India-Russia: News & Analysis

[rohiths]

Apologies for the name-calling....but honestly: do people realize what it would mean for India if the fantasy idea of Russia-China entente becomes true?

So when Indian people speak with joy or careless nonchalance about Rus become junior ally to PRC, I have to question their sanity.

Russia-China entente has already happened. China has Putin's balls in firm grip. Most of Russia's oil is sold to China. They will choose China over India any given day. Russia is a declining power in population, technological capabilities, social cohesion. They have no friends in the west except for Trump. Once Trump is gone, the next US president will not be that friendly. You can be in denial and call me names but that won't change the facts

[devesh]

Apologies for the name-calling....but honestly: do people realize what it would mean for India if the fantasy idea of Russia-China entente becomes true?

So when Indian people speak with joy or careless nonchalance about Rus become junior ally to PRC, I have to question their sanity.

Russia-China entente has already happened. China has Putin's balls in firm grip. Most of Russia's oil is sold to China. They will choose China over India any given day. Russia is a declining power in population, technological capabilities, social cohesion. They have no friends in the west except for Trump. Once Trump is gone, the next US president will not be that friendly. You can be in denial and call me names but that won't change the facts

ok. fine. Russia is doomed. PRC+Russia is new reality of the world.

We are looking at the next 50 years of strategic stalemate or much worse, vis-a-vis Pak. B/c if Russia has become a junior partner of PRC - then at this point all of India's strategic weaknesses will continue for at least a couple of more generations b/c India neither has the resources nor the alliance pull to confront a PRC-Russia duo.

There is nothing I can say which will change your myopic worldview. But if your worldview is right, there is an easy way to know for sure: the next 50 years are going to be a disaster for India. In a way that is irreparable.

Let posterity decide. ciao.

[svinayak]

If One reads History books one gets better perspective
It cannot be as bad

The Rise and Fall of Nations: Forces of Change in the Post-Crisis World 1st Edition
by Ruchir Sharma (Author)

In The Rise and Fall of Nations Ruchir Sharma provides ten economic reasons for why countries succeed or fail in the modern world.
These reasons include the following:
1. People matter. The population growth rate of a country impacts its potential for economic growth.
2. Political reform is necessary for economic success.
3. Inequality has a negative effect on economic growth.
4. Government interference in the economy can be negative. The so-called “Beijing Consensus” implemented by China is problematic.
5. Geographic location matters.
6. Investment in manufacturing is especially important.
7. Low and consistent inflation is supportive of economic growth.
8. A cheap and stable currency is a positive factor in economic growth.
9. Too much debt can lead to a financial crisis.
10. Some economies are overly hyped.
Of these ten indicators the most reliable is debt. When debt grows 40% or more faster than GDP over a five-year period, that condition is a sure indicator of a poor economy.

Sharma uses the 2008 world economic downturn as a dividing point. He notes that growth is impermanent, with five years being the usual limit. Applying his ten rules to the current world he ends the book by saying which country’s economies are good, average or bad. Among the good economies are the United States, Germany, India, Pakistan and Vietnam. The countries with bad economies include Russia, China, Canada, France and Australia. It is hard for me to see how problematic countries such as Mexico and Pakistan will have good economies, while Canada and Australia will have poor ones. Sharma’s views are too narrowly bound by economic considerations and he fails to account the impact that other factors such as culture can have on a country’s economic circumstances. Sharma also has generally negative feelings about Africa, taking issue with the “Africa Rising” mentality of recent years. Conversely, he sees his own country, India, in a positive light despite the large number of negative factors that beset that country.

[rohiths]

Russia-China entente has already happened. China has Putin's balls in firm grip. Most of Russia's oil is sold to China. They will choose China over India any given day. Russia is a declining power in population, technological capabilities, social cohesion. They have no friends in the west except for Trump. Once Trump is gone, the next US president will not be that friendly. You can be in denial and call me names but that won't change the facts

ok. fine. Russia is doomed. PRC+Russia is new reality of the world.

We are looking at the next 50 years of strategic stalemate or much worse, vis-a-vis Pak. B/c if Russia has become a junior partner of PRC - then at this point all of India's strategic weaknesses will continue for at least a couple of more generations b/c India neither has the resources nor the alliance pull to confront a PRC-Russia duo.

There is nothing I can say which will change your myopic worldview. But if your worldview is right, there is an easy way to know for sure: the next 50 years are going to be a disaster for India. In a way that is irreparable.

Let posterity decide. ciao.

Russia is doomed but not India. We don't have to confront PRC + Russia like we did not have to confront USA when they were supporting Pakistan or China. We have to ensure we have enough deterrence to prevent any China-Pakistan invasion. Our 120+ nuclear weapons are more than sufficient for that purpose.
We have to become internally strong, develop our capabilities in defence, human resources etc. If India is internally strong, no power on earth can stop us. If India is internally weak, there is no power on earth who can help us. It is as simple as that.

[svinayak]

Russia will adapt and build connectivity to growing economies

Connectography: Mapping the Future of Global Civilization Hardcover – April 19, 2016
by Parag Khanna (Author)

Connectivity is the most revolutionary force of the twenty-first century. Mankind is reengineering the planet, investing up to ten trillion dollars per year in transportation, energy, and communications infrastructure linking the world’s burgeoning megacities together. This has profound consequences for geopolitics, economics, demographics, the environment, and social identity. Connectivity, not geography, is our destiny.

