Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

M.K Bhadrakumar: India Turns to China as U.S. Bullying Backfires

Glenn Diesen | August 27, 2025

M. K. Bhadrakumar was an Indian ambassador and diplomat for decades. Ambassador Bhadrakumar discusses Trump’s pressure and threats against India, and how this blunder has pushed India toward China and Russia.

Rumble

August 27, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

Indian PM ‘ignored’ 4 phone calls by Trump amid US-triggered trade fight: Report

Press TV – August 27, 2025

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has reportedly brushed off several attempts by Donald Trump to reach him on the phone as a trade fight between the countries, which has been triggered by the US president’s heavy-handed and unprecedented trade tariffs, spirals.

According to Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung magazine, Trump has tried four times in recent weeks to get Modi on the line, but the Indian head of state has declined to answer.

Neither Washington nor New Delhi has confirmed the account, and the magazine piece did not cite its sources either.

‘Trauma trigger Trump’

Describing the situation at hand, however, the report wrote, “It is said on the subcontinent that Narendra Modi suffers from a trauma trigger called Trump.”

The report landed just as the White House rolled out a fresh round of penalties, namely a new 25-percent tariff on Indian goods, on top of existing measures, pushing the overall tariff rate to as high as 50 percent.

The move, Washington said, was in direct response to India’s stepped-up purchases of Russian oil.

On August 24, Japan’s Nikkei Asia had released a similar story, quoting Indian diplomatic analysts who said Trump had recently made “several attempts” to call Modi.

They added that Modi had repeatedly rebuffed him, deepening Trump’s irritation.

On the ground, Indian exporters are bracing for immediate fallout of the drastic tariff spikes.

Orders from the US are expected to shrink sharply after the collapse of trade talks and confirmation of steep new duties.

The first 25-percent levy is already in force; another 25 percent will take effect on August 27, as detailed in a notice from the US Department of Homeland Security.

Trump has, meanwhile, kept up his attacks. Earlier this month, he told CNBC that India and Russia had “dead” economies.

Trump alleged that New Delhi and Moscow’s gravitation towards one another amounted to their “fueling the war machine,” trying to claim that the former’s contribution to the Russian economy would prolong the conflict in Ukraine.

“And if they’re going to do that, then I’m not happy,” he added.

The US president had announced the initial 25-precent increase late last month as punishment for “trade barriers” and New Delhi’s purchase of military and energy supplies from Russia.

August 27, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

Indian FM pushes back on US pressure, stands by Russian oil imports

Press TV – August 24, 2025

Indian Foreign Minister has defended New Delhi’s continued imports of Russian oil despite US tariffs on Indian goods, saying that if others “don’t like it, don’t buy it.”

Speaking at the Economic Times World Leaders Forum (ET WLF) on Saturday, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said there are some “red lines” in the India-US trade deal negotiations.

He underscored that amid strained relations with the US over several aspects in bilateral trade, India refuses any concession to US President Donald Trump.

“It is funny to have people who work for a pro-business American administration accusing other people of doing business,” he said.

“If you have a problem buying oil or refined products from India, do not buy it. Nobody forces you to buy it. Europe buys, America buys, so you do not like it, do not buy it,” he added.

He asserted that India’s purchase of Russian oil serves both its national interest and contributes to global market stability.

He reiterated that New Delhi would continue to make decisions independently.

The US imposed punitive tariffs on India after Trump claimed that the country’s purchase of Russian crude indirectly funded the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Tensions in US-India trade relations extend beyond energy, with multiple rounds of negotiations for an interim trade agreement failing to produce a breakthrough.

“Where we are concerned, the red lines are primarily the interests of our farmers and, to some extent, of our small producers,” Jaishankar said.

The United States has pressed India to open its markets to American dairy, poultry, and agricultural products such as corn, soybeans, wheat, ethanol, fruits, and nuts.

But India, an agrarian economy, has resisted, particularly on genetically modified (GM) crops, which it considers harmful to human health and the environment.

Dairy remains a particularly sensitive issue as well, as millions of small and landless farmers depend on the sector for survival, especially during poor monsoons or agricultural downturns.

