India-Russia: News & Analysis

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Austin »

Yagnasri wrote:Making it part of Akhand Bharat may not be possible. Paki establishment has gone too green for being anything productive. It is almost like Saudis. I agree with T. Fhata when is says pakiland is the first Islamic state in our time and not ISIS. Maybe such idea would have worked before Gen Gia islamization in 1980s. But now, I am not sure.
Even if you break them up they will just be small tribal areas and they will keep attacking us they wont be under our control but under the control of some tribal leader , The PA itself will be disbanded and will turn into terrorist organisation , Remember what happened when US disbanded Iraq army after invasion they all joined AQ and Later IS , PA will effectively become Pakistan Taliban and will start their own 100 years wars against India and in this case we wont really know who will attack us if its P Taliban or some 100 other tribal locals they all will have their own Axe to grind against India.

If they merge into India they can be controlled to a good extent atleast the terrorism attack can be minimised by taking control of entire POK.

Some one has to bite the bullet and invade Pakistan at the earliest possible hopefully Modi does that
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Austin »

Indo Russian Bilateral Naval Exercise ( Indra Navy 2016)

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 648_1.html

Indo Russian Bilateral Naval Exercise ( Indra Navy 2016)

The 9th edition of exercise INDRA NAVY, an annual bilateral maritime exercise between Indian Navy and Russian Navy will be conducted in the Bay of Bengal from 14 to 21 December 2016. The primary aim of exercise INDRA NAVY-16 is to increase inter-operability amongst the two navies and develop common understanding and procedures for maritime security operations. The scope of the exercise includes wide-ranging professional interactions in harbor phase and a diverse canvas of operational activities across a spectrum of maritime operations at sea. INDRA NAVY is a bilateral maritime exercise between the Indian and Russian navies and epitomizes the strategic relationship between the two countries. Initiated in 2003, the exercise has matured over the years with increase in scope, complexity of operations and level of participation.

During exercise INDRA NAVY-16, the Indian Navy will be represented by INS Ranvir a guided missile destroyer, INS Satpura an indigenous frigate and INS Kamorta an indigenous Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) corvette. In addition, an IN submarine, P8I Long Range Maritime Patrol Aircraft, Dornier Short Range Maritime Patrol Aircraft, Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer and other integral rotary wing helicopters are scheduled to participate in the bilateral exercise.

The Russian Federation Navy (RuFN) will be represented by Rear Admiral Eduard Mikhalov, Deputi Chief of Flotilla, Pacific Fleet and ships from the Pacific Fleet, based at Vladivostok. RuFN ships Admiral Tributus (cruiser) and Boris Butoma (fleet tanker) are expected to arrive at Visakhapatnam on 14 December 2016 to participate in exercise INDRA NAVY-16.

The exercise will be progressed in two phases viz. the Harbour Phase (14 to 18 December 2016) at Visakhapatnam and the Sea Phase (19 to 21 December 2016) off Visakhapatnam. The Harbour Phase would encompass table-top exercises, planning conferences, and professional interactions prior progressing to sea. The thrust of exercises at sea this year would be on ASW, Air Defence Drills, Surface Firings, visit Board Search ans Seizure (VBSS) and Tactical procedures.

Exercise INDRA NAVY-16 will help to further strengthen mutual confidence and inter-operability, and also enable sharing of best practices between both navies. The exercise will be another milestone in strengthening maritime security cooperation between the two navies and will also serve to reinforce the long standing bond of friendship between the two countries.
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10407
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Yagnasri »

I do hope you are right sir. But green uniform daadi fellows will rather use nukes than give up their jihadi wet dreams.
schinnas
BRFite
Posts: 1773
Joined: 11 Jun 2009 09:44

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by schinnas »

chetak wrote:the ruskies supporting the taliban, which basically means entities against us, hasn't caused much comment here.
Earlier viewpoint in BRF which takes a very friendly view of Russia for historical reasons was that Russia is too indebted to PRC to take an independent stand and it is PRC which is arm twisting Russia to normalize relations with Pukistan. While it may explain some high level exchanges, it does not fully explain arm sale to Pukis and conducting joint military training with Pukis at or near POK when India - Pak tensions were at their peak.

Russia supporting Taliban now explains more things. We need deeper discussion on what Russian strategy for Afghanistan is and how it intersects with that of India, Pukistan and PRC. Unfortunately not a single read worthy article in mainstream media from any of these foreign policy experts and defense analysts.

One motivation for Putin to support Taliban might be to pay back US in the same coin. It would be poetic justice from Russian PoV but not a friendly act from Indian POV.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Agnimitra »

schinnas wrote:
chetak wrote:the ruskies supporting the taliban, which basically means entities against us, hasn't caused much comment here.
Earlier viewpoint in BRF which takes a very friendly view of Russia for historical reasons was that Russia is too indebted to PRC to take an independent stand and it is PRC which is arm twisting Russia to normalize relations with Pukistan. While it may explain some high level exchanges, it does not fully explain arm sale to Pukis and conducting joint military training with Pukis at or near POK when India - Pak tensions were at their peak.

Russia supporting Taliban now explains more things. We need deeper discussion on what Russian strategy for Afghanistan is and how it intersects with that of India, Pukistan and PRC. Unfortunately not a single read worthy article in mainstream media from any of these foreign policy experts and defense analysts.

One motivation for Putin to support Taliban might be to pay back US in the same coin. It would be poetic justice from Russian PoV but not a friendly act from Indian POV.
Russia's outreach to the Taliban stems partly from its fight against ISIS in Syria. Of late, ISIS' "Khorasan" section is in conflict with the Afghan Taliban. ISIS disparages Taliban as "nationalists" (a derogatory term in globalist Islamism), and accuses them of cooperating with "rafidi" Iranian Shi'a as well as Crusader lackeys Pakistan. OTOH, the Taliban are upset that several of their footsoldiers and generals are being bought over by ISIS.

