India's Foreign policy

jhelb wrote:

flamming_python wrote: Where does all this hate come from?

Where is the hate ? I'm saying things the way they are. Might sound unsettling but that's the truth.

When the Brits left India they created 3 parties - Congress, Muslim League, RSS (the current BJP's parent party). Muslim League created Pakistan and left. Brits ruled India indirectly via Congress for 70 odd years and now the Anglo-Saxons are ruling India using the BJP.

The Brits are not ruling India. Nor even the Americans. It's an independent country. It's elites don't always make the right choices, but they have an agenda all of their own - not one that's subordinated to London. Hence why India for example, didn't join the sanctions regime against Russia, continues to buy weapons from it, participates in the BRICS, carries out military exercises with Russia and is an observer in the SCO.

Would any of that even be possible if the Anglo-Saxons were still ruling India? Or even if it was significantly still influenced by Britain and kept the Queen as head of state? Can you imagine Canada, Australia, New Zealand doing any of the above?

Russians would be fools to believe that India is a friendly country.

Yet they are, the proof is in the pudding

And do you mind not calling them a great power? They have spend more than a 1000 years as a colony, either of Islamic countries or the Brits. Even nothing power like Uzbekistan had conquered those Hindus. In contrast Russia has not been a colony of any country for even 10 years.

No I don't mind calling them a great power. They have the world's 2nd largest population, the 7th largest country by land area, the 3rd largest economy in the world, are a nuclear power, possess their own space program, have the 3rd most powerful military on the Asian continent (after Russia and China).

That they're a developing country with backwards practices in rural society is obvious. Still, China was a lot closer to their development level back in the 50s/60s, and now look at them. All it takes is the right leadership and system of administration, and India can progress to becoming an industrialized and then post-industrialized power within decades, and leave all the caste system, preventable diseases and so on behind.

The obnoxious religion that country practices has kept it backward for ever. Even China despite lagging India initially, has leaped far ahead and is now a superpower. South Korea, Taiwan, Japan are other Asian states that are generations ahead of India.

It's got nothing to do with religion. Idealisms always become subordinated to material reality sooner or later, because it was material reality that birthed them in the first place. That goes for any religion or ideology. As India develops, either the religion will change - there where it no longer fits modern realities, or the religion will be left behind and something else will take its place; as happened in Europe.

What has kept India backward is its lack of unity and its composition as a bunch of warring principalities and city states. This made it easy for the British, Portugese and so on to play divide and rule.
Historically, when India had been at least partially united under a powerful dynasty - for example the Mughals; it developed rapidly economically and gave the world a bunch of innovations and advancements.
By the time the Europeans had arrived, the Mughals were long gone.

Ironically, it's due to the Brits that India had managed to unite into a cohesive entity for the first time in modern history.

Makes no sense for Russia to be friends with a failed state. If these Indians can afford Russian stuff go ahead and sell it, but there is no need to define them as friends. They are not.

India is not a failed state, it's a developing country. As a state it has a working system of government and administration across all its territory, a rapidly growing economy, an army under a single command structure to defend its borders, a foreign policy decided upon by its elite that all smaller regional elites in the country follow. You can hardly say any of those things for an actual failed state.

Already, Hindus are putting a whole lot of pressure on the Kremlin not to sell advanced hi tech weapons to Pakistan and China.

I would do the same thing in their position. They are a massive customer and that gives them leverage. It's perfectly within their right to say to Russia - 'them or us', and walk away from deals if they perceive that Russia is arming their enemies. Just the same as it's Russia's right to sell weapons to whoever they want.

Russia has to be careful around Indian sensitivities. At the end of the day this is the most valuable ally we have in Asia. China's great too but we've historically had our differences, and they can always go full retard in South Korea, Vietnam, Japan, etc... with which Russia also has valuable relations and a lot of mutual investments with.

Billions of $$ worth of prospective weapon sales to Pakistan were scuttled by Hindus.  Will those corrupt Hindus compensate Russia for all the losses? They also won drilling rights in Siberia despite the fact that Chinese companies were the highest bidder. Guess how.

India is Russia's largest defense industry customer so yes it is compensating Russia just fine.

As for corruption, well if your own country is corrupt than foreign corporations will of course play by corrupt rules too, less they lose out to other foreign competition or local companies, that will also be playing by corrupt rules.

It's Russia's problem to fix, not India's

At the end of the day this is the most valuable ally we have in Asia.

not anymore, China is-the RF & PRC recently started conducting joint land & air exercises/patrols, besides those at sea, & not only in the FE, while with India it's mostly occasional naval exercises in the Indian Ocean.
That's also why Russia tries to bring India & China closer together.

Tsavo Lion wrote:That's also why Russia tries to bring India & China closer together.

