1. 10 reasons why Hillary Clinton’s victory in US Presidential election would be ‘disastrous’ for India

10 reasons why Hillary Clinton’s victory in US Presidential election would be ‘disastrous’ for India

The India-US relationship would be under threat if Democratic party candidate Hillary Clinton wins the upcoming presidential election.

By: | Updated: October 31, 2016 4:41 PM
‪hillary clinton‬, fbi, federal bureau of investigation‬, james comey‬‬, huma abedin, who is huma abedin, clinton, fbi, washington post, cnn news, megyn kelly, anthony weiner, trump polls, joe biden, bill clinton, fbi clinton, clinton fbi, ny times, clinton email, hilary, clinton emails, presidential election, us presidential election, clinton trump polls, hillary clinton email, harry reid, abedin, trump news today, fbi invenstigation, fbi reopens case, ny daily news, clinton email news, clinton fbi, hillary clinton twitter, fbi hillary, clinton polls, florida polls, hillary clinton india, hillary clinton india policy, why hillary would be disastrous for india, hillary clinton policy on india, india hillary, india hillary clinton, hillary clinton news, hillary clinton fbi, Barack Obama‬, ‪Diwali‬, ‪White House‬‬, barack obama, obama, diwali obama, barack obama diwali, obama diwali, obama celebrats diwali, india news, us india, us india relations, indo-us relation, financialexpress, the Fellowship, the Family, C Street House, Madeleine Albright, Robin Raphel According to the US- based political analyst Arvind Kumar, Hillary’s victory would be a disaster for India. (Image: Reuters)

The India-US relationship would be under threat if Democratic party candidate Hillary Clinton wins the upcoming presidential election. According to the US- based political analyst Arvind Kumar, Hillary’s victory would be a disaster for India. In a detailed article published in the Sunday Guardian, the politics expert has shown how the Clintons have always been hostile to India and pursued policies against India not only vis-a-vis Pakistan but also in relation to the Indian space programme and Hindus. Considering the way Hillary’s husband and former US President, Bill Clinton, carried out his hostility towards India, it is highly unlikely that she would chart a different course of action if she wins the election. Kumar has pointed out that Hillary’s record as the US Secretary of State under President Barack Obama has also been anti-India in many aspects.

Here are 10 reasons that would make Hillary’s win a disaster for India, according to Kumar

1. Hillary Clinton’s victory would bring back the US hostility of the 1990s towards India under Bill Clinton

Kumar says that Hillary Clinton’ victory in the election would bring back the US’ hostility of the 1990s towards India under the presidency of Bill Clinton. He writes that India’s relationship with the US took a sudden downturn after Bill Clinton took office in 1993. For nearly a year, Clinton did not appoint an ambassador to India and he opposed India on a number of fronts. Kumar says Bill Clinton took a number of steps to disarm and weaken India by preventing access to technology and carried out a sustained attack on the Indian economy by imposing several economic sanctions.

2. Bill Clinton’s administration took several measures to “retard” development of India’s space and technology sectors

Kumar writes that in 1991, Senator Joe Biden, who is now the US Vice-President, introduced an amendment in the bill granting aid to Russia. The Bill made it mandatory for Russia that it would not sell cryogenic engines for India’s space programme. The Clinton administration took several measures to “retard” development of India’s space and technology sectors. The then US government also blocked the sale of Cray supercomputers that were approved under the
Ronald Reagan administration. In contrast, the Clinton administration allowed the sale of these supercomputers to China.

3. Bill Clinton administration tried to choke India economically

The Clinton administration also targeted for several economic sanctions and threatened the country under what was called the Super 301 clause of the American trade law. The then US government “specially targeted” Indian textile and carpet industries. In the 1990s, terms like “Dunkel Draft”, “Super 301”, “WTO” and “patent laws” were synonyms with the US’ bid to destroy the Indian economy, leading to several protests in India.

Kumar points out a “famous episode” in which the Clinton administration declared that Indian skirts were flammable and banned them after an officer ignited a skirt in front of television cameras.

4. Clintons have always been pro-Pakistan, anti-India

According to the article, the Bill Clinton administration was consistently anti-India and pro-Pakistan on the security front. Clinton’s Cabinet members supported terrorists in India. The then US Vice-President Al Gore even described Punjab as “Khalistan”.

Bill Clinton made his close friend Robin Raphel the Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia. Under Raphel, the US State Department agenda supported separatists in Jammu and Kashmir. The US administration also offered F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan. Not only this, the US State Department propped up the Taliban regime in Afghanistan during this period.

