Ukraine - Russia Conflict

I've never read so much crap in my life, Europe has already replaced Russia with Africa for oil and gas. Europe is doing just fine for food, I do the food shopping every week as normal. Putin's threats have zero effect. Meanwhile the Russian economy is collapsing and win or lose, it will no longer be the world's 2nd military after this war.

Ohh really! watch my words that is where you are headed. Russia decides whom to do business with not the looters and thugs of the nations like your country.
Lol. You're such a drama queen.
Yes, but why are your pumps have such high fuel cost? Why is your economy contracting and why such high inflation? Russia o is not to blame and nor does this war. Right?
Hmm. :unsure:

India’s shame​

New Delhi’s silence on Ukraine is unacceptable

Ramachandra Guha | Published 30.07.22, 02:50 AM

It is now five months since the first Russian tanks went deep into Ukrainian territory, and the first Russian jets rained bombs on Ukrainian towns and villages. It has been a brutal, bloody, war with perhaps 20,000 Russian soldiers killed in the fighting and probably twice as many Ukrainian men in uniform. The civilian casualties have been substantial too. Millions of Ukrainians have been compelled to flee their homeland to find temporary or permanent refuge in other nations. The economy of Ukraine has been ravaged; once the conflict ends, it shall take decades to restore it to its past position. And the lives and livelihoods of ordinary Russians have also been grievously affected, both because of Western sanctions and the costs of a war initiated by President Vladimir Putin.

Viewing the conflict as a member of the human species, I am horrified by the barbarism of the Russian military, its obliteration of the physical infrastructure of entire cities, its bombings of hospitals and civilian shelters, its assaults on Ukrainian women. Viewing the conflict as a citizen of India, I am dismayed by the pusillanimity of my country’s government, its refusal to condemn the invasion and its silence in the face of Russian atrocities.

When the war began in late February, and even through March, it was perhaps necessary for the Government of India to adopt a policy of wait and watch. It was not clear how long the conflict would go on; there was even talk of an early settlement. And getting the thousands of Indian students in Ukraine back home was obviously a top priority. However, as March turned into April, and April into May, and the cruelty of the Russian troops became more evident, it should no longer have been tenable to maintain a neutral position. It was clear that all that talk of the invasion being a reaction to Western provocation rang hollow. Anyone with any sense could now see that the war was being conducted by Putin not to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, but to teach the Ukrainians a lesson for not bending to his will. The Russian president was possessed of a maniacal delusion that he was a modern-day incarnation of a medieval emperor, unifying Russia and all its neighbours into one nation beholden to one all-powerful Leader. He, and his army, would seek to make these fantasies a reality whatever the cost to the Ukrainians or, indeed, to the Russians themselves. (The latest, but by no means the least, example of the venality of the Putin regime is its bombing of the port city of Odessa immediately after signing an agreement allowing Ukraine to export wheat.)

President Putin believes that the Ukrainians are really Russians by another name, and they need therefore to be united with the motherland, by force if necessary. However, if these five months of war have revealed anything at all, it is that the spirit of nationalism among the Ukrainians runs very deep indeed. They see themselves as a different, distinct people, who deserved, and must retain, a national identity of their own. Before the invasion, there were perhaps a fairly large number of Ukrainians who were happy to acknowledge, and even stress, the cultural ties they shared with Russia. Not anymore. Now, a majority even of those Ukrainians who speak Russian at home refuse to countenance a political union with Russia.
The spirit of nationalism which animates the Ukrainian resistance to Russian imperialism recalls the spirit of nationalism that once animated Vietnamese resistance to American imperialism. It is wise to remember that India, a country itself born out of a successful Independence movement against an imperialist power, spontaneously supported the Vietnamese when they sought to free themselves first from French and then American overlordship. Despite India’s reliance on American economic and military aid in the 1960s — the former crucial in averting famine — we did not hesitate to point out to the US government that what it was doing in Vietnam was both morally wrong as well as politically unwise.

Another parallel even closer home comes to mind. In 1970, the people of what was then East Pakistan became increasingly disenchanted with being economically exploited, socially discriminated against, and politically oppressed by what was then West Pakistan. Their innate Bengali nationalism was asserting itself against an imposed Islamic identity. They yearned for a nation of their own. However, the military regime in power in Islamabad insisted that the East Bengalis were Pakistanis before anything else. They sought to violently suppress the rebellion, leading to India’s intervention and the creation of an independent nation of Bangladesh.

The Ukrainians are to the Russians now what the Bangladeshis once were to the Pakistanis —namely, a people with an independent national identity of their own seeking to free themselves from being overwhelmed by a more powerful country falsely claiming to share (and represent) their identity and their history. Back in 1970-71, India rightly castigated the Pakistani army for its savagery, rightly gave refuge to millions of refugees from East Pakistan, and rightly used a modest amount of military force when it became feasible and necessary. Admittedly, since Bangladesh was next door and Ukraine is far away, this sort of material support is not feasible in this case. But must we go to the other extreme and — by our continuing refusal to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine — be complicit in the crimes of Putin and his men in Ukraine?

