India-Russia: News & Analysis

[VinodTK]

Russian security tsar to discuss sensitive issues in India

atrushev is to call on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and hold parleys with National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon on sensitive issues like military-technical cooperation, interaction in energy, including civilian nuclear and hydrocarbons, space research, and international and regional security issues, according to sources here.

During meetings on Monday, Patrushev is expected to clear the situation about the last moment cancellation of joint naval war games by Russia in April could also come up at Patrushev’s New Delhi talks.

Indian Ambassador to Russia Ajai Malhotra said the Russian navy had informed in mid-March about cancellation of the Indra 2011 naval war games due to Japan disaster and denied that they were put off after the arrival of three warships of the Indian Navy to Vladivostok.

If the Indian Ambassador is right, then why did the Indian ships go to Russia? When the "Indra 2011 naval war games" were canceled!!!

[Philip]

There appears to be an anti-Russian propaganda exercise on in India,benefiting a country whose name is too well known to repeat! It appeared absurd for the Russians ,who are very concious about protocl,to "snub" the IN in such a manner.The US has been wooing the IN and the current CNS for quite some time now,as it wants to rope in the IN into its anti-PLAN strategy.This is being stoutly resisted by many in the Indian security establishment as it might provoke an accelerated PRC build-up and further swing Pak into the PRC camp,apart from the current US-Pak spat that looks like leading to divorce in future.

Events in Libya,where the US/west are abusing a UN mandate that never envisioned regime change and western military ops against Libya,is an issue where India and Russia are of the same opinion.Obama is now high on his "fix" of "fixing" Osama and is in an adventurous spirit,esp.in Pak.India would be well to discuss with Russia a strategy to counter Obama trying to crack heads in resolving the so-called "Kashmir dispute",in an effort to prevent Pak from going totally overboard to China.

US strategy in the region also does not spare Sri Lanka,where a US def. attache openly questioned the LTTE's claim of war crimes by Lankan forces and demolished the myth that his own country was propagating!The Lankans want India,Russia and China to support it against US/western attempt to make it and its pres. culpable for alleged war crimes and bring him to the Hague like Milosevic and Kradic! There are several global isues where India and Russia agree upon and these should be leveraged with like-minded nations.

[Austin]

If the Indian Ambassador is right, then why did the Indian ships go to Russia? When the "Indra 2011 naval war games" were canceled!!!

Probably communication issue or the Russians told them too late about it , most certainly the tragic event a Japan was an unexpected one and most attention in Russia's Far East were focused in events out there.

The news is the exercise is being scheduled for June or July dates are being worked out.

[arunsrinivasan]

What Russia Fears in Asia

Despite its growing military and economic power, Russia doesn't see China as a threat. The potential chaos in Central Asia is another matter.

Developments in Central Asia and Pakistan are a major concern for Russia, but the growing military might of China isn’t really, at least according to Russian political and military officials I spoke with at a key conference in Moscow.

I probed numerous senior Russian officials at the off-the-record Defence and Security section meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club on China, and received what were in some ways some surprising responses. When considering China’s growing economic power and military potential, even many US defence analysts who don’t consider China a threat still see managing its rise as a challenge. Indeed, over the past two years, the Barack Obama administration has sought to strengthen defence cooperation with other Asian countries worried about China’s rise, including Japan and Vietnam. And, like previous US administrations, they’ve also called on Chinese policy makers to make their defence policies and programmes more transparent.

Russian leaders speaking in public, in contrast, almost always repeat the official view that Russia and China are strategic partners, and that rather than fear China’s rise, Moscow welcomes it as a stabilizing factor in Asia. And although one senior military officer I met with in Moscow insisted that the Russian defence community constantly monitors Chinese defence developments, and sees clear signs of improved Chinese capabilities, the country still doesn’t see China as a current or emerging threat.

A senior Russian general confirmed that Russian defence leaders regularly discuss China with their US counterparts, but added that this was because Russian leaders are concerned that tensions between China and the United States could negatively affect the security of Asia in general, and Russia in particular.

Still, some Russian defence analysts at the conference were a little less sanguine over China’s rising military potential. For example, one told the sole Japanese participant, who had asked several questions about this issue, not to worry about the likely placement of the Mistral warship in the Russian Far East, since its main function would be to deter China, not fight Japan.

Indeed, the crash in Russian arms sales to China in the past few years has led many Western defence analysts to believe that Russia has essentially given up on the Chinese. In the past, Moscow could count on China buying various high-tech weapons systems from Russia’s military industrial complex. And, following the decision of Western governments to impose an arms embargo on China after the 1989 Tiananmen Square incident, a ban that remains largely in force today, China emerged as one of the most reliable clients of Russian defence items. For almost two decades, China accounted for between one-fourth and one-half of Russia’s foreign military sales, with Beijing buying more military products from Russia than from all other countries combined. During the 1990s, the value of these purchases ranged up to $1 billion per year, while during the mid-2000s, this figure sometimes rose above $2 billion per annum.