Kumar says that recently, when Hillary Clinton was the US Secretary of State, Raphel was appointed to oversee a $7.5 billion aid package to Pakistan. However, she ended up being investigated by FBI for spying on behalf of Pakistan and lost her security clearance, he writes. Charges against Raphel were dropped after FBI started probing Hillary Clinton for using a private email server for classified emails.

5. Clintons are known to abuse power

When Bill Clinton took the second term as the US President in 1996, Madeleine Albright replaced Warren Christopher as the Secretary of State. Albright never made any effort to hide her hostility towards India. Kumar says her “weekly outbursts on television even bordered on racism.”

Albright continued her attacks on India even after leaving the office. She called for a plebiscite in Kashmir, thus justifying the actions of Pakistani terrorists and separatist groups. Kumar says the Clintons and people close to them have always abused power. He cites the example of Albright’s bombing of Yugoslavia and then getting her investment firm to attempt a takeover of mines in that country.

Albright had also justified the deaths around half-a-million children in Iraq, claiming the deaths were “worth it”. Recently, Albright threatened American women saying “there was a special place in hell reserved for them if they did not vote for Hillary Clinton.”

ALSO READ Barack Obama celebrates Diwali, lights first-ever diya in Oval Office

6. Hillary Clinton’s anti-India, anti-Narendra Modi activities

Kumar writes that as the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton picked up where Bill Clinton and his Cabinet members had left off. She “did not waste any time in pursuing anti-India activities. Soon after Hillary was appointed the Secretary of State, Teesta Setalvad, an activist who has been allegedly involved in framing Prime Minister Narendra Modi on false charges, received a “handsome donation” from Vikram Chatwal. Vikram’s father Sant Chatwal had been a trustee of the Clinton Foundation. Emails leaked by WikiLeaks have shown that Sant Chatwal also had a role in the infamous cash-for-votes scam in the Lok Sabha.

Other emails leaks highlighted that the US government wanted to Setalvad’s NGO and use her claims in the so-called human rights reports that could be used against India and Hindus. Considering Hillary’ background, Kumar says, these actions are not unexpected.

7. Hillary Clinton as a member of “the Fellowship”

Jeff Sharlet, an investigative reporter, had exposed that Hillary’s is part of a “secretive group” in Washington DC known by several names such as “the Fellowship, the Family, or the C Street House.” Kumar writes that this group uses religion to further their geopolitical agenda around the world and evangelical Christians are their main tool for interfering in other countries.

According to Kumar, the separation of East Timor from Indonesia using religious persecution as the excuse was one of their achievements under Bill Clinton. When Atal Behari Vajpayee became the Prime Minister of India for a few days in 1996, Bill Clinton acted at the behest of this group and set up an advisory committee that was supposed to deal with religious freedom around the world. The committee, which had members from every faith except Hinduism, recommended the creation of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). Since its inception, this government agency has made fictitious claims to attack Hindus and India. Kumar says that the USCIRF was also responsible for “demonising” Narendra Modi on “false charges” and recommending the US government not to let Modi enter the US.

8. Talks to appoint Joe Biden as Secretary of State under Hillary Clinton

Kumar said that Hillary’s victory would trigger a disastrous era for the Indo-US relationship not because of her past records but for her future plans as well. Kumar says that there are talks to appoint Joe Biden as Hillary’s Secretary of State if she wins. If this happens, Biden would pursue his agenda of thwarting the development of India’s space programme and other technological advancements.

9. Huma Abedin of Pakistani descent as Hillary Clinton’s closest confidante

What is more worrisome is the fact that Hillary Clinton’s closest confidante is Huma Abedin, who is of Pakistani descent and her family has links with radical Islamist elements in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, according to Kumar. Abedin may end up playing important role in determining the US foreign policy.

10. Henry Kissinger’s support for Hillary Clinton

According to Kumar, another point against Hillary is that “war hawk” Henry Kissinger has support and has praised her stint as Secretary of State. “Kissinger’s hostility towards India is no state secret, as many of his racist, anti-India statements have been recorded on tape.”

