In change of stance, India supports talks with Taliban

[ravishingravi]

"ANDAR SERI BEGAWAN: At a time when the US is seeking to directly engage the Taliban, India's shift away from its own "no-truck-with Taliban" policy became evident on Tuesday, when foreign minister Salman Khurshid said New Delhi supported dialogue with all sections of the Afghan society and armed opposition groups "including the Taliban". Although Khurshid, who was addressing a meeting of the Asean Regional Forum, stressed that any dialogue in Afghanistan must recognize all internationally accepted red lines, his remarks here amplified the shift in India's stand against Taliban's inclusion in negotiations with Afghanistan. Elaborating on the approach, Khurshid said, 'But this process must be a broad based Afghan-led Afghan-owned reconciliation process, within the framework of the Afghan Constitution and internationally accepted red lines. This dialogue must involve all sections of the Afghan society and armed opposition groups, including the Taliban". India had always maintained that it had strong reservations about talks with Taliban, arguing that the idea of "good Taliban" is an oxymoron. PM Manmohan Singh did say in a speech in Afghan Parliament in 2011 that India supported the reconciliation process in the war-torn country and that it would respect the choices made by its MPs, but refrained from mentioning Taliban. The new openness to the prospect of Taliban's participation in reconciliation talks in Afghanistan coincides with the US's overtures towards the group whom it had encouraged to open an office in Doha. The US has also said that the engagement with Taliban will not be at the cost of red lines. The red lines are diplomatic short hand for the insistence that Taliban agreed to abide by the constitution of Afghanistan, shun violence and commit to respect the rights of women and ethnic minorities. Reiterating this during an intervention on exchange of views on regional and international issues here, Khurshid also said that India will remain engaged with Afghanistan. "The reconciliation process must not undermine the legitimacy of the Afghan State and Government and the political, social and economic progress witnessed in Afghanistan over the past decade, to which members of the international community have contributed in great measure. I may emphasize here that India's Afghanistan policy does not have an exit policy. India has played an important role in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Afghanistan," he said. Without naming Pakistan, Khurshid said there was a need for joint and concerted efforts to dismantle terrorist sanctuaries and safe havens beyond Afghan borders and disrupt all financial and tactical support for terrorism. "We must assist Afghanistan in its efforts to become a stable, democratic and pluralistic state. The international community must stay committed to Afghanistan in the form of development and security assistance during this period of transition and transformation," he said. Khurshid also sought to draw attention to Pakistan's proliferation linkages with North Korea saying another area of deep concern to India was that of clandestine proliferation of WMD technologies which poses a grave threat to international security. "With a view to address the risk of nuclear weapons, materials and technology falling into the hands of terrorists, India has been piloting a UN resolution in this regard for the past several years. In this context, the situation in the Korean peninsula and the DPRK's links to clandestine proliferation emanating from our neighbourhood deserves careful scrutiny," he said." http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/In-change-of-stance-India-supports-talks-with-Taliban/articleshow/20884297.cms Just Wow !!

[surajmal]

Only 2 scenarios. Either India is being ruled by traitors or these *******s are the biggest bunch of idiots in the history of mankind. Knowing their history, each scenario is equally likely.

[Swing_n_Speed]

Disgusting!!!

[Clarke]

I'm sorry, what's the alternative ? We refuse to talk to Taliban ? That essentially means Afghan govt, ISAF & Padosis work it out among themselves and our $2 billion investments & other sacrifices are sidelined. We always were the sideshow there and unless we're sending boots on the ground to replace ISAF or completely leaving that place, this is the only option. Its the Americans, Brits and their buddies that spent so much more than us and shed far more blood than we did over there. They're not acting tough anymore, how on earth can we do so ?

[Swing_n_Speed]

I'm sorry, what's the alternative ? We refuse to talk to Taliban ? That essentially means Afghan govt, ISAF & Padosis work it out among themselves and our $2 billion investments & other sacrifices are sidelined. We always were the sideshow there and unless we're sending boots on the ground to replace ISAF or completely leaving that place, this is the only option. Its the Americans, Brits and their buddies that spent so much more than us and shed far more blood than we did over there. They're not acting tough anymore, how on earth can we do so ?

