Russia will find buyers for its oil – Putin
Samizdat | April 13, 2022
Russia can easily redirect exports of its vast energy resources away from the West to countries that really need them, while increasing domestic energy consumption, President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday.
“When it comes to Russian oil, gas and coal, we will be able to increase their consumption on the domestic market and stimulate the deep processing of raw materials,” Putin said speaking at a meeting on the development of the Russian Arctic.
“We will also increase the supply of energy resources to other regions of the world where they are really needed,” he added.
The statement comes amid the latest ban on Russian oil imports imposed by the US, Canada, Britain and Australia in response to Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine. The ban on energy imports was part of broader anti-Russian sanctions that are aimed at cutting the country’s economy off from the global trade and financial system.
Putin attributed the current energy crunch in Europe to the refusal by countries to “cooperate with Russia normally, thus, hitting millions of Europeans.”
“Of course we are also facing problems but this opens up new opportunities,” he said.
Putin added that “hostile countries” had destroyed supply chains in Russia’s Arctic regions and some nations were not fulfilling their contractual obligations, creating issues for Moscow.
On Wednesday, Russian Energy Minister Nikolai Shulginov said Moscow was ready to sell oil and oil products to “friendly nations” as traditional importers are shunning Russian energy supplies, forcing the country to reduce crude production.
India key to alternative payment mechanism for Russia
By Paul Antonopoulos | April 13, 2022
The war in Ukraine has focussed attention on Russia’s global exports as sanctions on the country have led to sharp rises in various commodity prices. As Russia is a key supplier of not just oil and gas, but also wheat, metals and fertilizers, the problem is further aggravated due to Russia’s exclusion from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) mechanism, which means that payments for trade with Russia are not permissible in dollars.
Indian exporters have payments of around $400-500 million pending in Russia due to the war in Ukraine and the subsequent economic ban on the country and its exclusion from the SWIFT mechanism by the western powers. In 10 months of FY22, India’s exports to Russia totalled $2.85 billion against $7.90 billion of imports, according to Bank of Baroda Economic Research data.
Discussions on a Rupee-Ruble trade mechanism is an inevitability after Russia’s exclusion from SWIFT. As economic sanctions against Russia are used as a weapon of war by the western powers, the countries trading with the Eurasian Giant need to have an alternative mechanism for payments. Some experts have suggested to identify an Indian bank in which Russia would deposit rubles, while India will deposit rupees. Russia would use all the rupees it gets from Indian importers to buy goods; Indian exporters would use the rubles to pay for imports from Russia.
This is especially crucial for India as sanctions on Russia have adverse effects on Indo-Russian trade. Amidst the uncertainties, there has been a substantial depreciation in the Rupee (Rs. 77/Dollar), making Indian imports more expensive. However, India’s non-weapon non-oil trade with Russia is miniscule, and so the effect would be minimal.
None-the-less, the exclusion of Russia from SWIFT as part of sanctions meant that millions of dollars in payments for Indian tea, steel, chemicals and pharmaceuticals have been held up. Tea exporters say that the necessity of rupee payment has come if the dollar payment has become impossible. This is significant when considering that India is the largest exporter of tea to Russia, amounting to 43-45 million kilograms.
The rupee-ruble trade mechanism will likely open an alternative channel for the Global South to continue trading with Russia. This would be possible because many Russian banks are already present in India. Large Russian banks with a presence in India include VTB, Sberbank and Gazprombank. Russia’s state-owned development bank VEB is also engaged in such trade.
VEB and the Reserve Bank of India are in the process of finalising an alternative transaction platform to facilitate bilateral trade. Apart from facilitating India-Russia bilateral trade, the Rupee-Ruble platform might facilitate the Global South’s alternative financial transactions with Russia.
Increasing economic sanctions have created problems in other currency zones as well, particularly Iran, demonstrating why many countries are entering into currency swap deals to continue trading without depending on the dollar.
The post-World War western dominated financial architecture is a skewed global financial system. In view of this, the Rupee-Ruble mechanism may open an era of trade without dollars. The global financial system should not be leveraged as a weapon of war by any group of countries, otherwise it would lose trust.