In a clear message to Trump, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has publicly declared that India will not compromise on the interests of farmers.

“Modi is standing like a wall against any harmful policy related to farmers, fishermen, and cattle rearers of India,” he said in his Independence Day speech.

August 24, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

India, Russia set $100bn trade target despite US pushback

The Indian external affairs minister is in Moscow for three days of talks focusing on economic cooperation

The Cradle | August 21, 2025

India and Russia plan to increase their annual trade to $100 billion over the next five years – an increase of 50 percent – despite US opposition to the growing cooperation between New Delhi and Moscow, a top Indian minister announced on 21 August.

During the first day of a three-day visit to Moscow on Wednesday, Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar emphasized the need for India and Russia to broaden their trade ties, foster additional joint ventures between their companies, and hold more frequent meetings to resolve issues such as payment systems.

Russia ranks as India’s fourth-largest trade partner, while India holds the position of Russia’s second-largest.

“We are all acutely aware that we are meeting in the backdrop of a complex geopolitical situation. Our leaders remain closely and regularly engaged,” he said while speaking at the India–Russia Business Forum in the Russian capital.

Jaishankar added that rising global uncertainty puts the emphasis back on “dependable and steady partners.”

Economic uncertainty has come from recent actions taken by US President Donald Trump to punish India for its ongoing purchases of Russian oil.

New Delhi’s purchases of Russian crude skyrocketed after the start of the war with Ukraine in 2022. After its oil exports to Europe collapsed in the wake of the war, Russia turned to India, offering steep discounts.

In response, Trump has imposed a 25 percent tariff on Indian goods, saying the oil purchases help fund Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “war machine.” Trump has threatened to raise tariffs on India further, to 50 percent, a rate high enough to ensure Indian exports to the US will not be competitive.

In response, India has said it has the right to buy oil from the cheapest source, calling the tariffs “unreasonable.”

Following Trump’s threats, India’s state refiners began last week to buy large volumes of non-Russian crude. Indian Oil Corp. and Bharat Petroleum Corp. have purchased oil from multiple alternate suppliers in recent weeks, including suppliers in the US, Brazil, and Gulf states, for October delivery.

Private Indian refiners are expected to continue purchasing Russian oil per the long-term contracts they have previously signed.

Earlier this month, India halted plans to purchase US weapons and military aircraft in response to President Trump’s tariffs on New Delhi’s exports.

“India had been planning to send Defense Minister Rajnath Singh to Washington in the coming weeks for an announcement on some of the purchases, but that trip has been cancelled,” two sources speaking with Reuters said.

In February this year, Trump and India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced plans for the procurement and joint production of Stryker combat vehicles made by General Dynamics Land Systems and Javelin anti-tank missiles made by Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.

The sources told Reuters that India’s defense minister was also planning to announce the purchase of six Boeing P-8I reconnaissance aircraft and support systems for the Indian Navy during the trip to Washington, which has now been canceled.

August 21, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

India Cancels Offshore Wind Tender–Due To Lack Of Interest

By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | August 13, 2025

Now India is losing interest in offshore wind.

Renewablesnow report:

The Indian government has cancelled the process to allocate sea-bed lease rights for a total of 4,500 MW of offshore wind projects, it was announced on Tuesday.

While SECI itself did not state a reason for the decision in its announcement, The Economic Times quoted two sources as saying that there was a lack of interest among project developers. …

This follows Trump’s US move away from offshore wind and the lack of bidders at Germany’s offshore auction last week.

Meanwhile Orsted have had to launch a massive $9.4 billion Share Rights Issue, largely because of huge losses on offshore wind projects.

It seems that it is only the UK where anybody wants to build wind farms at sea, but only because of the obscene subsidies on offer.

August 17, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , , | Leave a comment

The geopolitics of India-US ‘trade war’

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – August 10, 2025

By slapping tariffs on India and linking them to its ties with Russia, the Trump administration exposed its willingness to strong-arm New Delhi into submission.

Unless India pulls off a dramatic reset with China—and thus reduce its dependence on the US for military support—it will remain caught between appeasing Washington and defending its strategic autonomy.