But this has since changed markedly. Since 2005, China has stopped purchasing Russian warships or warplanes, and has ceased signing new multi-billion dollar arms sale contracts. For the most part, Russian suppliers have been fulfilling past contracts (such as delivering S-300 air defence missiles), modernizing previous deliveries, or supplying specialized technology, such as high-powered aircraft engines for fighter planes, where Russian manufactures retain a clear advantage. The director of Russia’s state-controlled arms export company, Rosoboronexport, has forecast that the value of Russian arms sold to China could decline to as little as 10 percent of the value of all Russian military exports in the coming years.

But the defence firm chief we had dinner with insisted that Russian firms still saw opportunities for additional lucrative arms sales to China. Although he recognized that Russia helped contribute to the improved quality of the Chinese defence industry through its license transfer of Su-27 technologies and other means, he still saw opportunities for profitable collaboration with the Chinese due to the recognition by many (if not all) members of the Chinese aerospace industry that China still needed to rely on foreign partners because its domestic industry remained unable to do everything by itself.

The defence firm chief added he also didn’t consider the Chinese aircraft industry a competitive threat. When I asked about China’s newly unveiled ‘5th-generation fighter,’ he responded that the Chinese have a long way to go before they will produce a ‘genuine’ 5th-generation plane equivalent to the Russian T-50. He added that although some of the subsystems of China’s J-20 might be considered 5th-generation, the Chinese still need much more time to combine all these subsystems effectively and produce a genuine state-of-the-art aircraft.

So what are the Russians worried about? Defence leaders seemed more focused on Central Asia, believing that instability in there will increase from the contagion effects of the social, economic and political disturbances in North Africa and from the withdrawal of NATO forces from Afghanistan in the coming years. Those I heard from are especially worried about renewed civil strife in Kyrgyzstan, the rise of Islamist militarism in Tajikistan, and the failure of the United States and NATO to stabilize the situation in Afghanistan before they withdraw their combat troops. Russian policymakers fear that complications resulting from these changes will increase the threat of terrorism and narcotics trafficking to Russia, as well as challenge Russian economic interests there, such as access and control over Central Asian oil and natural gas supplies.

To address the very real fears of chaos in Central Asia, Russia is relying heavily on the seven-member Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). One senior general responsible for Russian military planning and operations argued that member states, which include Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, had overcome many of the deficiencies that he confirmed the CSTO experienced last summer, when it was paralyzed during the Kyrgyzstan crisis. He said that the CSTO now has the military capacity, the operational plans and the legal foundation to undertake rapid interventions in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, or even possibly Afghanistan under the rubric of anti-terrorism, peacekeeping, or other justifications.

He said he also felt the military leaders of the CSTO members had achieved a genuine meeting of minds about the organization. Kazakhstan, for example, had become an especially close partner of Russia in the building of a new and more effective CSTO, and the general said he is looking forward to the major exercise the CSTO plans to hold this summer and early autumn to confirm this progress. He and other Russians urged NATO to develop relations directly with the CSTO given the likelihood that it will play a greater role in Central Asia when Western troops leave Afghanistan.

Interestingly, though, it became increasingly clear from our meetings that Russia’s military and civilian leaders view the CSTO’s potential quite differently. In contrast to the optimism expressed by Russian military leaders regarding the organization’s future coherence and capabilities, Russia’s civilian defence policy makers and analysts consider the divergent security perspectives of member states a major problem. For example, CSTO members Belarus and even Armenia are preoccupied with fundamentally different security problems from the four Central Asian members. For this reason, they see the CSTO primarily as a ‘political’ organization confirming Moscow’s primacy in Central Asia, rather than as a major military force.

They likewise downplayed the military potential of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which unlike the CSTO includes China but not Armenia and Belarus. They said they believed it would continue to focus on countering terrorism rather than developing the capabilities for joint military operations among its member states. In their view, the SCO also had a primarily political function, dampening a potential rivalry between China and Russia for control over Central Asia.

Looking further afield, Russian defence officials spoke highly of Moscow’s security relations with Turkey, arguing that the country is Russia’s main partner in ensuring the security of the Black Sea from pirates, terrorists, and other threats. They said, for example, that they regretted that other Black Sea countries have declined Russian and Turkish proposals to expand multilateral security cooperation in the Black Sea region, through which considerable amounts of Asian oil and gas traverse en route to European markets.

Yet despite Turkey’s membership in NATO, missile defence remains a tense issue between Russia and the West. The fundamental problem is that, unlike their NATO counterparts, Russian leaders don’t consider Iran a threat to European security. As one senior defence ministry official put it, ‘the Iranians are not crazy. They would never attack Europe.’ And the official considered a potential Iranian threat to Russia equally improbable. ‘From my perspective,’ he said, ‘the real threat to Russia comes from Pakistan,’ although he made clear this threat arose simply from the dangerous co-location of nuclear materials and Islamist extremists that equally alarms Western officials.

