US Foreign Policy and Diplomacy under Joe Biden

Well that's a shame

I guess from India's point of view the whole of Pakistan is an Islamist mess and it doesn't matter who gets elected there as they'll all just be competing with each other to be tough and belligerent towards India anyway

Nevertheless, I don't know about his popularity or what people hold him accountable for - but to have a democratically elected leader deposed so blatantly by the US and its agents in the country will probably turn even many of his opponents amongst the population towards outrage. As one way or the other it's an attack on Pakistan's sovereignty.
I doubt we've seen the end of this. Any government that replaces his has a serious problem with legitimacy and the people there can end up outright rejecting it.

My opinion is that India's frontiers are being pressed

An ongoing regime-change operation in Sri Lanka, where LGBT groups are holding rallies merging into the Muslim minority's rallies.

And now a seemingly successful regime change operation in Pakistan, although like I said, I doubt it's the end of the story

India's policies are too independent for Washington and thus it's playing the same game as it did with Russia earlier when it orchestrated regime changes in the Ukraine, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and was even working towards one in Kazakhstan.
It's a geopolitical version of gunboat diplomacy. Either bend your policies our way, or your neighbouring countries now under our control - will give you problems.

In Pakistan it seems the army chief was calling for diplomacy with India over issues.
So in practice both sides of the political divide are sending feelers to India and rummaging around for possible support.

This is a good position for India to be in - but it should remember that if the subservient to the US government wins out there; it's own sovereignty will be hemmed
An independent Pakistan under Khan may give India problems in the future too but it's still a preferable alternative, and if support is given to him then he will certainly owe a few favours

Chinese influence in Pakistan meanwhile came for nought if they couldn't act to prevent this effective coup.

The time for India to become a great power is now. Afterwards it may stick to neutrality and a non-aligned policy, but it must achieve the freedom to do that first by securing independent neighbours too.

I guess from India's point of view the whole of Pakistan is an Islamist mess and it doesn't matter who gets elected there as they'll all just be competing with each other to be tough and belligerent towards India anyway

Except Khan is being kicked out by the US who are frightened by him not being anti India on everything... or anti China or anti Russia.... it is that sort of independent thinking the world needs more of.

He is popular in the west because he is a famous cricket player and has lots of ties in the British commonwealth, but the point is that he is not rabidly anti Russia or India, which makes him better than any likely alternative.

If he can make some deals he might be able to clean house of the pro US nutters who are only interested in conflict between Pakistan and India and India and China and Russia with everyone. The constant mindless warfare keeps them down and makes them easier to control from the US perspective, but it also means no progress or development is possible for these countries.

That is something we all need to change.

The time for India to become a great power is now. Afterwards it may stick to neutrality and a non-aligned policy, but it must achieve the freedom to do that first by securing independent neighbours too.

The problem is to help those who oppose the US bullshit, without being exposed and potentially making things worse for them... the equivalent of Putins puppets... but then they don't need any evidence to make such accusations which they will make anyway whether you do help or not.

flamming_python wrote:In Pakistan it seems the army chief was calling for diplomacy with India over issues.
So in practice both sides of the political divide are sending feelers to India and rummaging around for possible support.

There is a theory in India that New Delhi itself doesn't want the destruction of Pakistan because the North Indian & Western Indian leadership may need to leverage Pakistan to deal with Indian states in the East and South at some point of time.

Minus the religion, North Indians and Gujaratis share almost the same culture with Pakistan. And traditionally much like the Brits the North Indian leadership considers Hindus from eastern & Southern India as rivals. Since 1947 India has had just two Prime Ministers from Southern India (just one of them was allowed to complete his term) and none from the East.  

Therefore, New Delhi interfered in Bangladesh in 1971 to save 90,000 Pakistani soldiers from Hindu mobs, allowed Pakistan to acquire nuclear weapons (so that this development can be used as an alibi for not invading Pakistan) and now is allowing Pakistan to acquire submarine based second strike capability.

The Delhi, Mumbai leadership survives by cornering resources from other parts of the country. Ergo, they will do whatever it takes to maintain stability in Pakistan.

GarryB wrote: but the point is that he is not rabidly anti Russia or India, which makes him better than any likely alternative.

He may not be anti Russia but he is rabidly anti India, more so to prove his loyalty to the Punjabi military establishment.
He pioneered drone attacks inside Indian territory. In fact even the Pak Army had warned him about not going overboard with these attacks.

Eventually, last month India "misfired" a BRAHMOS missile inside Pakistani territory to remind them that there is a threshold to India's patience.

TBH, he was an "asset" for India. The manner in which he destroyed Pakistani's economy is not something that India could have ever achieved.

Sujoy wrote:

flamming_python wrote:In Pakistan it seems the army chief was calling for diplomacy with India over issues.
So in practice both sides of the political divide are sending feelers to India and rummaging around for possible support.

There is a theory in India that New Delhi itself doesn't want the destruction of Pakistan because the North Indian & Western Indian leadership may need to leverage Pakistan to deal with Indian states in the East and South at some point of time.

Minus the religion, North Indians and Gujaratis share almost the same culture with Pakistan. And traditionally much like the Brits the North Indian leadership considers Hindus from eastern & Southern India as rivals. Since 1947 India has had just two Prime Ministers from Southern India (just one of them was allowed to complete his term) and none from the East.  

Therefore, New Delhi interfered in Bangladesh in 1971 to save 90,000 Pakistani soldiers from Hindu mobs, allowed Pakistan to acquire nuclear weapons (so that this development can be used as an alibi for not invading Pakistan) and now is allowing Pakistan to acquire submarine based second strike capability.

The Delhi, Mumbai leadership survives by cornering resources from other parts of the country. Ergo, they will do whatever it takes to maintain stability in Pakistan.

Before the British came, India was dominated by the Mughals, who were Muslims from the east of the Indian subcontinent, and in a sense its where Pakistan's identity derives from. Pakistan is the expression of the Indian subcontinent's Muslims wanting to dominate the economy and trade of greater India's population, as they once did. And hence why Pakistan's policy towards India is essentially expansionist, standing as the guarantor of the Kashmiris, and with further ambitions to win the support of India's wider Muslim population.

Pakistan's relation to India is much like the Ukraine's to Russia - it's a sort of anti-India, that was in the past supported by the West, and recently has been more supported by China, and from that Pakistan traditionally gets its benefits.
Russia failed unfortunately to pull the Ukraine away from the West, and then to attempt to solve the issue in a different way other than militarily - and will pay the price for it. But it's not too late for India.

Like with the Ukraine, it's important to note that Pakistan's identity is not purely artificial, it does have history behind it like I mentioned, and it has a mandate from its own people to exist, it didn't get declared by accident.

Hence Pakistan is not going away and shouldn't. However what India needs, is a Pakistan that is not some puppet of either the West or China, but one that in fact, is as close politically and economically as possible - to India itself. If it's not possible to pull Pakistan into India's orbit, then it should at least be supported as an independent country, with which areas of mutual collaboration are possible, and with whom trust can be built gradually. Eventually, you can have something like a South Asian EU - with the relationship between Pakistan and India being like the one between France and Germany, and with other regional states such as Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Afghanistan - pulled into their mutual orbit.

The US is concerned about the growing Chinese influence in Latin America:


https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-military-watching-chinas-presence-110100878.html