One may speculate about the reasons behind the Government of India’s deeply unsatisfactory response to events in Ukraine. Perhaps it is our dependence on Russian military supplies that is at work here. Perhaps the ruling party’s ideologues fear that if we stress the fact that Ukrainians have the right to be a free nation, then some people might make the same sort of case for the Kashmiris or the Nagas. Perhaps the government hopes that by diversifying our sources of oil, it may be able to keep inflation under control and, thereby, avert social discontent. Perhaps even after eight years as prime minister, Narendra Modi is not really au fait with the complexities of international geopolitics and thus cannot take a stand.

Whatever the reasons, the Government of India’s position — or more accurately, its lack of a position — on Ukraine is both morally untenable as well as politically imprudent. Our external affairs minister, speaking in Krishna Menonesque mode, has accused European nations of hypocrisy for using Russian gas while criticising India for buying Russian oil. That the West can be hypocritical is not exactly breaking news. What may be pertinent here, however, is the Government of India’s own hypocrisy in this regard. Next month, we mark the seventy-fifth anniversary of our Independence from British colonial rule. This anniversary has been widely publicised by the Modi Sarkar; there is not a government advertisement, press release, or email that does not mention that this is our Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav. And yet, in this exuberant celebration of seventy-five years of political freedom, the Indian government cannot bring itself to acknowledge the continuing existence of imperialism in the world today, as manifest most starkly in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

There is a compelling moral case for Indians to support the brave resistance of the Ukrainian people. And I believe there is a political case too. Because of our economic and demographic size, and our military and other assets, India has for some time now been taken fairly seriously in global public affairs. Given China’s own tacit endorsement of Putin’s actions, had our government more forthrightly condemned the invasion it might have helped put real pressure on Putin and his regime. India’s support could have decisively swung the narrative against Russia, compelling it to come to the negotiating table. Had our government acted thus, it would have enhanced our credibility on the world stage as well as helped bring the suffering to an end.

Ouch! Shame shame shame I know your name... Good article from this fella.
We carried the burden of supporting you in WW1 and WW2 when you killed our countrymen for your needs, You stole 45 tr from us and killed over 40m in famine by diverting our food to support the war in Europe. Why must we clean your shit? Do it yourself. You god damn toilet cleaners of the world. Wash your own shit or smell it and live with it. India did not create this shit. Its all yours. The truth is that USA+UK+NATO has no balls to fight even a ragtag army of taliban and you went into Russia after forgetting every lesson of History.
When we took on China on 15th of June 2020, we did not have your support and we dont need it as India can assemble an army of over 100 million within days. Do you know the truth of Galwan? We returned over 26 bodies of PLA which got washed on our side. All dead. We also have video proof available of over 46 bodies being air lifted of dead PLA soldiers and we also have intelligence that the total count of those who died that night from PLA either in direct combat or later in treatment was over 150. You sissies, don't teach us how to fight. We defeated Alexander on our shores, Gengis Khan dare not invade us and his progeny Taimur was defeated by us in north India and also he died of the battle wounds he got in India in Bukhara.
you are are a race of peope who slaughtered natives, looted their wealth, took over their lands and yet you call yourselves civilised and saviour of human rights. What an Irony. go and drown yourself in a bathtub.
 

They're too dependent on Russia, so all we get are half-baked, false equivalents and denialism.
However UK is still what it was during the Crimean war . How about you walk the talk without depending on others to carry your burden ? There are times like these I go on my knees to thank the lord this conflict didn't erupt a 100 yrs ago else much of Asia & Africa would be fighting the Russians in the Steppes.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Innominate
Hmm. :unsure:

India’s shame​

New Delhi’s silence on Ukraine is unacceptable

Ramachandra Guha | Published 30.07.22, 02:50 AM

It is now five months since the first Russian tanks went deep into Ukrainian territory, and the first Russian jets rained bombs on Ukrainian towns and villages. It has been a brutal, bloody, war with perhaps 20,000 Russian soldiers killed in the fighting and probably twice as many Ukrainian men in uniform. The civilian casualties have been substantial too. Millions of Ukrainians have been compelled to flee their homeland to find temporary or permanent refuge in other nations. The economy of Ukraine has been ravaged; once the conflict ends, it shall take decades to restore it to its past position. And the lives and livelihoods of ordinary Russians have also been grievously affected, both because of Western sanctions and the costs of a war initiated by President Vladimir Putin.

Viewing the conflict as a member of the human species, I am horrified by the barbarism of the Russian military, its obliteration of the physical infrastructure of entire cities, its bombings of hospitals and civilian shelters, its assaults on Ukrainian women. Viewing the conflict as a citizen of India, I am dismayed by the pusillanimity of my country’s government, its refusal to condemn the invasion and its silence in the face of Russian atrocities.