Given these divergent threat perceptions, and bearing in mind the message at one Russian briefing stating that the United States was simply using the Iranian threat as an excuse to construct a more extensive missile defence system against Russia, the senior defence ministry official said he saw little reason why his country should help construct a missile defence system that could potentially threaten Russia’s nuclear forces. They were, he said, prepared to look the other way if NATO wants to ‘waste all that money’ on building a missile defence, but only if Russia received written guarantees that the system’s capabilities would remain sufficiently limited so as not to threaten Russia’s nuclear forces.

And what of the other rising power, India? The defence firm chief expressed some irritation at the Indians for forgetting that it was Russia, rather than India, that is the leading partner in their defence relationship. He noted, for example, that despite the decision of the Indian defence ministry to eliminate the Russian (and US) planes from their latest round of competition to sell India its next multi-role fighter, he still considered India a good sales market — as long as the Indians appreciate that Russia has some ‘useful things’ to offer.

[devesh]

^^^
it seems our problem wrt Russians on the defense front is that they are feeling insulted that they have to cooperate with us SDRE's, when just 20 years ago, we simply had to buy whatever they offered. it was inevitable, in hindsight, that Russians would feel this way at some point.
but if we develop some niche areas where our skill-set becomes significant and to the level where we can dictate terms, that's when Russia will start accepting us as equals. till then, they will continue to behave this way b/c they think we are freeloaders who couldn't do anything without them. that perception should be changed by developing our skills and expertise and eventually at some point, Russians will have to accept that yes, they can actually learn something from us. we are getting there, imvho, and will make significant headway in that direction in 7-10 years time. the most significant project will be AMCA. without that, ultimately, we will be junior partners who have to suck up to everybody.

[Manishw]

^^^
it seems our problem wrt Russians on the defense front is that they are feeling insulted that they have to cooperate with us SDRE's, when just 20 years ago, we simply had to buy whatever they offered. it was inevitable, in hindsight, that Russians would feel this way at some point.
but if we develop some niche areas where our skill-set becomes significant and to the level where we can dictate terms, that's when Russia will start accepting us as equals. till then, they will continue to behave this way b/c they think we are freeloaders who couldn't do anything without them. that perception should be changed by developing our skills and expertise and eventually at some point, Russians will have to accept that yes, they can actually learn something from us. we are getting there, imvho, and will make significant headway in that direction in 7-10 years time. the most significant project will be AMCA. without that, ultimately, we will be junior partners who have to suck up to everybody.

Just some minor nitpicks, US already has fifth gen. planes but neither does Russia and China.Does that mean that we can infer that US can defeat them in a battle or balkanize them.Certainly not.Though US is a hyperpower it takes into account the sensibilities of both the Russkies and Chinese to some extent.Why?
Not because of some AMCA's but both countries have turned themselves into fortresses/have nuclear weapons/play a dirty game of arming or threatening to arm US enemies.India can do all these things.All we need is strategic leadership and Rashtriya goals and unity which again has a lot to do with strategic leadership.Unless we take ourselves seriously no amount of AMCA's are going to help and we will be always sucking up to somebody or other and everybody might detest us because we don't take ourselves seriously enough.

[devesh]

^^^
I was specifically referring to India's problems with Russian in the defense tech sphere. not any broad strategic terms.

[brihaspati]

^^^
it seems our problem wrt Russians on the defense front is that they are feeling insulted that they have to cooperate with us SDRE's, when just 20 years ago, we simply had to buy whatever they offered. it was inevitable, in hindsight, that Russians would feel this way at some point.
but if we develop some niche areas where our skill-set becomes significant and to the level where we can dictate terms, that's when Russia will start accepting us as equals. till then, they will continue to behave this way b/c they think we are freeloaders who couldn't do anything without them. that perception should be changed by developing our skills and expertise and eventually at some point, Russians will have to accept that yes, they can actually learn something from us. we are getting there, imvho, and will make significant headway in that direction in 7-10 years time. the most significant project will be AMCA. without that, ultimately, we will be junior partners who have to suck up to everybody.

Just some minor nitpicks, US already has fifth gen. planes but neither does Russia and China.Does that mean that we can infer that US can defeat them in a battle or balkanize them.Certainly not.Though US is a hyperpower it takes into account the sensibilities of both the Russkies and Chinese to some extent.Why?
Not because of some AMCA's but both countries have turned themselves into fortresses/have nuclear weapons/play a dirty game of arming or threatening to arm US enemies.India can do all these things.All we need is strategic leadership and Rashtriya goals and unity which again has a lot to do with strategic leadership.Unless we take ourselves seriously no amount of AMCA's are going to help and we will be always sucking up to somebody or other and everybody might detest us because we don't take ourselves seriously enough.

Don't the Chinese claim they already have one "stealth"? I think we can look at such JV's as a compromise with the purely indigenous development line. At this stage given all the internal opposition and grumbling about indigenous "capacities", even this is perhaps a step forward. Not ideal, I agree, but a step.

[Manishw]

B Ji,
Are u implying that we collaborate with the chinese in the stealth plane? Bold step indeed.I am all for it as long as both sides have full technology access, but it again comes down to the fact that elites in India backed by the west will never allow it to happen.

