India-Russia: News & Analysis

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Dec 2016 16:51

Seems Turkey Policy and even Military is heavily infiltrated by people who would work against the government policy and perhaps even national interest.

It was difficult to save the Ambassador from such shoot out which is done by police official who has easy access to such an event and can pretend to be there to protect , Short of having an SPG/NSG or Secret Service like personal security where the inner ring is protected by its own people.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 21 Dec 2016 16:55

Rudradev wrote:ST: New Delhi is the capital of India.
(Just telling you something which you already knew, to return the favour from you )

Classic

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Dec 2016 16:57

It seems Russian Foreign Intelligence service has special squad "Barrier" (7th own security department of the Center of the Foreign Intelligence Service) that protects its Embassy and Diplomats abroad but 10 years back Turkey has disallowed this and now post the assasination talks have started to resume the service.

Presumably, the soldiers of a special unit "Barrier" 7th department's own Security Center Russian Foreign Intelligence Service in the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov protection during the latter's visit to Baghdad (Iraq), November 2013 (c) VKontakte

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Dec 2016 16:59

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2334228.html

As reported by the news agency "Rosbalt" in the material , "Ambassador Charles was no one to guard" , Ankara has more than 10 years old are not allowed riot SVR "Barrier" to take under the armed protection of the Russian diplomats in Turkey. This was told "Rosbalt" Division officer.

More than ten years, the Turkish authorities were not allowed to Russian diplomats in the country guarded by a special squad "Barrier" (7th own security department of the Center of the Foreign Intelligence Service). Its main task is to ensure the safety of embassy staff, the soldiers "Barrier" work in many countries around the world. It is well-trained and armed fighters who not only carry out physical protection, but also have the operational skills. Only after the public murder Russian Ambassador to Turkey, Andrei Karlov hastily Turkish side returned to discussing the possibility of "Barrier" fighters arriving to ensure the safety of our diplomats. "Rosbalt" correspondent on condition of anonymity, had a talk with one of the special forces personnel.

"Rosbalt" correspondent on condition of anonymity, had a talk with one of the special forces personnel.

- Tell me if Andrew Charles guarded by soldiers "Barrier", it would be possible to avoid the tragedy?

- In this situation, we can say that would have been done in the case of the presence of our children in Turkey. Absolutely no people behind the diplomat during his speech would not be. Next to him were to be two men in plain clothes with guns, to monitor the behavior of people in the hall and exercise diplomatic cover in the event of emergencies. The room would have placed our soldiers in civilian clothes.

Getting around the city Charles was in an armored car, which is also commonly found fighters "Barrier", and not only with guns, but with automatic weapons. Unfortunately, Charles had no such protection. And it's not our fault.

- Why do representatives of the "Barrier" missing in Turkey, especially considering all the recent events?

- Threats against embassy in Turkey began to arrive more than 10 years ago. At this time, many of the militants who fought in the North Caucasus, came to rest and treatment in Turkey. From them came a significant danger. Then they were joined by representatives of the various terrorist and extremist organizations and their sympathizers. More than 10 years ago the question was first raised that the diplomats in Turkey must protect the fighters "Barrier." But it is necessary permission to the Turkish side, but it did not give all the time to do so.

- It turns out that Charles did not have any protection?

- It turns out that way. Sometimes a guard functions are performed by drivers of diplomats, but in 90% of cases this random people who do not have any training and are not able to protect the diplomat from a serious danger.

- And what were called the reasons for this reluctance of Turkey to the Russian diplomats guarded by professionals?

- Soldiers of the "Barrier" come to the country with a large arsenal, which includes a variety of weapons and equipment from armored cars to various equipment. The city soldiers, when they in the service, too, moved with the weapon. The Turkish side was against the fact that in their country there were armed people from Russia. Although it was a small number of fighters, whose function is solely to ensure the safety of diplomats. Usually with the countries where there is a threat for the embassy employees, such problems do not arise.

- Soldiers of the "Barrier" is now working in many countries?

- I can not say that the list of countries that big, but they are missing. For example, now our soldiers are in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen and several other countries.

- After the murder of Charles the Turkish side's position on this issue has changed?

- As far as I know, talks about coming to Turkey "Barrier" fighters resumed urgently. We expect that in the near future will do the appropriate order.

- Under the protection includes all embassy staff?

- If we talk about physical protection, we are talking only about the first person, diplomat, as well as embassy employees, is sekretonositelyami. However, the fighters "Barrier" guarded embassy building, adjacent areas, sometimes the place of residence of the Embassy staff. This allows you to greatly reduce the risk of incidents with the staff of embassies.

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 22 Dec 2016 00:11

India and Russia have no current inherent conflicts at all. In the long term however, one of India's imperatives as it grows will be to break out of geographical constraints imposed by partition. A land link to Central Asia and beyond. And a prosperous India connected to Central Asia will be as big or a bigger threat than China given our geographical proximity. Russia may simply be looking to back Pakistan and forestall or postpone this.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 Dec 2016 00:50

anjan wrote:India and Russia have no current inherent conflicts at all. In the long term however, one of India's imperatives as it grows will be to break out of geographical constraints imposed by partition. A land link to Central Asia and beyond. And a prosperous India connected to Central Asia will be as big or a bigger threat than China given our geographical proximity. Russia may simply be looking to back Pakistan and forestall or postpone this.