When the war began in late February, and even through March, it was perhaps necessary for the Government of India to adopt a policy of wait and watch. It was not clear how long the conflict would go on; there was even talk of an early settlement. And getting the thousands of Indian students in Ukraine back home was obviously a top priority. However, as March turned into April, and April into May, and the cruelty of the Russian troops became more evident, it should no longer have been tenable to maintain a neutral position. It was clear that all that talk of the invasion being a reaction to Western provocation rang hollow. Anyone with any sense could now see that the war was being conducted by Putin not to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, but to teach the Ukrainians a lesson for not bending to his will. The Russian president was possessed of a maniacal delusion that he was a modern-day incarnation of a medieval emperor, unifying Russia and all its neighbours into one nation beholden to one all-powerful Leader. He, and his army, would seek to make these fantasies a reality whatever the cost to the Ukrainians or, indeed, to the Russians themselves. (The latest, but by no means the least, example of the venality of the Putin regime is its bombing of the port city of Odessa immediately after signing an agreement allowing Ukraine to export wheat.)

President Putin believes that the Ukrainians are really Russians by another name, and they need therefore to be united with the motherland, by force if necessary. However, if these five months of war have revealed anything at all, it is that the spirit of nationalism among the Ukrainians runs very deep indeed. They see themselves as a different, distinct people, who deserved, and must retain, a national identity of their own. Before the invasion, there were perhaps a fairly large number of Ukrainians who were happy to acknowledge, and even stress, the cultural ties they shared with Russia. Not anymore. Now, a majority even of those Ukrainians who speak Russian at home refuse to countenance a political union with Russia.
The spirit of nationalism which animates the Ukrainian resistance to Russian imperialism recalls the spirit of nationalism that once animated Vietnamese resistance to American imperialism. It is wise to remember that India, a country itself born out of a successful Independence movement against an imperialist power, spontaneously supported the Vietnamese when they sought to free themselves first from French and then American overlordship. Despite India’s reliance on American economic and military aid in the 1960s — the former crucial in averting famine — we did not hesitate to point out to the US government that what it was doing in Vietnam was both morally wrong as well as politically unwise.

Another parallel even closer home comes to mind. In 1970, the people of what was then East Pakistan became increasingly disenchanted with being economically exploited, socially discriminated against, and politically oppressed by what was then West Pakistan. Their innate Bengali nationalism was asserting itself against an imposed Islamic identity. They yearned for a nation of their own. However, the military regime in power in Islamabad insisted that the East Bengalis were Pakistanis before anything else. They sought to violently suppress the rebellion, leading to India’s intervention and the creation of an independent nation of Bangladesh.

The Ukrainians are to the Russians now what the Bangladeshis once were to the Pakistanis —namely, a people with an independent national identity of their own seeking to free themselves from being overwhelmed by a more powerful country falsely claiming to share (and represent) their identity and their history. Back in 1970-71, India rightly castigated the Pakistani army for its savagery, rightly gave refuge to millions of refugees from East Pakistan, and rightly used a modest amount of military force when it became feasible and necessary. Admittedly, since Bangladesh was next door and Ukraine is far away, this sort of material support is not feasible in this case. But must we go to the other extreme and — by our continuing refusal to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine — be complicit in the crimes of Putin and his men in Ukraine?

One may speculate about the reasons behind the Government of India’s deeply unsatisfactory response to events in Ukraine. Perhaps it is our dependence on Russian military supplies that is at work here. Perhaps the ruling party’s ideologues fear that if we stress the fact that Ukrainians have the right to be a free nation, then some people might make the same sort of case for the Kashmiris or the Nagas. Perhaps the government hopes that by diversifying our sources of oil, it may be able to keep inflation under control and, thereby, avert social discontent. Perhaps even after eight years as prime minister, Narendra Modi is not really au fait with the complexities of international geopolitics and thus cannot take a stand.

Whatever the reasons, the Government of India’s position — or more accurately, its lack of a position — on Ukraine is both morally untenable as well as politically imprudent. Our external affairs minister, speaking in Krishna Menonesque mode, has accused European nations of hypocrisy for using Russian gas while criticising India for buying Russian oil. That the West can be hypocritical is not exactly breaking news. What may be pertinent here, however, is the Government of India’s own hypocrisy in this regard. Next month, we mark the seventy-fifth anniversary of our Independence from British colonial rule. This anniversary has been widely publicised by the Modi Sarkar; there is not a government advertisement, press release, or email that does not mention that this is our Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav. And yet, in this exuberant celebration of seventy-five years of political freedom, the Indian government cannot bring itself to acknowledge the continuing existence of imperialism in the world today, as manifest most starkly in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

There is a compelling moral case for Indians to support the brave resistance of the Ukrainian people. And I believe there is a political case too. Because of our economic and demographic size, and our military and other assets, India has for some time now been taken fairly seriously in global public affairs. Given China’s own tacit endorsement of Putin’s actions, had our government more forthrightly condemned the invasion it might have helped put real pressure on Putin and his regime. India’s support could have decisively swung the narrative against Russia, compelling it to come to the negotiating table. Had our government acted thus, it would have enhanced our credibility on the world stage as well as helped bring the suffering to an end.