In Connectography, visionary strategist Parag Khanna travels from Ukraine to Iran, Mongolia to North Korea, Pakistan to Nigeria, and across the Arctic Circle and the South China Sea to explain the rapid and unprecedented changes affecting every part of the planet. He shows how militaries are deployed to protect supply chains as much as borders, and how nations are less at war over territory than engaged in tugs-of-war over pipelines, railways, shipping lanes, and Internet cables. The new arms race is to connect to the most markets—a race China is now winning, having launched a wave of infrastructure investments to unite Eurasia around its new Silk Roads. The United States can only regain ground by fusing with its neighbors into a super-continental North American Union of shared resources and prosperity.

Connectography offers a unique and hopeful vision for the future. Khanna argues that new energy discoveries and technologies have eliminated the need for resource wars; ambitious transport corridors and power grids are unscrambling Africa’s fraught colonial borders; even the Arab world is evolving a more peaceful map as it builds resource and trade routes across its war-torn landscape. At the same time, thriving hubs such as Singapore and Dubai are injecting dynamism into young and heavily populated regions, cyber-communities empower commerce across vast distances, and the world’s ballooning financial assets are being wisely invested into building an inclusive global society. Beneath the chaos of a world that appears to be falling apart is a new foundation of connectivity pulling it together.
Supply chains and connectivity, not sovereignty and borders, are the organizing principles of humanity in the 21st century.
==

In reality, the governments of many countries rigorously control the supply chains coming into their countries in order to protect their domestic manufacturing.There is growing skepticism, especially in the USA, that free trade with these countries is mutually beneficial. The more the tariffs have been reduced, the more these countries have exported to the USA, without buying commensurate value of our products. The USA ran trade surpluses with Mexico until NAFTA was signed. The very next year the surplus turned into a soaring deficit as thousands of U.S. companies closed their USA factories and moved production to low-wage Mexico.

Trade with Asia has also fallen far short of the promise that it would "turn the USA into an export powerhouse, thereby creating millions of high-wage jobs for American workers." The reality is that the USA imports more than four times as much from China as we export to them, and import more than twice as much from Japan as we export. U.S. exports to South Korea actually DECLINED after the USA / South Korea free trade was signed, while imports from South Korea soared.

It seems that free trade with low-wage countries not only discourages them from producing in the USA, but also encourages American companies to relocate THEIR production out of the USA. If a certain candidate is elected President of the USA in a few months, the “global supply chain” may take a beating.

Another passage links the building of global infrastructure to political devolution of power from nation states to local governments:

[Austin]

If One reads History books one gets better perspective
It cannot be as bad

The Rise and Fall of Nations: Forces of Change in the Post-Crisis World 1st Edition
by Ruchir Sharma (Author)

In The Rise and Fall of Nations Ruchir Sharma provides ten economic reasons for why countries succeed or fail in the modern world.
These reasons include the following:
1. People matter. The population growth rate of a country impacts its potential for economic growth.
2. Political reform is necessary for economic success.
3. Inequality has a negative effect on economic growth.
4. Government interference in the economy can be negative. The so-called “Beijing Consensus” implemented by China is problematic.
5. Geographic location matters.
6. Investment in manufacturing is especially important.
7. Low and consistent inflation is supportive of economic growth.
8. A cheap and stable currency is a positive factor in economic growth.
9. Too much debt can lead to a financial crisis.
10. Some economies are overly hyped.
Of these ten indicators the most reliable is debt. When debt grows 40% or more faster than GDP over a five-year period, that condition is a sure indicator of a poor economy.

Sharma uses the 2008 world economic downturn as a dividing point. He notes that growth is impermanent, with five years being the usual limit. Applying his ten rules to the current world he ends the book by saying which country’s economies are good, average or bad. Among the good economies are the United States, Germany, India, Pakistan and Vietnam. The countries with bad economies include Russia, China, Canada, France and Australia. It is hard for me to see how problematic countries such as Mexico and Pakistan will have good economies, while Canada and Australia will have poor ones. Sharma’s views are too narrowly bound by economic considerations and he fails to account the impact that other factors such as culture can have on a country’s economic circumstances. Sharma also has generally negative feelings about Africa, taking issue with the “Africa Rising” mentality of recent years. Conversely, he sees his own country, India, in a positive light despite the large number of negative factors that beset that country.

I always found Ruchir Sharma as an blabbering idiot , He cannot see problem with US , EU economies are but is happy to point out problems around the world. That shows his world view is very biased or he just cannot comprehend the topic.

He has very poor analytical ability and his conclusion are all over , I guess he just gets good airtime because of his working with big banks that is claim to fame.

[Austin]

Russia is doomed but not India. We don't have to confront PRC + Russia like we did not have to confront USA when they were supporting Pakistan or China. We have to ensure we have enough deterrence to prevent any China-Pakistan invasion. Our 120+ nuclear weapons are more than sufficient for that purpose.
We have to become internally strong, develop our capabilities in defence, human resources etc. If India is internally strong, no power on earth can stop us. If India is internally weak, there is no power on earth who can help us. It is as simple as that.

Russia has been doomed since 1991 since it came to existance its collapase was always been few year away

Meanwhile unlike Western Economies that can print money out of thin air , Russia has useless things like Natural Resources

http://www.countrydetail.com/top-10-cou ... ces-world/

1. RUSSIA:

One of the former super power of the world, Russia has the largest share of natural resources in the world. Due to its vast size, it covers most of the coal, timber and gold reservoirs. The second largest deposit of coal is found in Russia whereas it has the third largest reservoir of gold in the world. It has also the second largest deposit of earthly minerals in the world. The total amount of natural resources found in Russia is estimated up to the worth of $75.5 trillion.

[prahaar]

Discounting Russia suggests a poor lack of understanding with regards to living in below freezing conditions. It is a different matter to control a city like St. Petersburg and a totally different matter to control the whole of Russia.

[Bart S]

Apologies for the name-calling....but honestly: do people realize what it would mean for India if the fantasy idea of Russia-China entente becomes true?