How so? Are you saying that India will seek to be an imperial power, to constitute a threat to Russia in the distant future. It will go against our entire civilizational narrative. I am willing to look very far into the future but do not see that as a distinct possibility. The only time Indian resources and power have been used in such a capacity is by the British. So, yes, India does have the innate capacities to be an imperial power, but our narratives and organic history are far from it. Any pointers to the theory that Russia is concerned of this?

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 22 Dec 2016 01:22

ShauryaT wrote:How so? Are you saying that India will seek to be an imperial power, to constitute a threat to Russia in the distant future. It will go against our entire civilizational narrative. I am willing to look very far into the future but do not see that as a distinct possibility. The only time Indian resources and power have been used in such a capacity is by the British. So, yes, India does have the innate capacities to be an imperial power, but our narratives and organic history are far from it. Any pointers to the theory that Russia is concerned of this?

One need not send soldiers to be a threat. You simply need to out influence someone else.

India's historical cultural sphere encompasses Afghanistan and radiates outwards. In recent history however Russia has enjoyed unfettered access and overwhelming influence in the region. Propelled by growing economic power India will return to that old normal. Land connectivity specifically is a strong channel for cultural/economic influence to propagate. After all that's what people are interested in when they discuss China's Silk route strategy. Not so much mil communication lines that can be interdicted but soft power projection that cannot be. Russia fears Chinese access to the Central Asia; but it isn't tanks that they fear.

IMO The only real question is on the actual rate at which India can grow.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 Dec 2016 02:09

OK, I see what you are saying but based on what I know of Russian history and their interactions and fears on China, Russian fears are solidly rooted in geo-political terms and geography is certainly part of the mix. Their fears with China are rooted in the migrations into NE Siberia, ceded to Russia by China during the 100 years of shame. China has not challenged it, yet. Similar issues in Central Asia, where it is geo-political dominance that is of concern and not just some influencing factors based on economy or culture. Russian actions to its west will also tell you a similar story. Russian is apt at playing the balance of power games that the continent is so adept at, minus the aberrations of the cold war era and even in that time, the core balance of power theories based on nation states and indeed, I would argue based on civilization interests was never completely abandoned.

Would be willing to read up some more expert materials on the topic. Thanks.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 22 Dec 2016 03:00

I think Anjan is right.

Russia is looking back much further in history to when Kushans and others dominated Central Asia. China is well aware of that period as well.

Indo-Bactrian (a Western Universalist term for "Indian") influence enjoyed primacy in this region for probably a longer period in Eurasian history than any other. Achaemenid Persia was more interested (or found easier pickings) to its west and never expanded beyond either the Hindu Kush or the south shores of the Aral Sea. China only extended far into Central Asia for a brief period in the T'ang dynasty period (11th century CE), while Russia is a relative latecomer which opened its account only with the conquest of Mongol-legacy Khanates from the 16th century CE onwards.

Only during those interregnums when the heartlands of Indus and Gangetic Valley fell into disarray and infighting did Indian influence withdraw, creating a vacuum into which various Hunas, Tatars, Mongols, Turkomen etc. forayed. By default, Central Asia (like Southeast Asia) is an extension of India more so than any other civilization-state.

The British attempt at "great gaming" was a poor attempt to reconstruct this sphere of Indian influence that mostly failed because it relied exclusively on the traditional methods of European colonialism; meanwhile, the vitally important cultural underpinnings of that influence had been bleached away by the Macaulayization efforts of British themselves, during their colonization of India.

Russian engagement with Pakistan (and Taliban) were inevitable, if seen through this lens. It recapitulates the need to create a schism between Indus and Gangetic Valley power centers so that Indian influence further afield into Central Asia is limited. This is independent of China (a newcomer even now into Xinjiang and Tibet, let alone further west).

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 22 Dec 2016 04:15

The other possibility is that Putin is increasingly becoming transactional. And looking purely at short term moves. Either he thinks India doesn't have the will to enter CA. Or he thinks such a possibility is so distant in the future that he can't sit around waiting for it.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 Dec 2016 04:37

RD: Can you provide pointers that Russia is looking that far to shape policies on India and that it looks upon such ancient history and its impact (which is its own debate) to shape its future policies vis-a-vis India? Breaking up Indian organic power is a well known western project (which has succeeded) however to look pre 1648 in the context of Russia would be an eye opener. Please do provide some references, if available, It will be informative to know, who all subscribe to such views.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 22 Dec 2016 05:37

ST: Hard to find because I'm sure much of the debate, especially regarding deep historical context, would not be in English language. I will certainly share whatever I come across.

For now, consider this IDSA critique of an article by Andrew Korybko (a Russian strategic thinker) that has laid out a vision of Pakistan as a "Zipper" that can play a pivotal role in integrating Eurasian powers.

http://www.idsa.in/issuebrief/RussiasNe ... dan_180915

And here is the article itself, at RISS' website. Note that the idea of Russian support for CPEC was introduced into the public (English-language!) debate by Russian think-tanks all the way back in September 2015. I am not sure if this was posted here before. We were (myself included) sleeping here with our fantasies of PAKFA and all that nonsense.

https://en.riss.ru/analysis/18882/

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 Dec 2016 05:52

^Thanks, will read up. Understand such views would be hard to find in English language.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Dec 2016 06:30

P. Stobodan is very good analyst and worked as an Ambassador for India.

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 22 Dec 2016 08:49

ShauryaT wrote:OK, I see what you are saying but based on what I know of Russian history and their interactions and fears on China, Russian fears are solidly rooted in geo-political terms and geography is certainly part of the mix. Their fears with China are rooted in the migrations into NE Siberia, ceded to Russia by China during the 100 years of shame. China has not challenged it, yet. Similar issues in Central Asia, where it is geo-political dominance that is of concern and not just some influencing factors based on economy or culture. Russian actions to its west will also tell you a similar story. Russian is apt at playing the balance of power games that the continent is so adept at, minus the aberrations of the cold war era and even in that time, the core balance of power theories based on nation states and indeed, I would argue based on civilization interests was never completely abandoned.