When the US President announced sweeping 25% tariffs on Indian goods in late July, his tone marked a jarring departure from the warmth once displayed toward New Delhi. Only months earlier, he had welcomed Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the Oval Office, hailing him as a “great friend” and celebrating the US-India relationship as a partnership destined for global leadership. Now, with the stroke of a Truth Social post, India is recast not as an ally, but as an economic adversary.

This abrupt reversal speaks volumes. The President’s social media declarations—accusing India of being a “dead economy”—ignored not only diplomatic decorum but economic reality. India is the world’s most populous nation and the fifth-largest economy, a critical player in global markets and geopolitics alike. To dismiss it so flippantly is to misunderstand the arc of global power.

But beyond the bluster lies a deeper provocation. Washington’s veiled threat—imposing additional, unspecified penalties on India over its continued oil trade with Russia—underscores a troubling shift in US foreign policy: coercion in place of collaboration. The implicit bargain offered to New Delhi is clear—cut ties with Moscow, and the US may relent on tariffs and even entertain a trade deal. Refuse and face economic punishment.

Why Trump Wants India to Submit

When Donald Trump referenced oil in the context of US-India relations, it wasn’t his only focus. A quieter, yet strategically significant, concern involved India’s long-standing defense ties with Russia. For decades, New Delhi has been one of Moscow’s most reliable customers in the global arms market. While India’s reliance on Russian military hardware has declined—from 55% of total imports in 2016 to an estimated 36% in 2025—Russia remains India’s top defense supplier.

To the Trump administration, however, this decline is an opening that must be exploited for American gains. A shrinking Russian share in India’s defense market presents the perfect opportunity to push more US-made military systems as replacements. In doing so, Washington hopes to edge out Moscow and deepen strategic ties with New Delhi in the process.

Signs suggest India may already be leaning toward such a transition. According to Indian defense media reports, the Indian Air Force (IAF) recently advised the government to prioritize acquiring US-made F-35 fighter jets instead of the fifth-generation aircraft offered by Russia earlier this year. Until now, India had remained undecided, caught between its historical ties with Russia and its evolving strategic calculus. However, should New Delhi proceed with the F-35 acquisition, it would mark a significant shift—not just symbolically, but financially and strategically. The Indian government reportedly plans to induct over 100 F-35s by 2035, an investment expected to run into billions of dollars, directly boosting the US defense sector. More importantly, such an investment will lock India as a firm US ally. As far as the Trump administration is concerned, this would also lend substance to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” agenda by channeling substantial foreign capital into the American economy.

As far as New Delhi is concerned, inducting F-35s could help bolster its regional standing vis-à-vis China and the latter’s continuous injection of its state-of-the-art defence technology into Pakistan, including its air-force. Indian defence analysts claim that this induction will allow India to avoid any more loses in aerial battles like the ones it suffered in its war with Pakistan in May.

What India Can Do

Yet, New Delhi’s strategic choices are far more complex than they might initially appear. Even if India opts to procure the F-35 fighter jets, it is far from certain that the US would permit their use in an offensive capacity against Pakistan—especially considering Washington’s increasingly cooperative ties with Islamabad. For context, Pakistan itself is restricted from employing its US-supplied F-16s for offensive operations against India. This raises a critical question for Indian policymakers: will a deepening defense relationship with the US genuinely enhance India’s air power posture vis-à-vis Pakistan, its principal adversary in South Asia?

The timing of New Delhi’s public disclosure of the Indian Air Force’s interest in F-35s—just days before a crucial deadline—was no accident. It seemed designed to sway the Trump administration’s position on trade tariffs. But the gambit failed to yield any concrete concessions. The episode underscores a deeper and more troubling question: should India continue to allow the US to exert disproportionate influence over its defense procurement and broader foreign policy?

This incident should prompt serious introspection among Indian policymakers. Rather than leaving its strategic vulnerabilities open to manipulation, India could take steps to insulate its foreign policy from external pressure. One pragmatic approach would be to normalize and even strengthen ties with regional competitors like China—an idea already gaining quiet traction. New Delhi has recently revived visa services with Beijing, and bilateral trade talks are beginning to show signs of momentum.