Americans and Brit took a spanking and despite waging a 10 year war still couldn't complete dislodge the Taliban. Why on earth do you expect our policies to mirror theirs? As far as investments go. Feck the TAPI pipeline. Lets get gas from Iran instead! I'm aware that India has substantial investments in Afghanistan, mostly made in agreement with the Karzai government. If for whatever reason there is a perception that the Karzai gov. is incapable of safeguarding our interests then it's time to move on... If we feel that a Taliban resurgence may affect peace in Kashmir then we might as well stop investing in Afghanistan and use the funds to bolster our defenses in Kashmir. The question I ask is who conducted the feasibility studies that entailed we make such investments? Cos clearly they miscalculated and now we are in the unsavory position of having to deal with the Taliban?

We always were the sideshow there and unless we're sending boots on the ground to replace ISAF or completely leaving that place' date=' this is the only option.[/quote'] And so we will always be.Quantitatively speaking, with 55% Afghans being of Pashtun origin and that, numerically more Pashtuns live in Pakistan; that way Pakistanis will have natural influence over there in Afghanistan. As far as investments go, China, USA and gang have invested may more than we can ever dream of and are still unsure about their investments. The best strategy is to wait and watch. Let's see how things are playing out with China. 'Some recent incidents have encouraged Indian optimism of finding a more receptive China to its plans for Afghanistan. One is an Islamist terror attack on a hotel in Gilgit-Baltistan of Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. On June 23 early morning, about a dozen gunmen walked into a hotel in a mountaineering base camp near the Nanga Parbat peak and gunned down nine tourists and their tourist guide. Of the victims two were Chinese citizens and one a Chinese origin person from the US. The others were Ukrainians. A shocked Beijing has strongly condemned the attacks and Islamabad has vowed to hunt down the guilty. A unit of what has come to be know as Pakistani Taliban has claimed responsibility for the attack. China will not be amused by the fact that the new Nawaz Sharif government in Islamabad has announced plans to talk to this outfit. Gilgit-Baltistan borders China's troubled Xinjiang province where ethnic Uyghur Muslims clashed with police twice in three days resulting in scores of deaths. Though government sources claimed there were 35 deaths, some reports say the fatalities may be more than 50. ' So I say again let's wait and watch and when the time is right we strike an accord with Beijing over Afghanistan. We already have good relations with Karzai. Absolutely no reason to jeopardize our relations with him and start talking with the Taliban. When the time is right China will be forced to ally with us in dealing appropriately with the Taliban. For now let Nawaz Sharif make all the moves.

[Clarke]

As far as investments go. Feck the TAPI pipeline. Lets get gas from Iran instead! I'm aware that India has substantial investments in Afghanistan, mostly made in agreement with the Karzai government. If for whatever reason there is a perception that the Karzai gov. is incapable of safeguarding our interests then it's time to move on... If we feel that a Taliban resurgence may affect peace in Kashmir then we might as well stop investing in Afghanistan and use the funds to bolster our defenses in Kashmir.

Yes, that's the only feasible way IF we want to continue not to talk with the Taliban.

The question I ask is who conducted the feasibility studies that entailed we make such investments? Cos clearly they miscalculated and now we are in the unsavory position of having to deal with the Taliban?

Going by our historical involvement there in supporting the Northern Alliance & having to deal with an extended safe haven for terrorists (Pak being the default safe haven) we made a suitable choice in backing the ISAF indirectly in 2001. What we might have to do now is raise our primary demand for Afghan territory not to be used as a base for insurgency in Kashmir or Rest of India, I'm not sure if the 'Good Taliban' will be averse to that at least on paper. This is keeping in mind the 'Good Taliban' comes to an agreement, its another story if it can somehow dislodge the govt in Kabul (which is less likely).

So I say again let's wait and watch and when the time is right strike an accord with Beijing over Afghanistan. We already have good relations with Karzai. Absolutely no reason to jeopardize our relations with him and start talking with the Taliban. When the time is right China will be forced to ally with us in dealing appropriately with the Taliban. For now let Nawaz Sharif make all the moves.

I'd say our role in/relationship with Afghanistan has to be independent of what the Chinese have in their minds. The economic & security interests might be common but we'll need our independent policy first up.