Would be willing to read up some more expert materials on the topic. Thanks.

Ayni AB, I think, is a clear indicator on Russian opinion on Indian projection into CA. Russia has historically been sensitive to other powers in CA which it regards as it's soft underbelly. All that said most of CA is closer to Delhi than it is to Moscow or European Russia or Han China and only our economic state and our lack of direct access due to partition have stopped that being taken to it's logical conclusion. IMO trade patterns and spread of cultural influence are strongly predicated on geography and thus repeat. Thus why central europe fears even a whiff of Russo-German cooperation like Nord Stream. It's a return to a pattern that sees much of Central/Eastern Europe in flames.

Edit: on sources, I don't have any to give on this specifically and all that geographical determinism may be as much bunkum but I've been reading on the Balkans and CE recently and at least it's clear that the Russians take their near abroad very seriously.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 22 Dec 2016 09:43

I have been saying on this forum for decades as a lone voice what Anglo saxons have done to Indian influence and interests on high seas, the Bear has done to Indian commerce and influence on land.

Ayni is classic example of Russian double faced Hyprocrisy. Good news is it will be difficult for Russians to lobby for Armata/FGFA etc for Indian army induction in the future.

CPEC is a failure without Indian participation....with or without Russia we are coming to reclaim our ancestral lands.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Dec 2016 10:46

MSM just couldn’t resist trying to justify killer of envoy who helped negotiate Aleppo evacuation

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 22 Dec 2016 11:48

Rudradev-ji, posting a response about Andrew Korybko.

_____________________

^^. Andrew Korybko was born and raised in the USA. He is of Polish descent. He came to dislike American foreign policy and settled down in Russia about three years ago.

The reason I mention all of this is that Korybko has an extremely unusual background for a Russian analyst. He's an intelligent person, but his critical views of India and lavish admiration of China are not typical among Russians.

There are reasons for that.
1). He was a teenager in the US in the 90's. He doesn't have an emotional memory of the fact that while China stabbed Russia in the back with the J-11B, India saved Sukhoi with the Su-30 MKI. Every other Russian analyst I've interacted with has recalled India's assistance with gratitude.
2). He's young (in his 30's at most). He simply doesn't have the experience to realize that much of the English-language media regarding India and the US is propaganda. It's worth nothing that Korybko's editor at "The Duran," Alexander Mercouris, took the unusual step of explicitly distancing himself from Korybko's views in this article:
http://theduran.com/modi-washington-ind ... e-us-ally/

I'll relate an interesting anecdote regarding India, the US, and Russia. I attended a seminar at a prominent DC think tank. (A senior BRF member can vouch that I'm telling the truth because we said hello to each other there. I'm not going to mention the specifics because BRF is closely monitored.) During the seminar, one analyst was critical of PM Modi and India's economic moves (essentially, not handing over enough money to US firms). However, in this person's op-ed written immediately after this seminar, this same analyst lavished praise on US-Indian ties and didn't mention any criticism whatsoever. When I read the article my jaw dropped. I thought, "Was this the same person I just heard?"

Do you see what the U.S. Deep State is trying to do? They're trying to break the partnership between India and Russia. For instance, the BrahMos is the world's best anti-ship missile. A BrahMos/Onyx salvo launched by an Arihant/Yasen submarine is the most potent threat in the world to a U.S. Carrier Strike Group. And it's US aircraft carriers which are propping up the petro-dollar system.

The U.S. Deep State is worried what further Indo-Russian partnerships can achieve. So, their agents in the English-language media push stories on how Russian equipment is junk, and how wonderful things are going between India and the U.S. This is designed to raise tensions between Indians and Russians. This is so obvious I'm surprised that senior BRF members--who should know better--are falling for it.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 22 Dec 2016 13:10

^^^^^^^

@Avarachan ji, Developing further on your theme.............

Such BOIs, in the past would conclude "material failure" as the cause of the accident, meaning we don't know WTF happened.

This seems to be a variation on that theme.

Russian-made medium transporter aircraft AN-32–the mainstay workhorse of the Indian Air Force (IAF)--will no longer ferry personnel, or civilians, the Indian Air Force has told the Ministry of Defence. It has also recommended that the entire fleet of AN-32 aircraft be replaced as soon as possible.

This follows a Court of Inquiry into the crash of an AN-32 aircraft on July 22 this year off the coast of Chennai. The aircraft crashed into the sea during a routine sortie to Port Blair with 29 people on board. The wreckage of the aircraft hasn't been found. Everyone on board the ill-fated aircraft is now "presumed dead".

The findings of the Court of Inquiry—recently accepted by the Indian Air Force—says the crash was caused due to a phenomena called "icing", where "super cool water droplets come in contact with the aircraft and freeze, distorting the airframe, causing it to stall," a senior official familiar with the findings of the Court of Inquiry said.

The decision has major implications for India's armed forces and beyond.

The IAF has eight squadrons of the AN-32. An Indian Air Force squadron typically comprises of 16-18 aircraft. The IAF has 33 squadrons of fighter aircraft and 12 squadrons of transport aircraft. The AN 32s were inducted into the IAF between 1984 and 1991.