Secondly, Taliban has the Afghan government against the ropes, with its repeated takeovers of towns like Kunduz in the far north (where Pashtuns were resettled by Afghan King Abdur Rehman as part of his wedge politics). So the Afghan Govt is not a reliable option for Russia's fight against ISIS, which poses a significant threat to Russia's Muslim Caucasus underbelly. Hence it has to turn to the Taliban.

Thirdly, Iran and Russia began to court the Taliban once the US established a presence in Afghanistan. Before that, Iran (and to some extent Russia), were with India in support of the Northern Alliance - at a time when the Taliban was also fiercely anti-Shi'a. The Taliban almost went to war with Iran in 1998. However, things have come a long way since then, and Iran regularly helped the Taliban during US occupation. (This cooperation with the hated Shi'a is another propaganda ISIS uses against the Taliban). Thus, Russia will also help the Taliban if it helps push back the US, which is known to have helped ISIS and ISIS-affiliates in Iraq/Syria.

Unless the Afghan Govt can establish a countrywide network outside of just Kabul, and become a valuable ally against all these pan-Islamist forces swirling around, Russia and Iran will be forced to keep feeding one or the other militia. Russia continues to give military aid to the Afghan Govt, so it clearly values that power center - but cannot rely on them enough yet.

Also, the Taliban itself has split into various factions, with varying levels of ishq with the Pakis. We need more information on which factions Russia or Iran work with.

India's strategy cannot be as simple as "anti-Taliban", but rather would need to facilitate a co-opting of amenable Taliban factions into the new Afghan Government's power-sharing national setup, and thereby cut those factions off from Paki influence by having them crystallize around a new nucleus. Then such a setup can become a focus for Indo-Russian and perhaps Iranian entente. After that, the Pashtun-Tajik-Hazara unification of Afghanistan will look more like the tripartite nation foretold by the Ahadith, who can merrily wage Ghazwa-e-Behind on the Dajjal Sind-o-Hind aka Pakjabistan.
Bhurishravas
BRFite
Posts: 680
Joined: 02 Sep 2016 18:25

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Bhurishravas »

Philip wrote:A Pak virtually on its knees,without friends,begging to be b*ggered,is being taken advantage of by Russia just as Russia "befriended" the Ottoman "turkey" to bail it out of trouble. Pak and Turkey share similarities and have been bumchums for aeons. Russia has Turkey now under control after the US/West condemned the Sultan's coup,imprisoning vast numbers of the populace,taking advantage of the failed coup. .
This is an extremely simplistic argument, the premise of which is that Russians know politics and Pakistanis and Turks dont.
Erdogan is under nobody`s thumb. Last I checked Turkey was still in NATO. In fact Erdogan is playing a very smart game of playing West against Russia.
Fail to see why Pakistan cant do the same.
schinnas
BRFite
Posts: 1773
Joined: 11 Jun 2009 09:44

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by schinnas »

Agnimitra, thanks for the informative post.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Philip »

https://in.rbth.com/blogs/stranger_than ... ent_657434
Gunboat diplomacy: Revisiting the Enterprise incident
14 December 2016 RAKESH KRISHNAN SIMHA
Exactly 45 years ago the US despatched a powerful naval task force into the Bay of Bengal to prevent India from overrunning Pakistan. While a military threat was implied, there is some evidence that the American political leadership contemplated a nuclear strike on India. This is an analysis of that incident, which led to a dangerous standoff with a nuclear armed Russian fleet.

Sweeping mines, salvaging looted gold after the 1971 War
1971 War: How Russia sank Nixon’s gunboat diplomacy
Toasting legacy of 1971 Indo-Soviet Friendship Treaty

During the 1971 War, as the Indian Army launched its blitzkrieg into East Pakistan – present day Bangladesh – US President Richard Nixon had a terrible idea. Under the pretext of evacuating American citizens from the warzone, Nixon ordered the US Seventh Fleet’s Task Force 74, led by the nuclear powered aircraft carrier Enterprise, to proceed towards the Bay of Bengal. He was spurred on by Henry Kissinger, his National Security Advisor.

Nixon’s rash move – which became America’s greatest PR disaster in India – was dictated by the condition of the Pakistani military, which was taking a hammering in East Pakistan. More than 100,000 Pakistani soldiers were trapped between the Bay of Bengal and the rampaging Indian Army. Of these 97,000 would soon surrender, making it the largest capitulation since World War II.

The Indian Army had not yet made any major attacks in the western sector, but a CIA mole in Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s cabinet had leaked her plan to bomb Pakistani military capability into the Stone Age. Hassan Abbas writes in ‘Pakistan's Drift into Extremism’ that “India's plans possibly included the final destruction of the country, as a CIA report had indicated".

Nixon – who was working to achieve a diplomatic breakthrough in China, with Pakistan acting as the middleman – asked Beijing to mobilise troops on the Indian border. He even contemplated “lobbing nuclear weapons” at the Russians if they retaliated by going to war with China. But as Moscow had moved its crack army divisions to the Chinese border, Beijing decided it was not going to sacrifice itself at Nixon’s bidding. At any rate China considered East Pakistan a lost cause.

Veto No.100: How Russia blocked the West on Kashmir
A livid Nixon stressed he would not allow India to break up Pakistan’s core territories in the west. He warned the Indian ambassador L.K. Jha in Washington: “If the Indians continue their military operations (against West Pakistan), we must inevitably look toward a confrontation between the USSR and the US. The Soviet Union has a treaty with India; we have one with Pakistan.”

Not satisfied with the envoy’s reply, Nixon ordered the USS Enterprise into the Bay of Bengal.

Enterprise steams towards India
Former Indian Navy Commander Raghavendra Mishra, a research fellow at the New Delhi-based National Maritime Foundation writes in a paper titled ‘Revisiting the 1971 USS Enterprise Incident’ that the nuclear powered, nuclear capable carrier’s entry was an instance of gunboat diplomacy.

In the paper, published by the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, he writes: “A broad plan of action emerged which included cutting off economic aid to India, and transfer of military equipment from other US regional allies to West Pakistan. These were to be supported by a possible naval deployment and a simultaneous move by the Chinese military along the border. The aim was to put pressure on the Soviet Union which, in turn, would prevail upon India from expanding the conflict. Nixon directed Kissinger to explore the option of US naval deployment with Chinese representatives before taking a final decision.”