Interestingly, President Donald Trump’s remarks about “not doing much business with India” were widely interpreted as a thinly veiled reference to India’s growing economic engagement with China. In essence, Washington seeks to mold India’s foreign policy—particularly its relationships with China and Russia—to align more closely with American strategic interests. Should India capitulate to that pressure, it risks downgrading its role from an emerging regional power to a junior partner dependent on Washington for strategic direction.

India’s foreign policy establishment is now at a pivotal juncture. The choices made in the coming years will not just determine the shape of the country’s defense acquisitions or trade policies—they will define India’s role on the world stage for decades to come. If New Delhi is to maintain its claim to strategic autonomy, it must resist the temptation to shape its policies in reaction to US expectations.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs

August 10, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

New Delhi between sanctions and sovereignty

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 8, 2025

In a world where the international order is increasingly shaped by the struggle between a declining unipolarity and an emerging multipolarity, sanctions have become the main weapon of a superpower that can no longer dictate the course of global affairs by consensus. What was once an exception — economic punishment against states clearly involved in illegal activities or blatant violations of international norms — has become a systemic, arbitrary, and politically motivated practice. And India is now the latest target of this coercive apparatus that defines the foreign policy of the United States.

The repeated use of sanctions by Washington reveals, above all, the exhaustion of its diplomatic capacity. Instead of building bridges with strategic partners, the U.S. chooses to punish, isolate, and sabotage any country that dares to follow an autonomous path.

Sanctions policy as a mechanism of domination

U.S. unilateral sanctions — almost always imposed outside the UN Security Council and in defiance of international law — have become a systematic policy of intimidation. Iran, Cuba, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Russia, and China have been the most well-known targets. But the list keeps growing. And India, previously seen as a potential Western ally in the Indo-Pacific, is now beginning to feel the weight of this punitive system.

The logic is simple: the U.S. identifies an “unacceptable” behavior — such as India’s refusal to join the sanctions against Russia — and from there constructs a narrative to justify pressure measures. It could be the defense of “human rights,” the “fight against terrorism,” or, as is now being done with India, the “war on drugs.” The content of the narrative is secondary; what matters is the effect: to break the sovereignty of the targeted country and force it to align with Washington’s foreign policy.

India: the new frontier of coercion

In recent days, Donald Trump has announced sanction packages of up to 50% against India, citing the “need” to punish trade partners of the Russian Federation. These coercive measures came after months of open threats toward India — some directly referencing the Indo-Russian partnership, others hiding behind the mask of the “fight against fentanyl.”

Although the recently announced sanctions are explicitly directed at Indo-Russian energy trade, there’s no guarantee that the U.S. will abandon the fentanyl rhetoric altogether. The “drug control” excuse may easily be revived at any moment to impose further sanctions on New Delhi, especially considering that this was Washington’s initial justification before Trump finally admitted the real motive: punishing India for its ties with Russia.

It must be emphasized that what brought India into Washington’s sanction crosshairs was not any real connection to fentanyl trafficking, but rather its strategic resilience in the face of Western efforts to isolate Russia. Since 2022, India has maintained firm energy and military cooperation with Moscow, refusing to take part in the U.S. and EU-led anti-Russian crusade. This pragmatic position — based on Indian national interests rather than ideological dogma — deeply irritated the Washington establishment.

In response, the U.S. began floating the idea that chemical exports from India could be diverted for fentanyl production — a claim made without solid evidence, but politically convenient. In a classic move, they attempt to turn a country with no proven role in fentanyl trafficking into part of the “drug problem,” paving the way for tariffs and trade restrictions.

This is Washington’s new modus operandi: transform internal crises — in this case, the collapse of the U.S. healthcare system and the opioid epidemic — into diplomatic weapons to force other nations to serve its strategic interests.

Rapprochement with Russia and China: India’s geopolitical response

In the face of this escalation, India appears to have understood the game — and is beginning to react astutely. Not only has it maintained and expanded its agreements with Russia, but it has also signaled a renewed openness to dialogue with China, having Prime Minister Modi announced a visit to Beijing.