If they can achieve that, it's basically game over for the "opposition" in the Asia-Pacific

If they can achieve that, it's basically game over for the "opposition" in the Asia-Pacific

I would love to see them achieve it... India and China and Russia are all much better off individually and as a group if they can put aside their differences and work together.

Would like to see India and Pakistan put aside their differences and learn to get on... though Pakistan has to stop funding and supporting terrorists of course... but then if the US and the west and Saudi Arabia and Israel continue to support terrorists why would Pakistan stop?

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/how-will-purchases-from-russia-affect-india-us-ties/article29606117.ece


Will a new American law and sanctions come in the way of the S-400 Triumf missile purchase?

The story so far: Exactly a year ago, on October 5, 2018, India and Russia signed a contract to buy the Russian Triumf missile system, concluding negotiations that began in 2015. During that time, however, a new U.S. law, called “Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act” or CAATSA was passed by the U.S. Congress, which transformed what should have been a straightforward bilateral deal into a complex trilateral balancing game for India.

How significant is the Russian deal for New Delhi?

A year after Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin signed an agreement for the $5.4 billion S-400 Triumf missile system (picture), the deal continues to cast a cloud over India-U.S. ties. Earlier this week, even as External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar was meeting his American counterpart Mike Pompeo in Washington, a U.S. official reminded India of the “risks” attached to the deal. The State Department spokesperson said on Tuesday, “We urge all of our allies and partners to forgo transactions with Russia that risk triggering sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).” This was shortly after Mr. Jaishankar reiterated at a think-tank event India’s intention to acquire the Russian system. Mr. Jaishankar had said in Washington, “We would not like any state to tell us what to buy or not to buy from Russia any more than we would like any state to tell us to buy or not buy from America,” asserting both India’s traditional ties to Russia, as well as the significance of the S-400 deal in particular.

Why is the S-400 deal important?

The agreement to purchase the Triumf missile system boosted India-Russia defence ties at a point of inflection last year.

Russia has traditionally been India’s biggest defence supplier, but was surpassed by the U.S. in the last few years, a fact that had added to a perceptible drift in bilateral ties. Mr. Putin and Mr. Modi addressed this drift with a special “reset” summit in Sochi last May, which was followed by Mr. Putin’s visit to Delhi on October 5, 2018, when the deal was announced. The Indian Air Force has also backed the superior air defence system in that it will fill the gap in India’s particular needs: countering its main adversaries and neighbours, China and Pakistan’s growing air power, while dealing with a depleting stock of fighter aircraft.



Is India the only country facing CAATSA sanctions?

By coincidence, CAATSA has now been invoked by the United States twice already, and both times for countries buying the Triumf system from Russia. In September 2018, the U.S. State Department and Treasury Department announced sanctions on China’s Equipment Development Department (EDD), the military branch responsible for weapons and equipment, for the procurement of the S-400 Triumf air defence system and Sukhoi S-35 fighter aircraft. The sanctions were triggered when the People’s Liberation Army’s took delivery of the systems. Washington expelled Turkey from the F-35 fighter jet programme in July this year after the first delivery of S-400s was received, and says sanctions are still under consideration unless Turkey reverses its deal with Russia. India is neither like China, which has an inimical relationship with the U.S., and hence not bound by its diktats, nor like Turkey which is a NATO ally of the U.S. and expected to comply with Washington’s demands, and hence hopes to escape CAATSA sanctions.

Is a sanctions waiver possible for India?

Written into the CAATSA language is also an exit clause, which states that “The [US] President may waive the application of [CAATSA] sanctions if the President determines that such a waiver is in the national security interest of the United States.” In August 2018, the U.S. Congress also modified the waiver clause to allow the President to certify that a country is “cooperating with the United States Government on other matters that are critical to United States’ strategic national security interests”. Government officials including Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale, National Security Adviser Ajit Doval and Mr. Jaishankar have all expressed the hope that the U.S. will exercise this waiver for the S-400 deal to India for a number of reasons: that a militarily stronger India is in the U.S.’s interests, and that India cannot completely drop its traditional dependence on Russian defence equipment without being weakened. In addition, it is no secret that U.S. President Donald Trump has misgivings about the CAATSA sanctions, which he said were meant to curtail his own powers to deal with Russia, and the other countries included in the act — Iran and North Korea. It is hoped that Mr. Trump will grant India a waiver on the deal, thanks to good bilateral relations with India and the fact that it is a “major defence partner” of the U.S.

What happens if a waiver is not granted?