The first mention of an aircraft carrier deployment comes up in Kissinger’s memorandum to Nixon on December 8, 1971. That was the night when the Indian Navy had made a bonfire of Karachi, with its second successive missile strike on coastal installations. The Pakistani port had been burning since December 4 after being hit by the Indian Navy’s Russian missile boats. These strikes in the west plus news about the collapse of the Pakistan Army in the east had greatly upset the Nixon-Kissinger duo.

Kissinger suggested that Nixon should direct the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – the highest-ranking and senior most military officer in the United States armed forces – to move naval Task Force 74, then deployed in the South East Asian theatre, to the Bay of Bengal immediately via the Singapore Straits under the pretext of “prudent contingency measures”.

On December 9, Nixon wanted the US and China to jointly move against India. That same day, during his meeting with the Chinese delegation led by Huang Hua, China’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations and Ambassador to Canada (as the US did not have diplomatic relations with China), Kissinger apprised his counterpart about the US naval task force move through a map showing the deployment of the US and Soviet forces.

Mishra writes: “Kissinger agreed the Pakistani military had collapsed in the East and the same was anticipated within two weeks in the West. Emphasising the importance of West Pakistan’s continued existence for regional dynamics, Kissinger sought military moves by China along the border to restrain India and the Soviet Union. Huang Hua, while expressing solidarity for the common cause, made no formal commitment, stating that he would convey the US proposal for consideration of Beijing.”

By December 11 the carrier Task Force 74 led by the Enterprise was moving as scheduled and the first media reports about its possible deployment in the Bay of Bengal had started circulating in India.

On the same day, a major development took place. Around 4.00pm, an Indian parachute brigade was dropped at Tangail and the race for Dhaka had begun. With the Pakistani military and political leadership in panic mode, Kissinger informed Pakistani Foreign Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto that Task Force 74 would be crossing the Straits of Malacca by December 12-13.

War in the east
A week into the war, it was clear the Pakistan Army in the East was about to capitulate. The Americans also realised to their dismay that China was not prepared to move even a column of trucks on the Himalayan border.

Overcame by his hatred, the reckless Nixon was even prepared to sacrifice the concept of détente that would soon be the cornerstone of US-Russia ties. He asked Kissinger to inform the Russians about the increasing probability of a major war involving both the superpowers. Moscow was told that its continued backing of New Delhi would endanger the planned strategic arms reduction talks.

It is unclear if Nixon’s threat worked or whether the Russian leadership was unduly sensitive about global opinion, but soon Russian ambassadorial staff informed Kissinger that a delegation from Moscow had arrived in New Delhi for consultations, and that India had agreed not to expand its military operations in the Western theatre.

During his meeting with Chou En-Lai in Beiing in February 1972, Nixon had said that in the early stages of the conflict the Russians “were doing nothing to discourage India in its actions against Pakistan. It was only after we made a very strong stand – I personally intervened with (Russian President Leonid) Brezhnev, and Dr Kissinger made a statement that was widely quoted in this respect – they took a more reasonable attitude and a more moderate position in the United Nations.”

Commander Mishra adds: “At this stage, the US administration possessed reasonable proof that West Pakistan would not be attacked by India. However, in a meeting attended by senior state and defence department officials, Kissinger decided to go ahead with the naval deployment, which was expected to traverse the Straits of Malacca in the evening and could arrive off East Bangladesh on the morning of December 16.”

On December 13, Pakistan’s Ambassador to the US, General Raza, requested the US Seventh Fleet deployment in the Bay of Bengal as well as in the North Arabian Sea to deter further attacks by the Indian Navy. This proposal was repeated by the President of Pakistan to Nixon, stating: “The Seventh Fleet does not only have to come to our shores but also to relieve certain pressures which (we are) not in a position to cope with. (We) have sent a specific proposal…about the role the Seventh Fleet could play at Karachi which, I hope, is receiving your attention.”

(This excerpt from the conversation between Nixon and his assistants is from December 15, 1971, 8:45-11:30 am.)

Kissinger: The Russians came in yesterday giving us their own guarantee that there would be no attack on West Pakistan.

Nixon: A letter from Brezhnev.

Kissinger: An addition – an explanation of the letter to – of Brezhnev saying, they, the Soviet Union, "guarantees there will be no military action against West Pakistan". So we are home, now it’s done. It’s just a question what legal way we choose.

Nixon: Well, what the UN does is really irrelevant.

Kissinger: Well, it’d be, the ******** (he’s referring to the Indians), of course, have broken promises before. It’d be better to have it on public record. We might be able to do it in an exchange of letters between Brezhnev and you. That is made public, in which you say you express your concern, and he says he wants to assure you.

Nixon: Well, what does that do now to the Chinese?

Kissinger: Oh, the Chinese would be thrilled if West Pakistan were guaranteed.

Nuclear standoff: Enter the Russian Navy
Based on an Indian intercept of US communications, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) prepared a six-page note, which said: “The assessment of our embassy reveals that the decision to brand India as an 'aggressor' and to send the 7th Fleet to the Bay of Bengal was taken personally by Nixon.”

1971 War: How Russia sank Nixon’s gunboat diplomacy
The MEA felt that “the bomber force aboard the Enterprise had the US President's authority to undertake bombing of Indian Army's communications, if necessary”.

Following this assessment, India secretly activated a provision in the Indo-Soviet Friendship Treaty, according to which either party would come to the defence of the other. A Russian naval task force from the Pacific Fleet based in Vladivostok, consisting of a cruiser, a destroyer and two attack submarines under the command of Admiral Vladimir Kruglyakov intercepted Task Force 74.

Sebastien Roblin writes in War is Boring that Kruglyakov revealed in a Russian TV interview about “encircling” the task force, surfacing his submarines in front of the Enterprise, opening the missile tubes and “blocking” the American ships.

