In September 2018, the U.S. signed a security agreement with India unlocked the sales of billions of dollars of high-tech American weapons. India will purchase fighter jets, transport planes, drones and missile defense systems from American military manufacturers including Lockheed Martin. The U.S. government is seeking India as an ally to counter the rise of China and Russia’s military strength in the Indo-Pacific region. Proponents argue that the agreement is necessary to counter China and Russia’s influence and the agreement will generate billions of dollars in revenue for U.S. military defense contractors. Opponents argue that the agreement will encourage China and Russia to beef up their militaries and trigger a global arms race.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Voting for candidate:
@ISIDEWITH6yrs6Y
No
@9F5T9JH2yrs2Y
The Chinese Russian alliance poses a major military threat to the United States and its allies going forward. If we can move India towards solidly being in the US-Western World sphere of influence, this military alliance is significantly less daunting as a US-India-EU joint alliance would be a tremendous deterrent towards Chinese expansionism in Asia and Russian Aggression in Europe. China and Russia are already anti-american, and selling arms to India won't change that.
That's an insightful perspective. Historical precedence, such as the U.S. support during the Cold War, supports your point. By providing arms and aid to countries resisting communism, the U.S. managed to create a balance of power. Following that logic, a U.S.-India-EU alliance could indeed serve as a substantial deterrent. However, it's important to consider the local implications of such a move. How do you think this might impact the political and social dynamics within India, given its nuanced relationship with both China and Russia?
@ISIDEWITH6yrs6Y
No, and we should not sell military weapons to any foreign country
@9GCLD4V2yrs2Y
Selling a total.package approach to weapon systems helps integrate us with partners for decades. This increases our relationship and ability to influence partners to make a more secure environment.
@ISIDEWITH6yrs6Y
No, this will start a global arms race
Not enough knowledge to make an informed vote
@8ZSCMSF3yrs3Y
No, and we should NOT sell military weapons to any foreign country. We should also NEVER sell our nuclear weapons to any foreign country either. This would start a global arms race.
@B5V7PMWIndependent2wks2W
First, we are not selling nuclear weapons to India, so that point does not connect. But we should sell weapons to foreign countries, we are the number one country to stand for democracy and human rights, so selling weapons is a way to continue this. And in the Indian case, we are preventing aggressive Chinese autocrats and Russian autocratic influence, a double-edged move for democracy. By selling weapons, we can push India to be more democratic as well.
@8NZC5ZMRepublican5yrs5Y
No, and we should NOT sell military weapons to any foreign country. This would start a global arms race. We should also NEVER sell our nuclear weapons to any foreign country either.
Absolutely, but make sure lasting aid is conditioned on India’s respect for human rights in disputed regions like Kashmir.
Absolutely, the U.S. can use this as an opportunity to promote human rights globally. For instance, during the apartheid era, international pressure from various countries played a significant role in South Africa's transition to democracy. Similarly, the U.S. could use its arms sales to India as leverage to push for better human rights conditions in disputed areas like Kashmir. Don't you think this could be a more effective approach in the long run?
@8RSZKBX4yrs4Y
Yes, but only to protect against terrorism.
@8LG6J6C5yrs5Y
Continue to foster a military alliance and international cooperation (through the Quadrilateral, etc.)
@9PJS6R41yr1Y
No, this will start a global arms race and we should not sell military weapons to any foreign country but increase diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts peacefully instead
@8GB4M8J5yrs5Y
No, and we should NOT sell military weapons to any foreign country. We should also never sell our nuclear weapons to any foreign country either. This would start a global arms race.
@8D3GVPHRepublican5yrs5Y
yes but only a limited amount
@938YDL33yrs3Y
Yes, but also increase diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts peacefully
@8PYVJK45yrs5Y
Only to counter Chinese influence.
@99MFTPG2yrs2Y
Yes, selling military weapons to foreign countries will help promote American interests
@8PJRPK75yrs5Y
No, and we should NOT sell military weapons to any foreign country. We should also NEVER sell our nuclear weapons to any foreign country either.
@93M3SYW3yrs3Y
@8NFSQ485yrs5Y
Yes, but only with strict regulations and cooperation agreements, selling military weapons to foreign countries will help boost the economy. Diplomacy and peaceful resolution should always be the first course of action.
@8PZFPXD4yrs4Y
@B5XYG3X4 days4D
Yes but only if we increase our prices. We would definitely risk a global arms race by selling military weapons.
@B5X79MMConstitution1wk1W
Yes, we should give the CIA a large budget to fund paramilitary guerrilla fighters and traffic in arms from Thailand, Myanmar, and Pakistan.
No, and we should sanction India for it's gross violations of international law regarding human rights.
@B3P4HQSIndependent4mos4MO
Only under strict contract, and our equipment should have a shut off failsafe if conflict were to break out.
@B3HSST84mos4MO
Yes, but both countries should sign a treaty to hold each other accountable under international law.