The man is a self avowed nehruvian still smoking from the same hookah of self righteousness & wearing the halo of moral relativism that Nehru himself wore , neglecting to see the realpolitik behind it much like his idol who himself started believing his own myth before the Chinese punctured it in 1962.

The last paragraph is both a dead giveaway of his ideology ( not that he ever attempted to cloak it but this is meant for those who came in late ) & a real hoot .
Ouch! Shame shame shame I know your name... Good article from this fella.
He fingered the US & the west pretty well in his articles / polemics / monographs / rants during your many misadventures over the past 2 decades . Do a bit of data mining & you'd hit that veritable pot of gold up yours or his.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Innominate
The man is a self avowed nehruvian still smoking from the same hookah of self righteousness & wearing the halo of moral relativism that Nehru himself wore , neglecting to see the realpolitik behind it much like his idol who himself started believing his own myth before the Chinese punctured it in 1962.

The last paragraph is both a dead giveaway of his ideology ( not that he ever attempted to cloak it but this is meant for those who came in late ) & a real hoot .

He fingered the US & the west pretty well in his articles / polemics / monographs / rants during your many misadventures over the past 2 decades . Do a bit of data mining & you'd hit that veritable pot of gold up yours or his.
Wow three post today! Does this mean you're starting to realize how silly your butt hurt is and will now be posting here more?

Oh and I just love how you pretend to know Guha's mind. This is the kind of BS post that gets you in trouble. This is the kind of BS post that forces my keyboard of righteousness to call out your BS which then causes you to have a mental breakdown and makes you post silly things that get you ban and then come back here and invite the Mods to permanently ban you. Don't go down that rabbit hole again, babe.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: _Anonymous_

They're too dependent on Russia, so all we get are half-baked, false equivalents and denialism.
🤣


butthurt.jpg
 
Since when is Chechnya a "neighbour?" If you consider Chechnya a war of aggression instead of a civil war , then we ought to be having a different argument.
OK, point.
Yes & what exactly triggered off this war ? Put another way why's there peace , however tenuous , between Georgia & Russia today ?
Because Russia achieved its aims.
Leftover of the dissolution of the USSR. For context , consider the issue of the Republic of Sprska & the Brcko district in Bosnia Herzegovina or even the "Republic of Kosovo " all leftovers from the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Had these issues been easy to resolve they would've been solved long ago .
They were easy to resolve, had there been will. To give an example... many consider Croatian homeland war a civil war because the main uprising was rebellion of Serb minority within Croatia. But in reality, it was a layered war of aggression: Serb Army had quite openly invaded Eastern Slavonia (Vukovar et al) and Dubrovnik, and Serbs in Croatia were nothing but pawns of Belgrade.

But this misunderstanding meant that for a time, there was a plan to give Serbs in Croatia autonomy (Z-4 plan). Now, even in current circumstances, Serbs in Croatia (Pupovac et. al.) are acting as agents of Belgrade in destabilizing Croatia. Imagine how much worse it would have been if Serbs had gained federal unit within Croatia?

With Bosnia, issue is more complex, but solution is just as easy - even if it is an opposite one. Bosniaks want to form a caliphate where they will have absolute dominance, Serbs want to have their slice of Bosnia (and they got it) and eventually join Serbia, and Croats want to be left alone (which nobody else will acceede to unless Herzegovina is annexed by Croatia... good luck with that). In short, there are only two possible solutions: either cantonization of Bosnia on the Swiss model, or else its disbandment with Serbia and Croatia both annexing areas where their ethnicities dominate.

Problem with Ukraine is similar to Bosnia: if it didn't give Russians in Ukraine some level of autonomy, they would feel threatened; but if it did, Russians there could easily become proxies of Moscow and be used as a fifth column against Ukraine (as they ended up being used).

But considering how Russians had been trying to Russify Ukraine (and not just Ukraine) since Imperial times, best solution would have been to move all the Russians in Ukraine to Russia (although there is a difference, I think, between a Russian and Russian-speaking Ukrainian).
What're you views on the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 ? How do you think things would've panned out had Khrushchev been adamant instead of accomodating ? How do you view the role of the Kennedy adminstration including Kennedy himself in the entire crisis ? What are the parallels you see in the current war in Ukraine ?
Basically? Both sides had a point... kinda. Cuba was right to be concerned and seek protection, seeing how US had only year earlier attempted to overthrow the Cuban government (Bay of Pigs 1961). However, it was also clear that US could not allow Soviet missiles so near to the US mainland - in fact, potential threat to mainland was one of major reasons for the whole Bay of Pigs affair.

