They backed, if not organised the coup that put the CCP in power in the first place.
That wasn't modern day Russia.
Putin wanted piece not peace.
Not as per the ambassador.
They backed, if not organised the coup that put the CCP in power in the first place.
Putin wanted piece not peace.
'Modern day' Russia ended when Putin took over.That wasn't modern day Russia.
He wanted to keep part of Ukraine and bend them to his will.Not as per the ambassador.
'Modern day' Russia ended when Putin took over.
He wanted to keep part of Ukraine and bend them to his will.
With his political roots in the St. Petersburg Gang and his own pro-Western wing, Putin's conservative policies are simply the only path Russia has taken after the collapse of communist ideology and neoliberal ideology.Putin is not a liberal or pro-West, he's a moderate communist who supports capitalism with some conservative leaning. He wants Russians to make money, allows people to practice religion and own property, but does not care about things like LGBTQ, but allows abortions. Putin also does not like racism or any sort of discrimination, the opposite of China. He is very lenient towards Muslims, completely opposite of China. But of course, like any communist country, he wants to control the military and all strategic sectors, so he's also a socialist when it comes to maintaining political power, which is similar to China. Russia has a more liberal version of communism than China because of Putin
I don't see Russia reaching Western Europe's level of development any time soon, nor do I see India catching up with China in cars and electronics. India's main drivers of development are domestic consumption and infrastructure construction. India's development model is similar to Turkey's, and it does not have exports as a driving force for economic development. Even labor-intensive industries like textiles are not as developed as Bangladesh and other Southeast Asian countries.Russia is currently in a no-choice friendship with China for now but is a long term enemy. Pretty soon they will achieve Western Europe levels of development. As that happens, their economy will shift from reliance on oil exports to reliance on advanced manufacturing. This will make them an economic competitor to China. Politically too, they will start favoring Indian companies over Chinese, for electronics and automobiles in particular. So Russia and China are not natural allies.
The future of Russia will only be a large Iran, using oil and gas to meet the basic life of the domestic people while all the money is spent on war and war industry.So, although Putin ended the possibility of democracy in Russia, he still managed to save Russia from other dangers. Best case, his successor goes back to strengthening democracy in Russia, since the main threat of collapse is gone. Or we get someone far, far worse
I have always had a question, where is the money for the construction of India's large-scale infrastructure coming from, India is a trade deficit country, can not rely on exports, can it rely on debt?I'd actually argue that, even though it's not visible today, Russia and India will become natural partners against China. India is going to enter a construction frenzy, and Russia's natural resources are necessary
I don't see Russia reaching Western Europe's level of development any time soon,
nor do I see India catching up with China in cars and electronics.
The future of Russia will only be a large Iran, using oil and gas to meet the basic life of the domestic people while all the money is spent on war and war industry.
I have always had a question, where is the money for the construction of India's large-scale infrastructure coming from, India is a trade deficit country, can not rely on exports, can it rely on debt?
Yelstin to Putin was like India's Congress to BJP transition. Yelstin was instrumental in turning Russia into a capitalist economy with private enterprises and removing price controls, just like Congress during the same time. But his rule was over a cesspool of ceaseless corruption. Russia was close to collapse because of him. He was also the reason why many pundits assumed Russia was done.
Worse would be difficult.So, although Putin ended the possibility of democracy in Russia, he still managed to save Russia from other dangers. Best case, his successor goes back to strengthening democracy in Russia, since the main threat of collapse is gone. Or we get someone far, far worse.
He wanted to keep Crimea and the Donbass.No, keeping that part of Ukraine in Ukraine ensured the Russians have some say in the going-ons in Ukraine. The current situation doesn't help Russia, it only weakens their presence in Ukraine.
To be honest, your graph only shows where infrastructure investment in India is coming from, which is mainly government funding. It does not indicate how the government finances itself.70% tax revenue and 30% debt. The private sector invests too.
The govt announced a $1.5 trillion 5-year plan in 2019, with 79% govt funding and 21% private funding. So private players also invest a lot.
Their share in investments had fallen considerably because of the Congress govt. It should pick up again after 2025, 'cause bank non-performing loans will drop to a little over 5% compared to 2018.
Russian Ruble - Quote - Chart - Historical Data - News
The USDRUB increased 0.2487 or 0.26% to 94.9996 on Friday October 4 from 94.7509 in the previous trading session. Russian Ruble - values, historical data, forecasts and news - updated on October of 2024.tradingeconomics.com
View attachment 31520
What damage that was done was done by rogue elements of the KGB selling state assets off for pennies on the dollar and by the Soviet state before that. All Putin does is sell resources, Russia still has no economy outside of that.
Worse would be difficult.
He wanted to keep Crimea and the Donbass.
To be honest, your graph only shows where infrastructure investment in India is coming from, which is mainly government funding. It does not indicate how the government finances itself.
Look who's talking. In 1990, Russia could no longer rob other Soviet SSRs and it lost a large portion of its export customers. There was no fixing that quickly. It was the West that helped them out of the hole.Leave the economics part to the experts.
Worse than locking people up for 7 years for criticising the war in private phone calls, assassinating political opponents, and an invasion in Europe? No leader has behaved this badly since Hitler. He had his excuses and well-polished speeches too.Haven't even scratched the surface.
Donbas would effectively not have been part of Ukraine, anymore than East Germany was part of Germany.Crimea, yes. Donbas, no.
With Donbas in Ukraine, Russia would have a say in Ukrainian politics. Crimea's geography is far too important for Russia to have left it in Ukrainian hands. If he was actually a despot, he would have taken Donbas in 2014, without much effort. Could have taken Kharkiv too.
Donbas would effectively not have been part of Ukraine, anymore than East Germany was part of Germany.
His game was to achieve his goals via a low key support and participation in a separatist conflict, avoiding major sanctions - a DDR-ification of the Donbass. He has even used the term 'People's Republic, whenever someone employs that term you know you're dealing with a grade A, type-R asshat.