Section 235 of the CAATSA legislation stipulates 12 kinds of punitive sanctions that the U.S. could place on a country conducting significant transactions in defence, energy, oil pipelines and cybersecurity technology with any of the U.S.’s “adversaries”, and according to the Act, the U.S. President may impose “five or more of the sanctions described”. These measures include export sanctions, cancellation of loans from U.S. and international financial institutions, ban on investments and procurement, restrictions on foreign exchange and banking transactions, and a visa and travel ban on officials associated with any entity carrying out the sanctioned transactions. None of these is expected to go into process until India takes delivery of the five S-400 systems it has paid an advance on, which are expected to begin in about 20 months and conclude by 2023.

Has India given the U.S. a fait accompli on the S-400?

India’s firm-footed response to the U.S. threat of sanctions on the Russian S-400 is in sharp contrast to its decision to “zero out” oil purchases from Iran, which were sanctioned by the U.S. last year, and denotes that while the government is prepared to diversify its energy sources, it will not be bullied on its defence security options. Given the stakes involved, the government hopes that the U.S. will put its burgeoning strategic, defence and business bilateral relationship with India above its rancour with Russia. If not, however, officials say they are prepared to ride out the storm.

US is free to use CATSAA or what ever but India won't be bullied not only on S400 but on other deals with Russia as well which in future will include more tanks (may be Armata) and at least 3 squadrons of su 57. US must understand that India is not like pakistan which was its closest ally in Afghanistan and Indian Govt will never allow relations with Russia to be held hostage by US

India is neither like China, which has an inimical relationship with the U.S., and hence not bound by its diktats, nor like Turkey which is a NATO ally of the U.S. and expected to comply with Washington’s demands, and hence hopes to escape CAATSA sanctions.

Tsavo Lion wrote:not anymore, China is

That's correct. The mandarins in Kremlin have realized one fundamental truth - China is Russia's neighbor, not India. Moreover, China is the most prosperous neighbor Russia has and so far Kremlin has no reason to regret trade with China. The Chinese can buy 10X more Russian stuff than the Hindus can, ever.

GarryB wrote:Would like to see India and Pakistan put aside their differences and learn to get on... though Pakistan has to stop funding and supporting terrorists of course... but then if the US and the west and Saudi Arabia and Israel continue to support terrorists why would Pakistan stop?

Anglo-Saxons created Pakistan to keep India in check. China uses Pakistan for exactly the same reason.

So there will be no peace between India and Pakistan. They will continue to fight. Pakistan by virtue of sponsoring Islamic terrorism inside India is actually winning the battle.

Basically the West destroys the economy and politics of countries in Africa, India and other third world states. This compels the highly skilled migrants to migrate to US, UK. So while the countries they migrate from suffer, the countries they migrate to, i.e US, UK, EU benefits from this brain drain.

India today is controlled by a western Trojan. Pakistan is controlled by its military who are backed by the West and Mid East.

flamming_python wrote:All it takes is the right leadership and system of administration, and India can progress to becoming an industrialized and then post-industrialized power within decades, and leave all the caste system, preventable diseases and so on behind.

And yet as you may have noticed 75 years after independence they are nowhere close to find an upright, strong leader like Putin or Xi.

That's primarily because they are still controlled by the Brits. Have you noticed their Navy ships sports the St George flag ?

flamming_python wrote:What has kept India backward is its lack of unity and its composition as a bunch of warring principalities and city states. This made it easy for the British, Portugese and so on to play divide and rule.

They are still divided today as much in the name of caste, community today, as they were a 1000 years ago. That explains why every other Asian country - China, Japan, South Korea, Singapore etc have raced ahead of them. In such a fragmented, divided society it's very easy for the West to play the anti Russia card.

flamming_python wrote:Ironically, it's due to the Brits that India had managed to unite into a cohesive entity for the first time in modern history.

Actually this part is not true. Hindus had empires in the past too that controlled almost the whole of modern day India

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurya_Empire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_Empire

The Brits realized in 1947 that they are in India to loot, not to govern. And that can easily be done by keeping your cronies in India without the need for any physical presence.

Therefore, unlike China's independence, India's independence (along with African countries like South Africa etc) is a joke. They are still controlled by the Brits and Yankees with the help of their cronies who continue to rule India.

That's correct. The mandarins in Kremlin have realized one fundamental truth - China is Russia's neighbor, not India. Moreover, China is the most prosperous neighbor Russia has and so far Kremlin has no reason to regret trade with China. The Chinese can buy 10X more Russian stuff than the Hindus can, ever.

The Chinese can buy 10% of what India buys and then make their own version of what they bought and never buy that again.

Why buy a DVD if you can download it for free from some local TV on demand service?

The Chinese pay market rates for Russian stuff just like India, so the fact that China has a booming economy means nothing if the Indians want to import more food they will be paying more money than China pays.

Anglo-Saxons created Pakistan to keep India in check. China uses Pakistan for exactly the same reason.