[surajmal]

Americans and Brit took a spanking and despite waging a 10 year war still couldn't complete dislodge the Taliban. Why on earth do you expect our policies to mirror theirs? As far as investments go. Feck the TAPI pipeline. Lets get gas from Iran instead! I'm aware that India has substantial investments in Afghanistan, mostly made in agreement with the Karzai government. If for whatever reason there is a perception that the Karzai gov. is incapable of safeguarding our interests then it's time to move on... If we feel that a Taliban resurgence may affect peace in Kashmir then we might as well stop investing in Afghanistan and use the funds to bolster our defenses in Kashmir.

That it is it. Get Iran involved. Get the Northern Alliance involved. And give a big middle finger to Uncle Sam. Unfortunately, I suspect we have a bunch of Chewtiyas running the IFS and Foreign ministry who are good for nothing other than collecting paychecks, going on foreign tours on taxpayers money and being gungadeens to the Amkreekans and Brits. India is the only major country in the world that has repeatedly chopped its own foot in matters of National/Foreign Policy over the last 60 years. This will continue to happen as long as the ideological base of the elite incharge of running this country is located in western universities. So when a crisis comes a calling, these nincompoops are caught with their pants down. And 10/10, their response is to go running to their masters sitting in Washington and London looking for advice like the remote controlled drones that they are. ackthoo. Every Indian foreign policy hack since independence is a disgrace to the name of Chanakya.

[surajmal]

The swift withdrawal of ISAF should tell us something about the mindset of Americans: They have no solution to the growing Islamist threat. They have a solution to protect the western states: keep buying off the generals and tinpot dictators that are running the terrorists camps. But the non western countries don't come under the gambit of this underhanded dealing. Biggest casualty of this under the table dealing is going to be India starting next year. Just wait and watch.

[Muloghonto]

That it is it. Get Iran involved. Get the Northern Alliance involved. And give a big middle finger to Uncle Sam. Unfortunately, I suspect we have a bunch of Chewtiyas running the IFS and Foreign ministry who are good for nothing other than collecting paychecks, going on foreign tours on taxpayers money and being gungadeens to the Amkreekans and Brits. India is the only major country in the world that has repeatedly chopped its own foot in matters of National/Foreign Policy over the last 60 years. This will continue to happen as long as the ideological base of the elite incharge of running this country is located in western universities. So when a crisis comes a calling, these nincompoops are caught with their pants down. And 10/10, their response is to go running to their masters sitting in Washington and London looking for advice like the remote controlled drones that they are. ackthoo. Every Indian foreign policy hack since independence is a disgrace to the name of Chanakya.

Look, India cannot form its own independent & India-centric foreign policy. The reason being we've never been militarily or financially strong enough to project hard power and our intelligence service is ordinary. Our foreign policy considers China as the #1 threat and we must act accordingly. Which means we cannot afford to lose western allies in our quest to contain China. We had the option to exercise influence in Moscow to contain China in the Soviet era but in the Russian Federation era, Russia has made it amply clear that while they see us as valuable allies in the military-industrial complex, they will do nothing whatsoever to upset China and the flourishing trade of oil & lumber with China. Therefore Russia is out of the picture, leaving us with hobnobbing with the anti-China gang, aka Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Phillipines- all of whom are taking a hostile position against China due to Uncle Sam's garantees in the region. Ie, in essence our foreign policy has to cater to the American one if we have any hope of ever attaining parity with China. Regarding the taliban, the west wont say it, but any war against the Taliban are unwinnable. This is because the Taliban are not defeated when you kill or capture thousands of their warriors, they simply breed more, wait for the kids to grow up with stories of their shaheed dads & pick up right where daddy left off. Geneva convention prevents us from genociding the Pashtun yet there is no solution to the Taliban outside of genocide of the Pashtuns.

[surajmal]

Look, India cannot form its own independent & India-centric foreign policy. The reason being we've never been militarily or financially strong enough to project hard power and our intelligence service is ordinary. Our foreign policy considers China as the #1 threat and we must act accordingly. Which means we cannot afford to lose western allies in our quest to contain China. We had the option to exercise influence in Moscow to contain China in the Soviet era but in the Russian Federation era, Russia has made it amply clear that while they see us as valuable allies in the military-industrial complex, they will do nothing whatsoever to upset China and the flourishing trade of oil & lumber with China. Therefore Russia is out of the picture, leaving us with hobnobbing with the anti-China gang, aka Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Phillipines- all of whom are taking a hostile position against China due to Uncle Sam's garantees in the region. Ie, in essence our foreign policy has to cater to the American one if we have any hope of ever attaining parity with China.

