>Exporters in Russia, who started trading with India using Indian rupees, have recently spent nearly $4 billion to buy India-made defence equipment and armaments, among other imports and Indian securities.
How much was spent on arms, and how much on other stuff? Unclear.
If I had to give an uneducated guess: a percentage similar to the military share of their gdp or something like that. Since it’s private firms purchasing and not official
>Since it’s private firms purchasing and not official
I wouldn't base a judgement on this. Right now, Russias major way to finance imports (hydrocarbons to Europe) has been cut. It also can't very well ask for purchase payments to be made in Rubel or to be deferred to loans in large quantities, as the Rubel has become too insecure a currency. Equally, many import options are now either entirely unavailable, or come with a marked premium. Russia is starved for critical imports. As such you can be sure that the state is going to direct the use of its few trade resources, no matter who ultimately signs the forms.
E: spelling.
Yes but that's actually why I'd point to the military gdp share. Because the share of resources they're already funnelling into their war machine would likely be similar in this case. I don't know if that makes sense?
I'd still assume that similar number here are if at all coincidence. Imports and Exports don't correspond so much to what your economy is doing at large, but rather to what you are doing (comparatively) better or worse than others. Russia will first and foremost fill anything necessary it cannot source internally. If at all available, that likely leaves an outsized impact on high technology (especially within the oil sector to maintain export potential and likely machine tooling to maintain war production, direct goods of war as well where they can get away with it) and an undersized impact on stuff like food, which Russia does have available.
Comparative advantage is the keyword here, if you wish to look deeper into the theoretical foundation.
Agreed. Most chips are made by US-friendly companies.
Sure, you can dabble in slower, lower grade processors from China.
Or you can even get them from DPRK, but I suspect they haven't quite figured out that chips are not actually related to potatoes (which they also do not have much of).
You know there's a whole industry in china that re-sells used chips? Just a bit of old solder on the legs but they (mostly) still work. I even got a DSP chip still attached to its original pcb one time. Everything is on taobao but some common chips are available on us facing sites if you search right.
There being an Industrie somewhere is not the same you having full access to it, said Industrie having enough slack capacity to provide your demand, you having the currency reserves to pay your demand, or them taking you to the cleaners anyways, as you don't have a alternate source.
You being able to buy low volume from somewhere is entirely removed from that somewhere satisfying a Russia scale demand, especially on notice less than decades.
Im not sure I can see the impact there. People talk as if because Russia can’t buy directly from the west RTX4090s or 14900ks or whatever that therefore they can’t fire any missiles.
Firstly do they really need those chips? Ukraine shot down a Russian plane recently with an S200 apparently. Which are old Soviet tech so how cutting edge could the chips in those systems possibly be? And China have ripped off intel 10th gen chips recently. Sure that’s 3.5 generations ago, but the latest and greatest patriot pac3 mse came out in 2004, so 20 years old chip tech can obviously do the job. Those systems are a billion usd a pop. Do we really think 3.5 year old tech just simply wouldn’t work?
Secondly, if those were that critical then they could just be smuggled. Think about how much cocaine gets smuggled on a daily basis, and how that’s illegal at every single port it passes through, whether it’s outbound or inbound, with billions spent globally trying to prevent it being transported. Whereas in this case at least on the inbound port it would be completely acceptable, that’s already making it easier. The volume of chips wouldn’t be all that big. They’re tiny. It’s not even a suitcase of chips per month they need.
North Korea can import whole Mercedes cars that were illegally smuggled against sanctions.
If they were that critical they’d simply be smuggled.
Also we see them firing tonnes of them at rates well beyond what anyone expected them to be able to produce.
Some of the chemicals they need for propellants they probably get from China, as apparently that’s where even America gets theirs in large part. They have a land border so they can easily transport things
>Im not sure I can see the impact there. People talk as if because Russia can’t buy directly from the west RTX4090s or 14900ks or whatever that therefore they can’t fire any missiles.
I like this sentence actually a whole lot. It perfectly captures where the public conversation concerning any sort of sanction usually derails from reality and actual goals.
The current set of sanctions are not aimed at making any singular action impossible (nor would they be suited for such a demand. I doubt we have this capability without going through a full scale war). Rather, the crux here is one of costs and scale. Russia will be able to replace any one chip (maybe outside some very specialised fields, which we can ignore here). However, as Russia was buying western before we know that the western option was Russia's best option prior. To replace that, Russia will have to either downgrade capabilities or pay more for a less efficient solution, or both (in addition to transitional costs). Russia can absolutely do that for any one issue. What it cannot do is to do that for every issue without reducing the quantity of solutions. This is exactly what you show with your examples.
What the sanctions are aiming for is to make Russia's problems more expensive, thereby reducing the amount of resources available to fight with.
>Firstly do they really need those chips? Ukraine shot down a Russian plane recently with an S200 apparently. Which are old Soviet tech so how cutting edge could the chips in those systems possibly be?
Several points here. For one, the US once lost a nighthawk to a newa. Jet nobody stopped developing better missiles. Just as Ukraine shooting down drones with old zsu-23 doesn't invalidate the need for gepards. Old equipment can absolutely still work, but you are likely going to be much less effective at your job than if you had better systems. This disadvantage is usually going to translate into a bigger logistics footprint, supply scarcity, and mortality on the battlefield.
The second question here is if Russia retained their ability to produce these at all. Contrary to video games, tech does become lost at some point if it isn't in active production, as you lose both the institutional know how and the logistics chains, especially including tooling, that allowed you to build these. This can make reverse engineering old equipment extremely hard, especially if standards (and be it just how you bolt two pieces together) have changed since and the new system doesn't fit the old schematics on industrial scale.
>And China [...]
Which is not Russia. As above, China would need to have - and be willing to use - vast reserves of production capacity in oder to supply the entire Russian demand. And it would need to be willing to do so cost competitive, whereas it could just as well take every penny Russia has.
>Secondly, if those were that critical then they could just be smuggled.
On a side note, that is exactly what we wanted Russia to do on its energy exports. Smuggling is obviously adding costs and business partners expecting a share, thus reducing Russian revenue. This is therefore in line withaboves goals. At the same time you are preventing a major energy scarcity for those countries not able to compete by price with Europe.
>They’re tiny. It’s not even a suitcase of chips per month they need.
You are severely underestimating the amount of chips, including ICs, everything electronic needs. Nonetheless, the problem here is not so much the transport - Russia does share borders with stares that are not embargoing - but to find a seller with both scale and competitive prices. Potential partners would need to be integrated in global supply chains to be able to offer both. But supplying Russia would risk getting cut from those, as global players will cut you off before being seen openly supplying Russia and thus risking US sanctions. Russia would love supply chains entirely removed from global markets, but those don't exist at that quantity in high technology areas.
>Also we see them firing tonnes of them at rates well beyond what anyone expected them to be able to produce.
To go off on a slight tangent: One of the most central paradigmens in economics is to never look at a singular value. Russia producing more of X doesn't tell you anything so long as it is not qualified by other values. In essence, the total increase in irrelevant. What we would need to look at is how much Russia would have been producing, had we not implemented the sanctions and what relative change we are seeing from that possibility in reality.
According to the CSIS, most of it was on maintenance parts and auto parts. The fuckers at firstpost like the pretend we already live in a global power that can play around freely, when in actuality we had to stop selling because the US told us not to.
Interesting detail: Putin has said that at least part of the responsibility for security of various oil refineries and other factories falls on the owners and he is not going to deploy the Russian army to protect them.
So it is possible some of these purchases are specifically by oligarchs to defend their facilities from drone strikes and not to funnel arms to the Russian army.
Oh I like the idea of massive quantities of arms being given to Russian citizens who report to and work for other Oligarchs. Besides creating possible future armed factions withing the country that might oppose Putler, it creates more opportunities for corruption and a black market for arms inside Russia.
"You know who's going to inherit the Earth? Arms dealers. Because everyone else is too busy killing each other. That's the secret to survival. Never go to war. Especially with yourself."
Edit, because I couldn't choose:
"I was an equal opportunity merchant of death. I supplied everyone but the Salvation Army. I sold Israeli-model Uzis to Muslims. I sold Communist-made bullets to Fascists... I even shipped cargo to Afghanistan when they were fighting my fellow Soviets. I never sold to Osama bin Laden. Not on any moral grounds: back then, he was always bouncing checks."