Differences in religion and religious intolerance created Pakistan and Bangladesh and India.

So there will be no peace between India and Pakistan. They will continue to fight. Pakistan by virtue of sponsoring Islamic terrorism inside India is actually winning the battle.

Hahahahaha.... in one line you say there wont be peace and the fighting will continue, but that Pakistan is winning?

The fact that there is no end in sight and there is fighting means both are losing... eventually they will work out there are only two solutions... one destroys the other, or they talk.

Basically the West destroys the economy and politics of countries in Africa, India and other third world states. This compels the highly skilled migrants to migrate to US, UK. So while the countries they migrate from suffer, the countries they migrate to, i.e US, UK, EU benefits from this brain drain.

Yeah, the brain drain is not really relevant because they might be their smartest and brightest, but they need to learn new languages and new cultures and be completely re-educated... and when they are re-educated there is a good chance these smart people will work out what you have been doing to their country and do something about it...

The real irony is that most production has been moved to these poor countries because of lax labour laws and low wages makes it cheaper... so the smart people from the third world might move to the first world, but the majority of people in the first world don't have many jobs available because they all moved with the factories to poor countries.

India today is controlled by a western Trojan.

As FP said above, if that were true then why are they not buying F-16s and Abrams tanks and Patriot air defence systems and just dumping all their Soviet and Russian gear?

Pakistan is controlled by its military who are backed by the West and Mid East.

Pakistan is as much a victim of terrorism as it is a user of terrorists... it has all the problems of India and even less chance of solving them any time soon.

I have read of programmes in India that are doing good, and I am confident with a bit of work and avoiding western advice they could have a wonderful future... they just need to avoid the rocks...

And yet as you may have noticed 75 years after independence they are nowhere close to find an upright, strong leader like Putin or Xi.

Russia started with Yeltsin, and could just as easily have had someone like Zhirinovsky considering the shit they went through during the 1990s...

That's primarily because they are still controlled by the Brits. Have you noticed their Navy ships sports the St George flag ?

Don't mistake tradition for allegiance... do you think the VDV or the Russian Naval Infantry will drop their striped tee shirts because now they might be considered Communist symbols?

They are still divided today as much in the name of caste, community today, as they were a 1000 years ago. That explains why every other Asian country - China, Japan, South Korea, Singapore etc have raced ahead of them. In such a fragmented, divided society it's very easy for the West to play the anti Russia card.

All countries have divided populations, in most former colonial countries there are the natives and the newer arrivals... in fact in New Zealand there were the Moriori which arrived first from the Pacific Island... and the Maori who arrived later and ate most of them... and then the white europeans who stole their land... pacific islanders are still coming here... mostly for health care and education, or to play rugby or rugby league.

The Brits realized in 1947 that they are in India to loot, not to govern. And that can easily be done by keeping your cronies in India without the need for any physical presence.

Therefore, unlike China's independence, India's independence (along with African countries like South Africa etc) is a joke. They are still controlled by the Brits and Yankees with the help of their cronies who continue to rule India.

Hahahaha... hilarious.... and totally wrong... they did that in the Middle East in the 1920s when they split up known oil reserves with France... with Germany removed from the colonial powers they had to redraw the oil supplies between them and so they took the lowest of the low and put them in power because they would be brutal and owed their position to the British and French, which got them loyalty, but of course as Britain and France have faded loyalty has migrated to the US now as their guarantee of power in their own country.

India is a democracy and if the people want good relations with Russia they can vote that way. You sound like the Polish guy complaining about Polish politicians and how Russia screwed them and is still screwing them... there is democracy and has been for some time... if there is a problem with the politicians you can't blame Russia or Britain... you got the vote.

It is what pisses me off about most religions... your god gave you free will so if this place is fucked up it is because of the decisions people have made and not some divine punishment or test from god.

Why is Russia interested in rapprochement between China and India: https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2747431.html

Very clever: https://asiatimes.com/2020/08/beijing-pushing-new-delhi-toward-a-hard-choice/?mc_cid=4f9545de82&mc_eid=5455568640

The Indian tiger is very strong, but the Chinese dragon is smarter.

I don't have much to add here: https://www.pravdareport.com/opinion/144914-india_russia/

Military infrastructure of India, built on the Agalega Islands in the western Indian Ocean. The islands are located 800 km northeast of Madagascar and 1,100 km north of Mauritius. Administratively belongs to Mauritius. As can be seen in satellite images dated December 2020, a 3,000-meter runway has been erected on the islands and a port complex is under construction. It is reported that the Indian Navy's Boeing P-8A Poseidon patrol aircraft will be based on the Agalega Islands.






https://dambiev.livejournal.com/2245074.html

Sujoy wrote:Two Turkey Air Force aircraft just landed in Rawalpindi.

https://twitter.com/FrontalForce/status/1435894278018846724?s=20

nomadski wrote: I am not sure, if addition of Afghan pashtun area, will put pashtuns there in significant majority or will it create an unstable near equality between them and other tribes.