AN-32 is a versatile transporter pressed into frequent service to carry men and equipment of India's armed forces. They play a major role in connecting far-flung areas, emergency preparedness and disaster relief. If the IAF stops transporting personnel on AN-32s, it will mean sensitive operations will have to use private chartered planes or commercial flights. IAF has one squadron each of Boeing C17 Globemaster and Lockheed C130J. These are very large aircraft unsuited to carry smaller loads. It also has two squadrons of Russia-made IL 76 and six planes of IL 78. These are also heavy-lift transporters that can't play the vital role of AN 32s.

Modern aircraft have automated anti-icing systems, whereas in an AN-32, it is manual. The Court of Inquiry has established the pilot tried to avoid bad weather and had even deviated from its course. "This indicates pilot awareness," the official said. But why the pilot couldn't take anti-icing measures is not very clear.

In India, icing is typically witnessed between altitudes of 22,000 and 24,000 feet, where the temperatures range between 0 degrees Celsius and minus 15 degrees Celsius.

"Recovery was possible had the pilot climbed higher—above 25,000ft. But these aircraft are old and to climb higher, the pilot would have had to reduce weight. That would mean dumping the load over the sea which was not possible in this case," the official said. The ill-fated transporter was carrying personnel.

This is why the IAF has now told the defence ministry that AN-32 will only carry a load that can be dumped into the sea in case of an emergency. This means no transporting personnel from now on.

Besides, the IAF has also asked the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to investigate why the Chennai radar—used to guide civilian air traffic—failed to raise an alarm soon after the AN-32 disappeared. The IAF raised the alarm after the aircraft failed to reach Port Blair—nearly three hours after the aircraft took off. "Crucial minutes were lost. Had the alarm been raised immediately, a rescue and search operation could have been launched earlier," the officer said.

(Sudhi Ranjan Das wrote this for the Huffington Post)

habal · Post by **habal** » 22 Dec 2016 14:31

icing was cause of pakistani ATR crash as well, killing Junaid Jamshed. Apparently the turboprop has some heating coils that melt away and prevent icing to form on the engine propeller. The pakis failed to maintain that heating coil that had gone kaput resulting in ice formation and engine dying in mid flight.

habal · Post by **habal** » 22 Dec 2016 15:11

habal wrote:Terrorist apologist "Gersh Kuntzman" uvacha

Assassination of Russian Ambassador Andrei Karlov was not terrorism, but retribution for Vladimir Putin’s war crimes

Gersh Kuntzman ✔ @GershKuntzman
Wherein I make a case for political assassinations ... when the victim works for Putin or Hitler, that is. http://nydn.us/2gYlolK
9:14 PM - 20 Dec 2016

This sort of editorial should not come as a surprise. The Daily News is owned by Mortimer Zuckerman, a Clinton supporter and Clinton Foundation donor. As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton oversaw the destruction of Libya and Syria. She chortled live on television about the brutal assassination of Moamar Gaddafi. Clinton was the Queen of Humanitarian Intervention, death toll presently accumulating.

Hitler is the motif, as usual. Kuntsman and the Daily News are adding to the pile of fake news sludge on Syria put out by the establishment media. If Putin is Hitler, then it is permissible to kill him and any other representative of the Russian Federation.

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/ru ... blication/

Russian Foreign Ministry demands apology from popular New York publication

(TASS) Russia’s Foreign Ministry demanded an apology from the chief editor of the New York Daily News for publishing an article which justified the assassination of Russia’s Ambassador to Turkey Andrei Karlov, the ministry’s spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Wednesday.

"We will immediately forward a message to the chief editor of the newspaper that published this Russophobic article justifying a terrorist attack, and demand an apology," Zakahrova said.

"Gersh Kuntzman, are you seriously comparing a Jewish student’s ideas to the ones of Mevlut Altintas?" she addressed the author of the article.

"Don’t you understand, you have said that the fight of the Jewish people against anti-Semitism in 1930s amounts to the terrorist ways of the Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra (both terror groups outlawed in Russia)? Are they really the same to you? Do you adopt the same sensitive approach to terrorist attacks happening in Israel?" Zakharova wrote.

According to her, the re-writing of history in the US has reached the point of absurdity but even against this background Kuntzman’s words stand out.

habal · Post by **habal** » 22 Dec 2016 15:17

the american leftie is a curious creature.

take the case of this 'kuntzman' over here. Last month this SJW (social justice warrior) was celebrating appearance of a 'black santa' in a local mall. And this month he is rejoicing the murder of a Russian diplomat. A quick transformation.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Dec 2016 17:01

How did the IAF in all these decades and years flew An-32 with crew and passenger onboard ? Didnt they experience icing before and if they did how did they deal with this issue ?

icing has caused crash of many civilians and military aircraft over the world and no one stopped using it just that they fixed the issue and improved their sop to deal with icing.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Dec 2016 17:18

Putin explained the lack of protection of the deceased Russian ambassador.

http://vpk-news.ru/news/34426

Russian President Vladimir Putin explained why at the time of the murder Russian Ambassador Andrei Karlov in Turkey at the diplomat had no protection.

"The fact that there is a general rule that the armed guards with guns Embassy only works on the territory of the embassy. Behind the fence with the weapon comes out. This is the problem. It is not in Turkey, the fact that it is in most countries, so "- Interfax quoted Putin.

The President also noted that "in some countries, taking into account the characteristics of the processes taking place there could be an agreement and a friend."

