July 22, 2005
GRAND ALLIANCE:
India, US make a tectonic move (Greg Sheridan, 23jul05, The Australian)
Some little time ago a senior US defence official received an admiral of the Indian navy. The Indian admiral explained that his country's military doctrine envisaged in due course Indian nuclear-armed submarines permanently in the Pacific Ocean. That would be unacceptable to the US, said the American defence man (or words to that effect).The Indian made two replies. First, he said, the Pacific doesn't belong exclusively to you and we can sail there if we want to. But also, consider the effect that our having nuclear subs in the Pacific would have. It would mean that the cities of northern China, presently beyond the range of our land-based missiles, would be covered by our nuclear deterrent.
Well, of course, said the American, in that case we can probably make a deal. [...]
[I]t was Singh's speech to a joint session of the US Congress that was most masterful. It was beautifully crafted for an American audience. The Congress was packed. Both sides of US politics have bought into this relationship in the biggest way. And Singh touched every right note for the Americans - India and the US are common democracies, one the oldest democracy, one the largest. They are united in the war on terror. At the press conference Singh lavished praise on Bush for his leadership in the war on terror. He told Congress that the two nations shared values and interests. India's success, he said, was in the national interest of the US.
One of the delightful touches in the speech was that it completely omitted mention of Pakistan, the most exquisite punishment an Indian leader in Washington could possibly administer to his troublesome neighbour. It is a sign of the decoupling of India and Pakistan in the Western mind, and the way in which India is moving forward on a much higher economic and strategic plane than Pakistan.
Singh emphasised that what he and Bush have embarked on is a broad-ranging partnership, ranging from IT investment and agriculture to heightened defence co-operation. Astoundingly, one of Singh's greatest applause lines was: "I would like to reiterate that India's track record in nuclear non-proliferation is impeccable."
Long after the tolling of Big Ben is replaced by the call of a muezzin, India and America will be shaping the world. Posted by Orrin Judd at July 22, 2005 6:49 PM
I suspect a pre-requisite for India's ascension will be another war with Pakistan, a country which seems utterly determined to dive into the maw of bloody suicide. Perhaps that will be necessary to convince the Chinese that India has "arrived", but probably 20 to 30 million people will die on the way.
The war will end there - not in Baghdad or even Riyadh.
Posted by: jim hamlen at July 22, 2005 10:36 PMIndian Hindus have been fighting for their religious freedom from Muslim invaders for 1000 years or so. There are no weak knees in India when it comes to facing the Islamicist threat. If/when Muscharaff is overthrown and Pakistan becomes Al Quaeda's host state, then India will be a very willing ally of ours in the war to take them out. They'll be pounding Pakistan's nuclear sites before Ted Kennedy can even start his filibuster against the President's war authorization.
Posted by: Robert Duquette at July 23, 2005 10:46 AMIndia is not capable of building a nuclear submarine armed with ballistic missiles.
It is not even capable of building a school in each village.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at July 23, 2005 3:06 PMThey're capable of buying them from us.
Posted by: oj at July 23, 2005 3:09 PMYeah, we know what happened when the Aussies tried that.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at July 23, 2005 6:40 PMAustralian subs helped win the Cold War. No reason Indian subs shouldn't help defeat China.
Posted by: oj at July 23, 2005 8:11 PMNaval warfare is quite different than just moving men around and shooting. The US Navy learned a lot of lessons in 1942 about fire-fighting, logisitics, armor, and a host of other individual items (that contribute to success). The Russians never really had a chance to learn these things, and the Chinese most certainly have not. Any naval engagement will be a short and quite exciting time for any Chinese vessel, above or below the water.
The question is whether the Chinese will decide to use a nuclear weapon against US targets (carriers, submarines, or even someplace like, say, Pearl).
Posted by: jim hamlen at July 23, 2005 11:51 PMMy guess is that no, they will not use nukes, at least not anytime soon.
The U.S. can reach any target in the PRC, but they cannot reach the vast majority of the U.S., nor can they find our Boomers.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at July 24, 2005 7:57 AMYou don't know the story about the Oz subs, do you, Orrin?
Oh, well, never mind.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at July 25, 2005 4:56 PMHarry:
Australia made a few abortive attempts at a sub fleet then just bought some of ours., India is cutting to the chase.
Posted by: oj at July 25, 2005 5:30 PM