This is a geopolitically significant move. India and China have long had a tense relationship, especially concerning the Himalayan border. But in the face of a common enemy — the global regime of unilateral sanctions that threatens the sovereignty of both — realism is starting to prevail. India already plays an active role in forums such as BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the G20, but now signals a willingness to deepen its coordination with both Beijing and Moscow.

This marks the emergence of a “new” strategic triangle in the Global South — not based on ideological affinity, but on a shared need to resist the economic coercion promoted by the West. India is not becoming an automatic ally of China, but rather a situational partner in building a multipolar order, where the right to chart one’s own path is no longer subject to Washington’s approval.

Fragmentation of the global system and alternatives to the dollar

This strategic reconfiguration is happening in parallel with the fragmentation of the global financial system. As more countries begin operating outside the SWIFT system, pursue bilateral trade agreements in local currencies, and strengthen alternative development banks, the power of unilateral sanctions is beginning to erode. India has already signed agreements with Russia, Iran, and the UAE to trade in rupees, bypassing the U.S. dollar. BRICS+, with the potential creation of a common currency, is moving in the same direction.

By abusing sanctions as a tool, Washington is accelerating this process. In its attempt to maintain control, it ends up stimulating the formation of new centers of economic and diplomatic power — exactly the opposite of its intended outcome.

The end of the American consensus

The attempt to punish India over a crisis that is, above all, the result of domestic failure in the U.S., is not only an act of hypocrisy but also a major strategic miscalculation. Instead of isolating India, the U.S. is driving it deeper into multilateral frameworks that challenge Western hegemony.

New Delhi has made it clear it will not be turned into a geopolitical vassal. India is a civilizational power with its own interests and will not hesitate to forge partnerships — even with historical rivals — if it means securing strategic autonomy.

Sanctions, once presented as instruments of international justice, have become the primary mechanism for imposing a failed global order — one that seeks to preserve historical privileges at the expense of national sovereignty. The economic attacks on India over its strategic ties with Russia are just one example of this broader reality.

But a new world is taking shape. A world where countries like India, Russia, and China are building bridges over ruins — converging not out of ideological alignment, but from the urgent need to resist the systemic coercion of a declining empire. National sovereignty, more and more, will be asserted not through submission, but through coordinated resistance to the language of sanctions.

India understands this. And by responding with dignity and pragmatism, it shows that the path to strategic independence necessarily involves rejecting the arbitrary use of sanctions as a weapon of economic warfare. The multipolar world is under construction — and there is no room in it for domination disguised as moralism.

August 8, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

Trump hits India with additional tariffs as Modi prepares to visit China for first time in seven years

The Cradle | August 6, 2025

US President Donald Trump signed an executive order imposing an additional 25 percent tariff on India over its purchase of Russian energy, the White House said on 6 August.

The additional tariffs will stack on top of 25 percent country-specific tariffs due to take effect overnight, and will come into force within 21 days, according to the executive order signed by Trump.

“They’re fueling the war machine. And if they’re going to do that, then I’m not going to be happy,” Trump said Tuesday in an interview with CNBC.

Despite a warm public reception during Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s White House visit in February, Indian diplomats were “stunned” by what one journalist briefed on the meeting described as a “lack of respect” shown to the prime minister behind closed doors.

Amid these economic tensions, Prime Minister Modi is scheduled to travel to China on 31 August to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Tianjin.

The visit will mark his first to China since the 2020 Galwan Valley clash, and is being widely seen by Indian media as a step toward repairing ties with Beijing amid growing economic strain from the US.

Modi’s last visit to China was in June 2018, also for a summit of SCO leaders in Qingdao.

That was followed by Chinese President Xi Jinping traveling to India in October 2019, just months before the Chinese army’s incursions in eastern Ladakh.

Indian officials have linked the Tianjin summit to earlier visits by India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and Defense Minister Rajnath Singh, describing them as part of a slow move to reset ties with Beijing.

Separately, the Times of India reported that Indian National Security Advisor Ajit Doval is expected in Moscow this week for talks on defense cooperation, including a possible expansion of India’s S-400 missile system deal.

Doval’s trip, while previously planned, has reportedly gained renewed importance in light of US pressure over India’s energy relationship with Moscow.