  1. George Cv
    Oct 31, 2016 at 2:25 pm
    Was this piece written by BJP HQ ?
    Reply
    1. F
      FDK
      Nov 1, 2016 at 7:14 am
      That article is incorrect, biased and incomplete in several respects. And its also inflammatory in several others (suggesting that HRC is likely to be biased against India because of Huma), and includes lots of conspiracy theories and flat out lies. For instance, Kissinger has not supported and/or endorsed HRC. I yield to few in my dislike for Kissinger (see previous posts from me), but the old fossil has gone back on many of his anti-India comments decades ago. It's worth pointing out too that lots of policies of the Clinton administration were insutional policies of the US -- remember that prior President Bush Sr. and Reagan were instrumental in the birth of what later became the Taliban, and turned a blind eye to stan's obtaining nukes. Furthermore, I remember Clinton and Chelsea visiting India and being hugely por. I doubt any US president has been as por in India before. (HRC visited alone later, while still First Lady). And Clinton was President during the time India opened its economy and started the outsourcing boom. Clinton was in favor of free trade (HRC is generally in favor too, but has had to walk that back a little after challenges from Sanders and Trump). In the same trip, he visited stan and lectured them on how they had to fix their broken state. Also, its worth pointing out US role in the Kargil war. I was in Washington during July 4th that year. Nawaz Sharif flew into the US around that day for hurried consultations with Clinton. After meetings, Sharif agreed to withdraw stani troops (that decision cost him his position, his freedom and nearly his life). Clinton pressured him to withdraw and likely used back channels to pressure the stani army (which of course, holds the real power in stan). That action prevented further Indian casualties (I have a relative in the Indian army, who was deplo to the border at that time, and I was concerned about him), and even the low probability but catastrophic possibility of a nuclear exchange. That is not the action of an India hater.
      Reply
      1. X
        xyz
        Oct 31, 2016 at 2:22 pm
        If I am not mistaken Bill Clinton sta 5 days in India and 5 hours in stan thus not equating India with stan. He also made Sharif withdraw from Kargil.
        Reply
        1. Swapan Deb
          Nov 1, 2016 at 12:50 pm
          If it is so ,there will be no problem for Indiadia will join Russia China nexus which going to be established for South China sea and for new geopolitical changes over the world.Russia will be more closer to India.China and Russia are waiting for India's concern.Even BRICKS may turn to a military alloy.US will be more friendlessdia does't care for US friendship.1971 is the proofdia is now more strong and hostile.Russia and China will be rather happy with that of India's joining to them.I don't think US will allow new pivot of influence in India for her own interest and should't jeopardise the hardly earned relationship.
          Reply
          1. Vijayekkumaran Murugaiah
            Nov 3, 2016 at 1:51 pm
            There are no permanent enemies or friends among nations-Better to develop our economy and people than constantly looking to be in good books anybody. Dismantling colonialism and independence for India was a constant push that UK got from FDR during WWII. During early years of independence (before the green revolution) India depended on food aid mainly from US. In 1962 Kennedy threatened to bomb the Chinese if they do not stop their push into India.... India and US jointly supported the Tibetan rebels. Khamba rebellion was a case of point... But, during 71 war, the US sent 7th fleet to Bay of Bengal as a warning to India not to take much real estate in the western front. Bangladesh independence was a forgone conclusion long before the war and hence Nixon admin saw India as a troublemaker in the war.We are no longer in early 1990s when we had just opened up our economy and were still nearly going hungry to bed. And China was still a developing nation (after the bruising Tianamen square) and US was believing in a long term unipolar world.NPT and MTCR and Robin Raphel were constant pain in our side during those days.Even during the late years of Mr Clinton presidency the tone changed. The way he responded to Pokran-II and the immediate start of Talbot-Jaswant Singh talks were an indicator of the importance attached to India.The time he spent in India and in stan during his 2000 visit was telling. And Post 9/11, too many things have changed.Obama’s Asian pivot is likely to continue during Ms Clinton years and India is likely to be in the good books of the next administration too.
            Reply
            1. Vijayekkumaran Murugaiah
              Nov 3, 2016 at 1:49 pm
              There are no permanent enemies or friends among nations-Better to develop our economy and people than constantly looking to be in good books anybody. Dismantling colonialism and independence for India was a constant push that UK got from FDR during WWII. During early years of independence (before the green revolution) India depended on food aid mainly from US. In 1962, Kennedy threatened to bomb the Chinese if they do not stop their push into India.... India and US jointly supported the Tibetan rebels. Khamba rebellion was a case of point... But, during 71 war, the US sent 7th fleet to Bay of Bengal as a warning to India not to take much real estate in the western front. Bangladesh independence was a forgone conclusion long before the war and hence Nixon admin saw India as a troublemaker in the war.We are no longer in early 1990s when we had just opened up our economy and were still nearly going hungry to bed. And China was still a developing nation (after the bruising Tianamen square) and US was believing in a long term unipolar world.NPT and MTCR and Robin Raphel were constant pain in our side during those days.Even during the late years of Mr Clinton presidency the tone changed. The way he responded to Pokran-II and the immediate start of Talbot-Jaswant Singh talks were an indicator of the importance attached to India.The time he spent in India and in stan during his 2000 visit was telling. And Post 9/11, too many things have changed.Obama’s Asian pivot is likely to continue during Ms Clinton years and India is likely to be in the good books of the next administration too.
              Reply
              1. Load More Comments

              Go to Top