Earlier, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has explained why the police dismantled on the spot Mevlut Altyntasha, the murderer of the Russian ambassador in Turkey Andrew Charles.

Russian Ambassador Andrei Karlov in Turkey was killed on December 19 in Ankara, during a speech at a photo exhibition in the Contemporary Art Centr

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 22 Dec 2016 21:06

Avarachan wrote:Rudradev-ji, posting a response about Andrew Korybko.

_____________________

^^. Andrew Korybko was born and raised in the USA. He is of Polish descent. He came to dislike American foreign policy and settled down in Russia about three years ago.

The reason I mention all of this is that Korybko has an extremely unusual background for a Russian analyst. He's an intelligent person, but his critical views of India and lavish admiration of China are not typical among Russians.

There are reasons for that.
1). He was a teenager in the US in the 90's. He doesn't have an emotional memory of the fact that while China stabbed Russia in the back with the J-11B, India saved Sukhoi with the Su-30 MKI. Every other Russian analyst I've interacted with has recalled India's assistance with gratitude.
2). He's young (in his 30's at most). He simply doesn't have the experience to realize that much of the English-language media regarding India and the US is propaganda. It's worth nothing that Korybko's editor at "The Duran," Alexander Mercouris, took the unusual step of explicitly distancing himself from Korybko's views in this article:
http://theduran.com/modi-washington-ind ... e-us-ally/

I'll relate an interesting anecdote regarding India, the US, and Russia. I attended a seminar at a prominent DC think tank. (A senior BRF member can vouch that I'm telling the truth because we said hello to each other there. I'm not going to mention the specifics because BRF is closely monitored.) During the seminar, one analyst was critical of PM Modi and India's economic moves (essentially, not handing over enough money to US firms). However, in this person's op-ed written immediately after this seminar, this same analyst lavished praise on US-Indian ties and didn't mention any criticism whatsoever. When I read the article my jaw dropped. I thought, "Was this the same person I just heard?"

Do you see what the U.S. Deep State is trying to do? They're trying to break the partnership between India and Russia. For instance, the BrahMos is the world's best anti-ship missile. A BrahMos/Onyx salvo launched by an Arihant/Yasen submarine is the most potent threat in the world to a U.S. Carrier Strike Group. And it's US aircraft carriers which are propping up the petro-dollar system.

The U.S. Deep State is worried what further Indo-Russian partnerships can achieve. So, their agents in the English-language media push stories on how Russian equipment is junk, and how wonderful things are going between India and the U.S. This is designed to raise tensions between Indians and Russians. This is so obvious I'm surprised that senior BRF members--who should know better--are falling for it.

Avarachan ji,

Korybko is hardly the only voice speaking in favor of Russian strategic partnership with China and Pakistan.

You state that Korybko's editor at "The Duran" distanced himself from the article. While this may be so, the fact remains that Korybko's article, vehemently evangelizing the cause of Russia-Pak partnership, continues to be available on the website of RISS... a Russian think-tank with no apparent ties to the US deep state.

So it is hardly credible to lay the blame for any of this at the door of the Western deep state. This pro-China, pro-Pakistan strategic thinking has been assimilated into Russian conventional wisdom all the way, and is being actively translated into policy implementations across the board.

Why even stop at discussing the mere words of Russian analysts? The actions of the Russian diplomatic establishment say very much more about how Moscow is going about pursuing its interests. Russian support for the Taliban, backing of the CPEC, intervention in Afghanistan in concert with China and Pakistan are all out on the table, in the public domain. Mantyisky, Dedov, and Kabulov are not merely making statements or writing articles, they are articulating what is now deliberate Russian state policy.

Here is what has actually happened with Russia:

While the US has been leaning increasingly towards "de-hyphenating" India and Pakistan... Russia has willingly recruited itself to the Chinese program of re-hyphenating India and Pakistan, and of building up Pakistan with a view to the strategic containment of India. It is demonstrating its eagerness to fill the 1/3.5 father-of-Pakistan position that many in Washington had begun to favor withdrawing from.

With the exception of Pakistan or China, Vladmir Putin is showing himself to be the most singularly anti-Indian world leader since Richard Nixon. While Nixon and Kissinger sought to follow the Pakistan-China Diplomatic Corridor, Putin throws his weight behind the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (which is, if anything, even more detrimental to Indian interests in that it directly traverses illegally occupied Indian territory).

There are some things on which India simply cannot compromise. The absolute territorial integrity of India, including the entire state of Jammu & Kashmir in its 1947 boundaries, is one of them. Zero tolerance for Islamist terrorism... including the Pakistani groups that China is now blocking the UN from recognizing, and the Afghan Taliban groups that Russia is supporting (despite their attacks on Indian diplomatic installations in Afghanistan)... is another.

Mil-hardware p0rn is a sorry brand of wool for Russian apologists to pull over Indian eyes in this regard. Russia has demonstrated that in terms of actively pursued geopolitical interests, it is rapidly developing into an overtly hostile power with utter disregard for India's security and territorial integrity. The onus is not on India to repair a relationship that Moscow has clearly deemed unworthy of strategic primacy.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 22 Dec 2016 21:24

^^Let me ask you something from an uninformed POV.