[Mahendra]

it seems our problem wrt Russians on the defense front is that they are feeling insulted that they have to cooperate with us SDRE's, when just 20 years ago, we simply had to buy whatever they offered. it was inevitable, in hindsight, that Russians would feel this way at some poin

Aiyayo sirji doesn't the same apply to taller than Yao-ming strategic partner China also? a decade ago they used to buy, then they photocopied Russian stuff and are now making photocopies and selling them around the world blatantly undercutting the Russians. Whyphor sirji the irritation only towards damn yindoos.

The day we mass produce ICBMs in proportion with the size of our nation the irritation will slowly change towards grudging respect, which the Russians already have for the Cheena birather

[Philip]

For all our achievements by the DRDO,etc., we must not lose sight of some fundamentals.We still cannot produce a fighter aero-engine and the Kaveri is being tested in Russia.We have yet too perfect a basic trainer,IJT or AJT or even UAVs!Transport aircraft is another item.Even China has et up an eclusive A-320 production line from France for its civilian needs! The LCA is still partially successful with MK-2 awaited.We have not developed a family or armoured vehicles and even with the success of Arjun,production figures are far below requirements requiring imports from Russia.In warship and sub construction,we still depend upon major weapon systems from abroad mainly from Russia.Though the IN has had the best track record of indigenisation and local production,the needs outstrip the delivery which in most cases has been delayed.A close look at tactical/cruise missiles for the services also shows a few successes but reliance on imports from Russia and Europe.There have been many successes,notwithstanding those achievements we have a long way to go before we start developing "world firsts".

Therefore at this juncture in time we cannot do without significant imports,foreign collaboration and JVs to slowly reduce the content of foreign tech.There are huge gaps in our capability in basic R&D in metallurgy,avionics,etc.As technology further develops,the gap increases and reducing it leapfrogging obsolete tech requires the help of foreign entities.There have been various studies which show that basic fundamental science research needs a major boost in the country for laying a foundation for developing new tech.How does our scientific base rate with other developed nations? The US is streets ahead of everyone.There are so many secret projects of which we know nothing about and only get a glimpse when an op like that to hit Osama gets publicity.A public-private approach is esential for this to succeed.If we look at Europe for example,we find that most major nations have all merged their efforts because of the challenges and costs involved.This is also happening in Russia with the merger of many companies,especially the aircraft industry which erstwhile produced a variety of systems for local and export needs.

[UBanerjee]

While we may mock China's exaggerated puffery, fact of the matter is they were forced to rely on themselves and yet are now ahead of us. Not that far ahead technologically, but certainly in indigenous manufacture and an army that can provide its own spares and supplies and basic arms.

There is something to be said for forced self-reliance in that you can't take the easy way out and must build research and manufacturing capabilities from the ground up. The budget we give to DRDO and co. is pretty minuscule and that's only half the problem.

[Austin]

While we may mock China's exaggerated puffery, fact of the matter is they were forced to rely on themselves and yet are now ahead of us. Not that far ahead technologically, but certainly in indigenous manufacture and an army that can provide its own spares and supplies and basic arms.

In many ways that helps in developing local MIC and your military accepts and learns to fight with what they have and not what they can get from abroad.

China is still under sanctions from West the entire West , so the only option is to develop it or get what ever possible from Russia.

[rajanb]

While we may mock China's exaggerated puffery, fact of the matter is they were forced to rely on themselves and yet are now ahead of us. Not that far ahead technologically, but certainly in indigenous manufacture and an army that can provide its own spares and supplies and basic arms.

In many ways that helps in developing local MIC and your military accepts and learns to fight with what they have and not what they can get from abroad.

China is still under sanctions from West the entire West , so the only option is to develop it or get what ever possible from Russia.

So are the Russians musharrafing the Chinese on price?

[Austin]

So are the Russians musharrafing the Chinese on price?

The problem seems more on IP then on price , there is perhaps one odd deal they have stuck on price , the Russians want Chinese to stop photocopying and go for lic production where they can make money.

[rajanb]

Thanks Austin. Was just wanting to see if the russians are giving them the same treatment as they did with us on AdmG.

[Austin]

Russia and India will set up JV for production of NPP equipment before yearend

In his words, the joint venture will be set by an Indian enterprise, which is ready to produce NPP equipment under Russia’s technologies.

“Currently, India has got several enterprises of rather high technological market, which may become participants in the Russian-Indian joint venture,” Kashchenko said.

“In addition, India is a very promising market of nuclear technological equipment for the entire Asian region,” he stressed.

The AtomEnergoMash director general is confident that the joint venture of the kind is “the prototype for the setting up of a regional structure for the production of atomic technological equipment, which may be exported to other countries of the region.”

“If the Asian market of nuclear technologies develops rather intensively, then the Russian-Indian joint ventures will be very interesting and promising project, which will be beneficial both for India and Russia,” Kashchenko said.

[VinodTK]

Indo-Russian ties too deep to be affected by MiG-35 deal rejection: Kadakin

Speaking in an exclusive interview to ANI on the sidelines of a function to mark Russia’s National Day, Ambassador Kadakin said: “ No, this (rejection of MiG 35 fighter jets) will not have any impact on the otherwise deep and traditional relations we (India and Russia) share. Of course, we were disappointed, but it is India’s sovereign choice.