Mishra notes: “The Soviet Indian Ocean naval component also got a lucky break with three of their ships near the Straits of Malacca, on their return passage to their Pacific homeport when the information about the possible US naval deployment to the Indian Ocean became general knowledge. These were retained and reinforced by two further task groups that arrived in the Indian Ocean on December 18 and 26. These Soviet naval assets continued to shadow the TF 74 off Sri Lanka until its return passage to the Pacific theatre on January 8, 1972.”

In addition, 12 other Soviet naval ships were present in the Indian Ocean. However, none of these Russian vessels were in the vicinity or heading for the Bay of Bengal or North Arabian Sea, where the Indian Navy was continuing with its operations.

It is an indication of how serious the Russians were about defending India that Moscow started despatching naval detachments from across the globe to Indian waters. Kissinger referred to unconfirmed reports about Soviet Mediterranean Fleet units being directed to the Indian Ocean and Bay of Bengal, but these warships were unlikely to arrive in time.

The reason Russia was able to quickly direct all this heavy naval firepower into the warzone was the Soviet Navy had rapidly grown into an impressive blue water force under Admiral of the Fleet Sergei Gorshkov.

John B. Hattendorf writes in ‘US Naval Strategy in the 1970s’ that the year 1970 was a seminal one as the Soviet Navy carried out the first of its OKEAN global war games that involved combined and joint forces for defensive, offensive and expeditionary operations. “The 200-ship exercise covered the four major theatres of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans as well as the Mediterranean Sea. This was also period that the majority of the US Navy was approaching en masse obsolescence. The increase in Soviet naval presence was especially notable in the Indian Ocean which far outstripped the US Navy deployments, although it is qualified that most of these deployments were in the North and South-West Indian Oceans.”

With such massive forces at its disposal, the Russian military forces were confident of repelling any American adventurism. Mishra says the Russian ambassador to India had dismissed the possibilities of the US or China intervening by emphasising that the Russian fleet was also in the Indian Ocean and would not allow the Seventh Fleet to interfere; and if China moved in Ladakh, Russia would respond in Xinjiang. As Nixon raged in the White House, a million Russian troops were stationed on the Chinese border.

At this point, Task Force 74 was east off Sri Lanka and this naval deployment had generated considerable anti-US feeling in India. Indian Foreign Minister Swaran Singh said that if the US invaded, the Indians would trap the Americans in a disaster greater than Vietnam.

Meanwhile, the Pakistani media was still publishing speculative reports about a possible naval intervention.

Nuclear threat: Real or imagined?
Ties with Pakistan not against India
There are military experts – both Indian and foreign – who deny the US had plans to launch military attacks, let alone a nuclear strike, on India. However, before second guessing Nixon’s intentions, let’s look at the components of Task Force 74.

Commander Mishra lists the following:

1 Nuclear powered strike carrier – USS Enterprise, 90 aircraft

4 Gearing class destroyers

3 Missile destroyers

2 Amphibious assault ships with 2000 Marines

1 Nitro class ammunition ship

1. Replenishment oiler

1 Nuclear attack submarine (SSN)

There are several reasons pointing to the seriousness of the threat. One, the availability of such potent assets was itself a temptation for the use of force by proto-neocons like Nixon and Kissinger.

Secondly, both Kissinger and Nixon were consumed by an intolerable hatred of India. Ironically, while Nixon was personally fond of Pakistani President Yahya Khan, who had massacred 3 million of his own Bengali citizens, the US President referred to Indians as “slippery, treacherous people”. Of Indira Gandhi, he was recorded as saying, “The old bitch. I don’t know why the hell anybody would reproduce in that damn country, but they do.”

Kissinger liked Yahya as he had been the intermediary who had helped the Americans reach out to China. It was clearly a role the Pakistani dictator relished. “Yahya hasn’t had such fun since the last Hindu massacre!” Kissinger remarked.

Thirdly, Nixon and Kissinger were mired in the Vietnam War which was proving to be a meat grinder for Americans troops. Massive US strategic bombing hadn’t broken the spirit of the Vietnamese but had in fact steeled their resolve to hit back harder. Because of this, Nixon’s popularity had plummeted at home. India had backed a number of UN resolutions condemning the US bombing of Vietnam, and Nixon was looking for a way to pay New Delhi back.

However, the biggest factor was China. Nixon knew that only a breakthrough in Beijing would salvage his presidency and rescue him from the proverbial dustbin. He was, therefore, prepared to bet the farm on this one factor. Besides, in his view, the humiliation of an American ally by a Russian ally would send the wrong signals to the rest of the world.

To get an idea of Nixon’s intent in despatching the Enterprise, see this still partly censored excerpt from the Nixon-Chou meeting.

Nixon: "In December when the situation was getting very sensitive in the subcontinent – I'm using understatement – I was prepared..... (Sanitised)."

Since Nixon was by all standards a crook and a braggart, he may have well said he was prepared to nuke India.

(During their December 15 conversation in Washington DC, Nixon and Kissinger had given plenty of indication of their desperate intent. Having received a guarantee from Brezhnev that the Indian Army won’t advance into West Pakistan, the US duo is in a triumphant mood.)

Nixon: How do you do it?

Kissinger: It’s a miracle.

Nixon: How do you get the formalisation of letters between Brezhnev and me [unclear].

Kissinger: It’s an absolute miracle, Mr President.

Nixon: Did you try to work that out? That we – I’d like to do it in a certain way that pisses on the Indians without, you know what I mean? I mean, we can’t [unclear] we have an understanding, an understanding with West Pakistan. Well, I don’t know. If you think it’s a good idea. I – don’t ask me.

Kissinger: No, I think it’s a good idea. But we have – I have this whole file of intelligence reports, which makes it unmistakably clear that the Indian strategy was –

Nixon: To knock – oh, sure.

Kissinger: – to knock over West Pakistan.

Nixon: Over the line of control here. Most people were ready to stand by and let her do it, bombing Calcutta [sic] and all.

Kissinger: They really are ********.