It won’t change Pakistan’s demography. Punjabis constitute 45% of Pakistan and Pashtuns just 15%. Even if Pakistan gobbles up all the Pashtun areas of Afghanistan the population of Pashtuns will increase by around 5% -6%.

nomadski wrote: So in Pakistan , they have to think very carefully about territorial acquisition on Punjab from India or Baloch from Iran or pashtun from Afghans . Territorial expansion by Pakistan may lead to partition of Pakistan.

Indian Punjab is overwhelmingly Sikh with a sizeable Hindu population. So, they will never want to be a part of Pakistan. Baluchistan, I understand wants to secede from Pakistan.  
Bifurcation of Afghanistan on ethnic lines need not necessarily mean that Pakistan will take over Pashtun areas. But it will certainly make Afghanistan extremely weak. Exactly what Pakistan wants.

nomadski wrote: As far as territorial claims by China in Tajik areas , and reasoning from historical justifications , one can equally and more correctly draw conclusions from historic names and most importantly present ethnic mix in these areas . Place names of Kashgar ( farmer in Persian ) and  karagul ( black flower in Turkish ) , together with majority Tajik of nearly 90 percent , make this Chinese claim void . Expansionism by China is as wrong as any other state . China already experiencing minority issues in the East .

Not just Tajik. China has laid claim to territory belonging to almost all the countries with which it shares a border.
May come as a surprise but these Chinese claims have the full backing of the U.S. which of course the U.S doesn’t accept openly. Their idea of the New World Order (G2) is an order where states are tied to a US-led Security Architecture via foundational agreements on the one hand and tied to China's economic web on the other via omnibus agreements.

Last year’s clash between India & China is a classic example. First the U.S encouraged China to invade India (to keep India busy with China while the US wraps up things in Afghanistan) and then quickly sold a plethora of weapons, foundational agreements to India so that India can “effectively” deal with China.

Hey Sujoy, do you agree with my statement that under Modi India has become weaker.

I say this because India had potential to become an independent regional power, where it could decide it's own foreign policies, it's own domestic agenda but India under Modi became a vassal of the US.

Where India's foreign policies are what the US tells them, like fighting China, ignoring Russia(India is coming around to Russia now but they ignored Russia for a while, not totally ignore but ignore), pulling out from the deals with Iran. You talk about China having claims to land of it neighbors but India has the same issues. With China, it feels like they can work it out by dialogue, doing economic deals and other things, with India, they can't mange to do anything, they are being talked down to by small countries like Nepal.

In domestic policies, the whole currency cancelation was a US project, the farmers protest is going on, there are water shortages, poverty has gone up, everything is being sold and privatized(the State owned things are being sold for pennies to the rich oligarchs, that support Modi), part of the military are being privatized even, the economic outlook may not be as great as thought.

I ask you this because I am a Indian as well and well I don't have anyone in my family to talk about Geopolitics and politics because none of my family members are interested.

Thank you.

par far wrote:Hey Sujoy, do you agree with my statement that under Modi India has become weaker.

Yes! Both economically and militarily.

par far wrote:I say this because India had potential to become an independent regional power, where it could decide it's own foreign policies, it's own domestic agenda but India under Modi became a vassal of the US.

I’m not sure if India either has such potential or even such an appetite. Ever since the British left, they ensured that India is tied down in South Asia and therefore financed the rise of both China and Pakistan.
Most Indian Prime Ministers were agents of either the West or the Soviet Union.
Pro Muslim policies of the previous Congress government is one of the main reason why Modi/BJP came into power. Both Congress & RSS (BJP’s parent body) were created by the U.K. And they continue to remain loyal to the U.K and U.S.

par far wrote:Where India's foreign policies are what the US tells them, like fighting China, ignoring Russia(India is coming around to Russia now but they ignored Russia for a while, not totally ignore but ignore), pulling out from the deals with Iran. You talk about China having claims to land of it neighbors but India has the same issues. With China, it feels like they can work it out by dialogue, doing economic deals and other things, with India, they can't mange to do anything, they are being talked down to by small countries like Nepal.