So when Indian people speak with joy or careless nonchalance about Rus become junior ally to PRC, I have to question their sanity.

Russia-China entente has already happened. China has Putin's balls in firm grip. Most of Russia's oil is sold to China. They will choose China over India any given day. Russia is a declining power in population, technological capabilities, social cohesion. They have no friends in the west except for Trump. Once Trump is gone, the next US president will not be that friendly. You can be in denial and call me names but that won't change the facts

+100

This has already happened. In fact not only is Russia already in China's grip, but they are basically now siding with Pakistan over India, despite having to keep up appearances in order to get business from us. Anyways, that is their choice. But the sad thing is that Indians are still in denial, and come up with some excuse or the other to satisfy themselves that Russia is still our friend and has our back, rather like the delusional behavior typical of a victim in an abusive marriage.

[Bart S]

Russia is doomed but not India. We don't have to confront PRC + Russia like we did not have to confront USA when they were supporting Pakistan or China. We have to ensure we have enough deterrence to prevent any China-Pakistan invasion. Our 120+ nuclear weapons are more than sufficient for that purpose.
We have to become internally strong, develop our capabilities in defence, human resources etc. If India is internally strong, no power on earth can stop us. If India is internally weak, there is no power on earth who can help us. It is as simple as that.

Russia has been doomed since 1991 since it came to existance its collapase was always been few year away

Meanwhile unlike Western Economies that can print money out of thin air , Russia has useless things like Natural Resources

http://www.countrydetail.com/top-10-cou ... ces-world/

1. RUSSIA:

One of the former super power of the world, Russia has the largest share of natural resources in the world. Due to its vast size, it covers most of the coal, timber and gold reservoirs. The second largest deposit of coal is found in Russia whereas it has the third largest reservoir of gold in the world. It has also the second largest deposit of earthly minerals in the world. The total amount of natural resources found in Russia is estimated up to the worth of $75.5 trillion.

You are missing the point. Nobody is talking about the landmass of Eurasia (or it's natural resources) being doomed. People are talking about Russia the political entity whose influence has been in steady decline from being a superpower to eventually a France (best case scenario) or a Brazil/Argentina (worst case scenario).

As for the much vaunted minerals and other stuff, it is just a matter of time before the Chinese make a run on it. This doesn't have to be overt aggression, their first choice would be to turn Russia into a vassal state like Pakistan.

[Austin]

Russia has been doomed since 1991 since it came to existance its collapase was always been few year away

Meanwhile unlike Western Economies that can print money out of thin air , Russia has useless things like Natural Resources

http://www.countrydetail.com/top-10-cou ... ces-world/

1. RUSSIA:

One of the former super power of the world, Russia has the largest share of natural resources in the world. Due to its vast size, it covers most of the coal, timber and gold reservoirs. The second largest deposit of coal is found in Russia whereas it has the third largest reservoir of gold in the world. It has also the second largest deposit of earthly minerals in the world. The total amount of natural resources found in Russia is estimated up to the worth of $75.5 trillion.

You are missing the point. Nobody is talking about the landmass of Eurasia (or it's natural resources) being doomed. People are talking about Russia the political entity whose influence has been in steady decline from being a superpower to eventually a France (best case scenario) or a Brazil/Argentina (worst case scenario).

As for the much vaunted minerals and other stuff, it is just a matter of time before the Chinese make a run on it. This doesn't have to be overt aggression, their first choice would be to turn Russia into a vassal state like Pakistan.

On the contrary Russias political and strategic fortune has gone up manifold after Ukraine and Syrian intervention.

Russia does not have to be a superpower , It has to manage its strategic interest any where in the world , If Superpower means any thing just 2 weeks back Obama has said Russia is a superpower but then what does it really mean. ( https://www.rt.com/news/367355-obama-ru ... influence/ )

The Chinese wont make any Run on Russia as Much As Indians in US wont make any Run on US , Russia Sells more Energy to EU then it sells to China and when Nord Stream-2 and Turk Stream goes online the number will simply grow significantly or any one else you need to check the fact . No one claims EU will run over Russia , Both EU and China are dependent on Russian Energy Products and Energy Reserves and Logistics makes it easier just to build pipeline and supply to them then build expensive LNG ports or transport half way down the world via ships.

Most of the BS on Western media is based on poor research not supported by fact , People like Ruchir Sharma are found out dime a dozen in Western MSM and these are clueless people.

These are the same clueless people who said Breexit wont happen , Trump will never win and there wont be Right parties coming up in EU or Islam will easily integrate with Western Secular societies .

The key for all the countries in this part of the world to break USD/Euro based financial system and go for mutual currency based system trading between India China Russia and South East Asian nation , thats makes these countries independent of any Western Financial System and makes them independent to pursue their own interest and makes them Stronger , All the countries in this part of the world realise this too well and are working on this via various mechanism set up in recent past.

[Philip]

Just ck into Russia's latest N-tipped sub UUV that can travel 6000+ km,at 57 kts,outrun any western torpoedo and can devastate any port and if need be irradiate it so that it cannot be used for a few hundred years.The ultimate deterrent what?

[Bart S]

Just ck into Russia's latest N-tipped sub UUV that can travel 6000+ km,at 57 kts,outrun any western torpoedo and can devastate any port and if need be irradiate it so that it cannot be used for a few hundred years.The ultimate deterrent what?

Great. The Pakis and North Koreans too have nukes. Without an economy it's only of nuisance value.

[panduranghari]

As for the much vaunted minerals and other stuff, it is just a matter of time before the Chinese make a run on it. This doesn't have to be overt aggression, their first choice would be to turn Russia into a vassal state like Pakistan.