August 6, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

India scraps F-35 deal with US as Trump slaps tariffs

Al Mayadeen | August 1, 2025

The Indian government is assessing its next move following US President Donald Trump’s decision to impose a 25% tariff on Indian goods, a move that reportedly caught policymakers in New Delhi by surprise. The tariffs are scheduled to take effect on August 1.

According to Bloomberg, Indian officials were “shocked and disappointed” by the sudden announcement. However, the government has ruled out immediate retaliation. Instead, it is considering trade adjustments to preserve relations with the United States, India’s largest trading partner.

The Economic Times (ET) reported on Friday that Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal addressed Parliament, stating, “The implications of the recent developments are being examined.” He emphasized that the government is working with industry stakeholders and exporters to assess the impact and affirmed that India will take “all necessary steps to secure and advance our national interest.”

According to the report, India is exploring ways to reduce its trade surplus with the US by increasing imports of US goods, such as natural gas, communication equipment, and gold. However, officials made it clear that new defense purchases are not being considered.

Despite US pressure to sell its advanced F-35 fighter jets, India has rejected the offer. During Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington in February, Trump personally pushed for the deal, but Indian officials ultimately declined, according to the report.

New Delhi conveyed that it is not interested in off-the-shelf military acquisitions and remains committed to the Make in India initiative, which emphasizes co-development and domestic production of defense equipment. However, Bloomberg reported that the Modi government is unlikely to approve any significant new defense deals with the US in the near term.

Trump attacks India over trade, Russia links

Trump launched a sharp criticism of India’s trade policies and its longstanding ties with Russia. In a series of posts on Truth Social, he stated: “India is our friend, we have, over the years, done relatively little business with them because their tariffs are far too high, among the highest in the world, and they have the most strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary Trade Barriers of any country.”

The report mentions that he also condemned India’s defense and energy ties with Moscow, saying, “They have always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia’s largest buyer of energy, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to stop the killing in Ukraine, all things not good!”

In a later post, Trump added, “I don’t care what India does with Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care.”

Despite the rhetoric, ET argues, India is opting for strategic patience. US officials have expressed frustration over India’s negotiating posture, as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC that the administration is “frustrated” by the lack of progress and criticized India’s foreign policy as too aligned with Russia.

Nevertheless, diplomatic engagement continues. India is preparing to host the next Quad summit, along with the US, Japan, and Australia. Former Commerce Secretary Ajay Dua told Bloomberg TV that India must be “a little more accommodating” in trade talks, while also noting that large-scale commitments in energy or defense are unlikely in the current climate.

Defense shift and regional implications

Moreover, India’s rejection of the F-35 highlights broader challenges in its defense planning. The Tejas program, aimed at producing an indigenous fourth-generation fighter, has struggled, with only 38 aircraft delivered, 17 of which are prototypes. Limited combat capability has restricted export potential and delayed production.

While no immediate alternatives for a fifth-generation fighter exist, India is turning to France, aiming to begin domestic production of Rafale jet components by 2028. Experts also point to Russia’s Su-57 as a more likely short-term option, given India’s extensive existing military infrastructure tied to Russian systems.

As per the report, even though India has ruled out immediate retaliation, sources indicate that the government may challenge the new US tariffs, particularly on steel and automobiles, at the World Trade Organisation, depending on timing and strategic interest.

For now, New Delhi appears focused on maintaining stability while avoiding escalation. It is unwilling to enter a trade war, but also unwilling to be pressured into one-sided defense arrangements.

India’s broader objective remains clear: uphold national sovereignty while pursuing long-term economic and strategic autonomy, even amid external pressures.

August 1, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

Kicking the peace can down the road

In discussion with Glenn Diesen
Ian Proud | July 28, 2025

Nice to catch up with Glenn Diesen to discuss recent developments, including my article on Trump’s 50-day ultimatum to Putin, which has now been reduced to 10-12 days, whatever that means. I continue to judge that the threat of secondary sanctions against Russia’s trading partners will have a greater impact on the US than on China, India or any other country that does business with Russia.

Meanwhile, Zelensky’s short-lived attempt to shut down anti-corruption organisations closing in on his cronies has been a big wake up call, not just for European political leaders and journalists, but more importantly, citizens.