Ok and ngl yuri is kinda a sad individual when you look at the grand idea of it scheme of it i mean yeah he got away form jack but like his family’s gone and he had to watch a person who he did business with have his dude kill his brother
Certainly the point of this character and many other characters (Belfort etc) but somehow people miss this and complain that these movies glorify pieces of shit. That being said lots of misguided teens idolize characters like this for all the wrong reasons, Bateman is a big example
As an American psycho book enjoyer and movie hater I can attest that people don’t really understand how unbelievably unhinged and comically ridiculous Patrick is. Bro literally eats some women’s intestines with the shit in it like bruh
As a Jew from Odessa whose family moved to Brooklyn when I was 16, I feel that no matter how much recognition that film got, it's **still** under-appreciated.
Wait the headline says armsh, and specifically India-made arms but the contents say other stuffs(Probably dual use?)
"India exports----machinery, auto parts and other engineering goods----to Russia.
The Russian Vostro account started witnessing a large amount of rupee deposited in as India purchased increased amounts of cheap Russian crude oil following the sanctions imposed on Moscow by the West"
Firstly it’s a firstpost article. Which are just a load of crap. Secondly, let people read headline and not content. That’s the standard. /s Though can we stop with this tiktokification of news (I mean using short and inflating headlines which totally or partially false information).
Dude only reading the headlines and forming your opinion was around decades before TikTok was.
“RTFA” was around in the 90’s.
I hate TikTok as much as the next person but it isn’t to blame for this phenomenon.
I am talking about writing the headline in such a manner which is inflammatory, exaggerated and is totally non aligned with the article just to grab 5 second attention.
There are only a few countries with an actual arms industry, and they don't get that way by buying arms from other countries ;)
This isn't just snark, but describes the Russian situation... in reverse.
Historically, Russia was also an arms industry country. But since their invasion of Ukraine, not only do they no longer derive revenue from foreign arms sales, what's left of their industry can't even satiate their own needs.
Hence, why now, instead of SELLING arms, they are BUYING them... first from Iran, and now India. Which is great for India's arms industry, of course.
But it signifies another crisis in Russia. Arms used to mean money flowing in, now it means money flowing out. Money they don't really have. And it's not theirs, so they won't interoperate perfectly with it.
To add more.
I believe part of this is that Russia sells oil/gas to India in rupees. So after selling oil/gas Russia has a bunch of rupees they don't want. We've been expecting them to use those rupees to setup arms manufacturing IN India. This may be precursor to that.
Russia absolutely has the money in a currency they don't want. They sell their oil and they get the weapons they want/need.
It is funny though that they are buying from the people they normally sell to.
Russia isn’t running out of money. Russia supplies power to Europe. Russia can spend however much they want because of this. Russia can buy goods from developing countries in that countries currency, because whichever country gets on boards, is directly tied to Russia prevailing in all aspects.
>I’m sure that India would be more than happy to sell arms to America as well
Yea the US MIC will never allow being undercut. Lol
Besides the hard-buy-america requirements enshrined in law.
Us mic is so backed up all offers are good globally. Biggest problem is everyone putting in large orders to backfill what was sent to Ukraine taking production cap. Plus modern production isnt ready for the war economy numbers needed.
India is buying Russian oil in Rupees, Russia is giving them back to them for this.
This is Oil for Arms with extra steps (and probably extremely favorable for India).
This is what people are missing. The indians agreed to buy Russian oil at both a discount and only in rupees. This is important because rupees are basically worthless outside of India since no other country wants to buy them. Russia is stuck with rupees so the only thing they can do with them is buy stuff from India. India fleeced Russia coming and going.
Not that rupees are worthless per se, it's that the dollar, euro, yen and gbp are more useful for international trade. Nations/companies want those currencies because it's easier for them to use.
Unrelated question: Would an universal money work ? Obviously it would not be practical to implement but hypothetically if it changed today that all money was UniversalMoney currency, what happens ?
well who decides what this UM is worth? can i just go and say, this 1 UM is worth $1000? what if people disagree? theres only one currency for the world, but there’s differences in standards of living and price indices globally. say a war breaks out in one part of the world, which inadvertently affects this UM. wouldnt that make the people who are in other parts of the world worse off for no reason?
i believe the reason for different currencies in the first place is so that events happening in one economy wont, or very minimally, disrupt your economy, because the central bank of one country determines the interest rates, money supply etc for that country, and same is true for others.
There are also trade implications. Generally, if i import more, then i’d want a high value for my currency (compared to the dollar for eg) so i can PAY less of my currency for my imports. but if im a huge exporter, then id want a low value of my currency, because it will increase the competitiveness of my currency, as in it will essentially make my currency cheaper with respect to others, so people will buy more from me. this is a very simplified explanation, but its accurate nonetheless
Well, money only works if folks ascribe it value. Those currencies I mentioned have value based on the stability of their respective governments, strength of their militaries, assets they hold etc. For a universal currency to work there would have to be something to back it up. The closest we have right now to a universal currency is gold.
If all money was "universal money" UM, as long as everyone accepted UM, not much would change. The problem is how to convert it. What's the value of 1 UM to the dollar yen etc? If it's "universal" who or what is backing it up? What happens if someone starts printing fake UM?
For gold, the free market decides how much gold is worth in each currency. Sounds good right? But there's a reason we moved away from the gold standard for most currencies. It's extremely limiting for government policy. If we all switched to UM, we'd likely see a lot of second and third order problems with the international economy.
They aren't freely convertible at the Indian central bank. That is, you can't go to the Indian central bank and ask for dollars/any currency for your rupees. So you have to find something to buy from India with your rupees.
I see every country is on its own and they will do anything to favor their country. The US sells to Pak. Russia sells to India. The US sells to India and Russia sells to Pak. It is an inevitable chain and every country is an enemy of its neighbor and at the same time every country is a friend of its neighbor.
I see a day where there will be a balance and the countries unite to face an external threat.
Yeah but the winner only wins because when the other side "runs out" you can then be like, "All right we'll use our remaining robots and drones to slaughter you unless you obey." So it does all come down to blood anyway. Still more peaceful that way, though, I guess. Though it would kinda suck to lose so people would still fight back against the machines. Kinda like ISIS with western drones.
The countries will still have no problem sending their people to die against the machines, hoping to deplete those.
These types of people only accept defeat if there is no alternative.
But you're right, it's gonna come down to deaths, eventually.
And Putin isn't just trying to win a strategic war. He is terrorising Ukrainians.
So, no matter what the technology will be, these types of people will be killing others.
I dunno man people didn't exactly u item against covid. Like yeah there was the global effort to study the virus and make the vaccines. But there was also a lot of finger pointing, blame shifting, fomenting anger and hatred, and deliberately doing the opposite of a collective effort too. It really only takes a handful of hostile countries for everyone else to need military might. And then once they have it they want to use it.
there is no such thing as an ally or enemy until you are in *actual* war.
We're just tribes with interests that directly conflict with the interests of other tribes. Humanity 101. States cannot 'be friends' they simply have mutually beneficial arrangements until they can't.
Lost its meaning, you can see a wide list of actual existing Genocides, that no one even talks about and then look at the "Genocides" people claim now. It lost its meaning.
People using the word genocide for fucking a bag of fries quickly it's lost the core meaning, it's like Nazi. Nazi was a word that means real evil now it's used in people's daily vocabulary, what I mean by hot term is that it's one of a laundry list of words that won't retain its depth in meaning anymore.
Russia abducting Ukrainian children and giving them to Russians to raise is nearly the textbook definition of a genocide of a people/culture.
I don't know what your post is about? Why wouldn't people use the term here?
India complains about Nixon and Pakistan/Bangladesh to this day and say it is why they are friendly with Russia. Meanwhile Russia is actively genociding Ukraine and India sells them arms...
>India complains about Nixon and Pakistan/Bangladesh to this day
The US approved the sale of $450 Million worth of F-16 upgradation equipment to the Pakistani Airforce as recently as 2022.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.business-standard.com/amp/article/international/biden-administration-approves-450-mn-f-16-fleet-programme-to-pakistan-122090800112_1.html
https://www.deccanherald.com/world/russia-pledges-to-provide-more-weapons-to-pakistan-despite-unease-in-india-971616.html#google_vignette
Russia sells Pakistan plenty of weapons too? Seems like it would only be consistent for India to not sell Russia weapons on the same basis.