But personally, I would have likely been on Cuban side in that affair. As I had said, United States had attempted to overthrow the Cuban government just a year previously, and it was clear that they saw Cuba as their backyard. And while removing Communism from Cuba would have been better for Cuba in the long run, if Cubans wanted Communism, US should not have intervened. Although... that is a big if.
I hold no brief for Putin save to say that it's one thing to have ideas about resurrecting the empire , another thing to have the means & will to do it & quite another to have the opportunity to execute these plans assuming the first two components are in place.

The last part was facilitated by the US & NATO . Then again as the view goes in most non European / non western nations including but not restricted to India , China , etc it may be precisely what the west wanted .

Out here in India , we see the US playing a similar game . The Chinese see reunification with Taiwan as part of their unfinished nation building project & it occupies the top most priority .

However , the recent clashes on the border or as we term it - the LAC with us in 2020 which was totally unexpected in most quarters in India has brought home the notion that China regards this as part of the their unfinished agenda too perhaps just a notch below Taiwan if not on par with it .

It's here that the US is trying desperately to inveigle India into some sort of defensive alliance. The situation is similar to late 1930's Germany where the Anglo French alliance saw both the regimes that ruled Germany & the USSR as odious .

Since Hitler was a sworn enemy of Communism , it was hoped that he would attack the USSR while the rest of Europe was content to let the 2 of them slug it out . This is the context in which the Munich Agreement ought to be seen .

Stalin who feared Hitler considering him as his mortal enemy just as Nazism as an ideology was the mortal enemy of Communism , desperately reaching out to the UK & France for a possible alliance , was alarmed at the Munich Agreement & redoubled his efforts , reaching terms with Hitler under the Molotov Ribbentrop pact .

Out here in India we are often fed this western trope of how cynical both Stalin & Hitler were since both were equally demonised by the west with Stalin being demonised to a lesser extent since after all he did ally with the west & ended up on the victorious side .

However the Russians were deeply sceptical of the Munich Agreement & saw it as an example of western cynicism . We know how the rest of the it panned out .

Why am I bringing this up in context to Zelensky , Ukraine , Putin , Russia , the US & NATO for we're seeing the same game being played here albeit more subtly , in a nuanced manner where the US , Japan , Taiwan etc would rather China join war with India instead of targeting Taiwan as it's only India today which has the ability to blunt China's offensive capabilities to a large extent & either get into a stalemate or see China winning a Pyrrhic victory. Of course there's the outside chance that we may turn the tables on China too .

As to why would the Chinese attempt it with India , I happened to read an article once in Asia Nikkei just before the pandemic wherein the Japanese security establishment concluded that the Chinese were suffering from the same state of hubris that pervaded the pro war faction of the IJA in pre WW-2 Japan.
Eh, Communism and Nazism were both more-or-less equally evil, so the West was right to demonize both Stalin and Hitler... in fact, up until World War 2, Communism had been (with good reason) seen as a worse evil than all right-wing (and "right"-wing) regimes put together.

But yeah, you are correct here.
The early western plans to introduce market style economy was disastrous for Russia. With Yeltsin drunk on the job , his kitchen cabinet , the oligarchy & western business & institutions busy carving up most of Russian assets the initial enthusiasm with the west dissipated after Russians of all classes were pauperised with their assets sold at bargain basement prices . Enter Putin.
Yeah, that is what I meant by "didn't go well for Russia".
Putin is on record stating he specifically requested Clinton on admission to NATO only to have the latter brush him off with a laugh towards the fag end of his presidency. I've no clue if it actually transpired in the way Putin described it but there are multiple videos of Putin out there since the Georgian crisis in 2007 with Putin repeating it just before the war in Ukraine began too to reinforce the point that the west & in particular the US was always hostile to Russia & it's interests.
Of course they were - West is hostile to any country attempting to gain independence. There are some in Croatia who suspect Tudjman had been murdered by the West because he refused to sell our banks and other assets to Western cartels - and they have good reasons to suspect that.

But the fact that the West is evil doesn't mean Russia is good.
 
The reconstruction will boost the GDP of the destroyed regions.
Russia will not have the money for that.

You can look at Crimea, which despite being seized intact and being a crown jewel in Russian rhetoric has stagnated. The Kerch bridge is the only real investment Russia did in the region.

The ruins will be left to rot and fester because the Kremlin only cares about how it looks like on a map.

The most valuable resource in these regions is the population.
Most of them fled. Russia was talking with North Korea about sending Korean workers in there instead...

Unlike other minorities, Ukrainian Russians will be treated on par with other Russians by the state. So that's still an upgrade over disenfranchisement in Ukraine.
A "disenfranchised" Ukrainian has more rights and freedoms than a Russian citizen. It's a straight downgrade.
Over the next 10 years, Russia will still be on par or superior to China and India. At the very least, the Russian navy will still be far more capable than either navy during this time.
The navy, really? Pretty sure China is already ahead of Russia on the surface fleet front. Over 500 ships totaling about two million tonnes, including three aircraft carriers and four LHDs. Russia has less than 350 ships totalling about 1.2 million tonnes, including a single coal-powered aircraft carrier that seems to think it should launch its aircraft directly into the sea, and zero LHD.
 
