Any meaningful improvement of Sino-Indo ties, especially in the economic dimension, could prompt Trump to either walk back his hardline policy on India to court it away from China or punitively double down on this approach.
It looks more and more like the USA is hyper-eager and working overtime to bring MacKinder's Heartland theory to fruition in the tripartite Russia-India-China alliance. Obviously, the US deep state people never in-depth read books on geopolitics in their university days at Harvard, Columbia or Yale. Exactly what comes about if you get indoctrinated with DEI.
Who are you kidding no one currently cares about geopolitical strategy in the US. Much of the Deep State was "educated" before DEI but play the jargon game.
Any thaw between India and China has to be set against precedent: decades of Sino-Russian hostility, deeper and more violent, yet set aside for the foreseeable future. The India–China conflict is narrower, but Tibet locks in the asymmetry. Beijing controls Himalayan headwaters and high-altitude radar; with satellite guidance added, the imbalance is built into the map and cannot be overcome or negotiated away. India’s only option is accommodation, as Russia has already done—without the same risks.
Modi’s business constituency has pressed for a thaw for years, ruled by profit, not strategy. Unlike other elite enthusiasms, this one carries wider consequences: large-scale employment, urbanisation, even poverty relief all require Chinese inputs at industrial scale. No other economy has either the capacity or the experience.
Beijing is no naval threat in the Indian Ocean: with dependence on West Asian oil declining, the prohibitive cost of projecting power from its own shores leaves it without appetite, its attention fixed instead on securing food flows from South America across the Pacific, via corridors from Peru to Brazil. Should it ever attempt control in the medium term, it would confront a United States without the economic base to sustain dominance at that scale, notwithstanding AI-driven hype and quixotic attempts at reindustrialisation; that Delhi should chase an American alliance on this basis baffles.
Silicon Valley and Wall Street’s Indian-American grandees, once boosters of the U.S. connection, have largely drifted off, secured by asset hoards and Ivy League passage for their offspring.
With the commanding strata of the diaspora largely uninterested, the U.S.–India connection survives only as a vanity project. India’s foreign-policy cadre, backed by its American fixers—second-rate academics and journalists who built careers repeating Washington’s catechism—will work to obstruct any rapprochement with China. What remains is a policy in the hands of a narrow segment of the elite, weak and insecure, without a popular base, buttressed only by a degraded English-language media ruled by clicks and eyeballs, craving a prestige invisible abroad and useless at home.
Since Indian independence Pakistan is being in firm control of Uk thereafter US. Now for a long time Both these used Pakistan to pull down India. Can be clearly a interpreted because of previous wars India had faced.
Subsequently in 2000s after afgan war ended. US started becoming more favorable to India. For it needed the access to growing indian markets and manufacturing. Thereby starting neglecting pakistan. And then Pakistan tired to pivot to China and Cpec was formed.
But India had faced severe US sanction after its atomic test in 98.
So India is very different situation for US to handle.
Pakistan will always will be in control of US and Uk as majority of pakistani beauracracy and army flock their ill gains in Uk and Us.
And for India to grow it needs favorable neighbors so as to not to engage in any long term armed conflict.
Even during biden era we saw Us machinations in Bangladesh to remove an india favorable government and put US pakistan axis government in place. So India was tiptoeing US policy.
But after Pahlgam terror attack on india by Pakistan proxy led to India Pak Skirmish.
And now with Trump more openly advocating for Pakistan much to ire of most Indians. India needed some balancing act.
I doubt that a state of the size of USA do things "inadvertently". I perhaps mistake but...
What I feel in the Indian policy of USA is a two way job:
- very hard, tough, rude for the official country.
- very friendly, bizness easy and caressing for Indian oligarchy, intelligentsia and deepstate.
They did exactly that in France and finished by killing the last tiny remains of french gaullist sovereignty in making their minion Sarkozy elected. And after him, two others, Hollande and Macron.
That works almost everywhere. When a leader want to preserve his country.s sovereignty, he's surrounded by very powerful ennemies in his land: money, médias, intelligentsia, deep state.
In India, we call them "Panch-makkars" ("Five Traitors"). They are Mullah, Missionary, Media, Marxist & Macaulay' sons. All these want India subservient to their respective patrons or rather their foreign bidders. Ever since 2014, the tide has been turning against them! That's why they are losing their shit!
Well, these folks do indeed form part of the above groups. For. e.g.,- Marxists are the snobbish intellectuals and academics. The wealthiest & the corrupted officials or the so called Elites are Macaulay' sons roughly. More appropriately, we call them "Brown Sahibs". They just want to see the old Government back in power because of their interests and their closed ties with them. Many have close ties with the US too since they receive their funding from them!
It's the same everywhere, whether Germany, Italy, Hungary, Israel or Russia. Or India. "Brown Sahibs" are sponsered by by US Deep State, MSM and Democrat Party throughout.