Strong Military requires a strong military industrial complex. How much effort has been put to remedy that? Funding for all indigenous efforts is a joke compared to how much money MOD allocates for foreign purchases. And I include the cigar smoking, whisky drinking moochards in the military leadership (who expect the DPSUs to deliver state of the art equipment in their first attempt) in my ire.

Regarding the taliban, the west wont say it, but any war against the Taliban are unwinnable. This is because the Taliban are not defeated when you kill or capture thousands of their warriors, they simply breed more, wait for the kids to grow up with stories of their shaheed dads & pick up right where daddy left off. Geneva convention prevents us from genociding the Pashtun yet there is no solution to the Taliban outside of genocide of the Pashtuns.

Tellibunnies are Pak Army's puppy. You want to wipe them off, first start with the jihadi Army. Problem isn't Taliban, problem is Islam that no one seems to have any solution to. And how can you, when the "educated" elites of the world refuse to even acknowledge that problem exists.

[Muloghonto]

Strong Military requires a strong military industrial complex. How much effort has been put to remedy that? Funding for all indigenous efforts is a joke compared to how much money MOD allocates for foreign purchases. And I include the cigar smoking' date= whisky drinking moochards in the military leadership (who expect the DPSUs to deliver state of the art equipment in their first attempt) in my ire. Well whoever are pulling the Taliban's strings is not the issue here. The issue here is that you cannot irradicate them without genociding their women and children first. That is reason no.1 and reason #2 through 100 why the ISAF did not beat the taliban.

The military industrial complex is not one where you just pour in money and you get top of the line products. It requires a strong basis in product building, developing and lifecycle maintainance. Indian defence industry sucks but the military has a legit point that we are better served with superior foreign imports than inducting inferior home-made products. If the DPSU cannot deliver state of the art product, it does not deserve a contract, period. Does not matter if its indegenous or not.

[surajmal]

The military industrial complex is not one where you just pour in money and you get top of the line products. It requires a strong basis in product building' date=' developing and lifecycle maintainance. Indian defence industry sucks but the military has a legit point that we are better served with superior foreign imports than inducting inferior home-made products.[/quote'] Chinese must be nuts then. I'm sorry, do you think a "strong basis in product building, developing and lifecycle maintenance" is going to drop out of the sky? If IITs, several large private corporations, and stumbling but learning DPSUs isn't enough of a starting block to create a industrial complex, then I don't know what is. What it takes is WILL. Which the deracinated elite doesn't possess because such actions will be in direct conflict with moves of their masters. F-16 went through a decade of post induction refinement because it was initially designed to be a air superiority fighter and the USAF wanted multi role. But USAF didn't chuck it to the side. Development of F-16 became a partnership not a Supplier/Client relationship that Indian Air Force and Army (Navy has finally come to its senses I must say) seems to have with DPSUs. Taliban's strings are exactly the issue. Kids don't pop out of their mothers' with a AK-47 in their hands. Logistics, Training, Brainwashing etc require an infrastructure that Pak Army has been proving since the late 80s. And Americans looked the other way because it didn't affect them... until 98 Kenya. Now they are going to deal with them by paying off their handlers. When you think about it, Americans aren't much smarter then their Indian counterparts but since they happen to be in charge of the world's mint, printing few extra billions for extortion money doesn't affect their bottom line and provides them with a solid option to protect American lives. India doesn't have that luxury. But since they are intellectual slaves of the West, problem solving is a problem.

[Muloghonto]

Chinese must be nuts then. I'm sorry, do you think a "strong basis in product building, developing and lifecycle maintenance" is going to drop out of the sky. If IITs, several large private corporations, and stumbling but learning DPSUs isn't enough of a starting block to create a industrial complex, then I don't know what is. What it takes is WILL. Which the deracinated elite doesn't possess because such actions will be in direct conflict with moves of their masters.