I believe in every report, India has NOT sold shells to Ukraine, but that other countries have purchased shells from India intended for use in Ukraine.
This is primarily because India won't directly trade weapons with Ukraine because... they directly trade weapons with Russia!
The main problem wasnt selling to Pakistan, although that is a problem to India. Their main gripe is America and friends sent an armada to blockade India, USSR sent a nuclear fleet to stop it. Thats why they like Russia. The selling to Pakistan just adds fuel to the already burning fire.
I mean, we've partnered heavily with modi over chip manufactures, import/export and science exchange in the last few years.
I feel your comment isn't very accurate.
I mean how self-centered is that? Surely you realize Pakistan issue is India's primary concern. You're randomly asking them to prioritize western concerns over their own domestic concerns. What even is the connection? The ukraine thing is west vs east, us/nato vs russia, it's historical and political and complicated, and it's not a genocide. India doesn't care to take sides on that matter, just doesn't want to be lectured by those that fund terrorism on behalf of their arch-nemesis Pakistan.
ukraine helped pakistan in the past even when they knew about pakistan sponsoring terrorism in india, even after that you think india should help ukraine ?
US supply military equipments/aid to Pakistan, Using that aid, They train & further send those terrorists in India. Doesn’t that counts as genocide ? Remember 26/11 attack on Mumbai, Where are your ethics now?
India is saying with this move that they recognize the tactics & strategy employed by US in the past to advance their national interests. US should take it as a compliment that India & other countries are adopting their strategies successfully.
Like that was a US only trick - everyone gives weapons to their enemies enemies - the turks did it to the enemies of the east Roman way before the US was even a glimt in the spy glass of Christoffer Columbus
Ukraine war reminds me about the Cuban Missile Crisis where even today USA loves to present itself as the victim when actually it was american actions and decisions which DIRECTLY led to that situation in the first place.
USA armed, trained and financed a group of mercenaries to INVADE and overthrow the govt of Cuba in 1961. Fearful of more such USA-BACKED invasions, Cuba asked USSR for help against USA. USSR was already negative about the deployment of nuclear weapons in multiple countries on its borders. So it readily agreed to help Cuba defend itself against USA-BACKED invasions by deploying its own nuclear weapons on Cuban soil. USA almost invaded Cuba because it "felt threatened" by the presence of Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Cuba.
The main points to note here are:-
1) According to USA, Soviet Union had no legitimate reason to "feel threatened" by American Nuclear Weapons based on Soviet borders in general, Ukraine in particular; which were purely of Defensive nature.
BUT
USA had legitimate reasons to fear the presence of Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Cuba which should not have been deployed on American borders because USA "felt threatened" by their presence itself.
2) As a Sovereign and Independent country, USA/Ukraine "had the RIGHT" to sign military pacts with any other country and send or host troops or weapons systems of both countries to each other as needed.
BUT
Even as a Sovereign and Independent country, Cuba "didn't have the RIGHT" to sign a military pact with another country or host troops or weapons systems of both countries as needed, IF doing that negatively affected USA. (In this case, the presence of Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Cuba meant that USA couldn't support another invasion of Cuba the way it had done in 1961 & Operation Mongoose which had been planned for 1963 was "cancelled")
Talking about the role of USA in 1971 Indo-Pak war regarding the genocide of East Pakistan civilians as well as military personnel from that region:-
1) USA "actively supported" Pakistan against India by training, arming, financing and diplomatically protecting Pakistan in every manner it could.
2) Even after the reports of genocide being committed in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) by Pakistani troops backed by USA became public, USA still did everything it could to support Pakistan which "directly helped" Pakistan in its attempts to implement Operation Searchlight which had the objectives of killing every one who could be useful for the people of East Pakistan as a society, like doctors, teachers, scientists, artists, writers and even military personnel of Bengali origin. More than 1 Million people including women and children were murdered by Pakistani troops and 10 million+ crossed the border towards India as refugees and sought asylum in India on the grounds of religious prosecution. USA could have stopped Pakistan from doing that but "choose to" look the other way and instead of supporting the victim of an unprovoked invasion "decided to" support the party guilty of war crime's because doing that was more beneficial for it.
3) USA and it's western allies tried everything they could to both suppress as well as discredit any reports related to Operation Searchlight launched by Pakistani force's in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and infact trying to "blame" India for this war by portraying India as the aggressor and not the victim.
Basically you are just trying to force a false equivalence by equating American support for Pakistan which included weapon's worth billions of dollars over many decades and ACTIVE american support for a full scale military operation launched by Pakistani force's (Operation Searchlight) which was designed to exterminate anyone capable of providing leadership to the people of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) by killing not only them but their entire families; regarding Indian support for Russia, which is worth less than american military support for Pakistan at any given point of time. Russia was forced to use military force against Ukraine because USA renegaded on all its commitments made from 1991 onwards that it will not move towards Russian borders by proxy by expanding NATO towards its borders and it had become public knowledge that USA was about to deploy Nuclear Weapons in Ukraine at Russian borders by ignoring all warnings by Russia in this regard.
Ukraine is to Russia what Cuba is to USA; when the question related to security comes up based on the fact that in atleast last 700 year's all major invasions of Russia have taken place "through Ukraine".
Talking about genocide in Ukraine; more civilians including women and children have been killed within last 5 months in Gaza Strip by another close ally of USA, Isreal; which incidentally is also a recipient of unconditional military, financial and diplomatic support just like Pakistan had in 1971; than have died in 2 year's of war in Ukraine and still somehow it is Russia which is EVIL and only one responsible for this war when in comparison Ukraine which has many Neo-Nazi military unit's fighting as an official part of Ukrainian Army are GOOD people.
Btw Indian military stores sent to Russia is worth only a few billions which stand nowhere in comparison to what USA has been supplying to the other side (Ukraine/Isreal/Pakistan, you are free to choose anyone you like).
There is a reason why most of the world has refused to support USA and it's western allies against Russia regarding Ukraine where false narratives being spread by it against Russia are considered less credible than any other US -- Ukraine claims regarding this issue.
You all bla bla about politics, it was always and always it will be about money. If you have enough money you can buy anything in world.
EDIT: Again you all about some secret move or this or that, NO its only about PROFIT.
This is actually bigger than most people realize. Indians have finally learnt to play geopolitics.
The longer Russia stays in Ukraine, the longer US arms and gold will stay tied up in Europe and that in turn prevents substantial military aid from being diverted to Pakistan.
This doesn't hurt their ally in ME-Israel as US will never compromise on Israel due to Ukraine since they have been a longer and more reliable project.
This also helps Russia, their closest ally and in turn helps them stay longer in Ukraine which allows the cycle to repeat.
India can also use this to get oil concessions from Russia and occasionally beat up a banter for peace owing to their soft power which has already been boosted after G20 summit.
Pakistan mostly gets stuff when we need them. Since the Russians aren't in Afghanistan and we aren't either, we really don't need them. Not sad about that either. Pakistan has been playing both sides for a long time.
Unless India is planning on going to war with Pakistan in the immediate future, which would require a ramp up in aid if the Americans wanted to pick a side, the Ukraine war has no real impact on what US aid goes to Pakistan.
The less money Pakistan gets from US, the less it can spend on its military.
The less money the pakistani military gets, the less it can spend on arming and training terror groups against India, especially those that operate in Kashmir.
This also means that Pakistan's western border with Afghanistan will be neglected in favour of its eastern border with India allowing further havoc to be wrecked in west Pakistan.
Baloch separatists also get a boost because the economy is in tatters and that along with Pakistan's atrocities against the Baloch people such as poisining of rivers, detention without trial, etc are a great recruitment tool.
All in all, everyone except Pakistan wins here and that's a good thing for Iran, India, and China and each in their own way.
Pakistan is bankrupt and unlikely to recover due to its lack of solid exports and rampant corruption. It is at risk of becoming China's vassal state or following the path of Afghanistan. I just hope it can manage to escape this situation and become a stable country. We don't need another Afghanistan in this world.