Any thaw between India and China has to be set against precedent: decades of Sino-Russian hostility, deeper and more violent, yet set aside for the foreseeable future. The India–China conflict is narrower, but Tibet locks in the asymmetry. Beijing controls Himalayan headwaters and high-altitude radar; with satellite guidance added, the imbalance is built into the map and cannot be overcome or negotiated away. India’s only option is accommodation, as Russia has already done—without the same risks.
Modi’s business constituency has pressed for a thaw for years, ruled by profit, not strategy. Unlike other elite enthusiasms, this one carries wider consequences: large-scale employment, urbanisation, even poverty relief all require Chinese inputs at industrial scale. No other economy has either the capacity or the experience.
Beijing is no naval threat in the Indian Ocean: with dependence on West Asian oil declining, the prohibitive cost of projecting power from its own shores leaves it without appetite, its attention fixed instead on securing food flows from South America across the Pacific, via corridors from Peru to Brazil. Should it ever attempt control in the medium term, it would confront a United States without the economic base to sustain dominance at that scale, notwithstanding AI-driven hype and quixotic attempts at reindustrialisation; that Delhi should chase an American alliance on this basis baffles.
Silicon Valley and Wall Street’s Indian-American grandees, once boosters of the U.S. connection, have largely drifted off, secured by asset hoards and Ivy League passage for their offspring.
With the commanding strata of the diaspora largely uninterested, the U.S.–India connection survives only as a vanity project. India’s foreign-policy cadre, backed by its American fixers—second-rate academics and journalists who built careers repeating Washington’s catechism—will work to obstruct any rapprochement with China. What remains is a policy in the hands of a narrow segment of the elite, weak and insecure, without a popular base, buttressed only by a degraded English-language media ruled by clicks and eyeballs, craving a prestige invisible abroad and useless at home.
Hello Andrew. Nice article here, among others lately. For you and anyone else here who claims to have strong arguments about this: How does Pakistan factor into this calculus?
All China has to do is give India a "win" in the border talks and they take India off the "board" in the great power game. India can easily be bought and sold with little more than flattery and some "free" stuff. This will happen as a precursor to China's attempt a Taiwan. India does not care would sum it up best.
Our Government reiterated One-China policy so. They are giving China the role of a bigger brother/power in Asia on a silver platter which is the most stupid and weak thing to do given the current & imminent growing competition between the two!
It looks more and more like the USA is hyper-eager and working overtime to bring MacKinder's Heartland theory to fruition in the tripartite Russia-India-China alliance. Obviously, the US deep state people never in-depth read books on geopolitics in their university days at Harvard, Columbia or Yale. Exactly what comes about if you get indoctrinated with DEI.
Who are you kidding no one currently cares about geopolitical strategy in the US. Much of the Deep State was "educated" before DEI but play the jargon game.
Andrew, I like you and respect you very much, but, that flays my eyes when I read that UE is a greatest vassal state of USA.
If UE is a vassal( serf?) IT IS NOT A STATE.
It's a supranational pile of shit that works on nothing other the oligarchy will and its eunuchs minions.
Any thaw between India and China has to be set against precedent: decades of Sino-Russian hostility, deeper and more violent, yet set aside for the foreseeable future. The India–China conflict is narrower, but Tibet locks in the asymmetry. Beijing controls Himalayan headwaters and high-altitude radar; with satellite guidance added, the imbalance is built into the map and cannot be overcome or negotiated away. India’s only option is accommodation, as Russia has already done—without the same risks.
Modi’s business constituency has pressed for a thaw for years, ruled by profit, not strategy. Unlike other elite enthusiasms, this one carries wider consequences: large-scale employment, urbanisation, even poverty relief all require Chinese inputs at industrial scale. No other economy has either the capacity or the experience.
Beijing is no naval threat in the Indian Ocean: with dependence on West Asian oil declining, the prohibitive cost of projecting power from its own shores leaves it without appetite, its attention fixed instead on securing food flows from South America across the Pacific, via corridors from Peru to Brazil. Should it ever attempt control in the medium term, it would confront a United States without the economic base to sustain dominance at that scale, notwithstanding AI-driven hype and quixotic attempts at reindustrialisation; that Delhi should chase an American alliance on this basis baffles.
Silicon Valley and Wall Street’s Indian-American grandees, once boosters of the U.S. connection, have largely drifted off, secured by asset hoards and Ivy League passage for their offspring.
With the commanding strata of the diaspora largely uninterested, the U.S.–India connection survives only as a vanity project. India’s foreign-policy cadre, backed by its American fixers—second-rate academics and journalists who built careers repeating Washington’s catechism—will work to obstruct any rapprochement with China. What remains is a policy in the hands of a narrow segment of the elite, weak and insecure, without a popular base, buttressed only by a degraded English-language media ruled by clicks and eyeballs, craving a prestige invisible abroad and useless at home.
Since Indian independence Pakistan is being in firm control of Uk thereafter US. Now for a long time Both these used Pakistan to pull down India. Can be clearly a interpreted because of previous wars India had faced.