China isnt nuts, China is under embargo for weapons export from virtually every western nation and has been for better part of the last 40 years. China initially relied on the Soviets for military help but China realized that Russia will never give them stuff as good as India gets due to Russia's 'shared border concern' with China. China developed its military defence complex entirely on its own because it had no other choice, not because it refused to import foreign weaponry to try and boost local military industrial complex. Will is there rfom everyone but we cannot simply accept substandard stuff like what the Arjun tank panned out to be over proven products due to nationalism. The US too rejects plenty of defence contractor's tenders due to quality issues and i just dont see why we should buy substandard stuff from our defence industry if better stuff is available. In a free-market situation, a military industrial complex doesnt spring up overnight, it takes decades. I figure we will be completely independent in our armaments needs by 2050 but till then we need to buy the best product our money can buy.

F-16 went through a decade of post induction refinement because it was initially designed to be a air superiority fighter but the USAF wanted multi role. But USAF didn't chuck it to the side. Development of F-16 became a partnership not a Supplier/Client relationship that Indian Air Force seems to have with DPSUs.

The F-16 met the USAF's initial requirement tender. When they decieded to need a multi-role fighter, they went with the modification option over a complete re-design, particularly because the USAF's multirole fighter program was geared towards a 5th gen. fighter that wouldn't be ready for decades ( F-22 and F-35s). The difference between that and the Tejas is that the Tejas failed to meet the initial criterias of the IAF in the first place.

Taliban's strings are exactly the issue. Kids don't pop out of their mothers' with a AK-47 in their hands. Logistics, Training, Brainwashing etc require an infrastructure that Pak Army has been proving since the late 80s. And Americans looked the other way because it didn't affect them... until 98 Kenya.

Havn't you ever watched videos of how the Taliban build AK-47s and bullets practically in the caves ? There is a reason why rebels the world over prefer AK-47s. Everyone harps on its reliability but the bigger issue is that it is extremely simple to make and fix too. Less than six moving parts, no polymers, all big hunks of metal and wood. Having jihadis armed with AK-47s doesnt require any 'funding', it requires mothers bringing up their kids with stories and songs about their jihadi daddy's kurbaanis.

Now they are going to deal with them by paying off their handlers. When you think about it, Americans aren't much smarter then their Indian counterparts but since they happen to be in charge of the world's mint, printing few extra billions for extortion money doesn't affect their bottom line. India doesn't have that luxury. But since they are intellectual slaves of the West, problem solving is a problem.

America is paying off the Taliban because America has limited interests in the region. It wont work either, but as i said, short of genociding the Pashtuns, i dont see how the Taliban insurgency can be dealt with.

[Swing_n_Speed]

Havn't you ever watched videos of how the Taliban build AK-47s and bullets practically in the caves ? There is a reason why rebels the world over prefer AK-47s. Everyone harps on its reliability but the bigger issue is that it is extremely simple to make and fix too. Less than six moving parts, no polymers, all big hunks of metal and wood. Having jihadis armed with AK-47s doesnt require any 'funding', it requires mothers bringing up their kids with stories and songs about their jihadi daddy's kurbaanis. .

I don't buy that one bit. Ak-47's alone an army do not make. There is massive brainwashing machinery at play here, with funding right from Saudi-Arabia to Pakistan. Cut the funding and instantly the Taliban menace won't go away, but eventually it will.

[Muloghonto]

I don't buy that one bit. Ak-47's alone an army do not make. There is massive brainwashing machinery at play here' date= with funding right from Saudi-Arabia to Pakistan. Cut the funding and instantly the Taliban menace won't go away, but eventually it will.

The Taliban are not an army. They are a guerilla force armed with AK-47s, simple home-made grenades while being exceptionally tough at surviving in the wild regions of Afghan-Pak border and knowing their terrain extremely well. If the Taliban did have major arms backing from the Pak Army, all it would've taken to completely destabilize American presence in Afghanistan is a shipment of a few thousand stinger missiles. That is how they beat the Soviets in the 80s and last i checked, all the Apaches & Warthogs are sitting ducks against Stinger missiles. Funding is not an issue with the Taliban. They will bring in enough money through islamic charities to 'feed the children of destitute war torn Pakistan regions' and that is all the money they need. They make their own grenades, RPGs, AK-47s and bullets. Their biggest capital is brainwashed children brought up by the madrassahs and their mothers to idolize their jihadi daddys. That capital is pretty much unassailable till you bring genocide on the table.

