Henery: Sorry about a delayed response. I have been too busy finishing a paper, and in a couple of days I'll be leaving Delhi too. In anycase, in my opinion the idea of Russia-India-China counterweight to US led world hegemony does not have much weight. First of all both economically and militarily the Western alliance would still be much too powerful than the triangle. The only way one can curb US led military adventures is by going back to the cold war situation, which I think is almost not possible--it could happen, thanks to the present war, if Russia gets a pure fascist regime (the old communists wouldn't be able to bring back the cold war). Secondly, I think the mistrust between India and China, and China and Russia are great enough to make this triangle extremely fragile. Thirdly, and probably most importantly, all the three countries economically need the western alliance more than the western alliance needs them--from the pragmatic point of view none of the three countries would want to make the western alliance its enemy unless their interests are attacked directly. I think a counterweight must develop as a political counterweight at global and UN level, which must include other important countries including South Afria. Cheers, ajit sinha > Ajit: > > The Russian foreign minister floated the idea last year while in > India. > It did not go very far. > The idea is not without merit, but it has a lot of historical > baggage to > overcome. > USSR-India alliance against China had been operative until the > fall of > the USSR. > India, a great friend of China after WWII under Nehru, has > abandoned the > non-aligned nation leadership since after Nehru's death. The > Indo-China > border war over disputed territory left by British imperialism > was > unfortunate and unnecessary and China saw it as part of US > containment > policy against China. When India shift toward the USSR, China > drew > closer to Pakistan for both geo-political and domestic minority > policy > (moslem) considerations. > Since the end of the Cold War, India and China repeatedly try to > move > toward rapprochement, but the complexity of Indian domestic > politics > needed a hostile posture toward China to justify its nuclear > policy. > And then there is the Tibetan exiled pretension government. To > China, > India adopted British imperialistic aims toward Tibet. Until > India stops > supporting the Dalai Lama, Indian-Chinese relations cannot > improve. The > Indian domestic political scene is too unstable for long term > foreign > policy structure as this time, and in many ways the same problem > exists > in Russia. > Yet in the long run, there is logic in the idea. > What does it look like from the Indian perspective? > > Henry > > Ajit Sinha wrote: > > > _____________________ > > Henery, > > What do you think of the talk about Russia-China-India > triangular > > counterweight to US led hegemony that is going on around here? > > Cheers, ajit sinha > > > >