Good luck in proving that.
http://www.dentresearch.com/archives/th ... the-globe/

http://www.businessinsider.com/15-count ... 013-9?IR=T

[Bart S]

^ What is your point? Russia has an equally bad problem with demographic decline. And they don't have the luxury of a billion plus population like the han hordes who can easily still overrun them despite the decline.

[Mukesh.Kumar]

^ What is your point? Russia has an equally bad problem with demographic decline. And they don't have the luxury of a billion plus population like the han hordes who can easily still overrun them despite the decline.

Russia had a demographic problem. No two ways about it. But there are nuances that western media (and many of us @BRF) miss. During my travels across Eastern Europe and in Russia you do come across the constant topic of declining demographics. But one thing I have come across is what causes this. The breakup of Soviet bloc, period of adjustment in between, return of some degree of affluence has had a strange effect on young couples. People have been putting off having children till later. Women who used to marry early 20's are more settled and staying to have kids in their thirties. Its almost as if there was a pause in having kids for a decade. Those lower fertility trays are going to go back up. The population will reduce slightly but stabilise. It won't be the Han who overrun Russia. If there is something to be feared its the immigration from the 'Stans' who will bring in their own cultural, religious values which over time will mould Russian politics.

[Rudradev]

Cross posting from Afghanistan thread (originally posted by SSridhar ji).

The article (from Reuters, NOT a Paki source) makes it clear that Russia has been backing the Afghan Taliban (Quetta Shura plus Haqqanis) for many years. Obviously this has been facilitated by Pakistan as a mediator. Apparently Moscow has been extending "moral and political support" to the Taliban since 2007 i.e. throughout the period of 2008 & 2009 attacks on Indian embassy in Kabul, 2014 attack on Indian consulate in Herat, etc.

This throws a new light on the alliance that is rapidly burgeoning between Moscow and Islamabad. The common interests between Russia and Pakistan exceed the widely known ambit of Russia-China and China-Pak relations.

It is only in the last year or so that the fruits of close friendship between Putin and Islamabad have finally begun to come "over-ground", with:

• *Russian-Paki joint military exercises, possibly in POK
  *Russia's open diplomatic rebuffs against India and in support of Pakistan's terrorist sponsorship at the BRICS summit and Heart of Asia conference
  *Russia's support for the CPEC (that runs through Indian territory under lillegal Chinese/Paki occupation)
  *Open supply of military equipment to Pakistan by Russia,

etc.



Russia-Taliban ties worry Afghan, US officials - Reuters

Afghan and American officials are increasingly worried that any deepening of ties between Russia and Taliban militants fighting to topple the government in Kabul could complicate an already precarious security situation.

Russian officials have denied they provide aid to the militants, who are contesting large swathes of territory and inflicting heavy casualties, and say their limited contacts are aimed at bringing the Taliban to the negotiating table.

Leaders in Kabul say Russian support for the Afghan Taliban appears to be mostly political so far. But they say a series of meetings taking place recently in Moscow and Tajikistan has made Afghan intelligence and defence officials nervous about more direct support including weapons or funding. A senior Afghan security official termed Russian support for the Taliban a “dangerous new trend”, an analysis echoed by the top US commander in Afghanistan, General John Nicholson.

He told reporters at a briefing in Washington last week that Russia had joined Iran and Pakistan as countries with a “malign influence” in Afghanistan, and said Moscow was lending legitimacy to the Taliban.

Russia’s ambassador to Kabul, Alexander Mantytskiy, told reporters on Thursday that his government’s contacts with the militant group were aimed at ensuring the safety of Russian citizens and encouraging peace talks.

“We do not have intensive contacts with the Taliban,” he said through an interpreter, adding that Russia favoured a negotiated peace in Afghanistan which could only happen by cultivating contacts with all players, including the Taliban.

Mantytskiy expressed annoyance at persistent accusations of Russian collaboration with the Taliban, saying the statements by American and Afghan officials were an effort to distract attention from the worsening conflict. “They are trying to put the blame for their failures on our shoulders,” he said.

Afghanistan has long been the scene of international intrigue and intervention, with the British and Russians jockeying for power during the 19th Century “Great Game”, and the United States helping Pakistan provide weapons and funding to Afghan militants fighting Soviet forces in the 1980s.

Taliban officials said the group has had significant contacts with Moscow since at least 2007, adding that Russian involvement did not extend beyond “moral and political support”.

“We had a common enemy,” said one senior Taliban official. “We needed support to get rid of the United States and its allies in Afghanistan and Russia wanted all foreign troops to leave Afghanistan as quickly as possible.”

Moscow has been critical of the United States and Nato over their handling of the war in Afghanistan, but Russia initially helped provide helicopters for the Afghan military and agreed to a supply route for coalition materials through Russia.

[krishna_krishna]

Rdevji, Knowing all the historical statements by Putin I agree the goal is what you posted. But means could be understanding with US on CPEC and in return US removes its base from A'stan, Putin will always prefer afghan government to talibunnies as long as they get to control them.
They are worried about ISIS and US getting a base in this region. Ruskies get connected to Gwadar and taste warm waters with blessing from chinkis. In return Russia makes sure we do not invade PoK.

1. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/wo ... ea7b0cdb89
2.http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 834159.cms
3. http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/07/2 ... abul-blast
4.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXidv0GILWY


The tactial retreat by US and mending its relations with Porkis what will they compromise for India. This is what I think :

1) PoK
2) Siachin

???

The question is can we draw our own coalition with Afghan government, Iran , Vietnam and Japan ? This is no super league but bare minimum to guard our interests like we had with northern alliance if you will

[devesh]

ok. fine. Russia is doomed. PRC+Russia is new reality of the world.