Nixon: The son-of-a-bitch [unclear] –

Kissinger: Now, after this is over we ought to do something about that goddamned Indian Ambassador here going on television every day –

Nixon: He’s really something.

Kissinger: – attacking American policy. And –

Nixon: Why haven’t we done something already?

Kissinger: And I – I’d like to call State (Department) to call him in. He says he has unmistakable proof that we are planning a landing on the Bay of Bengal. Well, that’s okay with me.

Nixon: Yeah, that scares them.

Kissinger: That carrier move is good. That –

Nixon: Why, hell yes. That never bothers me. I mean it’s a, the point about the carrier move, we just say fine, we had a majority. And we’ve got to be there for the purpose of their moving there. Look, these people are savages.

Kissinger: Mr President, an aggregate –

Nixon: ….we cannot, the United Nations cannot survive and we cannot have a stable world if we allow one member of the United Nations to cannibalise another. Cannibalise, that’s the word. I should have thought of it earlier. You see, that really puts it to the Indians. It has, the connotation is savages. To cannibalise –

Gunboat diplomacy
The Enterprise incident reinforced the image of the “Ugly American” in Indian minds. The political leadership became intensely anti-US too. The incident is reminiscent of the behaviour of former colonial powers.

War of attrition: How the outgunned IAF beat the PAF
Commander Mishra wonders whether the US could have gained much more by doing nothing. “Considering the international milieu where its stock was low by the Vietnam overhang, the emergence of a technologically improved and numerically robust Soviet Navy under Admiral Gorshkov, and the necessity of sending a reassuring signal to its allies, mandated some visible proof. The naval deployment was a gesture of solidarity for a formal ally (Pakistan) and an indicator to a future partner (China), that the US could be relied upon to abide by its formal commitments.”

At the same time, the incident highlights the impotence of US sea power against the gains made by a determined India on the ground. “Another takeaway from 1971 is that ‘strategic punditry is no substitute for tactical aggressiveness’ and, hence the importance of professional skill sets,” Mishra notes. “The importance of a cogent national/military strategy is paramount; nevertheless, it needs to be complemented in equal measure by decisive force application at operational and tactical levels.”

Strategic spinoffs
The 1971 War had several strategic lessons – especially in the area of sea power – for India. The brilliant performance of the Indian Navy in setting ablaze Karachi led to a sea change in the political leadership’s thinking regarding sea power. The navy had hit Karachi not once but twice. A third strike to completely obliterate the port didn’t happen as the war ended too quickly.

Task Force 74’s menacing move convinced India about the need to have assets at sea to counter a threat of this nature. Observing how effectively the Russian subs had enforced a naval blockade and stopped the American fleet, India’s political leadership quietly gave the green light to the nuclear submarine project.

There were other valuable spinoffs from the war. Not only did it change the political geography of South Asia with the creation of Bangladesh, but according to Mishra, it gave a jolt to the supremacist psyche harboured by the Pakistan military vis-à-vis the Indian armed forces.
dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by dinesha »

Price of angering the Bear, & the A-5 decision
https://bharatkarnad.com/2016/12/14/pri ... -bear-a-5/
ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 374
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by ragupta »

http://idrw.org/clearing-defence-procur ... -parrikar/

Excerpt:
Explaining why the government cannot clear defence deals in haste, he said: “If you don’t go through the fine print, we will end up buying 272 fighters without any real transfer of technology. How do you explain that?”

So much for Russian love in sharing technology with India.
They have practically delayed or tried to sabotage most indigenous projects, (Sitara, MTA), they have used classic bait and switch with India all these years. India was suckers as there was not much choice.

Yes they provided us with equipment and technology which we could not get it from elsewhere, but they surely extracted price for it, and India did not have much choice. Now since the doors are opening elsewhere, Russia is scared of losing business.

No matter how much noise they make, they have to adjust to new reality that India will not put all eggs in one basket, either they profit from it or lose the business.
Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Dipanker »

Iranian are untrustworthy people, they are now stabbing India in the back. Now Russians doing the same.
Time to change the nature of relationship with these ungrateful nations and reset the contours.

India cautions Russia and Iran against engaging with Taliban
NEW DELHI: India sounded a warning on Thursday to countries like Russia and Iran, which appear to be trying to change the ground situation in Afghanistan by engaging Taliban politically.

In a response, MEA spokesperson said, "In so far as the Taliban is concerned, they have to respect the internationally agreed red lines, give up terrorism and violence, sever all ties with al-Qaida, agree to follow democratic norms and not do anything which will erode the gains of the last 15 years."

This is an unusual cautionary note from India aimed at its oldest strategic partner. Even though India prefers to treat Russia with kid gloves, it feels Moscow's latest moves in Afghanistan have the potential to stir serious trouble. MEA spokesperson Vikas Swaroop stressed India and Russia's special relationship.
Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Dipanker »

Iranian are untrustworthy people, they are now stabbing India in the back. Russians doing the same.
Time to change the nature of relationship and reset the contours with these ungrateful nations .

India cautions Russia and Iran against engaging with Taliban
NEW DELHI: India sounded a warning on Thursday to countries like Russia and Iran, which appear to be trying to change the ground situation in Afghanistan by engaging Taliban politically.

In a response, MEA spokesperson said, "In so far as the Taliban is concerned, they have to respect the internationally agreed red lines, give up terrorism and violence, sever all ties with al-Qaida, agree to follow democratic norms and not do anything which will erode the gains of the last 15 years."

This is an unusual cautionary note from India aimed at its oldest strategic partner. Even though India prefers to treat Russia with kid gloves, it feels Moscow's latest moves in Afghanistan have the potential to stir serious trouble. MEA spokesperson Vikas Swaroop stressed India and Russia's special relationship.
Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Cosmo_R »

Dipanker wrote:Iranian are untrustworthy people, they are now stabbing India in the back. Now Russians doing the same.
Time to change the nature of relationship with these ungrateful nations and reset the contours....
Anyone wonder why the August 15 Balochistan freedom strategy is out of the news? The Iranians read GoI the riot act: don't mess with Balochistan since we don't want our Baloch getting ideas. If you persist, we will hand over Chahbahar to the Chinese.