I think that in certain spheres, India & Russia's interests are diverging fast. Russia expects significant business from India in form of weapon systems purchase in the coming years. Assuming that India is able to find a partner nation from whom they can purchase similar weapons system at equivalent or slightly higher price than Russian systems, Russia tends to lose them Rubles (or $$). And with China pursuing their own indigenous MIC aggressively, the future big ticket purchases from Russia by Chinese might be limited. Will China be ready to "compensate" Moscow for lost businesses from India (either directly or indirectly via helping Pak purchase Russian systems)? How does Moscow intend to keep its economy going forward with arms being one of their significant revenue generators?

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 22 Dec 2016 21:43

Zynda wrote:^^I think that in certain spheres, India & Russia's interests are diverging fast. Russia expects significant business from India in form of weapon systems purchase in the coming years. Assuming that India is able to find a partner nation from whom they can purchase similar weapons system at equivalent or slightly higher price than Russian systems, Russia tends to lose them Rubles (or $$). And with China pursuing their own indigenous MIC aggressively, the future big ticket purchases from Russia by Chinese might be limited. Will China be ready to "compensate" Moscow for lost businesses from India (either directly or indirectly via helping Pak purchase Russian systems)? How does Moscow intend to keep its economy going forward with arms being one of their significant revenue generators?

The answer is that Moscow will maintain its relationship with India on a transactional basis as opposed to a warm friendly basis. Their relationship with China is going to change with the arrival of Trump, who has promised to be friendly to Russia. Once global sanctions against Russia are lifted there will be no need for Russia to kow tow to China. IMHO, Russia is a friend of the past, aligning with the US is probably the desired future direction. Indian self reliance is the preferred outcome, but I dont see that happening for several decades. A black swan event to discuss which has not been discussed on BRF, is what happens if Putin is deposed...that would be an opportunity to reset Indo-Russian relations.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 22 Dec 2016 21:54

Regardless of Putin staying or going, the geopolitical change in Russian stance is real. Even if Russia does not see the need to kowtow to PRC, they have a vested interest in keeping India out if Central Asia.

Courtesy useful idiots like Natwar Singh and a few other A K Hangal type characters on this forum, this is turning out to be a Hindi chini bhai bhai movement for us.

But let me be the first one to say GOI did see this coming for some time. The Indian purchase of Rafale was a wise move for which we should thank the present pm for his damage control measures. The recent RFI for single engine fighters meant as jizya for mainly American manufacturers to India should be seen in the same light.

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 22 Dec 2016 22:15

Paul wrote:I have been saying on this forum for decades as a lone voice what Anglo saxons have done to Indian influence and interests on high seas, the Bear has done to Indian commerce and influence on land.

Ayni is classic example of Russian double faced Hyprocrisy. Good news is it will be difficult for Russians to lobby for Armata/FGFA etc for Indian army induction in the future.

CPEC is a failure without Indian participation....with or without Russia we are coming to reclaim our ancestral lands.

While I agree I also think it is a hard conundrum. Early policy makers were either wearing pink-tinted glasses or didn't see the value in antagonizing another power or as is most likely a mix of both. The west and the US in particular is not a particularly dependable ally either so the Indian FP establishment will likely move cautiously even now. The only country that did a good job of leveraging western help without getting screwed over is probably China. The age of Russia-India friendship across all spheres ended with India's economic growth. The reach for Ayni and Modi's visit to CA are the first signs of India returning to the area and the touchy Russian response too is as expected. As it is I think both will move to a position of conflict in CA while cooperating elsewhere -something that appears to be the new normal with great power relationships.

All major powers stand diminished with the rise of another. For Russia, our growth implies the loss of a reliable respectable ally(which could channel African/Asian voices to Russian causes) and the rise of a peer power in the near neighborhood. If you think about it, in reaching for the UNSC seat we're actually removing a lever of power that Russia holds over us. It has got to be bewildering to move from a world in which you're a superpower to one where you're surrounded by powers that are richer than you in the space of less than two decades. All of Europe is grappling with it. Western Europe seems to be dealing with it by pretending that while others may be richer they are better off in some other way. Hence the articles about how dirty, polluted, or whatever else India and China are. A version of the strategy that LBJ described. Russia from what I can see is more about hard power and so probably having a harder time dealing with it.

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 22 Dec 2016 22:40

Avarachan wrote:Do you see what the U.S. Deep State is trying to do? They're trying to break the partnership between India and Russia. For instance, the BrahMos is the world's best anti-ship missile. A BrahMos/Onyx salvo launched by an Arihant/Yasen submarine is the most potent threat in the world to a U.S. Carrier Strike Group. And it's US aircraft carriers which are propping up the petro-dollar system.

So how many Brahmos in Russian service?

Edit: not being snarky. Just pointing out that it is merely a dressed up buyer-seller relationship. Our nuclear sub partnership is deep though and aimed squarely at China. So cooperation in parts in conflict in others.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Dec 2016 00:39

Zynda wrote:^^Let me ask you something from an uninformed POV.

I think that in certain spheres, India & Russia's interests are diverging fast. Russia expects significant business from India in form of weapon systems purchase in the coming years. Assuming that India is able to find a partner nation from whom they can purchase similar weapons system at equivalent or slightly higher price than Russian systems, Russia tends to lose them Rubles (or $$). And with China pursuing their own indigenous MIC aggressively, the future big ticket purchases from Russia by Chinese might be limited. Will China be ready to "compensate" Moscow for lost businesses from India (either directly or indirectly via helping Pak purchase Russian systems)? How does Moscow intend to keep its economy going forward with arms being one of their significant revenue generators?