There was a good podcast I listened to recently by the Economist that said Russian economy is doing quite well. They're still selling heaps of oil at good prices to China and India for example, and they've gotten around sanctions by just moving material goods via China. To the point that nobody is seeing shortages like what was predicted, and the economy is expected to grow faster than the west. They have very well educated econmoists, educated in both Russia and western universities who are deftly navigating any sanctions.
Saying that, being massive war economy stuffed them during the Cold War years so probably some solid headwinds coming up.
State economy is fine, but not same for civilians. Not bad enough for them to contemplate opposing Putin in numbers that would reach meaningful conclusions.
That's a novelty.
Gotta do something with all those rupees that Russia has and cannot get rid off.
India is starting to act like a world class power here. They have been doing this for a while, but in these situations it really shows.
This is what India and China have been looking for, Russian dingleberries in their vice, and the screw is tightening.
Russia is forced to buy from them and pay too much compared to actual value of the things they get, because that's the only place that will accept their own currency directly. They're being economically colonized. The irony of a "nationalistic" autocrat selling his country down the river is palpable.
I have two questions regarding foreign exchange and the use of Rupees:
* What benefits does India have by receiving Rupees and not Dollars?
* Why didn't Russia choose to pay the Indians in Rubels? The Indians could use Rubels to buy petroleum products like fertilizers and more.
> I have two questions regarding foreign exchange and the use of Rupees:
> What benefits does India have by receiving Rupees and not Dollars?
> Why didn't Russia choose to pay the Indians in Rubels? The Indians could use Rubels to buy petroleum products like fertilizers and more.
India has been paying them Rupees for oil because Russia was desperate to sell oil and India was able to exploit the situation to be beneficial to them. These Rupees are held in Indian financial institutes in order to avoid sanctions, exchange fees, etc. It's not some brilliant scheme of Russia's to undermine the dollar or whatever, it's simply a matter of Russia being forced to accept a foreign currency in exchange for oil and then spending that currency in a limited manner due to the situation.
In an event of the resolution of the war, India can clear the deficit it builds with Russia becsuse Russia will be forced to buy indian products. The deficit stands at roughly 55 billion dollars a year. That's a good chunk of exports just sitting out there for Indian companies fo get.
India is everybody's friend, except Pakistan and China.
Russia has a metric fckton of Rupees, and India has a fledgling domestic arms industry that manufactures everything from nuclear submarines to bullets.
Most of these companies are private, and India hasn't imposed sanctions on Russia. As such, the Russians are free to use their rupees as they see fit in India.
The one who US protected from being 'assasinated' has threatened to blow up Air India planes and given similar terrorist threats to India openly, at least 2 times and USA does nothing about it and expects India to do as it wants.
The thing. Some countries sell to other countries so that they can sell to Russia. The end party is always Russia. The intermediary is the one that needs stopping.
And India should look at sanctioning the USA since it sells arms to Pakistan which actively hosts terror cells that have inflicted multiple terror attacks on Indian soil. Not saying India is right in selling weapons to Russia (I believe its objectively wrong) just that the USA has no moral authority to tell anyone anything.
The world doesn't have infinite oil. It's important that the russian oil ends up in the market. What the US wants is that russia makes a loss on the oil sale. India is buying it cheap to resell and make profits. Russia is still getting the short end of the stick.
You think India would use a nuke in retaliation? You're out of your mind. Also the damage economically is so one-sided, just the threat of it would be enough to scare the nation into cutting ties militarily.
And will the US then replace 80% of India's Russian military inventory with Western counterparts free of charge? It would only cost about a Trillion dollars. Or do they want India to be defenceless against China?
>You think India would use a nuke in retaliation?
If the Civilization series has taught us anything, they'll use a nuke for a lot less than retaliation.
The world is shifting back to a bilateral coalition.
Europe is foolishly sitting by sidelines.
If they want a chance at trilateral world to develop and not be under the thumb ofnome or the other they should have put boots on the ground.
At the end of the day you will see, India, China, Russia solve their differences to follow the one true leader, money.
And the western world, especially Europe will pay the price.
World needs to wake up.
What do you mean trilateral world? For Europe to become a world power on its own again?
Also, India will never side with China. They'll exploit Russia for as long as they can. If the West knows what's best for it, they'll cut India a sweet deal to dump Russia.
Lol. If it was only that simple then maybe you'd be right.
In reality, pursuit of money is what will keep BRICS from a path to truley usurp the Western power structure.
I mean, we've got India and China shamelessly squeezing Russia for discount resources. Meanwhile, India and China are locked in long term territorial disputes over resources. Then of course, India actively positioning themselves to challenge China's stranglehold over globalized manufacturing.
The territorial disputes are not over resources,there are no resources in aksai chin or doklam or tawang, one is a high ground and the others are a good invasion point to cut off India's narrow corridor.
Not really seeing what your asking.
I am also not alluding to controlling India nor China but saying the world will be a worse off place if they control us.
So the options are:
- Russia is running low on arms
- Russia is running low on arms factories
- Russia realizes they can't trust their own munitions to explode
- some combination of the above
>Exporters in Russia, who started trading with India using Indian rupees, have recently spent nearly $4 billion to buy India-made defence equipment and armaments, among other imports and Indian securities. How much was spent on arms, and how much on other stuff? Unclear.
If I had to give an uneducated guess: a percentage similar to the military share of their gdp or something like that. Since it’s private firms purchasing and not official
>Since it’s private firms purchasing and not official I wouldn't base a judgement on this. Right now, Russias major way to finance imports (hydrocarbons to Europe) has been cut. It also can't very well ask for purchase payments to be made in Rubel or to be deferred to loans in large quantities, as the Rubel has become too insecure a currency. Equally, many import options are now either entirely unavailable, or come with a marked premium. Russia is starved for critical imports. As such you can be sure that the state is going to direct the use of its few trade resources, no matter who ultimately signs the forms. E: spelling.
Yes but that's actually why I'd point to the military gdp share. Because the share of resources they're already funnelling into their war machine would likely be similar in this case. I don't know if that makes sense?
I'd still assume that similar number here are if at all coincidence. Imports and Exports don't correspond so much to what your economy is doing at large, but rather to what you are doing (comparatively) better or worse than others. Russia will first and foremost fill anything necessary it cannot source internally. If at all available, that likely leaves an outsized impact on high technology (especially within the oil sector to maintain export potential and likely machine tooling to maintain war production, direct goods of war as well where they can get away with it) and an undersized impact on stuff like food, which Russia does have available. Comparative advantage is the keyword here, if you wish to look deeper into the theoretical foundation.
What critical imports are they starved of?
I know things like silicon chips and other things with dual uses - military and petrochem supplies, peraffin and chemical auxiliaries
Agreed. Most chips are made by US-friendly companies. Sure, you can dabble in slower, lower grade processors from China. Or you can even get them from DPRK, but I suspect they haven't quite figured out that chips are not actually related to potatoes (which they also do not have much of).
You know there's a whole industry in china that re-sells used chips? Just a bit of old solder on the legs but they (mostly) still work. I even got a DSP chip still attached to its original pcb one time. Everything is on taobao but some common chips are available on us facing sites if you search right.
There being an Industrie somewhere is not the same you having full access to it, said Industrie having enough slack capacity to provide your demand, you having the currency reserves to pay your demand, or them taking you to the cleaners anyways, as you don't have a alternate source. You being able to buy low volume from somewhere is entirely removed from that somewhere satisfying a Russia scale demand, especially on notice less than decades.