The Iranians don't like us. Never have since the days of the 'Shahanshah' Pahlavi 'dynasty' with a 2500 year history dating back to 1925. A few years ago, they were so bold as to threaten us with Indian Shias :)

Nasty scheisskopfs with the odd individual an exception. Vaulting arrogance coupled with a bottomless sense of entitlement and underpinned by a sense of grievance dating back to Alexander. Pakistanis with brains and without the inbreeding.
Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 1019
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Rishi Verma »

Austin wrote:...
If they merge into India they can be controlled to a good extent atleast the terrorism attack can be minimised by ....
Only the lands can be merged. Pakis are too toxic to be merged back into India. The vermins can only be exterminated and they should be.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Austin »

Rishi Verma wrote:
Austin wrote:...
If they merge into India they can be controlled to a good extent atleast the terrorism attack can be minimised by ....
Only the lands can be merged. Pakis are too toxic to be merged back into India. The vermins can only be exterminated and they should be.
Who needs the land , Well it would be the icing on the cake but not the cake itself.

The question to ask is if the people in that part of land are better off under Indian Rule or Pakistan Rule , Will they be more anti-India under Indian State or Pakistan State , if the answer is under India they would be better off most certainly not as good as other indian states , Then we should take over them.

In good old days India Territory extend up until Afghanistan , Atleast with Indian as Immidiate neighbour to Afghanistan , they have far better chance to prosper with Pakistan as neighbour all they would get is terrorism till eternity
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by svinayak »

Rishi Verma wrote:
Austin wrote:...
If they merge into India they can be controlled to a good extent atleast the terrorism attack can be minimised by ....
Only the lands can be merged. Pakis are too toxic to be merged back into India. The vermins can only be exterminated and they should be.
Pak needs social transformation which will take 50 years or so.

This cleaning and scrubbing so that Pak looks at its roots inside Indian sub continent is very much needed.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Agnimitra »

Cosmo_R wrote:Nasty scheisskopfs with the odd individual an exception. Vaulting arrogance coupled with a bottomless sense of entitlement and underpinned by a sense of grievance dating back to Alexander. Pakistanis with brains and without the inbreeding.
Iranians used to be extreme inbreeders - in fact Islam made them less so. Inbreeding among Iranian elites was especially high - including sister-brother marriages (siblings from the same mother).

Post-Islam, rebellious poets like Fakhruddin Assad Gurgani wrote epic poems like Veys o Ramin, harking back to the proud pre-Islamic practices of sister-brother marriage, etc. Concomitant with sibling marriage was the paramour culture, also glorified in a different vein. That is also why, in Persian (and Urdu) poetry, the paramour is such a constant object of verse. I had written and quoted from such poems on the earlier avatar of BRF, posts which are now lost.

Only during the last century, the Shah instituted genetic tests before marriage, which continue to be enforced in Iran. This was because of a much higher number of congenital physical and mental illnesses. Still, even today Iran has a 38% rate of marriage to 1st or 2nd cousins - not as high as Pakistan, but still pretty high.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Austin »

Obama Upgrades Russia Status from making Nothing to Weak but trades in Oil gas and Arms ..... :eek:

Obama called weak country Russia, trading in oil, gas and arms


https://ria.ru/world/20161217/1483864966.html
WASHINGTON, Dec. 16 - RIA Novosti. US President Barack Obama called Russia a weak country that does not produce anything but gas, oil and weapons.

"They are smaller, they are weaker (than the US - Ed.). Their economy does not produce anything that would like to buy (other countries), other than oil, gas and arms," ​​- Obama said during a press conference in Washington on Friday.
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Manish_Sharma »

In a way he has a point. How come they are claiming advances in radars, aviation, weapons and hacking, but arent' able to produce mobiles, CAT-Scan machines- PETscans, laptops? They don't have to make in apple-mac level but it seems they have nothing - nothing at all in any line.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6919
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by habal »

Hell of a lot of Russian technical graduates intern in their missile divisions and advanced electronics before moving on. I think these strategic divisions retain the best. So there is an entire infrastructure already present in developing new tech for military use. But no such coherant institutional wings exist to deploy these trained people in civilian consumer use.

Most of the oligarchs in russia, (people who control and deploy most capital) are more interested in exploiting natural resources rather than cutting edge electronics development.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Austin »

Manish_Sharma wrote:In a way he has a point. How come they are claiming advances in radars, aviation, weapons and hacking, but arent' able to produce mobiles, CAT-Scan machines- PETscans, laptops? They don't have to make in apple-mac level but it seems they have nothing - nothing at all in any line.
Actually do they , Lot of their hospitals uses their own CAT Scan machine made by them
http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/?id=104
http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/?id=86

Energy Products http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/?id=67

Computers & Laptops in government uses their own hardware etc http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/?id=56437

Also their own brands http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/?id=112

But the point is you cant make every thing unless you are totally closed country like Soviet Union was , Consumer market in Russia competes with EU products or South Korean or US , so does Automobiles , IT/Computers , Software , Food/Agriculture etc

Russia is also a more freer economy compared to say India or China , Money can come in Easily and Money can go out Easily there is no resrictions and they have full capital account convertibility since 2006 and full floating currency where Central Bank does not control the exchange rate since 2014.

Russia has not imposed counter sanction except for Agriculture products since 2014 against EU or US so this years they managed to export more Agriculture product compared to Arms.

As far as Barak Obama Goes Well He can Have his Last Say and his Cake , He is the POTUS
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Manish_Sharma »

Wow I didn't know it. I thought they were importing wholesole systems. Thanks Austin Saar!
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Viv S »

Russia to host meeting with Pakistan, China
December 18, 2016

ISLAMABAD - Russia, Pakistan and China will hold the next round of three-way counterterrorism talks in Moscow December 27, primarily focusing on turmoil-hit Afghanistan.