Russian MIC export is penuts makes just 4 % of total exports , compared to its oil gas and non oil gas exports , its MIC export in 2016 is $14 billion same as last year , India makes around 30 % of 14 Billion USD , compare to total export in 2015 ~ $332 billion that too at time when Energy price was lowest

But MIC export is a good tool from strategic pov considering its second only to US in terms of arms export.

Russians are under no illusion that DT would do any good to them or sanctions would be lifted and that is stated by kremlin ........ DT would be able to do do little against China too ......Every president comes stating they would do something against china but when the reality of trade balance sinks in they have to swallow their pride

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Dec 2016 00:44

Like I said before Russia core Strategic and Military interest is in CSTO, SCO , CIS nations , That equally goes well for Economic Relations as well

Russia Sets Priority for Boosting Defense Cooperation With CIS, CSTO, SCO

Read more: https://en.ria.ru/military/201612221048 ... operation/

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – As the chief of the Russian Armed Forces General Staff, First Deputy Defense Minister Gen. Valery Gerasimov stated last week the priority was given to enhancing capabilities of the member countries to respond to various threats and crisis situations. Special attention is paid to the issue of countering terrorism.

"The priority is given to strengthening defense cooperation with partners from CSTO, CIS and SCO. Eight international agreements have been signed in different sectors of cooperation with CIS member states. Military technical cooperation with Asian countries was developing actively," Shoigu said.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 23 Dec 2016 01:57

Zynda wrote: How does Moscow intend to keep its economy going forward with arms being one of their significant revenue generators?

I think there is a lot of potential for Russia to evolve beyond its current portfolio of exports. Russians in general are a phenomenally talented people with access to first-rate educational and research facilities. Their scientists, engineers, and techies are among the best in the world, and as a nation Russia can play an unmatched role in the knowledge economy of IP, R&D etc. I hope for Russia's sake that they prioritize this type of export growth rather than relying too heavily on resource/raw-material extraction, which is never a good bet for any nation in the long run.

IndraD · Post by **IndraD** » 23 Dec 2016 02:31

Putin has ordered special investigators to reach Ankara and start investigating ambassador's assassination (no idea if Turk is in loop).

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 23 Dec 2016 04:23

Russia has clearly been running circles around Indians for way too long. Now, that they are forced to embrace the Sunni Islamics openly. Hence tight embrace of pakis. Maybe a good thing. Either pakis turn out to be like Cuba, or Russia receives paki love. pakis are very good negotiators, they will extract from Russians, just like they did with Unkil. Only comrade chinese, have been able to withstand the pressure from paki extraction and blackmail so far. pakis do not sell themselves free, without spreading the infectious disease. Parkalam.

Meanwhile, it is important to note that Russian official in India loudly complained about DeMonetisation. It means Russians, have been using lot of black money to grease lots of establishment SDREs inside India for long long long time. This is affected, and he was just cribbing about not able to buy kapi from cafe-De-cafe in Hastinapura, kerala. Hope blind russio-philes will wakeup atleast now.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 23 Dec 2016 04:48

Should we start gaming how Russian geopolitics will evolve with DT?

DT is going to use the sanctions as a negotiation ploy. So sanctions might come off. But not without quid-pro-quo from Russia. Like basing rights in CA or something like that. If DT can extract basing in CA, it neutralizes Pak blackmail in Afghanistan to a large extent.

Unless things evolve in a way where Pak decides to go on suicide mission, this won't change status quo for India. Its the curse of letting PRC and Pak have a land connection. Until that is reversed, India is irrelevant in CAR.

If blame is to be assigned, assign it to Nehru. Inviting UN into PoK was a disastrous mistake. That land corridor between Han and Pakis is a curse for us.

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 23 Dec 2016 05:28

anjan wrote:So how many Brahmos in Russian service?

Edit: not being snarky. Just pointing out that it is merely a dressed up buyer-seller relationship. Our nuclear sub partnership is deep though and aimed squarely at China. So cooperation in parts in conflict in others.

Anjan, the air-launched BrahMos will be a real achievement by India. I expect that Russia will order some of those for its Su-30 SM's. Belarus is interested, as well.

Also, the mission computers for Russia's Su-30 SM's are built by HAL in India.

As India's military-industrial sector matures, India's contribution to the joint ventures is growing. You do have a point, though: in the beginning of the BrahMos program, India's contribution was primarily financial.

With the MKI program, though, India made a significant technical contribution even back in the 1990's.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/aircr ... ivale.html

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 23 Dec 2016 05:49

Rdevji, I completely agree that Ruskies have started on path that is opposite to india's interest and they will go in any length to support chinkis in what they want to do (going to your earlier analysis on Russia giving them land route to sell stuff to Europe and beyond via land route that bypasses massa controlled seas) and Iran also fits in well into strategy. But Putin (esp. Ruskies) are no lovers of porkies and talibunnies , you have to go a bit into recent history on the days of MMS.

During MMS days idiot sat into lap of masssa, gave them everything even supported them during 2008 crisis by buying uber expensive weapons( I do not remember we got anything in return btw) while at the same time not a single big deal well to Rus. it does not end there Russkies have openly supported us in all international forums till recent past snub at UN perm. membership which was shock to me since in the past Russkies have tried openly to get us in even canvassed for us, but at that time massa opposed, and what did MMS do during ookraine crisis ? Putin publically stated after that crisis that Rusi-chini partnership is proved, where as Indian relationship is not.Given where he wants to go he needs dependable partners who he can depend upon.