The biggest problem for developing countries arises from the fact that Russia exports significant quantities of grains and has imposed a halt on grain shipments to its neighbours in the Eurasian Economic Union until the end of August. This is to “maintain stability on the Russian market”. The two largest buyers of wheat from Russia, Egypt and Turkey, have seen disruptions in supply due to closure of Black Sea ports as the war in Ukraine rages on. As Russia and Ukraine supply one-third of the total global supplies of wheat, the disruption in supply has pushed prices up.
What the West has not considered though is that the problem might be complicated further due to Russia’s exclusion from the SWIFT mechanism. In such cases, Rupee-Ruble trade will be another step towards the de-dollarization of the global economy as countries seek safety from potential sanctions and economic attacks from the West. As the Global South suffers from a war being waged in far off eastern Europe, it is inevitable that they will explore an alternative payment system as they do not want to lose their economic relations with Russia and will use the Indian model as a guiding principle.
Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.
Pentagon warns India of China threat
Samizdat | April 12, 2022
US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin hosted his Indian counterpart, Rajnath Singh, on Monday, calling for closer military ties between the countries and warning of security threats posed by China and Russia.
“We’re meeting at a critical moment in the US-India defense partnership,” Austin told Singh as Monday’s talks began. He added that Washington and New Delhi both believe in a “free and open Indo-Pacific” underpinned by respect for national sovereignty and the rule of law, but “we’re facing urgent and mounting challenges to this shared vision.”
Beijing is undermining security in the region by building “dual-use infrastructure” along its border with India and making unlawful territorial claims in the South China Sea, Austin said. “The United States stands with India in defending their sovereign interests,” he pledged.
Austin argued that like China, Russia is trying to “change the status quo by force,” adding, “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the humanitarian devastation that it has created are blatant attempts to undermine the international order that is grounded in the rules and the principles that we share.”
The US defense chief said that as the world’s largest democracy, India is “central to this rules-based order,” and he called for collaboration with “like-minded partners.” Those ties may include co-development of weapons.
Austin and Singh followed their talks by holding a so-called 2+2 meeting with US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Indian Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. “This is a momentous moment in global affairs, and I think as a result, this partnership is even more consequential and more vital,” Blinken said.
However, the partnership has been strained in recent weeks amid efforts by the US and its Western allies to punish and isolate Russia over the Ukraine conflict. Late last month, a top US national security official warned India that there will be “consequences” for countries that try to “circumvent” Washington’s sanctions campaign against Moscow.
“We are keen for all countries, especially our allies and partners, not to create mechanisms that prop up the ruble and that attempt to undermine the dollar-based financial system,” deputy national security advisor Daleep Singh told reporters during his visit to New Delhi on March 31.
President Joe Biden’s top economic advisor, Brian Deese, reiterated those concerns last week, saying Washington had warned India that it would face significant and long-term costs if it aligned strategically with Russia. “There are certainly areas where we have been disappointed by both China and India’s decisions, in the context of the invasion,” he said.
India has declined to impose sanctions against Russia and has ramped up purchases of Russian oil. Indian and Russian officials also have discussed a ruble-rupee payment mechanism for trade between the countries, bypassing the dollar and the euro.
Another source of tension between Washington and New Delhi is India’s historic reliance on Russian-made weapons. India has ordered five S-400 anti-aircraft systems from Russia – in defiance of a warning from the US against the $5.5 billion deal – and it reportedly has an option to purchase more of the surface-to-air missiles.
Austin told US lawmakers last week that it’s not in India’s best interests to continue buying Russian weaponry, and the Pentagon is working with New Delhi to reduce its reliance on Moscow.
Asian fault lines of Biden’s war on Russia
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | APRIL 11, 2022
The tremors of the United States’ tensions with Russia playing out in Europe are being felt in different ways already in Asia. The hypothesis of Ukraine being in Europe and the conflict being all about European security is delusional.
From Kazakhstan to Myanmar, from Solomon Islands to the Kuril Islands, from North Korea to Cambodia, from China to India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, the fault lines are appearing.
To be sure, extra-regional powers had a hand in the failed colour revolution recently to overthrow the established government in Kazakhstan, a hotly contested geopolitical landmass two-thirds the size of India, bordering both China and Russia, Washington’s sworn adversaries. Thanks to swift Russian intervention, supported by China, a regime change was averted.