Ambassador Kadakin, however, maintained that the MiG 35 fighter jets, which were offered by Russia to India along with other international bids for 126 combat fighter jets, were the best.

[Austin]

Obama's Russia 'Reset': Another Lost Opportunity?-Stephen F. Cohen

[Suresh S]

For all our achievements by the DRDO,etc., we must not lose sight of some fundamentals.We still cannot produce a fighter aero-engine and the Kaveri is being tested in Russia.We have yet too perfect a basic trainer,IJT or AJT or even UAVs!Transport aircraft is another item.Even China has et up an eclusive A-320 production line from France for its civilian needs! The LCA is still partially successful with MK-2 awaited.We have not developed a family or armoured vehicles and even with the success of Arjun,production figures are far below requirements requiring imports from Russia.In warship and sub construction,we still depend upon major weapon systems from abroad mainly from Russia.Though the IN has had the best track record of indigenisation and local production,the needs outstrip the delivery which in most cases has been delayed.A close look at tactical/cruise missiles for the services also shows a few successes but reliance on imports from Russia and Europe.There have been many successes,notwithstanding those achievements we have a long way to go before we start developing "world firsts".

Therefore at this juncture in time we cannot do without significant imports,foreign collaboration and JVs to slowly reduce the content of foreign tech.There are huge gaps in our capability in basic R&D in metallurgy,avionics,etc.As technology further develops,the gap increases and reducing it leapfrogging obsolete tech requires the help of foreign entities.There have been various studies which show that basic fundamental science research needs a major boost in the country for laying a foundation for developing new tech.How does our scientific base rate with other developed nations? The US is streets ahead of everyone.There are so many secret projects of which we know nothing about and only get a glimpse when an op like that to hit Osama gets publicity.A public-private approach is esential for this to succeed.If we look at Europe for example,we find that most major nations have all merged their efforts because of the challenges and costs involved.This is also happening in Russia with the merger of many companies,especially the aircraft industry which erstwhile produced a variety of systems for local and export needs.

Agree with many of your points philip.Just one point I want to make from real life experience being born and brought up in India is that during a transition period have public and private partnership but as soon as possible put most of defense manufacturing in private hands.We need to have a organisation like DARPA where few hundred best and brightest and patriotic scientists ( like president APJ )work on latest techs given all possible help from the indian state. Otherwise nothing large controlled by govt made of mostly of crooks is going to work. You could give the same argument about the darpa like organisation I am talking about but hopefully smaller size and status of the personalities will make a major differenece and not the least their patriotic commitment to mother India( the scientists I mean )

[Gerard]

Obama's Russia 'Reset': Another Lost Opportunity?-Stephen F. Cohen

Uneven trying to branch out to Russia now? Has Russia so fallen in prestige that third rate academics now cover it?

[ranjbe]

Obama's Russia 'Reset': Another Lost Opportunity?-Stephen F. Cohen

Uneven trying to branch out to Russia now? Has Russia so fallen in prestige that third rate academics now cover it?

There are two Stephen Cohen's in US academia - the more famous Russian scholar and the less famous Uneven Cohen who however is much more well-known in BRF. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_F._Cohen

[Austin]

ONGC deal for Sistema's Bashneft stake rests on due diligence

We have agreed the parameters of carrying out due diligence and de facto this process has been launched. After the formal procedure is over, our Indian colleagues will set their minds on the price. If the potential buyer meets our expectations, the deal will go through. Otherwise, the deal will fail," Shamolin said.

Sistema Board of Directors Chairman and key owner Vladimir Yevtushenkov announced in April the company might sell a blocking stake of 25 percent plus one share in Bashneft to India's ONGC.

Yevtushenkov said that Sistema, which holds 76.5 percent in Bashneft, was currently holding negotiations with ONGC on valuation of assets which the companies might swap in the next six months.

Bashneft head Alexander Korsik said last week the parties could decide on the deal before the end of the year.

Bashneft won a tender in December for the giant Trebs and Titov oilfields in the Russian Arctic.

The Trebs and Titov deposits are among the most promising in Russia's northern Timan-Pechora province with C1 reserves estimated at 78.9 million tons (578 million barrels) and 63.4 million tons (465 million barrels) of oil respectively. Russia's subsoil use agency granted Bashneft the license for the deposits in February following an auction in December.

[Austin]

Medvedev Financial Times Interview

[Austin]

Moscow and Delhi want to quadruple trade

India gets a share in petroleum production in Russia

Vladimir Skosyrev

In 2015, the annual trade volume between Russia and India is expected to amount to $20 billion. Such is the plan, approved by both states. A step toward its implementation was the merger of assets between India’s largest oil and gas corporation and Russian companies. According to Nezavisimaya Gazeta’s (NG) expert, the partnership has growth potential. But the set goal can be reached only with active co-operation between the governments of the two countries.