That’s not true. India neither has the military might or the intent to invade China.
China invaded India last year (just like they did in ’62, ’67 and’87) apparently at the behest of the U.S
India did not ignore Russia either. If you look at data released by the Kremlin you’ll notice that India continues to remain among the top 2 importers of Russian military hardware.
Then there is oil & gas. India has invested billions in the Russian oil & gas industry.

https://twitter.com/HardeepSPuri/status/1434700394395947008?s=20

https://energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/oil-and-gas/ongc-evaluating-stake-buy-in-russias-vostok-oil-project/85886454

par far wrote:In domestic policies, the whole currency cancelation was a US project, the farmers protest is going on, there are water shortages, poverty has gone up, everything is being sold and privatized(the State owned things are being sold for pennies to the rich oligarchs, that support Modi), part of the military are being privatized even, the economic outlook may not be as great as thought.

Some of the grievances of the farmers are true, but not all. Most of these farmers are filthy rich. They are driving down to these protest venues in US$100K cars.  

Some states in the Hindi heartland that barely makes any progress economically or socially is responsible for India's poor economic health, forever.
A few mercantile communities like Marwaris, Gujaratis and Hindu Punjabis control India. It doesn’t matter whether BJP or Congress is in power.
The only reason people continue to vote for BJP is because Hindus, Sikhs and even Christians are concerned that pro Muslim Congress will convert India into a Sunni Muslim nation.
Churches are now openly asking their followers to confront Muslims
https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1435930417631305733?s=20

Sujoy wrote:

par far wrote:Hey Sujoy, do you agree with my statement that under Modi India has become weaker.

Yes! Both economically and militarily.

par far wrote:I say this because India had potential to become an independent regional power, where it could decide it's own foreign policies, it's own domestic agenda but India under Modi became a vassal of the US.

I’m not sure if India either has such potential or even such an appetite. Ever since the British left, they ensured that India is tied down in South Asia and therefore financed the rise of both China and Pakistan.
Most Indian Prime Ministers were agents of either the West or the Soviet Union.
Pro Muslim policies of the previous Congress government is one of the main reason why Modi/BJP came into power. Both Congress & RSS (BJP’s parent body) were created by the U.K. And they continue to remain loyal to the U.K and U.S.

par far wrote:Where India's foreign policies are what the US tells them, like fighting China, ignoring Russia(India is coming around to Russia now but they ignored Russia for a while, not totally ignore but ignore), pulling out from the deals with Iran. You talk about China having claims to land of it neighbors but India has the same issues. With China, it feels like they can work it out by dialogue, doing economic deals and other things, with India, they can't mange to do anything, they are being talked down to by small countries like Nepal.

That’s not true. India neither has the military might or the intent to invade China.
China invaded India last year (just like they did in ’62, ’67 and’87) apparently at the behest of the U.S
India did not ignore Russia either. If you look at data released by the Kremlin you’ll notice that India continues to remain among the top 2 importers of Russian military hardware.
Then there is oil & gas. India has invested billions in the Russian oil & gas industry.

https://twitter.com/HardeepSPuri/status/1434700394395947008?s=20

https://energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/oil-and-gas/ongc-evaluating-stake-buy-in-russias-vostok-oil-project/85886454

par far wrote:In domestic policies, the whole currency cancelation was a US project, the farmers protest is going on, there are water shortages, poverty has gone up, everything is being sold and privatized(the State owned things are being sold for pennies to the rich oligarchs, that support Modi), part of the military are being privatized even, the economic outlook may not be as great as thought.

Some of the grievances of the farmers are true, but not all. Most of these farmers are filthy rich. They are driving down to these protest venues in US$100K cars.  

Some states in the Hindi heartland that barely makes any progress economically or socially is responsible for India's poor economic health, forever.
A few mercantile communities like Marwaris, Gujaratis and Hindu Punjabis control India. It doesn’t matter whether BJP or Congress is in power.
The only reason people continue to vote for BJP is because Hindus, Sikhs and even Christians are concerned that pro Muslim Congress will convert India into a Sunni Muslim nation.
Churches are now openly asking their followers to confront Muslims
https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1435930417631305733?s=20

Thank You for the reply.

Sujoy wrote:

par far wrote:Hey Sujoy, do you agree with my statement that under Modi India has become weaker.

Yes! Both economically and militarily.

What are the reasons for the decline of Congress party?

George1 wrote:What are the reasons for the decline of Congress party?

Several

1. Economic stagnation during the Congress's 10 year rule from 2004 to 2014.

2. Rise of regional parties that believe that both Congress and BJP are predominatly a party of North Indians

3. A flawed electoral system in India that allows overpopulated, backward states in the north to send the maximum number of Parliamentarians.

4. BJP successfully defining Congress as a pro Muslim and anti Hindu party.

5. Congress portrayed as a party belonging only to the Nehru-Gandhi family.

6. Western deep state actors favoring the BJP over the Congress. This thread reflects how Modi was created by the Western Deep State

Sujoy wrote:

George1 wrote:What are the reasons for the decline of Congress party?