Now I am not stating we should persuade ruskies or suck up. If our interests have to diverge so be it but that could have been contained till we got Afghanistan settled, our MIC (whatever its worth) stocked up to coming war with Chinka -porki combo. Straddling onto massa lap is not a wise option either IMHO. We could have had better relationship with both at the same time till we decide what camp we want to support.

I don't buy MMRCA or other contract any reason behind this, ruskies could have been placated via other contracts if the wanted to reasons are more strategic than economic interests

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 23 Dec 2016 08:29

Rudradev wrote:....
Mil-hardware p0rn is a sorry brand of wool for Russian apologists to pull over Indian eyes in this regard. Russia has demonstrated that in terms of actively pursued geopolitical interests, it is rapidly developing into an overtly hostile power with utter disregard for India's security and territorial integrity. The onus is not on India to repair a relationship that Moscow has clearly deemed unworthy of strategic primacy.

RDji, not that i disagree with your assessment, but I wonder if the you-are-our-all-weather-friend-and-you-must-be-on-our-side-regardless-of-our-inability-to-retake-lost-territory card has been used for too long, wayyy past its expiration date. Sanctions or whatever, has pushed Russia in corner in terms of who Russia can call BFF and simple acquaintance. If the Chinese support post sanctions on Russia is conditional on Russia supporting all Chinese efforts including CPEC (whatever hell that means), it is only possible because WE are making it possible by our inability to extend J&K boundry. It very well may be a "utter disregard" but who is responsible for taking things to that level? Bakistani breakage in the first round was with Russia's help with US on the other side, may be we redo the breakage, but this time US on our side and Russian on the other.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Dec 2016 13:56

The nation that has done most to support the TSP is not Russia but the US! Along with China,these two entities have ensured the survival of Pak and turned a blind eye...and are doing so still,to Pak's proxy way by terror. It is astonishing that India,under Mr.Modi is embracing a US that is suffering humiliating defeats both diplomatic and military around the world,most visible in Syria and other places in the ME.Gandhi once described the British guarantees in their twilight days in India as akin to a "post-dated cheque on a failing bank". If the GOI does not correct its "tilt" towards the US,it will suffer ta a later date ,just as the US has ditched its allies in the past. Look at how Putin keeps his word and acts,not talks like O'Bomber.We have to watch carefully the signs of the times and starts which are waxing (Russia) and those waning (US).

Anti-Western conspiracy theories rife in Turkey following Russian ambassador shooting
Anti-Western conspiracy theories are widely spread in both countries following major news events and Monday’s fatal shooting has been no exception

Bethan McKernan Beirut Tuesday 20 December 2016122 comments

155

Click to follow
The Independent Online
andrey-karlov.jpg
lowers are placed in front of a portrait of Russian Ambassador to Turkey Andrei Karlov in the Foreign Ministry in Moscow on December 20, 2016, a day after he was assassinated AFP/Getty Images
Several conspiracy theories are flying around in Turkey following the assassination of the Russian ambassador to the country at the hands of a gunman who shouted “Remember Syria! Remember Aleppo!” during the attack.

The incident is widely seen as an attempt to sour relations between the two countries ahead of two rounds of talks between Moscow, Ankara and Tehran on the future of the Syrian crisis.

Senior Russian diplomat shot dead in flat in Moscow
Andrey Karlov dead: The veteran diplomat who was chillingly shot dead
US relations with Turkey will suffer after the Ankara assassination
The brutal violence of Syria's war has shocking repercussions
While Turkish President Recep Erdogan and Russian leader Vladimir Putin have publicly stressed that they are more determined to “step up to terrorism” together than ever in light of the incident, Mr Putin has also said he is keen to find out who was “guiding the gunman’s hand” in the attack.

Anti-Western conspiracy theories are usually widely disseminated in both countries following major news events, and Monday’s fatal shooting has been no exception.

Pro-government newspapers in Turkey were quick to point blame in the direction of the US’ Central Intelligence Agency, claiming the envoy’s death was a plot carried out by the US-based Muslim cleric Fethullah Gulen, whom Turkey says is behind the failed coup in July aimed at toppling Mr Erdogan.

“Great Sabotage,” newspaper Yeni Safak’s front page headline read.

So the Turkish government's in-house papers all pretty certain this is the work of the west ("CIA" left, "western alliance," right)
12:42 PM - 20 Dec 2016
Mr Gulen has denied the accusation.

Many Turks have taken to social media to posit their own theories, including the idea that US President Barack Obama ordered the assassination as “payback” for Russian meddling in the election, or to prevent its Nato ally from becoming too close too Russia.

Some Russian politicians, too, have been speculating about the assassination, claiming it was orchestrated by Nato countries.

Frantz Klintsevich, the deputy chairman of the upper chamber of the Russian Parliament’s defence and security committee, told reporters on Monday “It is highly likely - that representatives of foreign Nato secrets services are behind it.”

“What has happened is a true provocation, a challenge. It is a challenge for Russia“, he added.

Man shouts 'We die in Aleppo, you die here' after shooting dead Russian ambassador to Turkey
Other theories floating around the internet include one which suggests the ambassador was not really killed.

“How can someone be shot 8 times and there be no blood in any of the photos? Staged assassination?”, one commentator wondered on Twitter.

And on the anti-Turkey side, some people are of the opinion that Mr Erdogan ‘planned the whole thing’ in order to hasten the thawing of Russo-Turkish ties.

Similiar claims were made by Mr Erdogan’s critics about July’s coup after the president used the incident to consolidate his grip on power and crackdown on critics in the name of security.

More about: Russian ambassador shootingTurkeyTurkey