Carter Calls U.S.-India Defense Partnership ‘Anchor of Global Security’

[Vikrant]

Well, that is kind of true.

---

WASHINGTON, December 10, 2015 — The defense partnership between the United States and India will become an anchor of global security, Defense Secretary Ash Carter said today in a joint news conference with Indian Defense Minister Manohar Parrikar.

Following a meeting between the defense leaders, Carter said Parrikar’s first official visit to the Pentagon is a sign of the growing strength of the defense ties between the two democracies.

The two leaders in June signed the Defense Technology and Trade Initiative, which Carter described as a framework that charts a course for the U.S.-India relationship for the next decade, fosters technology cooperation, works to build industry-to-industry ties and identifies opportunities for the co-development and co-production of defense systems.

“For instance,” Carter said, “today, Minister Parrikar and I discussed the progress that’s been made toward cooperation on jet engines and aircraft carrier design and construction [and] opportunities to collaborate on additional projects of interest.”

The growing strategic partnership between the United States and India is rooted in shared ideals, mutual interests and a spirit of innovation, the secretary said.

...

Carter Calls U.S.-India Defense Partnership ‘Anchor of Global Security’ > U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE > Article View

 

[waltky]

Ash Carter in Iraq...

Carter in Iraq to seek new ways to battle Islamic State
Dec 16,`15 -- Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Wednesday he came away from meetings with Iraqi leaders with no agreement on the use of Apache attack helicopters or additional military advisers in the battle to retake the key city of Ramadi from Islamic State militants.

But he said the U.S. was ready to provide such support if the Iraqis asked. Speaking to reporters after meetings with Iraq Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi and others, Carter said that as military conditions change, the U.S. is prepared to increase its contributions to the fight. The Obama administration has been talking for days about "accelerating" the fight against IS, but that could be complicated by Iraq's reluctance to a greater U.S. presence in the country, including tools such as Apache helicopters and more troops. "This is a very complex environment that we're operating in and we have to be attentive to some of the political realities that surround us every single day," said Lt. Gen. Sean MacFarland, top U.S. military commander for the Islamic State fight. "It's kind of hard to inflict support on somebody. So we try to provide support."

The two countries at times differ on how to wage the war, and any military support "has to be consistent with the way Iraqi security forces fight," said MacFarland, speaking to reporters at the Baghdad International Airport. Carter said MacFarland and Abadi believe there is no military need for the Apaches now. And those assets should only be used when they can make a critical, strategic contribution to the fight. But, he said, that doesn't mean they won't make a difference "sometime in the future." A senior U.S. official said the U.S. has been making preparations and will be ready at any moment to dispatch the Apaches when requested. The official was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly, so spoke on condition of anonymity.

At the start of his meeting with Abadi, Carter offered a short statement on the importance of Iraq's independence "Everything we do ... here is subject to the approval of the sovereign Iraqi government," Carter said. "And I also wanted to emphasize to you, the respect for sovereignty and for Iraq's territorial sovereignty is a principle that the United States strongly supports in every context." Abadi said he believes Iraqi forces are making progress. "I think we are on the verge of breaking the back of Daesh," he said, using the Arabic acronym for the Islamic State.

MORE

See also:

Russian airstrikes restore Syrian military balance of power
Dec 16,`15 -- Weeks of Russian airstrikes in Syria appear to have restored enough momentum to the government side to convince President Bashar Assad's foes and the world community that even if he doesn't win the war he cannot quickly be removed by force.

That realization, combined with the growing sense that the world's No. 1 priority is the destruction of the Islamic State group, has led many to acknowledge that however unpalatable his conduct of the war, Assad will have to be tolerated for at least some time further. The most dramatic sign of that came Tuesday with the statement by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry that Assad's future will be determined by the Syrian people, suggesting in the clearest way yet that he can stay on for now and be part of a transition.

That statement - less a reversal than the culmination of a rethink that had been underway for months - was doubly piquant coming in Moscow, where Kerry was discussing the Syria question with Russian officials. "The Russians with their military intervention have basically said you can refuse to talk to Bashar Assad, but that means that you won't get a political solution," said Yezid Sayigh, a senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. "If you do want that, then you have to deal with this man."

Still, significant gaps remain between the U.S. and Russia on Assad's future, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power said Wednesday, emphasizing that the U.S. position on Assad has not changed. "There is going to have to be a political transition, and Assad will have to go," Power told reporters ahead of a major international conference on Syria in New York on Friday. Russia, a key backer of Assad, began a campaign of airstrikes in Syria on Sept. 30 at a critical juncture in the civil war, when Assad's forces were fast losing ground to the rebels around areas considered key to the government's survival. While Moscow says its airstrikes target the Islamic State group and other "terrorists" in Syria, much of the Russian air campaign has focused on more moderate forces fighting Assad in the country's central and northern region where IS has little or no presence.

MORE

 

[whitehall]

The alleged "partner" part comes when American taxpayers furnish India with weapons and money. Otherwise there is no partnership.The same goes with NATO "partners".

 

[shadow355]

6.7 trillion PPP dollars (2013)
Is the GNP of India.

France. =
2.544 trillion PPP dollars (2013)


Less dependent on foreign military's.

Is India's Defense Budget Adequate?

Shadow 355

 

[Vikrant]

The alleged "partner" part comes when American taxpayers furnish India with weapons and money. Otherwise there is no partnership.The same goes with NATO "partners".

India pays for what it buys from the U.S.