We are looking at the next 50 years of strategic stalemate or much worse, vis-a-vis Pak. B/c if Russia has become a junior partner of PRC - then at this point all of India's strategic weaknesses will continue for at least a couple of more generations b/c India neither has the resources nor the alliance pull to confront a PRC-Russia duo.

There is nothing I can say which will change your myopic worldview. But if your worldview is right, there is an easy way to know for sure: the next 50 years are going to be a disaster for India. In a way that is irreparable.

Let posterity decide. ciao.

Russia is doomed but not India. We don't have to confront PRC + Russia like we did not have to confront USA when they were supporting Pakistan or China. We have to ensure we have enough deterrence to prevent any China-Pakistan invasion. Our 120+ nuclear weapons are more than sufficient for that purpose.
We have to become internally strong, develop our capabilities in defence, human resources etc. If India is internally strong, no power on earth can stop us. If India is internally weak, there is no power on earth who can help us. It is as simple as that.

There is a reason why I described your thinking as "moronic". You prove me right.

if PRC+Russia is true, then all of CAR is already against us. It will be a PRC+Pak offensive with the tacit/covert backing of CAR jihadi-islamist networks and states. because this is how transnational networks work. if Russia throws its hat in with PRC - we're talking about a combined Sino-Islamic offensive on India. it won't just be PRC + "Pakistan". If reality were as you described it, India would have no chance of ever undertaking a decisive war. Even a limited Kargil-type offensive would become close to impossible without major diplomatic fallout. I honestly don't think you have a clue of what the consequences are if your scenario of world situation were currently true.

My last on this. we're going in circles.

[devesh]

Cross posting from Afghanistan thread (originally posted by SSridhar ji).

The article (from Reuters, NOT a Paki source) makes it clear that Russia has been backing the Afghan Taliban (Quetta Shura plus Haqqanis) for many years. Obviously this has been facilitated by Pakistan as a mediator. Apparently Moscow has been extending "moral and political support" to the Taliban since 2007 i.e. throughout the period of 2008 & 2009 attacks on Indian embassy in Kabul, 2014 attack on Indian consulate in Herat, etc.

This throws a new light on the alliance that is rapidly burgeoning between Moscow and Islamabad. The common interests between Russia and Pakistan exceed the widely known ambit of Russia-China and China-Pak relations.

It is only in the last year or so that the fruits of close friendship between Putin and Islamabad have finally begun to come "over-ground", with:

• *Russian-Paki joint military exercises, possibly in POK
  *Russia's open diplomatic rebuffs against India and in support of Pakistan's terrorist sponsorship at the BRICS summit and Heart of Asia conference
  *Russia's support for the CPEC (that runs through Indian territory under lillegal Chinese/Paki occupation)
  *Open supply of military equipment to Pakistan by Russia,

etc.



Russia-Taliban ties worry Afghan, US officials - Reuters

Afghan and American officials are increasingly worried that any deepening of ties between Russia and Taliban militants fighting to topple the government in Kabul could complicate an already precarious security situation.

Russian officials have denied they provide aid to the militants, who are contesting large swathes of territory and inflicting heavy casualties, and say their limited contacts are aimed at bringing the Taliban to the negotiating table.

Leaders in Kabul say Russian support for the Afghan Taliban appears to be mostly political so far. But they say a series of meetings taking place recently in Moscow and Tajikistan has made Afghan intelligence and defence officials nervous about more direct support including weapons or funding. A senior Afghan security official termed Russian support for the Taliban a “dangerous new trend”, an analysis echoed by the top US commander in Afghanistan, General John Nicholson.

He told reporters at a briefing in Washington last week that Russia had joined Iran and Pakistan as countries with a “malign influence” in Afghanistan, and said Moscow was lending legitimacy to the Taliban.

Russia’s ambassador to Kabul, Alexander Mantytskiy, told reporters on Thursday that his government’s contacts with the militant group were aimed at ensuring the safety of Russian citizens and encouraging peace talks.

“We do not have intensive contacts with the Taliban,” he said through an interpreter, adding that Russia favoured a negotiated peace in Afghanistan which could only happen by cultivating contacts with all players, including the Taliban.

Mantytskiy expressed annoyance at persistent accusations of Russian collaboration with the Taliban, saying the statements by American and Afghan officials were an effort to distract attention from the worsening conflict. “They are trying to put the blame for their failures on our shoulders,” he said.

Afghanistan has long been the scene of international intrigue and intervention, with the British and Russians jockeying for power during the 19th Century “Great Game”, and the United States helping Pakistan provide weapons and funding to Afghan militants fighting Soviet forces in the 1980s.

Taliban officials said the group has had significant contacts with Moscow since at least 2007, adding that Russian involvement did not extend beyond “moral and political support”.

“We had a common enemy,” said one senior Taliban official. “We needed support to get rid of the United States and its allies in Afghanistan and Russia wanted all foreign troops to leave Afghanistan as quickly as possible.”

Moscow has been critical of the United States and Nato over their handling of the war in Afghanistan, but Russia initially helped provide helicopters for the Afghan military and agreed to a supply route for coalition materials through Russia.

nonsensical article which doesn't provide a single shred of evidence other than claims of vague "officials" claiming that they're "worried".

Russia cannot and will not support Taliban. It would undo the Russian scheme of things in CAR. Russia helping Taliban would probably unravel their position in Uzbekistan faster than they can say "quit".

Russia is increasingly the "jew" for western journalists these days. anything and everything can be blamed on them. an easy and convenient punching bag.

[RajeshA]

It is official: USA is shifting to Russia, away from China and Sunni world.

I have chosen one of the truly great business leaders of the world, Rex Tillerson, Chairman and CEO of ExxonMobil, to be Secretary of State.

[Austin]

It is official: USA is shifting to Russia, away from China and Sunni world.