Besides wasn't it incumbent upon Europe ( here, I'm referring to western Europe principally the big 4 viz : UK, France, Germany & Italy ) apart from prudence to include Russia in it's security architecture or accommodate the latter in some way if it wanted to enjoy the peace dividend & ever lasting prosperity? Why didn't it?
You seem to think that European countries did nothing to try to include Russia. But they did!
  • 1994: Russia joins the NATO "Partnership for Peace"
  • 1996: Russia joins the Council of Europe
  • 1997: EU-Russia Partnership and Cooperation Agreement
  • 1997: "Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security" between NATO and Russia
  • 2002: Creation of the NATO-Russia Council
  • 2003: "Four Common Spaces" EU-Russia agreement
and so on. Things went well but in 2004 and 2007 EU enlargement extended to several former subjects of Russia (the Baltic states, Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania...) and Russia started seeing the EU as a threat to its influence. By 2007 Russia had started a campaign of covert hostility (stuff like cyberattacks, corruption of influential persons, etc.) escalating to targeted assassinations. In 2008 Putin had started talking about "NATO" to really mean the EU, because he had to claim a military threat (that doesn't exist from the EU) since he couldn't admit it was really a diplomatic and economic threat.

Ultimately, the only thing that could be don to accommodate Russia would be to agree to be even more poor, corrupt and oppressive than Russia so that Russia still looks good to its former subjects. And no, the other way around of trying to bolster Russian economy would not work. It was attempted and it failed, because the EU money sent to Russia to modernize and develop it disappeared mysteriously when it crossed the Russian border. Weird.
 
Hmm. :unsure:

India’s shame​

New Delhi’s silence on Ukraine is unacceptable

Ramachandra Guha | Published 30.07.22, 02:50 AM

It is now five months since the first Russian tanks went deep into Ukrainian territory, and the first Russian jets rained bombs on Ukrainian towns and villages. It has been a brutal, bloody, war with perhaps 20,000 Russian soldiers killed in the fighting and probably twice as many Ukrainian men in uniform. The civilian casualties have been substantial too. Millions of Ukrainians have been compelled to flee their homeland to find temporary or permanent refuge in other nations. The economy of Ukraine has been ravaged; once the conflict ends, it shall take decades to restore it to its past position. And the lives and livelihoods of ordinary Russians have also been grievously affected, both because of Western sanctions and the costs of a war initiated by President Vladimir Putin.

Viewing the conflict as a member of the human species, I am horrified by the barbarism of the Russian military, its obliteration of the physical infrastructure of entire cities, its bombings of hospitals and civilian shelters, its assaults on Ukrainian women. Viewing the conflict as a citizen of India, I am dismayed by the pusillanimity of my country’s government, its refusal to condemn the invasion and its silence in the face of Russian atrocities.

When the war began in late February, and even through March, it was perhaps necessary for the Government of India to adopt a policy of wait and watch. It was not clear how long the conflict would go on; there was even talk of an early settlement. And getting the thousands of Indian students in Ukraine back home was obviously a top priority. However, as March turned into April, and April into May, and the cruelty of the Russian troops became more evident, it should no longer have been tenable to maintain a neutral position. It was clear that all that talk of the invasion being a reaction to Western provocation rang hollow. Anyone with any sense could now see that the war was being conducted by Putin not to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, but to teach the Ukrainians a lesson for not bending to his will. The Russian president was possessed of a maniacal delusion that he was a modern-day incarnation of a medieval emperor, unifying Russia and all its neighbours into one nation beholden to one all-powerful Leader. He, and his army, would seek to make these fantasies a reality whatever the cost to the Ukrainians or, indeed, to the Russians themselves. (The latest, but by no means the least, example of the venality of the Putin regime is its bombing of the port city of Odessa immediately after signing an agreement allowing Ukraine to export wheat.)

President Putin believes that the Ukrainians are really Russians by another name, and they need therefore to be united with the motherland, by force if necessary. However, if these five months of war have revealed anything at all, it is that the spirit of nationalism among the Ukrainians runs very deep indeed. They see themselves as a different, distinct people, who deserved, and must retain, a national identity of their own. Before the invasion, there were perhaps a fairly large number of Ukrainians who were happy to acknowledge, and even stress, the cultural ties they shared with Russia. Not anymore. Now, a majority even of those Ukrainians who speak Russian at home refuse to countenance a political union with Russia.
The spirit of nationalism which animates the Ukrainian resistance to Russian imperialism recalls the spirit of nationalism that once animated Vietnamese resistance to American imperialism. It is wise to remember that India, a country itself born out of a successful Independence movement against an imperialist power, spontaneously supported the Vietnamese when they sought to free themselves first from French and then American overlordship. Despite India’s reliance on American economic and military aid in the 1960s — the former crucial in averting famine — we did not hesitate to point out to the US government that what it was doing in Vietnam was both morally wrong as well as politically unwise.