Several

1. Economic stagnation during the Congress's 10 year rule from 2004 to 2014.

2. Rise of regional parties that believe that both Congress and BJP are predominatly a party of North Indians

3. A flawed electoral system in India that allows overpopulated, backward states in the north to send the maximum number of Parliamentarians.

4. BJP successfully defining Congress as a pro Muslim and anti Hindu party.

5. Congress portrayed as a party belonging only to the Nehru-Gandhi family.

6. Western deep state actors favoring the BJP over the Congress. This thread reflects how Modi was created by the Western Deep State

https://twitter.com/Aban__Ind/status/1283404931681128449?s=20

Economy was never stagnant under congress rule from 2004 to 2014 in fact it was much stronger then present govt achieved in years before pandemic stuck. The present govt has destroyed the economy to no return with pandemic effects now making it doubly challenging job to achieve with type of talent present in union cabinet along with ill advised demonetization and hurriedly pushed through GST . Over centralization of power from 2014 on wards is major reason for subsequent decline of GDP

Real reason for congress decline is one family rule and decaying leadership at state levels

Year GDP Growth (%) Annual Change
2020 -7.96% -12.01%
2019 4.04% -2.49%
2018 6.53% -0.26%
2017 6.80% -1.46%
2016 8.26% 0.26%
2015 8.00% 0.59%
2014 7.41% 1.02%
2013 6.39% 0.93%
2012 5.46% 0.22%
2011 5.24% -3.26%
2010 8.50% 0.64%
2009 7.86% 4.78%
2008 3.09% -4.57%
2007 7.66% -0.40%
2006 8.06% 0.14%
2005 7.92% 0.00%
2004 7.92% 0.06%

Pinto wrote:
Economy was never stagnant under congress rule from 2004 to 2014 in fact it was much stronger then present govt achieved in years before pandemic stuck. The present govt has destroyed the economy to no return with pandemic effects now making it doubly challenging job to achieve with type of talent present in union cabinet along with ill advised demonetization and hurriedly pushed through GST . Over centralization of power from 2014 on wards is major reason for subsequent decline of GDP

Real reason for congress decline is one family rule and decaying leadership at state levels

Year GDP Growth (%) Annual Change
2020 -7.96% -12.01%
2019 4.04% -2.49%
2018 6.53% -0.26%
2017 6.80% -1.46%
2016 8.26% 0.26%
2015 8.00% 0.59%
2014 7.41% 1.02%
2013 6.39% 0.93%
2012 5.46% 0.22%
2011 5.24% -3.26%
2010 8.50% 0.64%
2009 7.86% 4.78%
2008 3.09% -4.57%
2007 7.66% -0.40%
2006 8.06% 0.14%
2005 7.92% 0.00%
2004 7.92% 0.06%

Some of the most economically backward states in India grew at a rate higher than the national average. That's because there are several areas of development where other states had already achieved significant growth but not the backward states.

Similarly, India did grow at 7% and occasionally even 8% during Congress rule but given India's huge population and the subsequent economic backwardness this rate of growth was too little to have any major impact something akin to China's growth rate during the 80s and 90s.

People voted for a change hoping for an economic revival. That however never happened (explained that in Post 166 above), things went from bad to worse and as someone wrote a few days ago two Gujaratis are selling the nation and two are buying it.

Pinto wrote:

Real reason for congress decline is one family rule and decaying leadership at state levels

you mean only Gandhi family dominated

George1 wrote:

Pinto wrote:

Real reason for congress decline is one family rule and decaying leadership at state levels

you mean only Gandhi family dominated

yea and they too don't have any charisma left to attract young Indians

India went on principle against Zelensky, 08.16.2023.

Political scientist Kupriyanov: India does not share Western position on aid to Ukraine.

"Sanctions are not afraid." With these words, experts explain the public political slap in the face inflicted by India on both Zelensky and his Western backers. New Delhi refused to invite the Ukrainian president to the next G20 summit and substantiated this with emphatically ambiguous wording. Why did India allow herself such a gesture?

Ukraine will not attend the September G20 summit in New Delhi. India (which is the nominal host of the summit and has the right to invite whomever it sees fit) officially refused to invite the Ukrainian animation team to the event. The official reason is simple - according to Indian Foreign Minister Subramanyam Jaishankar, Ukraine is not a member of the G20, but Russia is. Therefore, Putin (to the angry shouts of the Ukrainian media) was invited, but Vladimir Zelensky was not.

In fact, this explanation looks doubtful. The host countries of such summits often invite outside participants to the events. Those whose presence will benefit not only and not so much the summit, but the host country.