Russian Ambassador to Islamabad Alexey Dedov disclosed the details in an interview with state-run Radio Pakistan. This will be the third meeting of the “trilateral working group on Afghanistan”, he said, following meetings in Beijing and Islamabad.

“What we see in Afghanistan, unfortunately, is worrisome because it does not bring us optimism. There is a lack of three crucial elements; that is a stable self-sufficient economy, good governance and strong army,” observed Dedov.

A deterioration in security and the emergence of Islamic State affiliates in volatile border regions of Afghanistan have necessitated the trilateral consultations with an aim to form a “regional anti-terrorism structure” to counter “spillover effects” of terrorism, insist Pakistani, Russian and Chinese officials. “In particular we are especially concerned about the growth of Daesh (Arabic acronym for IS), which is proliferating its influence to some northern areas of Afghanistan, which directly border territories of our allies in our brotherly Central Asian republics,” he added.

Dedov rejected media reports as ”fantasies” that Russia is assisting the Taliban in the fight against US-led forces in Afghanistan. “We have never ever provided any kind of assistance to (the) Taliban,” the ambassador said. Instead, he said, Russia is assisting the Afghan government and has granted “some light weapons” to its forces and is running programmes to train Afghan police and military personnel in Russian institutions. Dedov added that Moscow strongly supports the Afghan peace and reconciliation process, saying improvement in the situation in security in Afghanistan is in the interest of Russia.

“But what we can see that the progress there (in Afghan peace efforts) is very difficult to be seen. That’s very pity. So, I think that will be a very good discussion in two weeks in Moscow on Afghan matters.”

Responding to a question, the Russian envoy said that Russia has strongly supported China-Pakistan Economic Corridor project as it is crucial for Pakistan's economy and regional connectivity.

He pointed out that CPEC is component of China's Silk Road and his country was also working on a similar Eurasian Economic Union and China and Russia are holding discussions to merge the two projects.

Asked about North-South gas pipeline project of Pakistan government, the Russian ambassador said they are eager to realise the project at the soonest.

The ambassador said the two countries are closely cooperating in different areas but there is need to enhance the volume of bilateral trade.

About MI-35 gunship helicopter deal between the two countries, he said the contract has already been signed and it is now for the officials concerned to define a timeframe for the purpose.

Replying to a question, the Russian ambassador said his country wants Pakistan and India to resolve all issues including Jammu and Kashmir through peaceful means.

He said Pakistan and Russia are also closely cooperating in efforts for restoration of peace in Afghanistan.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by svinayak »

Russia will gain in Af Pak since US has reduced its commitment in Af Pak

US has moved from a position of dominance in Af Pak to just another troop in af Pak

CPEC is just another list of ideas which US had given to these two puppet states during cold war.

China Pak corridor is another bad policy of US govt. The corridor is wide open for any power to exploit since US has abandoned the region.
Russia seeing the opportunity has exploited the situation since it is another corridor to southern waters of Eurasian continent
Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Cosmo_R »

Agnimitra wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:Nasty scheisskopfs with the odd individual an exception. Vaulting arrogance coupled with a bottomless sense of entitlement and underpinned by a sense of grievance dating back to Alexander. Pakistanis with brains and without the inbreeding.
Iranians used to be extreme inbreeders - in fact Islam made them less so. Inbreeding among Iranian elites was especially high - including sister-brother marriages (siblings from the same mother).

Post-Islam, rebellious poets like Fakhruddin Assad Gurgani wrote epic poems like Veys o Ramin, harking back to the proud pre-Islamic practices of sister-brother marriage, etc. Concomitant with sibling marriage was the paramour culture, also glorified in a different vein. That is also why, in Persian (and Urdu) poetry, the paramour is such a constant object of verse. I had written and quoted from such poems on the earlier avatar of BRF, posts which are now lost.

Only during the last century, the Shah instituted genetic tests before marriage, which continue to be enforced in Iran. This was because of a much higher number of congenital physical and mental illnesses. Still, even today Iran has a 38% rate of marriage to 1st or 2nd cousins - not as high as Pakistan, but still pretty high.
OK stand corrected. "Pakis with brains and with the inbreeding."
Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Cosmo_R »

The Russians are playing a dangerous game with us. We are the buyers in this relationship and they are dissing us. I don't think that NaMo is going to take this lying down: end of PAKFA/FGFA/FAKPA
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Prem »

Cosmo_R wrote:The Russians are playing a dangerous game with us. We are the buyers in this relationship and they are dissing us. I don't think that NaMo is going to take this lying down: end of PAKFA/FGFA/FAKPA
Only if USA announce selling F35 right after DT take oath.
Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 1019
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Rishi Verma »

Only option for India to make the Russians and the Chinese see the cost of doing business with Pakistan is India's unambiguous intention to nuke or dismember Pakistan when "the" terror strike occurs in the near future.

For starters, the continuing weekly attacks on Indian soil costing Indian army and civilian lives should be repaid with a reply that carries very high economic cost.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by svinayak »

Cosmo_R wrote:The Russians are playing a dangerous game with us. We are the buyers in this relationship and they are dissing us. I don't think that NaMo is going to take this lying down: end of PAKFA/FGFA/FAKPA
This is geo political game. Once the US abandoned the Af Pak region the vacuum has to be filled in by other major powers in the region.

The current Af Pak situation is due to the major powers entering the area in 1970s and 1980s
After 911 it has become again the playground for the major powers. Due to weak govts those small states do not have much leverage but
to join the alliance of the major power

India has many options and lot of them are very expensive.

Just by creating a war front India will change the geo political game world wide.
GShankar
BRFite
Posts: 974
Joined: 16 Sep 2016 20:20

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by GShankar »

This is the time for India to make a statement on our own rather than waiting for massa to help us or pleading with russia and china. This is the time to stand up and be counted.

Right about now is the time to create the western wing of mukthi bahini. Jai Balochitan and Jai sindh!
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by devesh »

If Russia is serious about joining China-Pak in CA, this might be the final straw which pushes India away from its largely reactive docile foreign policy.