Another parallel even closer home comes to mind. In 1970, the people of what was then East Pakistan became increasingly disenchanted with being economically exploited, socially discriminated against, and politically oppressed by what was then West Pakistan. Their innate Bengali nationalism was asserting itself against an imposed Islamic identity. They yearned for a nation of their own. However, the military regime in power in Islamabad insisted that the East Bengalis were Pakistanis before anything else. They sought to violently suppress the rebellion, leading to India’s intervention and the creation of an independent nation of Bangladesh.

The Ukrainians are to the Russians now what the Bangladeshis once were to the Pakistanis —namely, a people with an independent national identity of their own seeking to free themselves from being overwhelmed by a more powerful country falsely claiming to share (and represent) their identity and their history. Back in 1970-71, India rightly castigated the Pakistani army for its savagery, rightly gave refuge to millions of refugees from East Pakistan, and rightly used a modest amount of military force when it became feasible and necessary. Admittedly, since Bangladesh was next door and Ukraine is far away, this sort of material support is not feasible in this case. But must we go to the other extreme and — by our continuing refusal to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine — be complicit in the crimes of Putin and his men in Ukraine?

One may speculate about the reasons behind the Government of India’s deeply unsatisfactory response to events in Ukraine. Perhaps it is our dependence on Russian military supplies that is at work here. Perhaps the ruling party’s ideologues fear that if we stress the fact that Ukrainians have the right to be a free nation, then some people might make the same sort of case for the Kashmiris or the Nagas. Perhaps the government hopes that by diversifying our sources of oil, it may be able to keep inflation under control and, thereby, avert social discontent. Perhaps even after eight years as prime minister, Narendra Modi is not really au fait with the complexities of international geopolitics and thus cannot take a stand.

Whatever the reasons, the Government of India’s position — or more accurately, its lack of a position — on Ukraine is both morally untenable as well as politically imprudent. Our external affairs minister, speaking in Krishna Menonesque mode, has accused European nations of hypocrisy for using Russian gas while criticising India for buying Russian oil. That the West can be hypocritical is not exactly breaking news. What may be pertinent here, however, is the Government of India’s own hypocrisy in this regard. Next month, we mark the seventy-fifth anniversary of our Independence from British colonial rule. This anniversary has been widely publicised by the Modi Sarkar; there is not a government advertisement, press release, or email that does not mention that this is our Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav. And yet, in this exuberant celebration of seventy-five years of political freedom, the Indian government cannot bring itself to acknowledge the continuing existence of imperialism in the world today, as manifest most starkly in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

There is a compelling moral case for Indians to support the brave resistance of the Ukrainian people. And I believe there is a political case too. Because of our economic and demographic size, and our military and other assets, India has for some time now been taken fairly seriously in global public affairs. Given China’s own tacit endorsement of Putin’s actions, had our government more forthrightly condemned the invasion it might have helped put real pressure on Putin and his regime. India’s support could have decisively swung the narrative against Russia, compelling it to come to the negotiating table. Had our government acted thus, it would have enhanced our credibility on the world stage as well as helped bring the suffering to an end.

Ouch! Shame shame shame I know your name... Good article from this fella.

Even India has sheep.
 
Russia will not have the money for that.

You can look at Crimea, which despite being seized intact and being a crown jewel in Russian rhetoric has stagnated. The Kerch bridge is the only real investment Russia did in the region.

The ruins will be left to rot and fester because the Kremlin only cares about how it looks like on a map.

Development in Crimea has been slow due to the threat of sanctions on companies, even Russian. Last year, the Russian govt moved a proposal to allow anonymous investments into Crimea. But that's no longer relevant.

Most of them fled. Russia was talking with North Korea about sending Korean workers in there instead...

They will come back.

A "disenfranchised" Ukrainian has more rights and freedoms than a Russian citizen. It's a straight downgrade.

On paper, yeah. But freedom is relative to ambition. A young Russian boy would have greater opportunities in Russia than in Ukraine now.

The navy, really? Pretty sure China is already ahead of Russia on the surface fleet front. Over 500 ships totaling about two million tonnes, including three aircraft carriers and four LHDs. Russia has less than 350 ships totalling about 1.2 million tonnes, including a single coal-powered aircraft carrier that seems to think it should launch its aircraft directly into the sea, and zero LHD.

Slightly nit-picky there. Yeah, their deployed army, air force and navy are bigger than Russia's, even ISR. But the Russian navy has a game-changing weapon like the SSN, which neither China nor India possess in the numbers and sophistication necessary to counter. India's ASW capability, although sophisticated, is inadequate, and China's may be adequate in terms of assets, but may not be in terms of sophistication. While things are changing faster for China and India than it is for Russia, at least for the next 10 years, Russia is likely to retain this massive advantage.
 