Zelensky is not needed

“The Indians absolutely do not hide the fact that nine states were invited to the summit, which, just like Ukraine, are not members of the G20. Among them are Egypt, Algeria, Singapore - those countries with which New Delhi has important trade, economic and political relations, ”Elena Suponina, an international political scientist and RIAC expert, explains to the VZGLYAD newspaper.

Yes, with Ukraine, continues Suponina, India's relations are not at such a high level. In 2022, the volume of bilateral trade decreased by almost 30%, from $3.4 billion to $2.5 billion. “Indian-Ukrainian relations are now neutral-cool. Ukrainian diplomacy pays little attention to contacts with India, plus Ukraine has good relations with Pakistan. India has no special interests in Ukraine,” Alexei Kupriyanov, head of the Center for the Indo-Pacific Region of the IMEMO RAS, explains to the VZGLYAD newspaper.

But it would seem that this does not matter. Zelensky is the Western prima of the international stage, and over the past year it has become customary to invite him to all international events in which the West is involved. Well, either allow them to speak online, via video link - as was the case at last year's G20 summit in Indonesia, where the head of the Kiev regime promoted his so-called peace plan (more like a list of demands for Russia's surrender).

And this is precisely what India did not seem to like.

“Indians want to avoid unnecessary political scandals. It is clear that Western countries will push through a statement condemning Russia, and the presence of President Zelensky will only exacerbate these discussions. The Indians are now trying to smooth things over in an oriental way,” says Elena Suponina.

For several months now, the media have been writing that India is in a very difficult situation. The country that claims to be one of the world leaders is trying to depoliticize the upcoming G20 summit as much as possible, so as not to turn it into a showdown and showdown on the Ukrainian issue.

According to the Indian Foreign Minister, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is outside the responsibility of the G20, and this is precisely the reason why Zelensky was not invited. “The G20 discusses the problems of energy, fertilizers, food supplies. This is the G20, not the UN Security Council. The G20 does not deal with global security issues,” Subrahmanyam Jaishankar explained.

Let's go against the Americans

New Delhi is aware that this statement is not just a statement of fact (the G20 was really created to address economic issues), but a speech against one of the most important Western narratives. The Americans, trying to involve the countries of the Global South in the anti-Russian campaign, began to position the NWO in Ukraine as one of the main causes of world economic problems. So, they say, it is in the interests of the Global South to put pressure on Moscow in order to end the conflict as soon as possible on Ukrainian terms. Including putting pressure on such platforms as the G20 or BRICS, even imposing sanctions.

However, the irony is that it is the sanctions against Russia that cause global economic problems, including for India itself. “Take, for example, the story of the sale of our hydrocarbons to India at reduced prices,” says Igor Yushkov, a lecturer at the Financial University and an expert at the National Energy Security Fund. “Now for India, this is an opportunity to make good money on the fact that they buy our oil, process it and sell the resulting oil products.

If they now succumb to pressure from the West and refuse our oil, we will have no one to sell such a large volume. We will cut exports and production, after which prices will rise well beyond $100 a barrel. And India - like other countries - any oil will be forced to buy at such high prices.

Therefore, the Indian authorities are trying in every possible way to distance themselves from participation in the American interpretation of the Ukrainian events. Moreover, it also entails a deterioration in Indian-Russian relations, which would be unfavorable for Delhi both politically (Moscow would get even closer to Beijing, which is India's adversary) and economically. “Relations with Russia are now developing rapidly, the trade turnover in the first half of 2023 alone exceeded 30 billion. And India does not want to overshadow these ties,” says Elena Suponina.

And unlike South Africa, which failed to protect its sovereignty as the BRICS host country and provide worthy conditions for Vladimir Putin's participation in the event, the Indians do not pay attention to Western pressure. “India has reached a high rate of economic development. And in New Delhi they believe that now not only the United States or China can show principles, but they too,” says Elena Suponina.

“The Indians have a well-defined line, they adhere to it. The conflict in Europe is of little interest to them, they do not share a common Western position regarding assistance to Ukraine, they are not afraid of sanctions, because they understand that the West needs India as a counterbalance to China,” explains Aleksey Kupriyanov.

On several occasions, the United States tried to put pressure on New Delhi (forcing it to refuse contracts with the Iranians and Russians), and the response to this pressure was the same. Indian media and politicians burst into harsh anti-American statements, after which responsible people from the American leadership (in particular, from the Pentagon and the State Department) urged colleagues from the White House not to jeopardize the Indian-American relations, important for the further containment of China.

So the current non-invitation of Zelensky will be ignored by the States. The value of the Ukrainian animator in their eyes is much lower than the partnership with India.

https://vz.ru/world/2023/8/16/1226022.html

Maybe they should invite Julian Assange... if the west wants to get all political... I am sure he would have some interesting things to say about the US and the West.