[surajmal]

China isnt nuts, China is under embargo for weapons export from virtually every western nation and has been for better part of the last 40 years. China initially relied on the Soviets for military help but China realized that Russia will never give them stuff as good as India gets due to Russia's 'shared border concern' with China. China developed its military defence complex entirely on its own because it had no other choice, not because it refused to import foreign weaponry to try and boost local military industrial complex.

Why is irrelevant. The point is they are doing it because they realize that for a country as large as theirs, importing arms is a ridiculous proposition. (something that Indian Babus fail to understand or they understand and just don't give a damn because their loyalty lies in the swiss bank accounts and not the country they are employed by).

Will is there rfom everyone but we cannot simply accept substandard stuff like what the Arjun tank panned out to be over proven products due to nationalism. The US too rejects plenty of defence contractor's tenders due to quality issues and i just dont see why we should buy substandard stuff from our defence industry if better stuff is available. In a free-market situation, a military industrial complex doesnt spring up overnight, it takes decades. I figure we will be completely independent in our armaments needs by 2050 but till then we need to buy the best product our money can buy.

Nothing to do with nationalism. Just foresight.

The difference between that and the Tejas is that the Tejas failed to meet the initial criterias of the IAF in the first place.

Tejas didn't fail (it hasn't and they are practically at the finish line now) because DRDO failed to meet the initial criteria, it failed because IAF geniuses expected a third world PSU to build a 4th gen (design freeze occurred in 98) AC from scratch with little input from the primary customer. One may even conclude that they expected/wanted DRDO to fail by the way they acted in the initial years so that they can get their hands on the foreign toys and make some nice cash on the side at the same time.

[Swing_n_Speed]

The Taliban are not an army. They are a guerilla force armed with AK-47s, simple home-made grenades while being exceptionally tough at surviving in the wild regions of Afghan-Pak border and knowing their terrain extremely well. If the Taliban did have major arms backing from the Pak Army, all it would've taken to completely destabilize American presence in Afghanistan is a shipment of a few thousand stinger missiles. That is how they beat the Soviets in the 80s and last i checked, all the Apaches & Warthogs are sitting ducks against Stinger missiles. Funding is not an issue with the Taliban. They will bring in enough money through islamic charities to 'feed the children of destitute war torn Pakistan regions' and that is all the money they need. They make their own grenades, RPGs, AK-47s and bullets. Their biggest capital is brainwashed children brought up by the madrassahs and their mothers to idolize their jihadi daddys. That capital is pretty much unassailable till you bring genocide on the table.

Obviously Pakistan would not supply Manpads to the Taliban dude. C'mon. That would be direct provocation. Yet Pakistan does support the Taliban through funding, providing refuge to Taliban leaders etc etc. Pakistan does enough to keep the Taliban juggernaut rolling on. And madrassas as you said need aid to run. Their lure is not only in Islamic studies but also in providing food and other necessities. All of which require funding. Nonetheless read this article. The Taliban were in possession of Manpads and there were a number of attacks on helicopters. Most missiles though were diverted with flares http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-taliban-missile-strike-chinook

[Muloghonto]

Why is irrelevant. The point is they are doing it because they realize that for a country as large as theirs, importing arms is a ridiculous proposition. (something that Indian Babus fail to understand or they understand and just don't give a damn because their loyalty lies in the swiss bank accounts and not the country they are employed by).

No, that is the point i am totally disagreeing with. China didnt realize that weapons imports wont work- they tried their level best to get the French to sell them Scorpene submarines and it still didnt go through because of embargo. The truth is China's military industrial complex was given so much importance because China had no other choice. It was home-made Chinese crap vs nothing. Our options are homemade Indian crap vs better stuff from the west/Russia.

Nothing to do with nationalism. Just foresight.

There is nothing 'foresight' worthy about buying substandard crap because it has 'made in India' tag on it. if i am the General leading a war, i want my troops to have the best equipment we can get hold of, not 'made in India' equipment only. Its simple joingoistic nationalism to say that we should favour our defence industry even when our defence industry cannot meet the requirment criterias for 50% of the stuff it makes.

Tejas didn't fail (it hasn't and they are practically at the finish line now) because DRDO failed to meet the initial criteria, it failed because IAF geniuses expected a third world PSU to build a 4th gen (design freeze occurred in 98) AC from scratch with little input from the primary customer. One may even conclude that they expected/wanted DRDO to fail by the way they acted in the initial years so that they can get their hands on the foreign toys and make some nice cash on the side at the same time.