Equally, the Anglo-American project to embroil Myanmar, bordering China, in an armed insurgency has floundered for want of a sanctuary in India’s northeastern region and due to the perceived congruence of interests among the surrounding countries in Myanmar’s stability.
In comparison, the North Korean fault line has aggravated. North Korea moves on its own timetable and has probably decided that the Ukraine crisis offers useful cover while it ramps up its testing program. Pyongyang explicitly supports Russia’s special operation in Ukraine, commenting that “the basic cause of the Ukraine incident lies in the high-handedness and arbitrariness of the United States, which has ignored Russia’s legitimate calls for security guarantees and only sought a global hegemony and military dominance while clinging to its sanctions campaigns.”
North Korea’s objective is to enhance its security and leverage by increasing the quality and quantity of its deterrent capabilities and strengthening its bargaining position.
On another plane, the Ukraine crisis injected a new urgency into the US efforts to cultivate new Asian partners. But Washington has run into headwinds and had to indefinitely postpone a special summit with the ten member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) that was initially scheduled for end-March. No new date has been proposed, although the US had hyped up the summit as “a top priority.”
Showing some ire, Washington has since sanctioned Cambodia, currently the ASEAN Chair. Clearly, the southeast Asian countries are chary of taking sides between the US and China or of voicing criticism against Russia.
Perhaps, the most direct fallout of the Ukraine crisis in Asia so far is the sharp deterioration in Japan’s ties with Russia. It is an unwarranted development insofar as Tokyo simply did a cut and paste job, copying all the US sanctions against Russia (including against President Putin). Prime Minister Kishida wantonly destroyed what his predecessor Shinzo Abe had carefully cultivated as a cordial, friendly relationship.
Japan now openly refers to Russian “occupation” of the Kuril Islands — something it hasn’t been doing in the past. Moscow retaliated by designating Japan as an “unfriendly” country. Yet, analysts were estimating until recently that Russia and Japan had congruent interests in blocking China’s Arctic ambitions and were, therefore, moving toward solving their dispute over the Kurils.
Suffice to say, Kishida’s motivations in an abrupt turnaround to make Kurils a potential flashpoint in relations with Russia are, to say the least, to be traced to the broader US strategy to isolate Russia.
Meanwhile, a contrarian development has also appeared in China’s challenge to the US’ Island Chain strategy in the Western Pacific by negotiating a new security deal with Solomon Islands. This game-changing development may have extensive consequences and is dangerously interwoven with the Taiwan issue. Biden is reportedly dispatching a top White House official to Solomon Islands to scuttle the deal with China.
The Biden administration is now doubling down on India to roll back its ties with Russia as well. That becomes a fault line in the US-Indian strategic partnership. What must be particularly galling for Washington is the likelihood of India pursuing its trade and economic cooperation with Russia in local currencies. Indeed, China and India have taken a somewhat similar stance on the Ukraine crisis.
Given the size of the Chinese economy and the high potential of growth for the Indian economy, their inclination to bypass the dollar would be a trend-setter for other countries. Russia, hit by Western sanctions, has called on the BRICS group of emerging economies to extend the use of national currencies and integrate payment systems.
Suffice to say, the “weaponised dollar” and the West’s abrasive move to freeze Russia’s reserves sends a chill down the spine of most developing countries. Nepal caved in to ratify the Millennium Challenge Corporation agreement following threat by a middle ranking US official!
There is no conceivable reason why the NATO should become the provider of security for the Asian region. That is why Afghanistan’s future is of crucial importance. Without doubt, the regime change in Pakistan is partly at least related to Afghanistan. The Russian Foreign Ministry has disclosed certain details of the US interference in Pakistan’s internal affairs and its pressure on former Prime Minister Imran Khan.
But time will show how realistic are Washington’s expectations of inducting Pakistan into the US orbit and making it a surrogate to leverage the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Russia and China are making sure that the door remains closed to NATO’s return to Afghanistan. They have undercut Washington’s recent efforts to co-opt the Taliban leadership in Kabul. (See my blog US pips regional states at race for Kabul.)
The message out of the recent Foreign Ministers’ Meeting on the Afghan Issue Among the Neighbouring Countries of Afghanistan in Tunxi, China, is that in that country’s transition from chaos to order, the regional states hope to undertake a lead role. Thus, the regional states have incrementally marked their distance from the West’s exceptionalism and are instead adopting a persuasive track through constructive engagement. The joint statement issued at Tunxi reflects this new thinking.