The two governments’ intent to bring the Russian-Indian annual trade volume to $20 billion by 2015 was announced by India’s Commerce and Industry Minister, Anand Sharma. These bilateral ties can be galvanized by a comprehensive economic partnership agreement. The parties had agreed to create a joint group to develop this document and hold a trade and investment forum in Moscow in November.

Moscow plans to create favorable conditions for Indian investors. According to India’s newspaper, the Hindu, Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin offered Indian firms, producing medicines and spare parts for cars, the territories of the non-operating factories in Russia’s capital.

Sharma stressed that co-operation should not be limited to procurement of military technologies or capital investments into the oil and gas sector. It needs to include private business.

Nevertheless, Russia’s hydrocarbon riches continue to attract the attention of the Indian state. Recently, the Indian government had approved the merger of assets between the state-owned oil and gas corporation, ONGC, and Russian companies Bashneft and RussNeft. The joint enterprise will bring the Indian corporation one fourth of the petroleum, produced by the Russian partners, or 25 million tons, as well as a share of profits of oil refineries with capacity of 20 million tons.

ONGC is involved in the Sakhalin-1 project, in which it owns a 20% stake, reads a message on the website of the Russian Embassy in India.

The plan to raise the trade volume and economic co-operation, agreed upon by the Indian Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma and Russia’s Minister of Economic Development Elvira Nabiullina is, to put it mildly, ambitious. After all, according to the Indian statistics, in the 2009-2010 fiscal year, Russian-Indian trade volume declined and amounted to only $4.54 billion. This means that it needs to nearly quadruple in the next four years.

Is this a realistic plan? NG turned with this question to the Head of the Economic Studies Department at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Aleksandr Akimov.

“Setting this goal would not hurt. There is potential for growth. In the Soviet times, our countries co-operated quite well. Of course, since then, the structure of trade has changed. And yet, new opportunities may arise, such as to increase the import flow from India. After all, the price of Chinese goods is rising. They could, at least partially, be compensated by the Indian. But shifts won’t happen without the support of the governments.”

The expert indicated certain fields, in which there are emerging prospects to expand co-operation. One is the pharmaceutical industry, where India’s positions are strong. Another is the agricultural sector. India plans to lease our land to grow grains. They will, subsequently, be exported to India.

The expanding Indian economy needs steel. This means that it needs to either develop its own steel industry, or become dependent on China, where steel output is 10 times greater than in India. Co-operation between the Indian and Russian enterprises is possible in this sector.

“The main obstacle on the way of developing bilateral relations, as paradoxical as it may seem, is globalization. The Soviet Union’s relations with India were based on political will. When it disappeared and diminished, competition came into play. It is possible to establish relations with any country and obtain cheaper goods. That’s why it is necessary to, again, make a political effort to revive partnership,” concluded the expert.

[UBanerjee]

That's certainly a very ambitious project; currently Russia isn't in our top 15 trading partners.

[Austin]

Trade between India and Russia is actually penuts compared to many smaller and bigger countries we deal with. Some how both countries are not able to increase trade to reasons unknown.

[Philip]

SN,that's why the DRDO according to some studies/committees,needs to restrict itself to fundamental R&D,not become a manufacturer and opass on the tech/systems developed to PSUs and private industry.The criticism aboiout it makig fruit juice,etc. is a common criticism,but even these have their value for the jawans in the field esp. at high altitudes.IF t tries to hog the whole show,then ineffieciency and unaccountability results.

[RajeshA]

Published Jul 08, 2011
By Teresita and Howard Schaffer
Afghanistan and Pakistan: perspectives from Russia: Hindu

Some of the Russian participants went a step further and argued that changing India-Pakistan relations was essential to stabilising Afghanistan. There was not, however, any discernible appetite for active Russian diplomacy on India-Pakistan issues. One of the Russian team cited India's lack of enthusiasm for an earlier proposal that Gorbachev serve as an envoy for India and Pakistan. The Russians showed little expectation of an India-Pakistan breakthrough, but also little concern about India-Pakistan hostilities in the near term.

[Austin]

Interview with Indian ambassador to Russia Ajai Malhotra: India is a partner in Russia’s modernisation

[Rony]

Rise of the Russian Orthodox Church

Moscow taxi-drivers claim that only three persons in the Russian capital would take no more than 15 minutes to ride from their country residences to the city centre, despite horrendous traffic jams: President Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Patriarch Kirill, head of the Russian Christian Orthodox Church.

It is only for these VIPs that traffic is stopped so that their stretch armoured limousines, escorted by SUVs with armed bodyguards, can speed through the emptied streets at 150 kmph. The Patriarch's bodyguards are from the Kremlin security services, provided free of charge, which is another thing that puts him in the company of the President and the Prime Minister. The church is separate from the state in Russia, the Constitution says. It also says there can be no state religion. But in reality, the Orthodox Church in post-Communist Russia is as much a pillar of the state as are the army, the police and the courts.