Ohh really! watch my words that is where you are headed. Russia decides whom to do business with not the looters and thugs of the nations like your country.
Funny how it is Russia invading and looting a country right now then. Russian oil and gas has been replaced with African oil and gas. Russia's loss will be Africa's gain.

Yes, but why are your pumps have such high fuel cost? Why is your economy contracting and why such high inflation? Russia o is not to blame and nor does this war. Right?
It's still easily affordable though. Inflation is more than twice as high in Russia.

We carried the burden of supporting you in WW1 and WW2 when you killed our countrymen for your needs, You stole 45 tr from us and killed over 40m in famine by diverting our food to support the war in Europe. Why must we clean your shit? Do it yourself. You god damn toilet cleaners of the world. Wash your own shit or smell it and live with it. India did not create this shit. Its all yours. The truth is that USA+UK+NATO has no balls to fight even a ragtag army of taliban and you went into Russia after forgetting every lesson of History.
You never had £45 trillion to steal, you still don't. The total value of all the oil in Saudi Arabia is only <£2tr present day values. Where do you come up with these numbers, they're not even possible. No scholar quotes even one tenth of that figure for the Bengal Famine, even ignoring the reasons. And what does 7,000/day for 75 years come to? Nobody went into Russia, you can't even perceive reality correctly let alone interpret history.

When we took on China on 15th of June 2020, we did not have your support and we dont need it as India can assemble an army of over 100 million within days. Do you know the truth of Galwan? We returned over 26 bodies of PLA which got washed on our side. All dead. We also have video proof available of over 46 bodies being air lifted of dead PLA soldiers and we also have intelligence that the total count of those who died that night from PLA either in direct combat or later in treatment was over 150. You sissies, don't teach us how to fight. We defeated Alexander on our shores, Gengis Khan dare not invade us and his progeny Taimur was defeated by us in north India and also he died of the battle wounds he got in India in Bukhara.
you are are a race of peope who slaughtered natives, looted their wealth, took over their lands and yet you call yourselves civilised and saviour of human rights. What an Irony. go and drown yourself in a bathtub.
Wow, you are so stuck in the past, this is why China is leaving you behind.
 
The truth is that USA+UK+NATO has no balls to fight even a ragtag army of taliban

WASHINGTON — Al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahri, who took over command of the terrorist organization after the death of Osama bin Laden in 2011, was killed by a U.S. drone strike in the Afghan capital of Kabul on Saturday night, President Joe Biden said in a White House address on Monday evening.
 
You never had £45 trillion to steal, you still don't. The total value of all the oil in Saudi Arabia is only <£2tr present day values. Where do you come up with these numbers, they're not even possible. No scholar quotes even one tenth of that figure for the Bengal Famine, even ignoring the reasons. And what does 7,000/day for 75 years come to? Nobody went into Russia, you can't even perceive reality correctly let alone interpret history.
45 Tr is the figure at present day value of the money stolen from India for over 190yrs starting 1757 till 1947. And this has been proven and quoted by some of your own economists.
This is due to the deal between USA and Pakistan ISI to help them get more money from IMF and US. They handed him over to USA otherwise USA could not find him even after staying in Afghanistan for over 20yrs while he was just across Durandline in Pakistan.
 
Ohh really! watch my words that is where you are headed. Russia decides whom to do business with not the looters and thugs of the nations like your country.

Yes, but why are your pumps have such high fuel cost? Why is your economy contracting and why such high inflation? Russia o is not to blame and nor does this war. Right?

We carried the burden of supporting you in WW1 and WW2 when you killed our countrymen for your needs, You stole 45 tr from us and killed over 40m in famine by diverting our food to support the war in Europe. Why must we clean your shit? Do it yourself. You god damn toilet cleaners of the world. Wash your own shit or smell it and live with it. India did not create this shit. Its all yours. The truth is that USA+UK+NATO has no balls to fight even a ragtag army of taliban and you went into Russia after forgetting every lesson of History.
When we took on China on 15th of June 2020, we did not have your support and we dont need it as India can assemble an army of over 100 million within days. Do you know the truth of Galwan? We returned over 26 bodies of PLA which got washed on our side. All dead. We also have video proof available of over 46 bodies being air lifted of dead PLA soldiers and we also have intelligence that the total count of those who died that night from PLA either in direct combat or later in treatment was over 150. You sissies, don't teach us how to fight. We defeated Alexander on our shores, Gengis Khan dare not invade us and his progeny Taimur was defeated by us in north India and also he died of the battle wounds he got in India in Bukhara.
you are are a race of peope who slaughtered natives, looted their wealth, took over their lands and yet you call yourselves civilised and saviour of human rights. What an Irony. go and drown yourself in a bathtub.
Why goi & military always give narrations without proofs?.

Balakot strike without proofs.

F16 shoot down with out wreck.

Galwan Chinese casuality without proof.

Lastly asper some reports, around 60+ km2 is under control in despang/hotspring areas, the thing we denied indirectly by saying not an inch is under chines control. But funny part is that we denied acces to free press in to that places.