Faced with admitting defeat in Ukraine and throwing Zelensky under the bus and continuing with an ineffective foreign policy towards Russia, I judge that Starmer, VdL and others will keep kicking the peace can down the road.

Yet every day the war continues, Ukraine loses more ground and more lives on the battlefield, and slides further towards the status of a failed state. My optimism remains low that the war will end in 2025.

July 29, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Decarbonization myth frays as hydrocarbon use grows

By Vijay Jayaraj | BizPacReview | June 20, 2025

One cannot peruse the morning headlines or scroll through the digital ether without being assailed by the global media’s solemn decree: Society is gracefully, unequivocally and inexorably decoupling from the deathly embrace of fossil fuels.

Many in the “enlightened” professional classes, forgoing independent scrutiny of the issue, regurgitate the declaration with the vigorous conviction of newly converted acolytes. What we have today is a digital amphitheater flooded with hashtags and half-truths, where perception cosplays as accomplishment and misinformation marches under the banner of inevitability.

Take China for example: Online posts about the country’s undeniable dependence on coal is glossed over or misrepresented. Popular reporting has Beijing showing great interest in “net zero” as evidenced by the installation of record amounts of solar and wind energy generators. Cherry-picked are the ebbs and flows of fossil fuel use and investments in “renewable” technology to argue that Chinese hydrocarbon use is waning.

However, the energy sector in China cares little about these fantasies. Beijing began building 94.5 gigawatts (GW) of new coal-powered capacity in 2024, in addition to resuming 3.3 GW of suspended projects. This is the highest level of construction in the past 10 years!

As recently as May, China deployed the world’s largest fleet of driverless mining trucks to fast-track efficient operations, partially to overcome the challenging conditions of harsh winter weather at the Yimin coal mine in northeastern Inner Mongolia.

Indeed, both China and India are pouring colossal sums into wind turbines and solar panels. Yet, let us not, for a moment, confuse this fervent activity with the zealous repudiation of fossil fuels seen in some European countries. The Asian nations are not renouncing fossil fuels but rather grabbing every energy source as would hoarders before an expected crisis.

Speaking at the Heartland International Conference in 2023, I dubbed this the “twin strategy” – a clever diplomatic pas de deux – where Beijing and Delhi strike photogenic “green” poses for the Western press while quietly constructing new coal-fired plants and excavating and importing ever more fuel for them.

The result? Applause from climate summiteers and megawatts from smokestacks – a brilliant balancing act of virtue signaling and strategic realism. The West calls it hypocrisy; China and India call it another day at the office.

Climate doomsayers must advance a narrative of Asian complicity in the increasingly fraying “green” agenda to help keep alive the myth of a decarbonizing world, which for most sensible people has become about as believable as the Easter Bunny.

India’s target for achieving net zero is set for a distant 2070 – 100 years after the first Earth Day, whose observance by then will be about as relevant as tossing virgins into volcanoes. More lasting will be the country’s commitment to economic growth through the use of coal, oil and natural gas – a path to having the highest rate of increase in energy demand going forward.

The case is similar in dozens of other countries across Asia, Latin America, the Middle East and Africa, where new discoveries of energy reserves and an appetite for economic progress have the oil and gas industries booming.

Approximately 120 oil and gas discoveries were made globally in 2024, with significant drilling expected in Suriname, Cyprus, Libya and South Africa. About 85% of these discoveries occurred in offshore regions, the bigger ones being in Kuwait and Namibia.

Rystad Energy predicts deepwater drilling to hit a 12-year high in 2026. Once the poster child of climate repentance, the British multinational oil and gas company BP is abandoning plans to reduce production in favor of drilling deeper in the Gulf of Mexico. Norway’s Equinor announced early this year that “renewables” would take a back seat, as the country’s offshore oil fields roar back to life.

The climate commentariat, already breathless from their creative contortions to recast reality, now finds itself rattled by President Trump’s funding cuts that turned off the tap to the climate-industrial complex.

Meanwhile, the digital battleground remains an arena for the ongoing tug-of-war between the realities of economics and physics and fanciful rhetoric about an energy transition. The growth in consumption of fossil fuels continues apace, nonetheless.