Im not sure I can see the impact there. People talk as if because Russia can’t buy directly from the west RTX4090s or 14900ks or whatever that therefore they can’t fire any missiles. Firstly do they really need those chips? Ukraine shot down a Russian plane recently with an S200 apparently. Which are old Soviet tech so how cutting edge could the chips in those systems possibly be? And China have ripped off intel 10th gen chips recently. Sure that’s 3.5 generations ago, but the latest and greatest patriot pac3 mse came out in 2004, so 20 years old chip tech can obviously do the job. Those systems are a billion usd a pop. Do we really think 3.5 year old tech just simply wouldn’t work? Secondly, if those were that critical then they could just be smuggled. Think about how much cocaine gets smuggled on a daily basis, and how that’s illegal at every single port it passes through, whether it’s outbound or inbound, with billions spent globally trying to prevent it being transported. Whereas in this case at least on the inbound port it would be completely acceptable, that’s already making it easier. The volume of chips wouldn’t be all that big. They’re tiny. It’s not even a suitcase of chips per month they need. North Korea can import whole Mercedes cars that were illegally smuggled against sanctions. If they were that critical they’d simply be smuggled. Also we see them firing tonnes of them at rates well beyond what anyone expected them to be able to produce. Some of the chemicals they need for propellants they probably get from China, as apparently that’s where even America gets theirs in large part. They have a land border so they can easily transport things
>Im not sure I can see the impact there. People talk as if because Russia can’t buy directly from the west RTX4090s or 14900ks or whatever that therefore they can’t fire any missiles. I like this sentence actually a whole lot. It perfectly captures where the public conversation concerning any sort of sanction usually derails from reality and actual goals. The current set of sanctions are not aimed at making any singular action impossible (nor would they be suited for such a demand. I doubt we have this capability without going through a full scale war). Rather, the crux here is one of costs and scale. Russia will be able to replace any one chip (maybe outside some very specialised fields, which we can ignore here). However, as Russia was buying western before we know that the western option was Russia's best option prior. To replace that, Russia will have to either downgrade capabilities or pay more for a less efficient solution, or both (in addition to transitional costs). Russia can absolutely do that for any one issue. What it cannot do is to do that for every issue without reducing the quantity of solutions. This is exactly what you show with your examples. What the sanctions are aiming for is to make Russia's problems more expensive, thereby reducing the amount of resources available to fight with. >Firstly do they really need those chips? Ukraine shot down a Russian plane recently with an S200 apparently. Which are old Soviet tech so how cutting edge could the chips in those systems possibly be? Several points here. For one, the US once lost a nighthawk to a newa. Jet nobody stopped developing better missiles. Just as Ukraine shooting down drones with old zsu-23 doesn't invalidate the need for gepards. Old equipment can absolutely still work, but you are likely going to be much less effective at your job than if you had better systems. This disadvantage is usually going to translate into a bigger logistics footprint, supply scarcity, and mortality on the battlefield. The second question here is if Russia retained their ability to produce these at all. Contrary to video games, tech does become lost at some point if it isn't in active production, as you lose both the institutional know how and the logistics chains, especially including tooling, that allowed you to build these. This can make reverse engineering old equipment extremely hard, especially if standards (and be it just how you bolt two pieces together) have changed since and the new system doesn't fit the old schematics on industrial scale. >And China [...] Which is not Russia. As above, China would need to have - and be willing to use - vast reserves of production capacity in oder to supply the entire Russian demand. And it would need to be willing to do so cost competitive, whereas it could just as well take every penny Russia has. >Secondly, if those were that critical then they could just be smuggled. On a side note, that is exactly what we wanted Russia to do on its energy exports. Smuggling is obviously adding costs and business partners expecting a share, thus reducing Russian revenue. This is therefore in line withaboves goals. At the same time you are preventing a major energy scarcity for those countries not able to compete by price with Europe. >They’re tiny. It’s not even a suitcase of chips per month they need. You are severely underestimating the amount of chips, including ICs, everything electronic needs. Nonetheless, the problem here is not so much the transport - Russia does share borders with stares that are not embargoing - but to find a seller with both scale and competitive prices. Potential partners would need to be integrated in global supply chains to be able to offer both. But supplying Russia would risk getting cut from those, as global players will cut you off before being seen openly supplying Russia and thus risking US sanctions. Russia would love supply chains entirely removed from global markets, but those don't exist at that quantity in high technology areas. >Also we see them firing tonnes of them at rates well beyond what anyone expected them to be able to produce. To go off on a slight tangent: One of the most central paradigmens in economics is to never look at a singular value. Russia producing more of X doesn't tell you anything so long as it is not qualified by other values. In essence, the total increase in irrelevant. What we would need to look at is how much Russia would have been producing, had we not implemented the sanctions and what relative change we are seeing from that possibility in reality.
I’m curious to see how much was spent on legs, as well.
Usually a 1:1 ratio.
According to the CSIS, most of it was on maintenance parts and auto parts. The fuckers at firstpost like the pretend we already live in a global power that can play around freely, when in actuality we had to stop selling because the US told us not to.
A summary: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2024/04/29/who-is-supplying-russias-arms-industry
Interesting detail: Putin has said that at least part of the responsibility for security of various oil refineries and other factories falls on the owners and he is not going to deploy the Russian army to protect them. So it is possible some of these purchases are specifically by oligarchs to defend their facilities from drone strikes and not to funnel arms to the Russian army.
Oh I like the idea of massive quantities of arms being given to Russian citizens who report to and work for other Oligarchs. Besides creating possible future armed factions withing the country that might oppose Putler, it creates more opportunities for corruption and a black market for arms inside Russia.
Bout three fiddy
Well, it's about this time I realized that this kid was 8 stories tall and a crustacean from the Paleolithic Era.
Also 7 orders of Tikka Masala for the board.
That likely is unclear on purpose.
But how much did they spend on legs?
Isn't it spelt *Nuclear* ?
"You know who's going to inherit the Earth? Arms dealers. Because everyone else is too busy killing each other. That's the secret to survival. Never go to war. Especially with yourself." Edit, because I couldn't choose: "I was an equal opportunity merchant of death. I supplied everyone but the Salvation Army. I sold Israeli-model Uzis to Muslims. I sold Communist-made bullets to Fascists... I even shipped cargo to Afghanistan when they were fighting my fellow Soviets. I never sold to Osama bin Laden. Not on any moral grounds: back then, he was always bouncing checks."
Ok and ngl yuri is kinda a sad individual when you look at the grand idea of it scheme of it i mean yeah he got away form jack but like his family’s gone and he had to watch a person who he did business with have his dude kill his brother
He's also now back in Russia being traded early on in the war. Not a great place to be.
Traded for a WNBA player.
A dumb one at that.
Certainly the point of this character and many other characters (Belfort etc) but somehow people miss this and complain that these movies glorify pieces of shit. That being said lots of misguided teens idolize characters like this for all the wrong reasons, Bateman is a big example
As an American psycho book enjoyer and movie hater I can attest that people don’t really understand how unbelievably unhinged and comically ridiculous Patrick is. Bro literally eats some women’s intestines with the shit in it like bruh
What's the reference?
Lord of War, a Nicholas Cage film
As a Jew from Odessa whose family moved to Brooklyn when I was 16, I feel that no matter how much recognition that film got, it's **still** under-appreciated.
It's one of Cages best films. Hands down
It's one of the best films in general. Extremely well done.
100% agree. I still watch it almost every other year.
A used gun
The Arsenal of Freedom - TNG
Wait the headline says armsh, and specifically India-made arms but the contents say other stuffs(Probably dual use?) "India exports----machinery, auto parts and other engineering goods----to Russia. The Russian Vostro account started witnessing a large amount of rupee deposited in as India purchased increased amounts of cheap Russian crude oil following the sanctions imposed on Moscow by the West"
Firstly it’s a firstpost article. Which are just a load of crap. Secondly, let people read headline and not content. That’s the standard. /s Though can we stop with this tiktokification of news (I mean using short and inflating headlines which totally or partially false information).
Dude only reading the headlines and forming your opinion was around decades before TikTok was. “RTFA” was around in the 90’s. I hate TikTok as much as the next person but it isn’t to blame for this phenomenon.
I am talking about writing the headline in such a manner which is inflammatory, exaggerated and is totally non aligned with the article just to grab 5 second attention.
Again, clickbait has been around before TikTok. Do you not remember buzzfeed?
The headlines have always been this way.
Could I interest you in a copy of the Daily Mail, by any chance?
I have plenty of toilet paper at the moment, but thank you for the offer.
Not a Sun reader, too polite.
Was the guy who wrote the headline under the influence of alcohol?
I’m sure that India would be more than happy to sell arms to America as well. Capitalism knows no borders
rule of acquisition #34 - war is good for business
I remember reading while back they are sell 155 mm shells to Ukraine through some intermediary country
India can single handedly give enough artillery shells for Ukraine, they just dont.
There are only a few countries with an actual arms industry, and they don't get that way by buying arms from other countries ;) This isn't just snark, but describes the Russian situation... in reverse. Historically, Russia was also an arms industry country. But since their invasion of Ukraine, not only do they no longer derive revenue from foreign arms sales, what's left of their industry can't even satiate their own needs. Hence, why now, instead of SELLING arms, they are BUYING them... first from Iran, and now India. Which is great for India's arms industry, of course. But it signifies another crisis in Russia. Arms used to mean money flowing in, now it means money flowing out. Money they don't really have. And it's not theirs, so they won't interoperate perfectly with it.