I have chosen one of the truly great business leaders of the world, Rex Tillerson, Chairman and CEO of ExxonMobil, to be Secretary of State.

Thats just Nonsense to believe that Trump is pro-Russia , Thats the same kind of stuff peddled when Obama was the President and he was over heard over microphone speaking with Medvedev saying , He can make a deal with Putin and the Reset stuff both have failed miserably.

The Goal of Trump Adminstration or rather US System irrespective who ever is in power is to play China and Russia against each other by dealing with one and punishing the next , that is what Obama did when he was president by treating China with Kids Glove and Russia heavily with sanctions etc , China stood by Russia and vetoed many things together including Syria and So did India and other nations. Trump is just playing the game reverse.

Make No Mistake Neither Russia or China is not delusional enough to understand this and once Trump get into Presidency we will see this happening

[Philip]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12 ... secretary/

Donald Trump names pro-Russian ExxonMobil boss Rex Tillerson US secretary of state
Rex Tillerson and Vladimir Putin during the signing of a Rosneft-ExxonMobil strategic partnership agreement in Sochi on August 30, 2011

Our Foreign Staff
13 DECEMBER 2016 • 11:21AM
President-elect Donald Trump announced ExxonMobil's Rex Tillerson as his choice for secretary of state on Tuesday, praising the business leader as a successful international deal-maker who has led a global operation.

Tillerson's experience in diplomacy stems from making deals with foreign countries for the world's largest energy company, although questions have been raised about the oil executive's relations with Russia.

"He will be a forceful and clear-eyed advocate for America's vital national interests, and help reverse years of misguided foreign policies and actions that have weakened America's security and standing in the world," Trump said in a statement.

Tillerson said he shared Trump's "vision for restoring the credibility of the United States' foreign relations and advancing our country's national security."
I have chosen one of the truly great business leaders of the world, Rex Tillerson, Chairman and CEO of ExxonMobil, to be Secretary of State.
Trump picked Tillerson, 64, after the Texan was backed by several Republican establishment figures including former Secretary of State James Baker, former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the transition official said.

Their support is seen as key to helping Tillerson get past a possibly contentious Senate confirmation battle likely to focus on his relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In 2013, Putin bestowed a Russian state honor, the Order of Friendship, on Tillerson, citing his work "strengthening cooperation in the energy sector".
Trump judged in making the pick that Tillerson could adequately address questions about his relations with Russia, an official said.

Lawmakers from both major parties have raised questions about Tillerson and former UN Ambassador John Bolton, who has been mentioned as a possible No. 2 State Department official and who has voiced hawkish views on Iraq and Iran.

Separately, a source close to the transition said Trump had chosen former Texas Governor Rick Perry as his nominee for energy secretary, with an announcement expected soon. Perry met Trump on Monday at Trump Tower in New York.

Republicans and Democrats said Tillerson, who is president of ExxonMobil, would be asked about his contacts with Russia, having met Putin several times. He won fresh praise from Moscow on Monday.

Senator John McCain, a leading foreign policy voice and the 2008 Republican candidate for president, told Reuters in an interview: "I have concerns. It's very well known that he has a very close relationship with Vladimir Putin."

There has been controversy over the role alleged Russian cyber hacking may have had on the outcome of the November 8 presidential election, in which Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton.

[Yagnasri]

The same DT made a very good friend of China as the US ambassador to China. So we can not make anything yet. The proposed SoS may be looking for closer relations with Russia as the CEO, but can he do that as SoS is the question. At least he will not be HC.

[Austin]

Exxxonmobil is the largest US Oil Company perhaps the largest in the world and has great sway over many US politician , That guy may or may not be good to Russia but most certainly he will be good for US business.

I think lot of project that are stopped due to Environmental Concern will be started if he becomes the Seceratary of State and Trump has promised to make US Self reliant on energy reducing dependencies on Saudi .......So the Exxon guy should be the right person on the job to guide the president and pull strings with Putin , Gulf Shaiks and alike

[Austin]

Rex must have made a deal with Trump , I will get back jobs to US , you give me a free hand on how to deal with US Foreign Policy , This must be good news for Exxon Share holders too , He will bring big bussines to Exxon Corp

[svinayak]

It is official: USA is shifting to Russia, away from China and Sunni world.

Thats just Nonsense to believe that Trump is pro-Russia , Thats the same kind of stuff peddled when Obama was the President and he was over heard over microphone speaking with Medvedev saying , He can make a deal with Putin and the Reset stuff both have failed miserably.


Make No Mistake Neither Russia or China is not delusional enough to understand this and once Trump get into Presidency we will see this happening

Trump is Pro Russia. Putin’s a winner regardless of whether Tillerson’s confirmed

Russia wins no matter who are in the cabinet. The global system is fragile and needs correction

US policy will change which will support US interest. US changing the course will be for US Interest.
Tillerson said he shared Trump's "vision for restoring the credibility of the United States' foreign relations and advancing our country's national security."

[chetak]

be interesting to have a US secretary of state named T Rex.

with cowboy Trump as the president

[Rudradev]

Cross posting from Afghanistan thread (originally posted by SSridhar ji).

The article (from Reuters, NOT a Paki source) makes it clear that Russia has been backing the Afghan Taliban (Quetta Shura plus Haqqanis) for many years. Obviously this has been facilitated by Pakistan as a mediator. Apparently Moscow has been extending "moral and political support" to the Taliban since 2007 i.e. throughout the period of 2008 & 2009 attacks on Indian embassy in Kabul, 2014 attack on Indian consulate in Herat, etc.

This throws a new light on the alliance that is rapidly burgeoning between Moscow and Islamabad. The common interests between Russia and Pakistan exceed the widely known ambit of Russia-China and China-Pak relations.