Tejas failed because DRDO failed with the Cauvery engine. That and that alone is the major undoing of the Tejas. Ofcourse if i am incharge of IAF i would rather have my pilots fly around in Rafales than Tejas. You seem to think that our military should buy inferior made in India products to prove their nationalism. I think that it isnt nationalism to push inferior products on your military, its jingoism.

[Muloghonto]

Obviously Pakistan would not supply Manpads to the Taliban dude. C'mon. That would be direct provocation. Yet Pakistan does support the Taliban through funding, providing refuge to Taliban leaders etc etc. Pakistan does enough to keep the Taliban juggernaut rolling on. And madrassas as you said need aid to run. Their lure is not only in Islamic studies but also in providing food and other necessities. All of which require funding. Nonetheless read this article. The Taliban were in possession of Manpads and there were a number of attacks on helicopters. Most missiles though were diverted with flares http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-taliban-missile-strike-chinook

1. The taliban didnt fire stingers at the USAF/US Army. they fired a few 'fire and forget' line of sight G2A missiles like strelas and RPGs pointed at air. If the Taliban were firing stingers and javelins at the USAF, they'd be losing helicopters at the rate of 1 every day. 2. precisely-the Paki support of the Taliban constitutes to funding the madrassahs, having pow-wows with their leadership, letting them know when drone strikes are comming and thats it. This type of support is significant, but it is practically invisible support because the funding comes in through the way of Islamic charities. Something you cannot stop, period. I mean what- make it illegal to donate to an Islamic charity ? make it illegal to donate to starving paki/afghan children ? Never going to happen, so their pipeline will remain open. Its harder to shut down these charity-based terror-network funding than getting the Swiss to be frank with their bank account names. So how do you deal with the Taliban ? You cannot hurt their financial pipeline. You cannot hurt their armament production (they do it themselves, in caves of the Suleiman ranges) and they get thousands of kids every year who wish to get themselves killed like their daddys for their fictional God and 72 virgins. Only option: kill them all. But that option only exists in paper and cannot be implemented. So the net result is, the Taliban are unbeatable.

[surajmal]

No, that is the point i am totally disagreeing with. China didnt realize that weapons imports wont work- they tried their level best to get the French to sell them Scorpene submarines and it still didnt go through because of embargo. The truth is China's military industrial complex was given so much importance because China had no other choice. It was home-made Chinese crap vs nothing. Our options are homemade Indian crap vs better stuff from the west/Russia. There is nothing 'foresight' worthy about buying substandard crap because it has 'made in India' tag on it. if i am the General leading a war, i want my troops to have the best equipment we can get hold of, not 'made in India' equipment only. Its simple joingoistic nationalism to say that we should favour our defence industry even when our defence industry cannot meet the requirment criterias for 50% of the stuff it makes.

How many of the Rafales, Su 30s will be used against jihadis and naxals - the 2 primary security threats at present? Pakistan army apparatus either isn't a threat or India is incapable of making them accountable for the their transgressions. (I am not saying this. This is the track record of India) So, fancy Air Force toys shouldn't factor into the defence situation. From Pakistan's side, they have also clearly shifted towards asymmetric warfare against India because they don't have the guts to go to full out war either (since Indian Army has been sufficient at whooping their behinds in each of the past instances). And as you have put it in prior posts, India doesn't have much of chance against China so 100 Rafales shouldn't do much to move the scales. So the rational decision should be to stop funding defence companies of the goras and build your own capabilities for the long run. Because in the short run India is still the same old underdeveloped shithole incapable of not only challenging the big dogs but even little chihuahas next door.

Tejas failed because DRDO failed with the Cauvery engine. That and that alone is the major undoing of the Tejas. Ofcourse if i am incharge of IAF i would rather have my pilots fly around in Rafales than Tejas. You seem to think that our military should buy inferior made in India products to prove their nationalism. I think that it isnt nationalism to push inferior products on your military, its jingoism.

No, I think that Rafales and Sukhois are for display purposes only (since the political leadership doesn't have the gumption to use them). You are the one displaying a false sense of nationalism. As if buying several dozen fighter jets going to impact the security situation. Current policy signifies a lack of vision and planning. That is my point. Lack of vision and planning across the board.