Subsequently in 2000s after afgan war ended. US started becoming more favorable to India. For it needed the access to growing indian markets and manufacturing. Thereby starting neglecting pakistan. And then Pakistan tired to pivot to China and Cpec was formed.
But India had faced severe US sanction after its atomic test in 98.
So India is very different situation for US to handle.
Pakistan will always will be in control of US and Uk as majority of pakistani beauracracy and army flock their ill gains in Uk and Us.
And for India to grow it needs favorable neighbors so as to not to engage in any long term armed conflict.
Even during biden era we saw Us machinations in Bangladesh to remove an india favorable government and put US pakistan axis government in place. So India was tiptoeing US policy.
But after Pahlgam terror attack on india by Pakistan proxy led to India Pak Skirmish.
And now with Trump more openly advocating for Pakistan much to ire of most Indians. India needed some balancing act.
I doubt that a state of the size of USA do things "inadvertently". I perhaps mistake but...
What I feel in the Indian policy of USA is a two way job:
- very hard, tough, rude for the official country.
- very friendly, bizness easy and caressing for Indian oligarchy, intelligentsia and deepstate.
They did exactly that in France and finished by killing the last tiny remains of french gaullist sovereignty in making their minion Sarkozy elected. And after him, two others, Hollande and Macron.
That works almost everywhere. When a leader want to preserve his country.s sovereignty, he's surrounded by very powerful ennemies in his land: money, médias, intelligentsia, deep state.
It's what happening to India.
In India, we call them "Panch-makkars" ("Five Traitors"). They are Mullah, Missionary, Media, Marxist & Macaulay' sons. All these want India subservient to their respective patrons or rather their foreign bidders. Ever since 2014, the tide has been turning against them! That's why they are losing their shit!
In your list, I don't see the very wealthiest, the corrupted officials, the snobbish intellectuals and academics.
An oversight? Or perhaps you think these folks are true patriots?
Well, these folks do indeed form part of the above groups. For. e.g.,- Marxists are the snobbish intellectuals and academics. The wealthiest & the corrupted officials or the so called Elites are Macaulay' sons roughly. More appropriately, we call them "Brown Sahibs". They just want to see the old Government back in power because of their interests and their closed ties with them. Many have close ties with the US too since they receive their funding from them!
It's the same everywhere, whether Germany, Italy, Hungary, Israel or Russia. Or India. "Brown Sahibs" are sponsered by by US Deep State, MSM and Democrat Party throughout.
Thank you for these précisions.
Any thaw between India and China has to be set against precedent: decades of Sino-Russian hostility, deeper and more violent, yet set aside for the foreseeable future. The India–China conflict is narrower, but Tibet locks in the asymmetry. Beijing controls Himalayan headwaters and high-altitude radar; with satellite guidance added, the imbalance is built into the map and cannot be overcome or negotiated away. India’s only option is accommodation, as Russia has already done—without the same risks.
Modi’s business constituency has pressed for a thaw for years, ruled by profit, not strategy. Unlike other elite enthusiasms, this one carries wider consequences: large-scale employment, urbanisation, even poverty relief all require Chinese inputs at industrial scale. No other economy has either the capacity or the experience.
Beijing is no naval threat in the Indian Ocean: with dependence on West Asian oil declining, the prohibitive cost of projecting power from its own shores leaves it without appetite, its attention fixed instead on securing food flows from South America across the Pacific, via corridors from Peru to Brazil. Should it ever attempt control in the medium term, it would confront a United States without the economic base to sustain dominance at that scale, notwithstanding AI-driven hype and quixotic attempts at reindustrialisation; that Delhi should chase an American alliance on this basis baffles.
Silicon Valley and Wall Street’s Indian-American grandees, once boosters of the U.S. connection, have largely drifted off, secured by asset hoards and Ivy League passage for their offspring.
With the commanding strata of the diaspora largely uninterested, the U.S.–India connection survives only as a vanity project. India’s foreign-policy cadre, backed by its American fixers—second-rate academics and journalists who built careers repeating Washington’s catechism—will work to obstruct any rapprochement with China. What remains is a policy in the hands of a narrow segment of the elite, weak and insecure, without a popular base, buttressed only by a degraded English-language media ruled by clicks and eyeballs, craving a prestige invisible abroad and useless at home.
Hello Andrew. Nice article here, among others lately. For you and anyone else here who claims to have strong arguments about this: How does Pakistan factor into this calculus?
All China has to do is give India a "win" in the border talks and they take India off the "board" in the great power game. India can easily be bought and sold with little more than flattery and some "free" stuff. This will happen as a precursor to China's attempt a Taiwan. India does not care would sum it up best.
Our Government reiterated One-China policy so. They are giving China the role of a bigger brother/power in Asia on a silver platter which is the most stupid and weak thing to do given the current & imminent growing competition between the two!