It is only in the last year or so that the fruits of close friendship between Putin and Islamabad have finally begun to come "over-ground", with:

• *Russian-Paki joint military exercises, possibly in POK
  *Russia's open diplomatic rebuffs against India and in support of Pakistan's terrorist sponsorship at the BRICS summit and Heart of Asia conference
  *Russia's support for the CPEC (that runs through Indian territory under lillegal Chinese/Paki occupation)
  *Open supply of military equipment to Pakistan by Russia,

etc.



Russia-Taliban ties worry Afghan, US officials - Reuters

nonsensical article which doesn't provide a single shred of evidence other than claims of vague "officials" claiming that they're "worried".

As opposed to MOST public-domain analyses of foreign policy positions... which come bundled with verified copies of leaked diplomatic cables, top-secret cabinet memoranda, and other such "hard" evidence no doubt.

What evidence do YOU offer to substantiate the vacuous claim that negotiations between Moscow and the Afghan Taliban are a "nonsensical" idea?

If Russia had no interest in accommodating the Taliban, why would they have been invited to the table with Beijing, Islamabad, and Kabul to determine Afghanistan's future? This foursome was mooted by China and Pakistan to replace the erstwhile (US-Pak-China-Afghanistan) quadrilateral consultative group, EXACTLY because the US became unwilling to accommodate the Taliban's terms any longer. That was made abundantly clear with the American drone strike on Mullah Akhtar Mansour of 21 May, 2016.

If Russia has been brought on board by China and Pakistan for the reconstituted quadrilateral commission, it is precisely because Russia is happy to countenance (and facilitate) a political role for the Taliban in Afghanistan's future... a position fully in consonance with Chinese and Pakistani preferences, and in stark contrast to the reluctance of the Americans.

Indeed, this very month, Moscow will be hosting a meeting between Russia, Pakistan, and China... (with no Indian, Iranian, or even Afghan representatives invited!)... to discuss the common interests of the three nations in shaping the political future of Afghanistan.
https://sputniknews.com/world/201611141 ... ip-russia/

This should come as no surprise whatsoever to anyone aware of Russian Special Envoy Zamir Kabulov's robust, public defense of both the Taliban and Pakistan at international fora:

http://thewire.in/84672/pakistan-isis-a ... an-russia/

Amritsar: Justifying Russia’s recent overture to Pakistan, the Russian president’s special representative to Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov said that ISIS in the subcontinent cannot be eliminated without cooperation from Islamabad. Exactly how is this different from the bilge of "al-lie in the war on terror" peddled by Colin Powell, Armitage, et al?

Kabulov, Russia’s most experienced diplomatic hand in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, was in India to attend the annual ministerial meeting of the Heart of Asia process that aims to develop a regional strategy for Afghanistan’s development.

Russia’s move towards Pakistan had been greeted with wariness but understanding in New Delhi. But this understanding was stretched to its limit when Moscow announced that it will hold a first joint military exercise with Pakistan in Gilgit-Baltistan, which India claims as part of Jammu and Kashmir. After India protested, the exercise went ahead but took place in Cherat, in the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province.

“We understand all concerns of India about your western neighbour…But we cannot combat (terrorism) efficiently and productively and eliminate (it) without the cooperation of Pakistan. We need their cooperation and they should realise their importance and responsibility,” Kabulov said, justifying Russia’s strategic decision to reach out to Pakistan in order to combat ISIS.

‘More dangerous than the Taliban’

The veteran Russian diplomat, who has also been ambassador to Afghanistan in the past, describes ISIS in Afghanistan as being more insidiously dangerous than the Taliban.

He described the Taliban as a “predominantly a national military-political movement”. “It is local, Afghanistan-based. They believe that they should have, from their perspective, fair share in the government of Afghanistan…They should talk and deal in their local context”.

But Daesh (Arabic name for ISIS) “as an international organisation is really dangerous”. “If you recall, young Taliban under the influence of Al-Qaeda in 1994, their rhetoric was very similar to today’s Daesh rhetoric”.

Among Indian officials, there is some scepticism about the existence of ISIS in Afghanistan. “There is a still a lot of confusion about them. They seem to be largely disgruntled Taliban elements who have formed their own groups and have declared themselves as ISIS,” a senior Indian diplomat said.

However, Kabulov was convinced that stopping ISIS in Afghanistan was a bigger project than stopping the Taliban and that India should be taking note.

There seems little room for doubt that the Russians have concocted a largely fictitious bogey of "ISIS in Afghanistan" to justify their increasingly overt support for Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban. It is highly noteworthy that Kabulov publicly articulates Russia's official position on the Taliban as a "national military-political movement" that simply wants their "fair share" in Afghanistan. This is no different from the Pakistani or Chinese position as far as I can see. It is precisely the position that Washington walked away from, with a parting shot at Mullah Mansour.

Anyone who isn't blinded by dense sentimentality for "India-Russia Bhai Bhai", or clinging to outmoded geopolitical convictions that have long exceeded their shelf life, would recognize what Moscow is now up to with Pakistan and the Taliban.

Russia cannot and will not support Taliban. It would undo the Russian scheme of things in CAR. Russia helping Taliban would probably unravel their position in Uzbekistan faster than they can say "quit".

Vapid rhetorical assertions are no substitute for reasoning, and wither in the face of abundantly available evidence, no matter how many times one might repeat them. All they demonstrate is profound susceptibility to the "personal incredulity" fallacy... i.e., one is personally unwilling to believe something because it produces too much cognitive dissonance, therefore the thing itself must be untrue.

The idea that Russia would feel constrained in pursuing its interests in Afghanistan because this might "unravel their position" in Uzbekistan is preposterous. Is Russia being run by some "log kya kahengey" dhoti-shiverer in the mold of Manmohan Singh?