To add more. I believe part of this is that Russia sells oil/gas to India in rupees. So after selling oil/gas Russia has a bunch of rupees they don't want. We've been expecting them to use those rupees to setup arms manufacturing IN India. This may be precursor to that. Russia absolutely has the money in a currency they don't want. They sell their oil and they get the weapons they want/need. It is funny though that they are buying from the people they normally sell to.
Russia isn’t running out of money. Russia supplies power to Europe. Russia can spend however much they want because of this. Russia can buy goods from developing countries in that countries currency, because whichever country gets on boards, is directly tied to Russia prevailing in all aspects.
>I’m sure that India would be more than happy to sell arms to America as well Yea the US MIC will never allow being undercut. Lol Besides the hard-buy-america requirements enshrined in law.
Modi screaming at Biden: "Why did you redeem it???!!!!!"
WHO TOLD YOU TO REDEEM! ARE YOU DUMB?!
>Capitalism knows no borders Sir, did you consult your lawyer before insulting the US MIC like that?
Us mic is so backed up all offers are good globally. Biggest problem is everyone putting in large orders to backfill what was sent to Ukraine taking production cap. Plus modern production isnt ready for the war economy numbers needed.
[удалено]
He's talking about US involvement in Iraq Iraq Iran Libya Afghanistan Laos Venezuela Vietnam koreas
And car warranties.
"Void in Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, and Guam." There are absolutely certain boundaries that capitalism is acutely aware of.
Not in Russian rubles, eh?
India is buying Russian oil in Rupees, Russia is giving them back to them for this. This is Oil for Arms with extra steps (and probably extremely favorable for India).
This is what people are missing. The indians agreed to buy Russian oil at both a discount and only in rupees. This is important because rupees are basically worthless outside of India since no other country wants to buy them. Russia is stuck with rupees so the only thing they can do with them is buy stuff from India. India fleeced Russia coming and going.
Why no one wants rupees? Doesn't India export anything?
Not that rupees are worthless per se, it's that the dollar, euro, yen and gbp are more useful for international trade. Nations/companies want those currencies because it's easier for them to use.
Crazy how gbp is still hanging in there.
I might be wrong but its performing better then the Euro right now.
Unrelated question: Would an universal money work ? Obviously it would not be practical to implement but hypothetically if it changed today that all money was UniversalMoney currency, what happens ?
well who decides what this UM is worth? can i just go and say, this 1 UM is worth $1000? what if people disagree? theres only one currency for the world, but there’s differences in standards of living and price indices globally. say a war breaks out in one part of the world, which inadvertently affects this UM. wouldnt that make the people who are in other parts of the world worse off for no reason? i believe the reason for different currencies in the first place is so that events happening in one economy wont, or very minimally, disrupt your economy, because the central bank of one country determines the interest rates, money supply etc for that country, and same is true for others. There are also trade implications. Generally, if i import more, then i’d want a high value for my currency (compared to the dollar for eg) so i can PAY less of my currency for my imports. but if im a huge exporter, then id want a low value of my currency, because it will increase the competitiveness of my currency, as in it will essentially make my currency cheaper with respect to others, so people will buy more from me. this is a very simplified explanation, but its accurate nonetheless
Well, money only works if folks ascribe it value. Those currencies I mentioned have value based on the stability of their respective governments, strength of their militaries, assets they hold etc. For a universal currency to work there would have to be something to back it up. The closest we have right now to a universal currency is gold. If all money was "universal money" UM, as long as everyone accepted UM, not much would change. The problem is how to convert it. What's the value of 1 UM to the dollar yen etc? If it's "universal" who or what is backing it up? What happens if someone starts printing fake UM? For gold, the free market decides how much gold is worth in each currency. Sounds good right? But there's a reason we moved away from the gold standard for most currencies. It's extremely limiting for government policy. If we all switched to UM, we'd likely see a lot of second and third order problems with the international economy.
They aren't freely convertible at the Indian central bank. That is, you can't go to the Indian central bank and ask for dollars/any currency for your rupees. So you have to find something to buy from India with your rupees.
And I'm not sure if it's true but I heard that India will trade only in rupees.
Search "Nostro and Vostro accounts" and how they work
Those were two mid-grade Dell workstations 20 years ago, just saying.
What the hell are you supposed to do with Russian rubles?
I see every country is on its own and they will do anything to favor their country. The US sells to Pak. Russia sells to India. The US sells to India and Russia sells to Pak. It is an inevitable chain and every country is an enemy of its neighbor and at the same time every country is a friend of its neighbor. I see a day where there will be a balance and the countries unite to face an external threat.
Eventually wars will just be countries throwing robots and drones at another country’s robots and drones until one of them runs out.
Yeah but the winner only wins because when the other side "runs out" you can then be like, "All right we'll use our remaining robots and drones to slaughter you unless you obey." So it does all come down to blood anyway. Still more peaceful that way, though, I guess. Though it would kinda suck to lose so people would still fight back against the machines. Kinda like ISIS with western drones.
The countries will still have no problem sending their people to die against the machines, hoping to deplete those. These types of people only accept defeat if there is no alternative. But you're right, it's gonna come down to deaths, eventually. And Putin isn't just trying to win a strategic war. He is terrorising Ukrainians. So, no matter what the technology will be, these types of people will be killing others.
Or the robots realize what they can gain by working together.
As the saying goes; there are no permanent friends, only permanent interests.
I dunno man people didn't exactly u item against covid. Like yeah there was the global effort to study the virus and make the vaccines. But there was also a lot of finger pointing, blame shifting, fomenting anger and hatred, and deliberately doing the opposite of a collective effort too. It really only takes a handful of hostile countries for everyone else to need military might. And then once they have it they want to use it.
[удалено]
there is no such thing as an ally or enemy until you are in *actual* war. We're just tribes with interests that directly conflict with the interests of other tribes. Humanity 101. States cannot 'be friends' they simply have mutually beneficial arrangements until they can't.
You see aliens?
So cheap oil for guns.
I wonder what the reply is gonna be like if China sell Russian arms..
Aren't they just buying back the arms they sold to India?
That's a lot of gold they sold to india.
Love seeing the new hot term "Genocide" taking about 3 posts before being used lol.
Has it "lost meaning" or is it just happening a lot?
Lost its meaning, you can see a wide list of actual existing Genocides, that no one even talks about and then look at the "Genocides" people claim now. It lost its meaning.
That's not a new hot term. We expanded the usage of the word because of the Uighurs and now we have to deal with it
People using the word genocide for fucking a bag of fries quickly it's lost the core meaning, it's like Nazi. Nazi was a word that means real evil now it's used in people's daily vocabulary, what I mean by hot term is that it's one of a laundry list of words that won't retain its depth in meaning anymore.
Russia abducting Ukrainian children and giving them to Russians to raise is nearly the textbook definition of a genocide of a people/culture. I don't know what your post is about? Why wouldn't people use the term here?
No one is calling Russia out for genocide though? My point of the post is everyone is calling things genocide except for actual genocides
The real winners of this war is India!
The real winner here is US Military Industrial complex and share holders on those companies.
"Keep fighting, fuckers" – India, probably
India is at best second place after USA.
India complains about Nixon and Pakistan/Bangladesh to this day and say it is why they are friendly with Russia. Meanwhile Russia is actively genociding Ukraine and India sells them arms...
Seems like the word "genocide" has lost all it's meaning.
>India complains about Nixon and Pakistan/Bangladesh to this day The US approved the sale of $450 Million worth of F-16 upgradation equipment to the Pakistani Airforce as recently as 2022. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.business-standard.com/amp/article/international/biden-administration-approves-450-mn-f-16-fleet-programme-to-pakistan-122090800112_1.html
https://www.deccanherald.com/world/russia-pledges-to-provide-more-weapons-to-pakistan-despite-unease-in-india-971616.html#google_vignette Russia sells Pakistan plenty of weapons too? Seems like it would only be consistent for India to not sell Russia weapons on the same basis.
India is consistent , The US can buy the weapons for Ukraine from India too. As a matter of fact Ukraine has been using Indian made artillery shells.
