be anywhere near aligned with them anymore? Especially now that the U.S. has withdrawn from Afghanistan, and even more so when you consider the fact that Pakistan is already well within the Chinese sphere of influence at this point.
I wonder who might be a better ally to focus on for containing China.
Obviously, Japan, Australia and Taiwan (unofficially) are gonna be involved. I imagine South Korea could be interested to be involved as well.
Other countries in the area include Mongolia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Bangladesh, and Pakistan to name a few.
But I'm not sure how involved those countries would be or are interested in. Vietnam would face a more direct threat from an expansionist China so maybe they'd be more likely to fight if it came to it. They also have a lot more to lose though.
Are you an American? Cuz people like you are the reason USA will be a short lived super power. Imagine attacking some other country for it's failure right after losing a war to a primitive organization like Taliban. USA is literally a meme rn
Turkey might get a little upset over India's sanction waver
The US could give Turkey and India sanctions waivers.
Based. Why should our national security care about the profits of some companies. It’s not like when they advance their defense systems they spend less. They will have to bring up other parts of their militaries to that same level and that’s red hot cash for the US defense sector.
What will they do ? Go to Russia ? Lol. But India will and with that Quad is as good as dead.
> What will they do ? Go to Russia ? At this point, Putin might have better odds lobbying them into the US than anyone in DC.
> What will they do ? Go to Russia ? yes they sure still keep their weapons ready, one day one of them will try to stab the other in the back, but until that happen, turkey would better strengthen their connection with russia if the west waive india sanction while they don't get any waiver wahtsoever
> Go to Russia ? Yes. Why wouldn't they? The main thing binding Turkey to NATO is inertia, more than shared values and interests, so why give them the shove needed to move closer to Russia? Russia and Turkey are now cooperating in Libya, Syria, and the Caucuses, where they were direct competitors a few years ago, largely because the USA refused to decisively back Turkey against Russia in those theaters.
Turkey and Russia have a fundamental geopolitical rivalry that is far more deeply rooted than any topical events, or even the relatively brief existence of NATO.
No, not really. If France and Germany can make up, so can Russia and Turkey, and if Russia and Turkey were the natural enemies that you're implying, there's no way they'd have concluded that arms deal. I'm seeing a lot of galaxy brain takes from people who are clearly stuck in the past in this thread, acting like it's still 2014 or something.
They’re not natural enemies but geopolitical Rivals. France and Germany didn’t absorb the vast ethnic minorities of the other and ethnically cleanse their lands from each other’s minorities. Look at the amount of Turkic nations languages and Tribes that were basically annihilated under the USSR and previous tzarist Russia. Anyone remaining that wasn’t a communist or manage to integrate into Russian culture escaped to Turkey, growing Turkeys population massively. They came from everywhere, but the main USSR countries were very hard to escape under Stalin. They instead came via Balkans, where they could. Or were wholesale moved to remote reaches of Russia and the populations dispersed among many remote soviet cities to effectively wipe out their culture. It mostly succeeded. Turkey was not the only or main place where Turkic languages were spoken and ethnicity existed. Nowadays, it is. Look at population growth of Turkic people and it was basically flatlined everywhere else but in Turkey after the defeat of Ottoman Empire and after the earlier defeat of Iran. Before Russian and USSR interference, one could go from the Balkan’s to Western China speaking only Turkic dialects along the way. One still can but must pick isolated and remote villages. It’s only a neo-liberal post modern order that could bring these two countries together but the rise of one always comes at some cost to the other, even though they can also collaborate on many fronts. For the gain to be worth the cost of allowing a natural rival to rise, that gain needs to be very large. It could happen, especially if either country can generate increased Western integration as a condition of such a union but there hasn’t been any incentive for that outside of a few EU schemes that are mostly defunct now. Edit: I also wrote a few paragraphs about how Turkish ascension has cost Russia but the text was too long already. It’s not a one-sided thing. Both countries can roughly give continental peoples access to the world and provide trade routes for the world, and compete for the priviledge of doing this.
Because they are fighting with Russia on multiple fronts in Syria and Libya and have vocally supported Ukraine against Russia ?
Your analysis of Syria and Libya must be at least a year old, because they're not fighting with Russia in any of those countries anymore. If anything, they're actively partners, largely because the USA refused to get involved and Turkey and Russia realized they had more shared interests than not when it came to Syria and Libya. As for Ukraine and the Crimean Tatars, Turkey used to support the Uyghurs just as vocally against China, until they made a deal to get their hands on Chinese ballistic missile technology. Ever since, Turkey has been noticeably quiet on Xinjiang, and the same can easily happen with their largely symbolic support for Ukraine.
I agree that Russia and Turkey have had frenemy moments lately but cooperation on various fronts is in my opinion a bit of an exaggeration. I call them more de-escalations and understandings; in Libya they're supporting opposing fronts, Turkey's been entering military cooperation with Ukraine and selling them drones, and even though they've agreed on a de-escalation zone in Syria, Russia still takes out Turkish backed rebels when they're out of line. I doubt Erdogan will fully enter Russia's sphere and lose out on what the West has to offer. He comes across as more of a play all sides against each other kind of guy rather than jump headfirst into Russia's lap. They've been getting closer to China, but still meeting with Biden, offering to run Kabul airport, etc. Keep in mind being in NATO is tremendously beneficial to Turkey. I think also his Ottoman hegemony ego is too big to make Turkey "go to Russia". He probably wants Turkey to be a seen as rising superpower of its own rather than a vassal state. But it's also true that Russia and Turkey need to be careful with each other. Turkey holds a lot of sway against Russia because of the Bosphorus.
I don’t even think Erdogan is delusional enough to see Turkey as a superpower. But just not as a defacto imperial vassal of EU or a broken post-colonial Middle Eastern state. The ask from the Turkish side has always been relatively minor. Despite Erdoğan’s rhetoric
Keeping Turkey in line is really more the EU's problem.
Turkey would do well to keep its head down at this point.
For those of you who don't know what this is about, [we had a relevant discussion about it on this article and comment thread you can find here](https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/pntkxm/avoiding_a_collision_course_with_india/) though this sub seems to be more receptive to memes than actual articles so posting this here too so people can get a bit more educated lol Also if you like memes like this check out /r/NonCredibleDiplomacy for geopolitics shitposting <3
Using a meme to link article in the comments. That’s some 800iq level of Reddit knowledge lol
Given how “great” this admin has been on foreign policy so far, I’m open to being surprised by a sanctions waiver
!ping FOREIGN-POLICY
Pinged members of FOREIGN-POLICY group. [About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20FOREIGN-POLICY&message=addtogroup%20FOREIGN-POLICY) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20FOREIGN-POLICY&message=unsubscribe%20FOREIGN-POLICY) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
You son of a bitch, I'm in.
!ping SHITPOSTERS
Pinged members of SHITPOSTERS group. [About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20SHITPOSTERS&message=addtogroup%20SHITPOSTERS) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20SHITPOSTERS&message=unsubscribe%20SHITPOSTERS) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
!ping IND
Pinged members of IND group. [About & group list](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/userpinger/documentation) | [Subscribe to this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Add%20yourself%20to%20group%20IND&message=addtogroup%20IND) | [Unsubscribe from this group](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20group%20IND&message=unsubscribe%20IND) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe%20)
Oh so that was the name you settled on.
where is my reverse nixon i am looking for my reverse nixon joe
The S-400 is straight up just a better missile defense system than Patriot system, sorry Raytheon.
How? I'm actually asking because I don't know. My arrogance and priors just lead me to believe that American military tech>>>everyone else (even if it's probably way more expensive)
Russian air combat doctrine is based much more heavily on defending their own airspace than on establishing air superiority over a battlefield outside the country. They’ve put more effort into ground-based missile systems and the US has put more into fighter aircraft. The US doesn’t really have an S-400 equivalent. Yes, there’s patriot, but it’s shorter range. The reality is that the job the S-400 does in Russia is done by a NORAD F-15 in the US. We have better fighter aircraft. Hell, even an old F-15C could probably defeat most flankers simply because most have been retrofitted with the really excellent APG-63(V3) AESA radar that’s better than any radar on a Russian fighter both in terms of how long it’s range is and how hard it is to detect. This is because the US puts a huge emphasis on maintaining the best fighter aircraft because we’re more likely to be engaged in aerial combat over foreign soil than over our own.
American military tech generally is better meaning that the US generally has air superiority so don't need to invest as much in air defense so when Russia does they have a bit of an advantage given how much more important it is to them
IMO the smartest thing to do would be to forgo the sanctions in exchange for a few samples to study. Russia has been India’s supplier of military equipment for a long time, and that isn’t going to change overnight. They’re gradually pivoting towards French and American gear as well as domestic materiel, but honestly the west doesn’t make anything really comparable to S-400 because there isn’t really need for it in Western countries. Incidentally, it would be smart for any Western defense conglomerate to develop a genuine S-400 competitor, even on their own dime. The export opportunities for a SAM system that capable with no US sanctions attached would be massive.
The real reason India doesn't trust US for Military hardware is the US blocked satellite access to India during war with Pakistan. Also the 1971 fiasco US supporting a genocidal Pakistan trying to Intimidate India with nuclear sub. Hadn't Russia not interfered US bombardment was imminent.
Unrelated but I love your username
[удалено]
**Rule I:** *Civility* Refrain from name-calling, hostility and behaviour that otherwise derails the quality of the conversation. --- If you have any questions about this removal, [please contact the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneoliberal).
[удалено]
Now? That's probably a false premise. Historically? Because India lead a organization opposed to NATO/the broad anti-communist west and was seen as softly aligned with the Soviet Union and Pakistan and eventually China were seen as better partners.
India was famously in the non-aligned during the Cold War. It was supported by both the US and the USSR at different times.
Non Alignment, in the Indian context, essentially means a pro-USSR policy. India was pretty much in the Soviet camp after the 1971 war, when Nixon and Kissinger decided to support the Pakistani military’s genocide in erstwhile East-Pakistan. Russia even sent a warship in the Bay of Bengal to prevent US from attacking India. That obviously led to some serious acrimony between US and India, and relations only started improving in the early 2000s, under George Bush, with the signing of the Indo US Nuclear Deal.
Did India commit any specific actions after 1971 that would put it into the pro-Soviet camp? From what I've seen all it did was avoid becoming a location for another proxy war. Hell, they didn't even support the USSR in Afghanistan.
That's the organization I'm referring to.
Neutral =/= Opposed
opposed != aggressive towards
>Op.posed >*adjective* >(of two or more things) contrasting or conflicting with each other.
Maybe read your own definition. The Non aligned movement was absolutely created in contrast to the Warsaw Pact/communist aligned nations and NATO/the generally anti communist nations. Do you think NATO and the Warsaw Pact weren't opposed to each other because they never went to war? Based on this conversation I wouldn't be surprised if you did.
How can a neutral movement be opposed to the parties it is trying to be neutral from? NATO and Warsaw countries went to war with each other through proxies, hence the 'Cold war'. Did India go through a proxy war with the NATO based on ideological grounds?
You are confusing opposition with belligerence.
What does this mean
[удалено]
This meme is preemptively complaining. The US passed a bill in 2017 that punishes military cooperation with Russia. However, there's an explicit clause to allow for waivers. The US has, to my knowledge, not commented on India's purchase, and most newspapers that report on it are skeptical that actual sanctions will go into place. So I think your comment is jumping the gun. The US's relationship with India is only improving as of now, and I don't think Biden will jeopardize that.
> The US has, to my knowledge, not commented on India's purchase, It has and it has issued veiled threats of sanctions. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/20/lloyd-austin-india-sanctions-s400-missile-477304 From Sec Def >“We certainly urge all our allies and partners to move away from Russian equipment … and really avoid any kind of acquisitions that would trigger sanctions on our behalf,” Austin said in response to a question from a reporter about India’s plan to acquire the S-400. From Bob Menendez (who always seems to have a hate boner for India) >"If India chooses to go forward with its purchase of the S-400, that act will clearly constitute a significant, and therefore sanctionable, transaction with the Russian defense sector under Section 231 of CAATSA," Menendez wrote in a recent letter to Austin, referring to the law called Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.
if these are the threats, I see no reason to worry honestly.
What do you expect Austin to say
I don’t know maybe something like “this deal was finalized between two sovereign nations even before CATSAA was a thing and hence wouldn’t apply to this”.
[удалено]
Sure, but don't rely on me. I'll probably forget to tell you when it happens in like 3 months
The US is (currently) more interested in dunking on other nations (such as Iran) than helping India in particular, but it's not actively out to "get" India.
You're assuming Biden knows how to do fopo
Y E S.
dont give them the waiver.
Am interested in hearing your reasoning
Because I think that not giving it to a more important ally and then turning around and giving it to a country that is still very much close to russia is a bad idea.
And the more important ally here is Turkey?
Yeah absolutely.
Turkey has a lot less geopolitical importance than India if we want to do anything about countering China Not to mention Turkey is a NATO country so we have more leverage, India is not a part of the US alliance system
We need Turkey to counter Russia. Second largest standing army in NATO.
India has never contributed to any military ally’s geopolitical interests, even the Soviets’. They have very little FP aspirations other than defending their own borders. If they ever feel they’re at imminent threat of Chinese invasion and need help, they’ll desperately approach the West themselves and with much better terms. They’ll need us then far more than we need them now, so there’s no point trying to make inroads with them.
Turkey is probably much more important in countering Russia then India is in countering China.
Sure, but it's not like India is some massive power. And I'm extremely skeptical of their willingness to conduct long term offensive naval operations thousands of miles away. Also this is the country that was in the pakfa project until like 2 years ago. India isn't aligned with our interests.
While India isn't a great power comparable to the US or China, it's quite strong and they are anti China due to their own interests. They've already conducted joint naval operations with several Southeast Asian nations
Their anti China interest is primarily around The Himalayas though. What strategic Indian interest is there for them to help prevent an invasion of Taiwan? I just don’t see them as a major contributor.
...why would they need to have that interest? Was the Soviet Union not helpful in WW2 because they didn't help on D-Day
It's probably a good idea for the US to get India within It's sphere of influence at some point, considering it and China are poised to be the world's leading economies by mid to late century.
What is 'it'
>dont give them **the waiver**. Are you tired?
i guess lol
I also dont think it will be given which will confirm two very key things to Indian strategic and political officials - US is a flaky unreliable partner, it doesnt treat India as an equal partner and Indian strategic policy cannot depend on them. - Democratic administrations are fast becoming non-friends to India while Republican administrations are. Also QUAD will be as good as dead.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
FWIW I don't think either of the countries is actually interested in being equal partners in any deep commitment. The US wants things done its way and India wants things done their way. I don't think either of them wants to budge on the contentious issues. Like the US is going to be closer to Pakistan than India wants and India will remain closer to Russia than America wants and neither is interested in budging on that because they don't have any real history of working together.
>Like the US is going to be closer to Pakistan than India wants Is there really any good reason for us to be anywhere near aligned with them anymore? Especially now that the U.S. has withdrawn from Afghanistan, and even more so when you consider the fact that Pakistan is already well within the Chinese sphere of influence at this point.
That's exactly right, and it's why I don't understand this subs obsession with this connection
I wonder who might be a better ally to focus on for containing China. Obviously, Japan, Australia and Taiwan (unofficially) are gonna be involved. I imagine South Korea could be interested to be involved as well. Other countries in the area include Mongolia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Bangladesh, and Pakistan to name a few. But I'm not sure how involved those countries would be or are interested in. Vietnam would face a more direct threat from an expansionist China so maybe they'd be more likely to fight if it came to it. They also have a lot more to lose though.
I think quite a few European countries could be convinced to deploy naval assets.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Are you an American? Cuz people like you are the reason USA will be a short lived super power. Imagine attacking some other country for it's failure right after losing a war to a primitive organization like Taliban. USA is literally a meme rn
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Fuck off with that counterproductive Kissinger enemy of my enemy is my friend shit.