Vijay Jayaraj is a research associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Va., and holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, U.K.He resides in Bengaluru, India.

Copyright © 2025. All Rights Reserved. BizPacReview

June 28, 2025 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , , , , | Leave a comment

India Spurns Carbon Tax Threat, Promotes Trade and Fossil Fuels

By Vijay Jayaraj | RealClear World | May 24, 2025

Like many developing economies, India faces coercion from the United Nations and Europe to conform to climate policies, especially through the imposition of carbon taxes on imports into their countries. But Delhi is not about to bend to such tactics.

“If they [EU and U.K.] put in a carbon tax, we’ll retaliate,” said India’s Union Minister Piyush Goya at the Columbia India Energy Dialogue in New York City. “I think it will be very silly, particularly to put a tax on friendly countries like India.”

That isn’t a bluff. It’s a moral, strategic, and scientific imperative grounded in realpolitik and economic logic.

India and the U.K. have inked a trade deal that promises to boost bilateral trade by more than $33 billion and increase U.K. gross domestic product and wages by many billions.

On paper, this deal is a triumph for both nations, removing duties on 99% of Indian goods entering the U.K. For India, this means greater market access for textiles, agriculture and manufactured goods – sectors that employ millions and drive economic growth.

Yet, the U.K.’s pending Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) remains in place with no exemptions for Indian steel, cement and aluminum, despite the trade agreement.

Starting January 2027, the U.K. is to impose a levy on these “carbon-intensive” imports, supposedly to compensate for the difference between the U.K.’s domestic carbon tax and India’s lower assessment at home. The tax on imports is to prevent “carbon leakage” — the idea that emissions are “outsourced” to countries with fewer regulations.

This hocus-pocus is nothing more than repugnant virtue signaling that penalizes manufacturers in developing countries for using the very fossil fuels that powered the West’s rise in the 19th and 20th centuries.

India’s export of these products to the EU and U.K. are a critical part of its economic engine. In 2022 alone, 27% of India’s iron, steel and aluminum exports went to the EU.

Yet, the EU’s CBAM, set to take effect in 2026 prior to the U.K. tax, would slap tariffs of 20-35% on these goods.

For Indian exporters, this translates to a steep cost increase. India’s predominantly coal-based blast furnaces have higher carbon intensity of around 2.5-2.6 metric tons of CO₂ emissions per metric ton of steel produced in comparison to the global average of 1.85 metric tons of CO. This means a higher CBAM assessment for India.

Profit margins for steel exports could shrink, while aluminum exporters might face a sudden surcharge once indirect emissions from coal power are factored in. Take the case of Tata Steel, which employs over 75,000 people and produces 30 million tons of steel annually. A 20-35% carbon tax under the EU’s CBAM would erode profit margins, forcing layoffs or price hikes that could cost it market share.

India’s dismissal of the climate war on fossil fuels is grounded in necessity and science. Economically, the nation aims to become a $5 trillion economy by 2027, a goal that demands rapid industrialization and infrastructure growth.

Steel, cement, and aluminum are the building blocks of this ambition, used in everything from bridges to skyscrapers, and an important source of export revenue. Fossil fuels, particularly coal, are the lifeblood of these industries, providing the energy needed to keep production costs low and globally competitive.

Coal generates more than 70% of India’s electricity. It powers the factories that make steel and cement. It keeps the lights on in rural hospitals and schools. And it fuels the economic engine that has lifted 415 million people out of poverty in the past two decades.

The modern crusade against fossil fuels is based on the false premise of a disintegrating global environment. But that is not the case. Carbon dioxide is not a toxin. It is a colorless, odorless gas essential to life on Earth.

Even the term “carbon emissions” is a sleight of hand. The emissions are carbon dioxide but calling them “carbon” conjures images of potentially harmful soot and smoke. Fear perpetrated by lies have made people less resistant to destructive policies like CBAM.

However, India won’t bow to carbon taxes, and it won’t join an unscientific climate war that sacrifices its future. The U.K. and EU would do well to listen, lest they find themselves on the losing end of an Asian-dominated trade battle over manufactured goods.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India.

June 10, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment