Article

2005-12-03 India-Pakistan

India unveils naval blueprint for Indian Ocean dominance

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2005-12-03 00:00|| || Front Page|| [10 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Steve, thanks for the nutshell report, nicely done..with chutney gravy no less.

Posted by Red Dog 2005-12-03 03:07|| 2005-12-03 03:07|| Front Page Top

#2 Good analogy, but I think it's more akin to the British guarantee of French North Atlantic ports during the same period, allowing the best part of the French Fleet to base in the Med.

Posted by Shipman 2005-12-03 12:11|| 2005-12-03 12:11|| Front Page Top

#3 Boy, I'm glad they're on our side. Only a couple of years ago they were still talking about confrontation with the U.S. in the Indian Ocean.

Posted by gromky">gromky 2005-12-03 13:06|| http://communistposters.com/]">[http://communistposters.com/] 2005-12-03 13:06|| Front Page Top

#4 Memories of the Enterprise battle group sailing into the Bay of Bengal to save Pakistan in 1971.
One of Nixon and Kissinger's worst ever decisions (signal to China with Kissinger goading the Chinese Premier to open a front against India to distract it).
The battle group arrived too late to do anything if it wanted (Indian armor was already surrounding Dhaka) and India viewed the conflict as a just war, stopping genocide. This poisoned relations between Delhi and Washington for thirty years.

The US pretty much ignored India and for a few years in the late 1980s (IIRC) did not even confirm an ambassador. This left South Asia policy to be handled by Ambassador Robin Raphael in Foggy Bottom. She blamed India for the death of her husband in the Zia plane "crash" and made many pro-Pakistan noises about Kashmir. She convinced many paranoid Indians that the US was interested in Jammu and Kashmir and this made relations even worse.

Posted by john 2005-12-03 13:30|| 2005-12-03 13:30|| Front Page Top

#5 Under President Bush, relations have probably never been so good (though Eisenhower was popular - during his visit to India crowds lined the streets throwing flowers. Nehru had to take over the vehicle himself, ordering people out of the way. The trip took hours longer than usual. When the car arrived it was filled waist deep in petals).
Bush's policy has turned things around remarkably. Combined with the influence of GE, Walmart etc, and with new found Indian confidence in its nuclear arsenal, relations look set to take off.
Ten years ago, the idea of US troops or aircraft training on Indian soil would have been unthinkable.

Posted by john 2005-12-03 13:42|| 2005-12-03 13:42|| Front Page Top

#6 On the topic of dominance - what condition is the Kitty Hawk's hull in?
Might be a useful purchase for the IN. This would seal the F-16 super hornet contract since both the IAF and IN would need squadrons. The new base in Karwar should be able to handle a vessel of this size though the running costs may be prohibitive..

Posted by john 2005-12-03 13:46|| 2005-12-03 13:46|| Front Page Top

#7 India is not on our side. India is on India's side. There is no guarantee the two sides will be aligned unless we take steps to make it so.

While we look at what we could have done differently, the Indians have to want to be friends also. In the past they have not wished it to be. Regardless of how Ike was viewed as a war hero, India was not our firend in the '50's or any time later. Their number one defence supplier is Russia for a reason. India's economy could be more robust than China's were it not as xenophobic and more fabian. I'm all for strong ties with India as it makes sense so many ways. But the Indians have not wanted it in the past because of baggage from colonial days.

I'd just a soon the Indian navy continued to be built by Russians. Enough to handle the Chinese and not enough to pose a threat to us. An LPD here and there but no CVs, please.

Posted by Phereper Crush9533 2005-12-03 15:04|| 2005-12-03 15:04|| Front Page Top

#8 The Kitty Hawk is nearing the end of its serviceable lifetime. There is extensive metal fatigue and the need for billions in renovation to handle the latest naval aircraft. Besides, it's oil-fired, and India has limited indigenous oil production. I'd much rather the Kitty be given to Japan as a template for developing their own carrier squadrons.

Could you imagine China's reactions if Japan had a handful of aircraft carriers and the vessels to defend them, and India had the same? There would be an epidemic of heart attacks from Harbin to Hainan!

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2005-12-03 19:50|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2005-12-03 19:50|| Front Page Top

23:19 Redneck Jim
23:00 mac
22:49 mac
22:42 Malikrik
22:31 Warner
22:27 2b
21:53 Rafael
21:44 Rafael
21:40 john
21:34 49 pan
21:24 Warner
21:23 49 pan
21:17 Gloger Clinens8435
21:10 Malikrik
20:50 Rafael
20:48 Valentine
20:47 Bobby
20:41 Pappy
20:39 Red Dog
20:35 Bomb-a-rama
20:31 Bomb-a-rama
20:21 Bomb-a-rama
20:21 Barbara Skolaut
20:11 Captain America