After the collapse of the atheist Soviet Union, state persecution of religion came to an end in Russia. The new law on religious freedom adopted in 1997 identified four religions as “constituting an inalienable part of the historical heritage of the Russian people” — Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Judaism. This in itself was a violation of the Constitution, which enshrines equality of all religious organisations. Moreover, the law set the Orthodox Church apart from other religions, noting its “special role” in Russian history. It was probably in line with this special status that Russia's Chief Rabbi Berl Lazar and Supreme Mufti Ravil Gainutdin lost the right to flash car lights several years ago.

The Orthodox clergy claim that religious belief in Russia has been rapidly growing stronger. Indeed, according to pollsters, two-thirds of ethnic Russians now identify themselves as Russian Orthodox believers, up from less than half in the mid-1990s. However, only 10-15 per cent of Russians go to church regularly, and just five per cent seek communion, which is a key act of faith for a true believer. Sociologists say the vast majority confuse their ethnic identity with religious belief.

Notwithstanding the indifferent mood of most Russians, the Orthodox Church, with active state support, has effectively established itself as state religion. Its privileged status is illustrated by the new Kremlin tradition of a newly elected President receiving the blessings of the Patriarch. Both Mr. Putin and Mr. Medvedev went through the ritual after they were sworn in. Accepting the gift of an icon from the Patriarch in May 2008, Mr. Medvedev crossed himself and said that it was through “joint efforts of the state and the Orthodox Church” that Russia had scaled new heights in its development. The ceremony looks like enthronement, not least because it takes place in the Kremlin's oldest church, former family chapel of the Russian Tsars. It is meant to lend greater legitimacy to the President, as the election process in Russia can hardly be called truly democratic or competitive.

The Church-state nexus has proved mutually beneficial. The Kremlin promotes the Church in order to fill an ideological and spiritual vacuum that the collapse of Communism left in its wake, while the Church uses state support to raise its profile and influence. The Kremlin finds useful the traditional orthodox values extolled by the Church — submission and deference to authority. It hopes that the Church can help control public protests against the massive impoverishment and glaring inequalities that market reforms have created in Russian society. The Church is also a valuable instrument for projecting Russian interests abroad, as the Orthodox Churches of Georgia, Ukraine and Belarus are all parts of the Russian Patriarchate. In 2007, the Russian Orthodox Church reunited with its overseas sister Church ending an eight decades-long split and giving the Moscow Patriarchate a global reach.

The government has helped build new and restore thousands of churches that were used as offices and warehouses during the Soviet era. The huge 19th century Cathedral of Christ the Savior near the Kremlin, which was razed to the ground in 1931 and rebuilt in the 1990s, stands as a symbol of the Orthodoxy replacing Marxism-Leninism. The lavishly decorated 103-metre high cathedral, the size of a football field, is the largest Orthodox Church in the world. It cost a whopping $500 million to build the cathedral and critics said it was largely financed with public money.

Four years ago, a group of eminent scientists, including two Nobel Prize winners, addressed an open letter to President Putin voicing concern at the “growing clericalisation of the Russian society and aggressive penetration by the Church in all spheres of public life.” The tendency has only gathered momentum under Patriarch Kirill, who replaced the deceased Patriarch Alexei II in January 2009.

Russia's most charismatic cleric, whose oratorical talent is known to millions of Russians through his long-running television show “Words of a Pastor,” Kirill, 65, has worked to dramatically enhance the power of the Church and strengthen its ties with the state. It was largely thanks to his influence that President Medvedev emerged as an even more ardent supporter of the Church than Mr. Putin. When he was still head of Mr. Putin's Kremlin administration and chaired a presidential commission for religious affairs, Mr. Medvedev was instrumental in giving Orthodox theological schools the same status as secular universities. Last year, Mr. Medvedev signed a decree establishing a federal holiday, the “Day of the Baptism of Rus” when Kyiv Prince Volodymyr converted his people to Christianity in the 10th century.

There are now two officially recognised Orthodox holidays in Russia and there is none representing any other religion. Following the approval in December of a controversial law to restore to religious organisations property and assets seized by the state in Soviet times, the Orthodox Church looks set to become the biggest real estate owner in the country, which is what it was before the 1917 revolution. Critics say this is the price the Kremlin is ready to pay the Church for its political support and ideological cover. The law has appalled museums and archives as many will have to vacate their premises in former church buildings and surrender religious artefacts. Art experts point out that Russia may lose priceless icons by Andrei Rublev and other medieval painters because churches lack proper conditions and specialised personnel to preserve ancient items.

Mr. Medvedev has also backed the Church in its long-standing demand to have “Orthodox culture” classes opened in schools. In some regions, the classes are optional but at least in five provinces they are mandatory. This has invited protests from parents belonging to other religious groups.

The Defence Ministry announced earlier this week that “on the instructions of the President,” it will establish a military chaplain corps by the end of the year and will train chaplains at one of its military schools.

The current position of the Church is often compared with pre-1917 revolution time, when Orthodoxy was the official religion of the Russian state. The one big difference though is that in imperial Russia, the Church was subservient to the state with the Tsar being the formal head of both, whereas today the Church is the most powerful non-state actor.

Addressing the Council of Russian Orthodox Bishops in February, Patriarch Kirill called for the active involvement of the Church in all spheres of public life. The Council went as far as to authorise priests to participate in elections to local and federal legislatures, even if only in exceptional cases, “to oppose forces … that attempt to use the vote to fight the Orthodox Church.”

In contrast to his predecessor Alexei II who was mainly concerned with religious affairs, Patriarch Kirill has established himself as a political figure who passes his verdict on everything from a multipolar world to new regulations for technical inspection of motor vehicles. He has consistently entered the list of top 10 most influential Russian politicians compiled by the Russian expert community and is the only non-government official. Some experts have even suggested that the Medvedev-Putin duumvirate is gradually transforming into a triumvirate with Patriarch Kirill.

“Patriarch Kirill is an absolutely independent political figure who is worthy and capable of leading the country,” says political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky. “The only question is when he may be called upon to do this duty.”

Flashing lights on his car and Kremlin bodyguards may be an acknowledgement of Patriarch Kirill's new role.

[abhishek_sharma]

SLIDE SHOW: Images of the birth of a new Russia

[Thomas Kolarek]

Qn - Can't we ask Russia to test our H-bomb which was called fizzle by many renowned scientists in exchange for some back deals. China did it for Pak, why cant Russia do for India. Heard they have Kolbas to hide it in their test site which is far off from any IMS.

[ramana]

They already signed the CTBT and might even have ratified it.

[abhishek_sharma]

PHOTO ESSAY: Calling All Comrades! The long-lost propaganda posters that rallied the Soviets against Hitler.

SLIDE SHOW: Guns of August: One photographer's view of the 2008 Georgia-Russia war

PHOTO ESSAY: Russia's Big Backyard: A grand tour of the stunningly diverse former Soviet states.

PHOTO ESSAY: Gorby, the Man Who Changed the World: Life in the limelight for the West's favorite Soviet.

PHOTO ESSAY: A Kremlin Built for Two: Putin and Medvedev through the years.

[abhishek_sharma]

Ten of Russia's most disturbing unsolved mysteries.

The Blank Spots: Why so many remain.

Don't Go There: Chasing the dying memories of Soviet trauma.

Meltdown: For the first time, Boris Yeltsin's right-hand man tells the inside story of the coup that killed glasnost -- and changed the world.

[Philip]

Putin on course to return as Russian president.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... aside.html

Vladimir Putin on course to be Russia's next president as Dmitry Medvedev steps aside
Vladimir Putin has dispelled months of speculation and confirmed he will return to the Russian presidency next year in a move that cements his already vice-like grip on the world’s largest country.

[Philip]

Russia's equiv. to 007?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... rseas.html

Russia 'gave agents licence to kill' enemies of the state
The Russian secret service authorised the “elimination” of individuals living overseas who were judged to be enemies of the state and ordered the creation of special units to conduct such operations, according to a document passed to The Daily Telegraph.

[RajeshA]

Published on Oct 12, 2011
By Tarun Vijay
What Putin's second coming would mean for India: Rediff

Yeltsin reinforced Gorbachev's strategic relationship of coalition with China, 'emphasising the need for de-ideologisation of foreign policy'. Putin didn't change it. The astounding levels of Russia-China military cooperation must make India cautious. Post-Afghanistan withdrawal, Russia seems to be keen on improving relations with Pakistan.

In this context, India will be advised well to welcome Putin wholeheartedly, yet try to build up its independent capabilities. Putin has a tough guy image, his immense popularity with the masses powers him to take on the Western bloc and challenge US positions. Let him do that. India with its fragmented polity, can't hope to have the same position. Hence India must not burn its boats with the West, which remains an ideologically close bloc, as a democratic, plural, multi religious and multi-cultural region. SCO and BRICS notwithstanding, our Look East policy must also be reinvigorated and trusted democratic friends like Japan [ Images ] and Korea should not be isolated on our radar of foreign relations.

In diplomacy, like in politics, there are no permanent friends or foes. Only interests guide the policy. The same principle must hold true for India-Russia relations in the coming Putin era too.

[Philip]

Putin is a hard-boiled "egg".He is very realistic and focussed on Russian interests in international relations.The visit to China and the many tehc coop. agreements to be signed show that Russia means business when it comes to modernising the country.High-tech collaboration with China will replace Russian collaboration with the asinine west/Europe,who still have their Cold War blinkers on and are still trying to wean former Soviet bloc nations into an anti-Russian front and provocatively station ABM systems on its borders.

Indo-Russian trade had been stuck in an equally boring fashion focussing upon raw materials and commodities.Instead,India must look to providing Russia with the high-tech that it has developed indigenously and invite Russian investment into India and vice-versa.There are huge opportunties if properly structured.If the Russo-China trade gallops as is expected,further cooperation between the two will flourish to the detriment of India.India has to carve out its special relationship with Russia not on a foundation of only defence related trade,but across the board,with better person-to-person relations,cultural ties,exchange programmes in education,health,otourism,etc.,and using our especial strengths like the IT industry to fuel mutual interests.