@B2XSP6G5mos5MO
Let the three of them Rot. Now if any of these countries decided to import "sporting rifles" then maybe, but still no.
@B2FBC5D6mos6MO
Yes, but the government should be aware so we don't have a 2nd Turkey and this time it will be much worst.
@B22BPMB7mos7MO
We should engage in further diplomatic negotiations with Russia and China first. If they fail, then sell the weapons to India with safeguards.
@9ZYWZHZ7mos7MO
I would have to say like no not really cause one that what if something happens to anyone like if a really bad war comes to happen it can be hard and a struggle too.
@9ZYNHQ4 7mos7MO
No, but we should do so after allying ourselves to India so far that they leave BRICS and join our alliances
@9ZXVZHV7mos7MO
If only India stops cooperating with the Russian Federation and other nations that are enemies of the United States.
@9ZWPHKK7mos7MO
Yes, but only if there is credible intelligence that they will need them to defend themselves for an attack.
@9ZW543C7mos7MO
No, we should not sell arms to other countries and yes I do believe this would start a global arms race.
Deleted7mos7MO
i wish for any government to not exist. I am an anarchist, but if it continues to exist then no. it should be free
@9YG32KQ8mos8MO
I feel like if we sell weapons to India to counter at Chinese and Russian influence they will turn against us.
@9YBGYB6Independent 8mos8MO
Yes, under strict restrictions and guidelines. We need to also ensure we have allies in the Eastern hemisphere as Chinese and Russian influence gains traction.
@9YBGYB6Independent 8mos8MO
Yes, but with stringent stipulations and restrictions to ensure our high-tech weaponry and defense technology does not get misused. While this could be a baffling concept it also makes sense from a global standpoint to protect ourselves against foreign counterparts, such as Russia, China, North Korea. We cannot be blind to the fact that other countries are beefing up their defense systems. We need to make sure we are working with other nations to have strong relationships and defense support, where needed. This could prove beneficial but there needs to be heavy restrictions around such agreements.
@9W56WH29mos9MO
No. India has a complicated position within the geopolitical structure in the region and prospects of conflict with Pakistan that could go nuclear preclude selling more modern capability to them. Wed be better off pushing India to address social inequities internal to India.
@9W4LQR79mos9MO
No, we should counter with economic influence instead, and focus on diplomacy unless threatened directly.
@9VSSQV79mos9MO
yes, but only limited ones, and we should increase diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts peacefully
@9TRYNCP10mos10MO
No, India cannot be trusted. Sometimes they are America's friend. Then they are Russia's friend. Sometimes they are both.
@9TDBMP310mos10MO
Yes but not so many weapons that Russia and China interpret it as a stance against them and start another arms race
@9T8GNJK10mos10MO
Only items that are not sensitive in either technology or effects if they are misused, i.e. electronic warfare/modern avionics
@9SZ7FX410mos10MO
We should try to increase diplomatic efforts first. But, if all goes down the rabbit hole, then we should consider selling arms.
@9RMVJSY11mos11MO
Yes but there should be weapon catagories/classifications that should not be sold to other countries. Once they are sold, we are no longer in control of the actions that follow.
@9RM4J4911mos11MO
Yes but only older equipment that can't damage national defense if it is given by India to Russia or China
India plays both of sides of the fence with the US and Russia, so it's trustworthiness is in question.
@9RBBBSQ 11mos11MO
I am ambivalent on this topic. China and India already dislike each other, and Russia hardly has the capability of selling arms due to its "SMO"
@9N8MT4F 12mos12MO
No, and selling military weapons to other countries should be reserved for only the most extreme situations in which our national security is directly threatened.
@9R475NG 12mos12MO
Yes, only to countries who are at immediate risk of invasion or war with Chinese, Russian, communist countries.
@9R4232P 12mos12MO
Yes, but we should simultaneously work to resolve conflicts peacefully through diplomacy and closer relations
@9R37LWP12mos12MO
No, do not sell military weapons to any foreign country and increase diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts peacefully
@9QX7B5912mos12MO
Until India crackdown on the hackers on fraudsters attacking US and It citizens we should not be giving them weapons.
@9QVZ5S8Independent12mos12MO
This should be decided by the President, State Department, and security agencies cooperating with each other..
@9QTVFWC12mos12MO
No, this will start an arms race and we should increase diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts peacefully.
@9QRGSRG12mos12MO
Yes but Never sell our most advanced weaponry and do so when the sales do not affect socio-political alliances
Yes. India is a crucial ally for containing China, but such aid should be conditioned on Indian respect for human rights
@9NCVR3K1yr1Y
Yes, but we should not sell but not anymore than deemed necessarily by our military and not until India either, leaves B.R.I.C.S or follows American interests.
@9N8Z2GTLibertarian1yr1Y
India’s access to U.S. weapons systems should be limited until such time as their ties to Russia are minimized in favor of the west. India’s claimed neutrality too often benefits and bails out Russia as against United States and U.S.-allied interests.
@9N7CT7V 1yr1Y
Only with written guarantees that said weapons will not be used on their own civilians or in any other acts of aggression.