Russia sells their latest weaponry to China, which opposes Indian membership in the NSG, blocks the UN sanctioning of anti-India terrorist groups, periodically makes military incursions onto Indian territory with its own PLA, proliferates nuclear weapons to Pakistan, and contrives to build an economic corridor across Indian territory illegally occupied by Pakistan. In recent months Russia has gone several steps further, offering weaponry directly to Pakistan, and engaging in military exercises with the Pakistan army.

Russia does ALL this, has been doing much of it for years, and what has India done in response? Nothing. India has concluded that it needs Russian energy supplies, Russian diplomatic support, Russian military assistance, Russian technological assistance (especially in the nuclear energy arena) too much to do a goddamn thing about it.

When even mighty India sits quietly on its thumbs while Russia consolidates its growing alliance with China and Pakistan... do you seriously expect Uzbekistan, so much punier and so much more dependent on Moscow, to breathe a murmur of protest when Russia offers moral and diplomatic support to the Taliban?

Russia is increasingly the "jew" for western journalists these days. anything and everything can be blamed on them. an easy and convenient punching bag.

That we know very well. However, this final assertion of your argument resides on the inverse of a "No True Scotsman" fallacy... the Western Journalists are saying it, and they have a habit of being mean to Russia, so that's enough reason to believe that anything Western Journalists might say about Russia is untrue.

Fact is, the US, Russia, and China are ALL completely untrustworthy from India's perspective. China is a motivated enemy in its own right, the other two are willing to get into bed with both China and Pakistan with no regard whatsoever for Indian interests or sensitivities. We are on our own. Period.

[GShankar]

15 years ago it was war on Terror to dominate the world with just one player. Now the war on terror has morphed to war on ISIS and there are several players leveraging the concept to their own advantage.

Rest of the world has almost caught up with US on playing the game.

But we are not playing. Or we are playing in secret.

I wish(hope rather) the latter is true.

[Rudradev]

Cross posting an article frpm TSP thread with more details. Apparently Russia and Iran have been supplying the Afghan Taliban with aid that they have used to fight the Kabul government.

http://indianexpress.com/article/explai ... i-4425827/

In fact: Why General Qamar Javed Bajwa faces the abyss in Afghanistan

... Gen Bajwa is beginning the game with the best hand any Pakistan Army chief has held since 9/11: both Russia and Iran are backing the Afghan Taliban, Pakistan’s proxies, against the Islamic State...
Last week, Russia’s ambassador to Afghanistan, Alexander Mantytskiy, sought to explain his country’s emerging relationship with the Taliban to enraged members of Afghanistan’s parliament, the Meshrano Jirga. “Our interests are the same as the Taliban,” he said. Behind the scenes, Afghan intelligence officials say, Russia’s intelligence services have been arming Taliban and warlords fighting Uzbek jihadists in Kunduz; Iran has given similar assistance in Farah and Herat. Not surprisingly, part of the aid has been used to fight the Afghan government.

[Austin]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-afgha ... SKBN13W2XJ

Russia's ambassador to Kabul, Alexander Mantytskiy, told reporters on Thursday that his government's contacts with the insurgent group were aimed at ensuring the safety of Russian citizens and encouraging peace talks.

"We do not have intensive contacts with the Taliban," he said through an interpreter, adding that Russia favored a negotiated peace in Afghanistan which could only happen by cultivating contacts with all players, including the Taliban.

Mantytskiy expressed annoyance at persistant accusations of Russian collaboration with the Taliban, saying the statements by American and Afghan officials were an effort to distract attention from the worsening conflict.

"They are trying to put the blame for their failures on our shoulders," he told Reuters.

[Austin]

US policy over 15 years in Afghanistan has lead to failure , they could neither eliminate Taliban or could they reign in Pakistan inspite of the billion dollars they provided and arms provided during this period , Pakistan happily used both the money and arms to support Pakistani Taliban in Af-PAK and in Kashmir , End result is we are just back to square one

[Philip]

The last "Latitude" debate was on Pak,what after ":surgical strikes"? This was a v.pertinent Q. Ifw e reall want to sort out the regional chaos,thenw e have to deal firmly with Pak.and seriously invest in dismantling the rogue state.Baluchistan,Gilgit,etc.,widening the fault lines in Pak and suporting anti-Punjabi sub-national separatist entities must be done.Pak will then be too worried and occupied with internal strife in holding the nation together than adventurism in the Af-Pak region. This card India has to play v.dexterously,as it will have to involve stakeholders like Iran,the Central Asian states and of course Russia in achieving a Paki collapse.

[Kashi]

This card India has to play v.dexterously,as it will have to involve stakeholders like Iran,the Central Asian states and of course Russia in achieving a Paki collapse.

Yes and Russia is doing a fine job of "getting involved in achieving Paki collapse" as their recent actions suggest

PhilipJi, could you please be critical of Russia for once?

[Austin]

Good Read on Russian ArmedForces Doctorine for Europe

Russian strategy and the evolving anti-access/area denial threat in Europe

[Austin]

This card India has to play v.dexterously,as it will have to involve stakeholders like Iran,the Central Asian states and of course Russia in achieving a Paki collapse.

Pakistan wont collapse untill India Invades it completely and make it part of Akhand Bharat

[Yagnasri]

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.

[chetak]

the ruskies supporting the taliban, which basically means entities against us, hasn't caused much comment here.

[chetak]

This card India has to play v.dexterously,as it will have to involve stakeholders like Iran,the Central Asian states and of course Russia in achieving a Paki collapse.

Pakistan wont collapse untill India Invades it completely and make it part of Akhand Bharat

can't afford to invade and not do a reverse Hindu kush all over again.

That land is valuable but untenanted onlee.