Increasingly, if we can't break the Paki land corridor to PRC and cut off that land connection - we might find ourselves simply irrelevant in Asian geopolitics. The window is closing for us to reset the rules of the game.

This wouldn't be as alarming if Russia wasn't making the noises that it is. which also makes me wonder, how much of this is a complex quid-pro-quo between Rus and India. Putin and Modi are not conventional players. What understanding these two men have reached over past 2.5 years and what game they're playing....could be decisive for India.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19280
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by NRao »

Russia is playing a sly game. First she announces they have no interest in a port, whatever. Then calls for a meeting about A'stan, ...................................without A'stan?

Agreed that there is a vacuum (which should be filled IF Mattis becomes SoD), but it is China that is filling it. Russia is in no positiion to fill anything at the moment, needing a financier for her to do anything (even the PAK-FA). What Russia is doing is tagging along with China. Were China to pull out, for a very weird reason, Russia will too.

IMHO, sad to see Russian plight. But, it is what it is.

True, like always, India needs to stand up an be counted. And, I think India has the solid backing of at least A'stan.

Finally, a wee bit surprised that Iran is not in the gang.
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10196
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by sum »

ISLAMABAD - Russia, Pakistan and China will hold the next round of three-way counterterrorism talks in Moscow December 27, primarily focusing on turmoil-hit Afghanistan.

Russian Ambassador to Islamabad Alexey Dedov disclosed the details in an interview with state-run Radio Pakistan. This will be the third meeting of the “trilateral working group on Afghanistan”, he said, following meetings in Beijing and Islamabad.
How does this work without even A'tan itself not being represented?

Not sure if there is some deeper game ongoing but from outside, looks like India and Russia seem to be diverging pretty rapidly on a few issues
Bheeshma
BRFite
Posts: 592
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 22:01

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Bheeshma »

Russia is irrelevant in Afghanistan. For some reason pakis and hoping US will withdraw and china and russia will help them in afghanistan. But I doubt DT will be that stupid.
brvarsh
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 03 Mar 2011 20:29

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by brvarsh »

A nation does not make another nation a friend - Its leaders who make friends with leaders of another country and in doing so create elements who would sustain that friendship. India and Russia both have many active friends still who are relevant. Putin's flirt with Pakistan is with one "kind" of leadership there but should this be at the cost of Indian friendship is what we need to tell Russia unequivocally. Its the same Pakistani leadership that India is willing to work with too though on the Kashmir issue. There is no conflict just a new emerging equation.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Austin »

Russia interest in Afghanistan is twin fold

1 ) Drug Trade
2 ) Security

On Drug Tade , there are 3 CIS/CSTO countries Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan bordering Afghanistan and most of the Drugs inside Russia and even the transit route to Europe is via CIS/Afghanistan , To quote offical figures from Russia Narcotics Bureau the drug trade in Russia is as high as $25 billion

https://www.rt.com/news/252453-afghanis ... ty-forces/
Drugs from volatile regions are becoming a global problem, with Russian borders positioned closer to it than anyone else in Europe.

In another interview, with Russian radio Kommersant FM, Ivanov attested to how for the first time the drug trade in Russia has eclipsed the defense budget, as the country approaches 1.3 trillion rubles (US$25.5 billion) spent annually on getting high.
Security wise IS itself earns $1 billion from Drug Trade and is major source of funding
"According to our estimates, the IS makes up to $1 billion annually on Afghan heroin trafficked through its territory," Ivanov said in early March.

What’s more, over half of Europe’s heroin now comes from the IS, he added. Together with oil and conquest, drugs have risen to the top of the terrorists’ income-generating activities.
Russia also views US presence as temporary who knows DT much just completely withdraw from Af-Pak region by making a deal with Pakistan to manage the Taliban and might just keep Skeleton Presense in Afghanistan.

During Taliban era Russia has no contact with Taliban or Pakistan and that gave Pakistan full control over Taliban to shape up the security the way it wants affecting CIS countries and Russian security , They see it better to have some contacts with Taliban/Pakistan on Afghanistan rather then have nothing at all , Although officially they support the current Ruling Alliance and have provided them lots of Arms virtually Free of Cost.

But we have seen in past any ruling alliance in Kabul can melt over night and no countries or the UN would be willing to send in any arms reenforcement to defend it.
schinnas
BRFite
Posts: 1773
Joined: 11 Jun 2009 09:44

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by schinnas »

Any country supporting CPEC is openly against Indian interests and India should cancel deals with them. CPEC is non negotiable for it passes through sovereign Indian territory without India's permission.

We need to make Russia pay a price for this back stabbing. There is no point supporting their economy with billions of dollars when they are openly supporting a project t that impinges upon our sovereignty.

Russia is fast becoming a pariah state under Putin. He is over stretching Russia's capabilities and will soon pay the price on the global front.

If Putin wants to choose Pakistan over India, so be it. Thats what they deserve. Future would rate Putin killing the friendship with India as one of his biggest diplomatic and strategic blunders.

It would be good for India to get F-35 and dump PAK-FA to send the message. Even if we take some delays in strategic projects, its better to draw a clear red line with Russia.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Austin »

schinnas wrote:Any country supporting CPEC is openly against Indian interests and India should cancel deals with them. CPEC is non negotiable for it passes through sovereign Indian territory without India's permission.

We need to make Russia pay a price for this back stabbing. There is no point supporting their economy with billions of dollars when they are openly supporting a project t that impinges upon our sovereignty.

Russia is fast becoming a pariah state under Putin. He is over stretching Russia's capabilities and will soon pay the price on the global front.

If Putin wants to choose Pakistan over India, so be it. Thats what they deserve. Future would rate Putin killing the friendship with India as one of his biggest diplomatic and strategic blunders.

It would be good for India to get F-35 and dump PAK-FA to send the message. Even if we take some delays in strategic projects, its better to draw a clear red line with Russia.
US should pay a price for support Pakistan Financially for decades and Funding its Military ....All the money worth billions provided absolutely free ends up buy arms which is used to support terror in India
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-Russia: News & Analysis

Post by Austin »

Post Reply