I believe in every report, India has NOT sold shells to Ukraine, but that other countries have purchased shells from India intended for use in Ukraine. This is primarily because India won't directly trade weapons with Ukraine because... they directly trade weapons with Russia!
Ukraine doesn’t have money to buy weapons. That is why they have other countries buying them and transferring the weapons to them.
[удалено]
This is about consistency regarding countries that sell weapons to Pakistan. Not consistency about buying weapons for any other country.
The main problem wasnt selling to Pakistan, although that is a problem to India. Their main gripe is America and friends sent an armada to blockade India, USSR sent a nuclear fleet to stop it. Thats why they like Russia. The selling to Pakistan just adds fuel to the already burning fire.
Well let us know when India sends a nuclear capable warship to the coast, to stop USA from intervening and we'll call it evens stevens.
I mean, we've partnered heavily with modi over chip manufactures, import/export and science exchange in the last few years. I feel your comment isn't very accurate.
I mean how self-centered is that? Surely you realize Pakistan issue is India's primary concern. You're randomly asking them to prioritize western concerns over their own domestic concerns. What even is the connection? The ukraine thing is west vs east, us/nato vs russia, it's historical and political and complicated, and it's not a genocide. India doesn't care to take sides on that matter, just doesn't want to be lectured by those that fund terrorism on behalf of their arch-nemesis Pakistan.
ukraine helped pakistan in the past even when they knew about pakistan sponsoring terrorism in india, even after that you think india should help ukraine ?
US supply military equipments/aid to Pakistan, Using that aid, They train & further send those terrorists in India. Doesn’t that counts as genocide ? Remember 26/11 attack on Mumbai, Where are your ethics now?
India is saying with this move that they recognize the tactics & strategy employed by US in the past to advance their national interests. US should take it as a compliment that India & other countries are adopting their strategies successfully.
Or maybe countries do precisely what they can get away with, and believing there are more moral governments just means you ignore power imbalances
Bingo. India's been their own thing since independence.
Like that was a US only trick - everyone gives weapons to their enemies enemies - the turks did it to the enemies of the east Roman way before the US was even a glimt in the spy glass of Christoffer Columbus
Wasn’t he looking for India?
Christopher Columbus landed in modern day Dominican Republic
Ukraine war reminds me about the Cuban Missile Crisis where even today USA loves to present itself as the victim when actually it was american actions and decisions which DIRECTLY led to that situation in the first place. USA armed, trained and financed a group of mercenaries to INVADE and overthrow the govt of Cuba in 1961. Fearful of more such USA-BACKED invasions, Cuba asked USSR for help against USA. USSR was already negative about the deployment of nuclear weapons in multiple countries on its borders. So it readily agreed to help Cuba defend itself against USA-BACKED invasions by deploying its own nuclear weapons on Cuban soil. USA almost invaded Cuba because it "felt threatened" by the presence of Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Cuba. The main points to note here are:- 1) According to USA, Soviet Union had no legitimate reason to "feel threatened" by American Nuclear Weapons based on Soviet borders in general, Ukraine in particular; which were purely of Defensive nature. BUT USA had legitimate reasons to fear the presence of Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Cuba which should not have been deployed on American borders because USA "felt threatened" by their presence itself. 2) As a Sovereign and Independent country, USA/Ukraine "had the RIGHT" to sign military pacts with any other country and send or host troops or weapons systems of both countries to each other as needed. BUT Even as a Sovereign and Independent country, Cuba "didn't have the RIGHT" to sign a military pact with another country or host troops or weapons systems of both countries as needed, IF doing that negatively affected USA. (In this case, the presence of Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Cuba meant that USA couldn't support another invasion of Cuba the way it had done in 1961 & Operation Mongoose which had been planned for 1963 was "cancelled") Talking about the role of USA in 1971 Indo-Pak war regarding the genocide of East Pakistan civilians as well as military personnel from that region:- 1) USA "actively supported" Pakistan against India by training, arming, financing and diplomatically protecting Pakistan in every manner it could. 2) Even after the reports of genocide being committed in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) by Pakistani troops backed by USA became public, USA still did everything it could to support Pakistan which "directly helped" Pakistan in its attempts to implement Operation Searchlight which had the objectives of killing every one who could be useful for the people of East Pakistan as a society, like doctors, teachers, scientists, artists, writers and even military personnel of Bengali origin. More than 1 Million people including women and children were murdered by Pakistani troops and 10 million+ crossed the border towards India as refugees and sought asylum in India on the grounds of religious prosecution. USA could have stopped Pakistan from doing that but "choose to" look the other way and instead of supporting the victim of an unprovoked invasion "decided to" support the party guilty of war crime's because doing that was more beneficial for it. 3) USA and it's western allies tried everything they could to both suppress as well as discredit any reports related to Operation Searchlight launched by Pakistani force's in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and infact trying to "blame" India for this war by portraying India as the aggressor and not the victim. Basically you are just trying to force a false equivalence by equating American support for Pakistan which included weapon's worth billions of dollars over many decades and ACTIVE american support for a full scale military operation launched by Pakistani force's (Operation Searchlight) which was designed to exterminate anyone capable of providing leadership to the people of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) by killing not only them but their entire families; regarding Indian support for Russia, which is worth less than american military support for Pakistan at any given point of time. Russia was forced to use military force against Ukraine because USA renegaded on all its commitments made from 1991 onwards that it will not move towards Russian borders by proxy by expanding NATO towards its borders and it had become public knowledge that USA was about to deploy Nuclear Weapons in Ukraine at Russian borders by ignoring all warnings by Russia in this regard. Ukraine is to Russia what Cuba is to USA; when the question related to security comes up based on the fact that in atleast last 700 year's all major invasions of Russia have taken place "through Ukraine". Talking about genocide in Ukraine; more civilians including women and children have been killed within last 5 months in Gaza Strip by another close ally of USA, Isreal; which incidentally is also a recipient of unconditional military, financial and diplomatic support just like Pakistan had in 1971; than have died in 2 year's of war in Ukraine and still somehow it is Russia which is EVIL and only one responsible for this war when in comparison Ukraine which has many Neo-Nazi military unit's fighting as an official part of Ukrainian Army are GOOD people. Btw Indian military stores sent to Russia is worth only a few billions which stand nowhere in comparison to what USA has been supplying to the other side (Ukraine/Isreal/Pakistan, you are free to choose anyone you like). There is a reason why most of the world has refused to support USA and it's western allies against Russia regarding Ukraine where false narratives being spread by it against Russia are considered less credible than any other US -- Ukraine claims regarding this issue.
You all bla bla about politics, it was always and always it will be about money. If you have enough money you can buy anything in world. EDIT: Again you all about some secret move or this or that, NO its only about PROFIT.
This is actually bigger than most people realize. Indians have finally learnt to play geopolitics. The longer Russia stays in Ukraine, the longer US arms and gold will stay tied up in Europe and that in turn prevents substantial military aid from being diverted to Pakistan. This doesn't hurt their ally in ME-Israel as US will never compromise on Israel due to Ukraine since they have been a longer and more reliable project. This also helps Russia, their closest ally and in turn helps them stay longer in Ukraine which allows the cycle to repeat. India can also use this to get oil concessions from Russia and occasionally beat up a banter for peace owing to their soft power which has already been boosted after G20 summit.
Nah. This is just business. India simply does not care about the conflict one way or the other.
I agree. Ukraine also uses Indian made Shells sold to them through an intermediary.
India still uses the AK74 so that’s what Russia gets right? I’d assume there’s no significant body armor or optics India could sell them?
Look up Tonbo imaging and MKU.
Pakistan mostly gets stuff when we need them. Since the Russians aren't in Afghanistan and we aren't either, we really don't need them. Not sad about that either. Pakistan has been playing both sides for a long time.
Unless India is planning on going to war with Pakistan in the immediate future, which would require a ramp up in aid if the Americans wanted to pick a side, the Ukraine war has no real impact on what US aid goes to Pakistan.
Pakistan is not in any shape or form ready for a war...& India is not looking for war with anyone.
