3 ms·

> I say this measuredly I should hope so. That’s a stunning generalization if I get your intent, and to boot, wholly inaccurate as Indians are (and many can/do

by aksss 6y ago

> I say this measuredly I should hope so. That’s a stunning generalization if I get your intent, and to boot, wholly inaccurate as Indians are (and many can/do identify as) Caucasians. Are you using The term as a proxy for the Occident as a whole? The United States specifically? Ignoring the technical inaccuracy, I think America remains a bit of an Indiaphiliac and has been that way for decades. It’s entirely compatible to hope the best for a nation, respect its intellectual achievements and regional challenges, value the alignment of interests while also remaining critical of its political and humanitarian shortcomings - as The US regards India and I’m sure the feeling is mutual. At the same time, I think the US is wise to stay out of the growing conflict in Northern Kashmir. When it comes down to dust though, I’ve no doubt the US would help India defend against existential threats. China on the other hand isn’t worried about existential threats except maybe from Japan, and is in fact demonstrating and expansionist (if not imperial) foreign policy - which is to say, they would not conceivably need help from the US in the present conflict. I don’t see India attempting to seize territory from China any time soon.

thawaway1837 6y ago
Is there any reason whatsoever to believe the US would help India in a conflict with China? I see absolutely no evidence of this being the case. The US has never in the history of India stepped in to help India. In all likelihood, if IndanandnChina came to blows, the US would simply sit aside and not participate.
- rangibaby 6y ago
  China’s “problem” is that if they directly attack any nation in Asia the others will see the writing on the wall and make an alliance that will include India and the US.
  - aksss 6y ago
    True. I would go further and say that but for the US/Russian hegemony post WW2, regional powers would have torn China to shreds over the last eighty years, to include an unbridled Japan, India, and perhaps some of its southern neighbors. In point of fact, this process had already started in the lead-up to WW2. The war of Manchuria was in fact Russia and Japan fighting over a piece of China like two lions on the hide of a water buffalo that’s still walking upright.
    - rangibaby 6y ago
      Yes, China's treatment by every empire of note is the reason for the PRC's obsession with taking back every piece of land Qing China ever occupied. > The war of Manchuria was in fact Russia and Japan fighting over a piece of China like two lions on the hide of a water buffalo that’s still walking upright. In that metaphor, Japan was another water buffalo that was peacefully minding its own business, was told "you're next" by the lions, then shrugged and said "if you can't beat them, why not join them?"
      - aksss 6y ago
        Good points, and nobody (least of all Russia) thought Japan would be such a badass when they threw down.
- aksss 6y ago
  A) the two countries have signed a defense pact. B) the two countries were conducting joint war games as late as last year. In fact, the US performs military exercises with India more than any other non-NATO partner. C) since the sixties the US has provided billions in military equipment, economic aid and loans to India (US is heavily invested in their success and stability), to say nothing of remittances. D) a strong ex-pat community in the US, one of the fastest growing, makes for political influence (did you see/watch the “Howdy Modi” rally in Texas?). I could go on if those don’t make a compelling enough case, but I would like to address your prediction about China and India coming to blows. I agree, until the conflict starts to threaten India existentially. I think current US policy is bending towards a preference for letting partners deal with their own regional issues to the extent they can. Witness the call for Europe to clean up its own backyard to their East and in Africa, the endorsement to Israel and Saudi Arabia for managing the Middle East, the slow unwinding if restrictions on Japan. I think this endorsement comes with a promise of air cover (literal and figurative) if things start to go sideways.

by aksss 6y ago

thawaway1837 6y ago

Is there any reason whatsoever to believe the US would help India in a conflict with China? I see absolutely no evidence of this being the case. The US has never in the history of India stepped in to help India. In all likelihood, if IndanandnChina came to blows, the US would simply sit aside and not participate.

rangibaby 6y ago
China’s “problem” is that if they directly attack any nation in Asia the others will see the writing on the wall and make an alliance that will include India and the US.
- aksss 6y ago
  True. I would go further and say that but for the US/Russian hegemony post WW2, regional powers would have torn China to shreds over the last eighty years, to include an unbridled Japan, India, and perhaps some of its southern neighbors. In point of fact, this process had already started in the lead-up to WW2. The war of Manchuria was in fact Russia and Japan fighting over a piece of China like two lions on the hide of a water buffalo that’s still walking upright.
  - rangibaby 6y ago
    Yes, China's treatment by every empire of note is the reason for the PRC's obsession with taking back every piece of land Qing China ever occupied. > The war of Manchuria was in fact Russia and Japan fighting over a piece of China like two lions on the hide of a water buffalo that’s still walking upright. In that metaphor, Japan was another water buffalo that was peacefully minding its own business, was told "you're next" by the lions, then shrugged and said "if you can't beat them, why not join them?"
    - aksss 6y ago
      Good points, and nobody (least of all Russia) thought Japan would be such a badass when they threw down.
aksss 6y ago
A) the two countries have signed a defense pact. B) the two countries were conducting joint war games as late as last year. In fact, the US performs military exercises with India more than any other non-NATO partner. C) since the sixties the US has provided billions in military equipment, economic aid and loans to India (US is heavily invested in their success and stability), to say nothing of remittances. D) a strong ex-pat community in the US, one of the fastest growing, makes for political influence (did you see/watch the “Howdy Modi” rally in Texas?). I could go on if those don’t make a compelling enough case, but I would like to address your prediction about China and India coming to blows. I agree, until the conflict starts to threaten India existentially. I think current US policy is bending towards a preference for letting partners deal with their own regional issues to the extent they can. Witness the call for Europe to clean up its own backyard to their East and in Africa, the endorsement to Israel and Saudi Arabia for managing the Middle East, the slow unwinding if restrictions on Japan. I think this endorsement comes with a promise of air cover (literal and figurative) if things start to go sideways.