5 ms·

> India hasn't said a word about Russia Why should we? When China killed 20 of our soldiers in 2020,[1] the whole world prayed for "de-escalation and a peacefu

by sinyug 5y ago

> India hasn't said a word about Russia Why should we? When China killed 20 of our soldiers in 2020,[1] the whole world prayed for "de-escalation and a peaceful resolution." And that is what India will say in the Ukraine-Russia conflict. [1] 2020–2022 China–India skirmishes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020%E2%80%932022_China%E2%80%93India_skirmishes#International https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020%E2%80%932022_China%E2%80%...)

ren_engineer 5y ago
I'm agreeing that it is a wise decision. I put that in there because people in this thread are acting like India will blindly follow the US against Russia/China with things like sanctions. The US is in a weak position right now due to a number of dumb foreign policy decisions, going nuclear by kicking Russia off SWIFT would have even allies questioning SWIFT and cause the US to lose even more control over the financial system India is doing what's in the best interest of their people, which is what a government should do https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-explores-setting-up-rupee-trade-accounts-with-russia-soften-sanctions-blow-2022-02-25/ https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-explores-setting-u...
wolverine876 5y ago
Every country in the world has suffered many such slights, but somehow we have to and we do cooperate, to our great mutual benefit. The slights are used by those who want division, in every country (and if they can't think of one, they make them up anyway). Why should India sacrifice it's larger interests to temporary outrage - never a good idea in international or personal relations. (Also, China didn't attempt to conquer India, attacking Delhi, Mumbai; annexing the south, etc. The comparison is very exaggerated.)
- sinyug 5y ago
  > China didn't attempt to conquer India China illegally occupies Aksai Chin. Pakistan illegally occupies parts of Kashmir. We have fought multiple wars with both countries over the last 75 years with very little help from outside parties. When the rest of the world goes beyond mere words to help restore these territories to India, I am sure India will be more than happy to move beyond mere words in similar situations.
  - ninjagoo 5y ago
    > with very little help from outside parties. You might have missed the part of history where Bill Clinton pretty much ended the Kargil War and stopped Pakistan from nuking India [1][2]. [1] https://www.mea.gov.in/articles-in-indian-media.htm?dtl/15419/July+4+1999+Clinton+Nawaz+Vajpayee+and+a+Nwar https://www.mea.gov.in/articles-in-indian-media.htm?dtl/1541... [2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-india-nuclear-bomb-kargil-war-former-cia-officer-sandy-berger-bruce-riedel-a6758501.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-india... This isn't to say that the world goes often beyond mere words; every democratic nation's leadership is obligated to act in the best interest of their citizens, and what's in their best interest is not always clear at the outset. There's a reason diplomacy and statecraft are full-time jobs, and defense pacts like NATO exist. These pacts tie populations together and organize some of the decision-making process. Even then those pacts have steps that need to be triggered before action is taken, and NATO Article 5 [3] has been invoked only once in its history. The really interesting thing is that according to NATO Article 6, an attack on Hawaii or some Spanish cities may not trigger a NATO response [4] [3] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Treaty#Article_6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Treaty#Article_... If you're looking for an example closer to home, consider the Pandavas' exile; they went to war only after all other options had been exhausted [5]. [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurukshetra_War#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurukshetra_War#Background Much as we as individuals want nations to act emotionally as we would, democratic nations simply do not make decisions that way. There are tens, perhaps even hundreds, of people involved at all levels of government in any major decisions around foreign policy. It is possible to subvert that machinery like with the 2nd Bush administration, and trash it altogether like with the Trump administration, but for the most part it works fairly rationally, if not always in the long-term interest.
    - sinyug 5y ago
      > stopped Pakistan from nuking India That was never going to happen. Neither Musharraf nor Sharif are stupid people. The Americans have always been a cowardly lot when it comes to nuclear weapons. The Pakistan situation is a result of the gross incompetence on the part of the Indian and American establishments. India chose the wrong politics, the wrong friends and didn't contain Pakistan when we were in a position to do so. And America funded and protected them for imaginary achievements of their political objectives. The only winner in all this was the Pakistani establishment that made out like a bandit.
amriksohata 5y ago
India are very wary of US led wars, they do not have a good track record and when this all blows over and everyone forgets about it, India will never get support from the US against Pakistani sponsored terrorism. So why should India fight its wars for them?