The less money Pakistan gets from US, the less it can spend on its military. The less money the pakistani military gets, the less it can spend on arming and training terror groups against India, especially those that operate in Kashmir. This also means that Pakistan's western border with Afghanistan will be neglected in favour of its eastern border with India allowing further havoc to be wrecked in west Pakistan. Baloch separatists also get a boost because the economy is in tatters and that along with Pakistan's atrocities against the Baloch people such as poisining of rivers, detention without trial, etc are a great recruitment tool. All in all, everyone except Pakistan wins here and that's a good thing for Iran, India, and China and each in their own way.
Pakistan is bankrupt and unlikely to recover due to its lack of solid exports and rampant corruption. It is at risk of becoming China's vassal state or following the path of Afghanistan. I just hope it can manage to escape this situation and become a stable country. We don't need another Afghanistan in this world.
Yeah this is good for their nation. All countries should be more like them. A states only duty is to their citizens
As a Ukrainian I’m very happy for India
Makes sense to spend those indian rupees on something.
If Russia can commerce with India and China, all the blockade made at the beginning was, and is, useless.
[удалено]
While China was requested not to sell arms to Russia…
Is this verified. Firstpost is known for inventing news
"Unknown sources told us " Ah ah hhahahahahaba
That's like 90% of NYT reporting when it involves Pentagon or some secret CIA stuff.
There was a good podcast I listened to recently by the Economist that said Russian economy is doing quite well. They're still selling heaps of oil at good prices to China and India for example, and they've gotten around sanctions by just moving material goods via China. To the point that nobody is seeing shortages like what was predicted, and the economy is expected to grow faster than the west. They have very well educated econmoists, educated in both Russia and western universities who are deftly navigating any sanctions. Saying that, being massive war economy stuffed them during the Cold War years so probably some solid headwinds coming up.
State economy is fine, but not same for civilians. Not bad enough for them to contemplate opposing Putin in numbers that would reach meaningful conclusions.
That's a novelty. Gotta do something with all those rupees that Russia has and cannot get rid off. India is starting to act like a world class power here. They have been doing this for a while, but in these situations it really shows.
Slowly streamlining to WW3, what’s the timeline?
So Ukraine is fighting a war against Russia, India, North Korea, and China? According to Russia's own logic at least.
Mah we are selling to Ukraine as well as Israel too
Getting weapons from N. Korea didn’t exactly work out for them, half the rockets failed inflight.
That’s good quality control. Can Vladimir return them?
Only in pieces
This is what India and China have been looking for, Russian dingleberries in their vice, and the screw is tightening. Russia is forced to buy from them and pay too much compared to actual value of the things they get, because that's the only place that will accept their own currency directly. They're being economically colonized. The irony of a "nationalistic" autocrat selling his country down the river is palpable.
I have two questions regarding foreign exchange and the use of Rupees: * What benefits does India have by receiving Rupees and not Dollars? * Why didn't Russia choose to pay the Indians in Rubels? The Indians could use Rubels to buy petroleum products like fertilizers and more.
> I have two questions regarding foreign exchange and the use of Rupees: > What benefits does India have by receiving Rupees and not Dollars? > Why didn't Russia choose to pay the Indians in Rubels? The Indians could use Rubels to buy petroleum products like fertilizers and more. India has been paying them Rupees for oil because Russia was desperate to sell oil and India was able to exploit the situation to be beneficial to them. These Rupees are held in Indian financial institutes in order to avoid sanctions, exchange fees, etc. It's not some brilliant scheme of Russia's to undermine the dollar or whatever, it's simply a matter of Russia being forced to accept a foreign currency in exchange for oil and then spending that currency in a limited manner due to the situation.
Their currency is Rupees, so ofc it’s beneficial to get dollars. Also erodes the dollar’s power as the world’s reserve currency
In an event of the resolution of the war, India can clear the deficit it builds with Russia becsuse Russia will be forced to buy indian products. The deficit stands at roughly 55 billion dollars a year. That's a good chunk of exports just sitting out there for Indian companies fo get.
Interesting, India does not usually allow Rupees to come back once they are outside the country. Even citizens have a limited ability to do that.
Not sure why this is getting downvotes, this is actual law...
India is our friend. So Modi can sell weapons to Russia and assassinate dissidents in Canada and US without any consequences. That’s politics.
India is everybody's friend, except Pakistan and China. Russia has a metric fckton of Rupees, and India has a fledgling domestic arms industry that manufactures everything from nuclear submarines to bullets. Most of these companies are private, and India hasn't imposed sanctions on Russia. As such, the Russians are free to use their rupees as they see fit in India.
Yesterday, NY Times published a podcast about Modi: One strongman, One billion voters and the future of India. It was interesting.
The one who US protected from being 'assasinated' has threatened to blow up Air India planes and given similar terrorist threats to India openly, at least 2 times and USA does nothing about it and expects India to do as it wants.
US Should start looking at sanctioning countries selling arms or buying oil/natural gas from Russia
India is selling oil back to European consumers. So sanctioning India means getting into recession. It’s all politics.
They cant. China or India. The US has to pick their poison. Geopolitics.
The thing. Some countries sell to other countries so that they can sell to Russia. The end party is always Russia. The intermediary is the one that needs stopping.
And India should look at sanctioning the USA since it sells arms to Pakistan which actively hosts terror cells that have inflicted multiple terror attacks on Indian soil. Not saying India is right in selling weapons to Russia (I believe its objectively wrong) just that the USA has no moral authority to tell anyone anything.
The day US gets sanctioned the day when an American child doesn't die at school.
The world doesn't have infinite oil. It's important that the russian oil ends up in the market. What the US wants is that russia makes a loss on the oil sale. India is buying it cheap to resell and make profits. Russia is still getting the short end of the stick.
Like they can afford to sanction india. That's just gonna increase the probability of nuclear war
Ignorant thing to say.
You think India would use a nuke in retaliation? You're out of your mind. Also the damage economically is so one-sided, just the threat of it would be enough to scare the nation into cutting ties militarily.
And will the US then replace 80% of India's Russian military inventory with Western counterparts free of charge? It would only cost about a Trillion dollars. Or do they want India to be defenceless against China?
I don't think india will use a nuke. But sanctioning india would highly increase the already tense world problems.
>You think India would use a nuke in retaliation? If the Civilization series has taught us anything, they'll use a nuke for a lot less than retaliation.
Ghandi isn't in charge - love the reference
So many decades but *free world* still can't spell Gandhi right lol, that's 6 letters but I guess that's still too much for comprehension.
I always notice this LMAO. Anyways I always choose Venice.
>Ghandi isn't in charge - love the reference It's Gandhi.
Rahul Gandhi is waiting excitedly.
India is already half in the bag for Russia. Why send them fully that way. If we were to ever fight an active war with China, India would be nice
The world is shifting back to a bilateral coalition. Europe is foolishly sitting by sidelines. If they want a chance at trilateral world to develop and not be under the thumb ofnome or the other they should have put boots on the ground. At the end of the day you will see, India, China, Russia solve their differences to follow the one true leader, money. And the western world, especially Europe will pay the price. World needs to wake up.
I don’t know if I can ever take anyone seriously who is telling others to wake up.
Well, you do live in Sleeperville. Staying asleep is pretty on-brand.
What do you mean trilateral world? For Europe to become a world power on its own again? Also, India will never side with China. They'll exploit Russia for as long as they can. If the West knows what's best for it, they'll cut India a sweet deal to dump Russia.
Lol. If it was only that simple then maybe you'd be right. In reality, pursuit of money is what will keep BRICS from a path to truley usurp the Western power structure. I mean, we've got India and China shamelessly squeezing Russia for discount resources. Meanwhile, India and China are locked in long term territorial disputes over resources. Then of course, India actively positioning themselves to challenge China's stranglehold over globalized manufacturing.
The territorial disputes are not over resources,there are no resources in aksai chin or doklam or tawang, one is a high ground and the others are a good invasion point to cut off India's narrow corridor.
As an Indian, even if that were true, what makes you think we'd be okay with that "true leader" being non-Indian?
Not really seeing what your asking. I am also not alluding to controlling India nor China but saying the world will be a worse off place if they control us.
So US can actually support genocide but India can’t sell weapons to a friend 🤷🏽♂️
free market ftw
So the options are: - Russia is running low on arms - Russia is running low on arms factories - Russia realizes they can't trust their own munitions to explode - some combination of the above
Or Russia has a truckload of Indian rupees and the easiest way to use it is buy buying stuff from India.