@9N4JYSZRepublican1yr1Y
do this and expand sphere of influence on india to prevent them from siding from russia and china. dont provide anything too good until we can fully trust
@9N5R33W1yr1Y
US companies should be allowed to sell whatever they want to foreign companies. The US government should not be involved
@9N5CK431yr1Y
India opposes us on most foreign policy questions and mass murders its minorities. We shoudl support the freedom movements within India.
@9N4X39S1yr1Y
No, and weapons should only be sold to countries we are directly allied with such as NATO and Japan.
@9MZ7ZKX1yr1Y
No, I do not support the Modi Government in India who been discriminating against the Muslim Minority.
@9MYMGYN1yr1Y
Yes, as long as war crimes are not committed. Any country who commits a war crime, as determined by the ICC, NOT the US, should receive no more weapons from the US for a 5-year period, to be reassessed at the end of that time.
@9MYDFG7 1yr1Y
Seems like you’re adding wood to an already hot fire. They have their own nukes so why arm them further. Very tribal conflicts and would not recommend this policy
@9MV7Q841yr1Y
I truly don't have an opinion on this, I don't have enough knowledge on the topic to have a valid opinion.
@7YXQRQCLibertarian 1yr1Y
No, the government should not sell weapons to foreign nations, but private companies may do so provided sales are not taxpayer-funded.
@9MN334F1yr1Y
I think we should sell the military weapons to countries that are in our NATO group not foreign countries that aren't in NATO
@9MJWZLSConstitution1yr1Y
Yes we should to try and counter China and Russia, but we should keep it very well regulated, and we shouldn't exceed certain amounts.
@Politics_531yr1Y
Yes but we should increase our diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts peacefully to prevent a war and an global arms race. We should also limit to which foreign countries that we sell military weapons as well as, set a limit on how many military weapons we sell and host a vote once a year to determine whether or not to continue selling military weapons, to who we sell, and how much we sell.
@9MGL3BT1yr1Y
This should be on a case by case basis since, while India is a key ally and faces formidable opposition from both Russia and China should open hostilities begin, they also have a long-standing and not always rational adversarial relationship with Pakistan, which might be where India would choose to employ any weapons sold to them.
Yes, but only if they agree to leave the BRICS economic coalition which China and Russia are also part of
@9MCGFQY1yr1Y
We should be careful about who we sell to because of other countries that are apart of NATO might have bad government like hungry. We would just be helping them get more weapons that are strong and we wouldn't know what would they do with them
@9M9JJL81yr1Y
No, we should primarily attempt to build positive relations through diplomatic means, especially in consideration of the current Indian administration’s domestic policy
Yes, this could have significant positive effect, it won't effect our relations with Russia, but it helps current US foreign policy, could improve our relations with India, and boost the US economy.
@9LZP5W8Libertarian1yr1Y
Yes, it is up to private companies who make weapons to decide who they do business with. The Government doesn't sell weapons.
@9LZBBM81yr1Y
You can make it different. You can make it right. You can make it better. We don't have to fight. You can make an effort, starting with tonight. 'Cause you-ooo you can make a change.
@9LSWJTC1yr1Y
No, selling American military technology only serves to destroy our advantages on the battlefield by allowing our enemies or potential enemies the ability to analyze our products.
@9LSNQ8V1yr1Y
No, we should not sell military weapons but should increase diplomatic. Efforts to resolve conflicts peacefully
@9LRSP9Y1yr1Y
Yes, China and Russia are threats to Global Peace. India is our ally, we should be able to sell military equipment to them
@9LR4WJN1yr1Y
We can sell military weapons to foreign nations to weaken our adversaries, however do not sell them our most modern weapons, but still give them relevant weapons.
@9LLWM3K1yr1Y
As we have seen in Afghanistan, the strategy can backfire on us. We should only support India if they have moderate, reliable leadership.
@9LJCSPV1yr1Y
Yes if and only if conditioned on respect for democracy, human rights, and international law, and if it will not drag us into a war with China.
@9LHFBQ81yr1Y
Yes, and we should try to increase diplomatic efforts with India as well as send military weapons to help boost the economy
@9LH5PXL1yr1Y
Uh this is a hard question, but spending money to aid in countries fight against countries doesn't always solve everything, and plus were the US were a major player in geopolitics, so this sort of act will make us look like enablers of war.
Yes, having an allied relationship would be good considering current business relationships between the countries.
@9KWD3FL1yr1Y
Nope. We should not provide foreign aid. If there is going to be a coming global conflict, we need to protect our homeland. If world war III starts, we only have ourselves (humans) to blame. Let it happen. It's about time for the world to get a reset.
@9KWBZDZ1yr1Y
Not to counter foreign influence, but weapon sales should be balanced with diplomacy and needs in other parts of the world
@9KNNHX81yr1Y
Yes, cautiously, and with the goal in mind to bring India into our sphere of influence, if it's not working then abandon this plan.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