by sinyug 5y ago

ren_engineer 5y ago

I'm agreeing that it is a wise decision. I put that in there because people in this thread are acting like India will blindly follow the US against Russia/China with things like sanctions. The US is in a weak position right now due to a number of dumb foreign policy decisions, going nuclear by kicking Russia off SWIFT would have even allies questioning SWIFT and cause the US to lose even more control over the financial system India is doing what's in the best interest of their people, which is what a government should do https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-explores-setting-up-rupee-trade-accounts-with-russia-soften-sanctions-blow-2022-02-25/ https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-explores-setting-u...

wolverine876 5y ago

Every country in the world has suffered many such slights, but somehow we have to and we do cooperate, to our great mutual benefit. The slights are used by those who want division, in every country (and if they can't think of one, they make them up anyway). Why should India sacrifice it's larger interests to temporary outrage - never a good idea in international or personal relations. (Also, China didn't attempt to conquer India, attacking Delhi, Mumbai; annexing the south, etc. The comparison is very exaggerated.)

sinyug 5y ago
> China didn't attempt to conquer India China illegally occupies Aksai Chin. Pakistan illegally occupies parts of Kashmir. We have fought multiple wars with both countries over the last 75 years with very little help from outside parties. When the rest of the world goes beyond mere words to help restore these territories to India, I am sure India will be more than happy to move beyond mere words in similar situations.
- ninjagoo 5y ago
  > with very little help from outside parties. You might have missed the part of history where Bill Clinton pretty much ended the Kargil War and stopped Pakistan from nuking India [1][2]. [1] https://www.mea.gov.in/articles-in-indian-media.htm?dtl/15419/July+4+1999+Clinton+Nawaz+Vajpayee+and+a+Nwar https://www.mea.gov.in/articles-in-indian-media.htm?dtl/1541... [2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-india-nuclear-bomb-kargil-war-former-cia-officer-sandy-berger-bruce-riedel-a6758501.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-india... This isn't to say that the world goes often beyond mere words; every democratic nation's leadership is obligated to act in the best interest of their citizens, and what's in their best interest is not always clear at the outset. There's a reason diplomacy and statecraft are full-time jobs, and defense pacts like NATO exist. These pacts tie populations together and organize some of the decision-making process. Even then those pacts have steps that need to be triggered before action is taken, and NATO Article 5 [3] has been invoked only once in its history. The really interesting thing is that according to NATO Article 6, an attack on Hawaii or some Spanish cities may not trigger a NATO response [4] [3] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Treaty#Article_6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Treaty#Article_... If you're looking for an example closer to home, consider the Pandavas' exile; they went to war only after all other options had been exhausted [5]. [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurukshetra_War#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurukshetra_War#Background Much as we as individuals want nations to act emotionally as we would, democratic nations simply do not make decisions that way. There are tens, perhaps even hundreds, of people involved at all levels of government in any major decisions around foreign policy. It is possible to subvert that machinery like with the 2nd Bush administration, and trash it altogether like with the Trump administration, but for the most part it works fairly rationally, if not always in the long-term interest.
  - sinyug 5y ago
    > stopped Pakistan from nuking India That was never going to happen. Neither Musharraf nor Sharif are stupid people. The Americans have always been a cowardly lot when it comes to nuclear weapons. The Pakistan situation is a result of the gross incompetence on the part of the Indian and American establishments. India chose the wrong politics, the wrong friends and didn't contain Pakistan when we were in a position to do so. And America funded and protected them for imaginary achievements of their political objectives. The only winner in all this was the Pakistani establishment that made out like a bandit.

amriksohata 5y ago

India are very wary of US led wars, they do not have a good track record and when this all blows over and everyone forgets about it, India will never get support from the US against Pakistani sponsored terrorism. So why should India fight its wars for them?