The developments over Afghanistan provide a signpost that any attempt at imposing Western dominance over Asia will be resisted by the regional states. Most Asian countries have had bitter experiences with colonialism in their history. (See my blog India’s dilemma over West vs. Russia)
Although the American analysts underplay it, the fact remains that the conflict in Ukraine is bound to impact the “Asian Century” very significantly. The US is determined to transform NATO as the global security organisation that will act beyond the purview of the United Nations to enforce the West’s “rules-based order.”
The West’s desperate push to weaken Russia and tilt the global strategic balance in the US’ favour aims to clear the pathway leading to a unipolar world order in the 21st century. In a recent interview, Hal Brands, Henry Kissinger distinguished professor of global affairs at Johns Hopkins, put across the US strategy behind the war in Ukraine as very logical:
“Well, there’s long been a debate in the United States over whether we should prioritise competing with Russia or China or treat them as co-equals. And that debate has flared up again in the context of this war. I think what the war indicates, though, is that the best way of putting pressure on China, which is the more dangerous and the more powerful of the two rivals, is actually to ensure that Russia is defeated, that it does not achieve its objectives in this war, because that will result in a weaker Russia, one that is less capable of putting pressure on the United States and its allies in Europe and thus less useful as a strategic partner for Beijing.
“The United States simply can’t avoid the reality that it has to contain both Russia and China simultaneously.”
NATO member-supplied S-300 launchers obliterated – Russia
Samizdat | April 11, 2022
Russian forces have destroyed foreign-supplied S-300 anti-aircraft launchers in a number of precision strikes on Ukraine, the Defense Ministry, in Moscow, claimed on Monday. Days earlier, Slovakia reported the donation of a battery of old Soviet-made S-300 air defense missiles to Kiev.
In its regular briefing on the ongoing military action in Ukraine, the Russian Defense Ministry reported hitting a hangar “on the southern outskirts of the city of Dnepropetrovsk,” where “equipment from an S-300 battery supplied to the Ukrainian regime by one of the European nations” was hidden.
The barrage of sea-launched Kalibr missiles destroyed four S-300 launchers and as many as 25 Ukrainian troops in the Sunday strike, ministry spokesman Major General Igor Konashenkov claimed. He used the old name of the city, which Ukrainian authorities renamed Dnepro in 2016 to distance it from the Soviet period of the country’s history.
The Russian official also reported destroying an S-300 targeting radar in a separate overnight precision airstrike near Uspenovka. The general didn’t specify which of the multiple villages of that name in Ukraine he was referring to, and didn’t say whether the radar was part of the battery supplied by the foreign nation.
Last Friday, Slovakia announced that it had donated its only S-300 battery to Ukraine. The weapon system was part of the NATO member’s legacy from the Warsaw Pact days, when it formed part of Czechoslovakia. It was not clear how many vehicles were sent to Ukraine. A regular S-300 battery can have as few as four and as many as 12 launchers using a single radar to identify targets, and is controlled by a single command post.
Prime Minister Eduard Heger assured citizens that the country’s national security would not be compromised since “allies” agreed to boost its air defense in return. US President Joe Biden said his country would provide an American Patriot missile battery as a replacement and thanked Bratislava for agreeing to give the S-300 to Kiev. Elements of the Patriot system started arriving in Slovakia three weeks ago, according to its defense minister.
Responding to Russian claims on Twitter, Prime Minister Heger called them a “hoax” and “Russian propaganda.” The statement was apparently based on a denial that Slovakia received from Kiev.
Washington reportedly wanted another NATO member, Turkey, to strike a similar deal with Ukraine and send it a Russian-supplied S-400, which is more advanced than the S-300. Ankara rejected the idea, saying the system would remain in its possession. In 2020, the US imposed sanctions on Turkey for buying the S-400s from Russia under a deal signed in 2017.
The Ukrainian Conflict Is a U.S./NATO Proxy War, but One Which Russia Is Poised to Win Decisively – Scott Ritter
By Finian Cunningham – Strategic Culture Foundation – April 9, 2022
Scott Ritter is a former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer who has gained international respect for his independence and integrity as a commentator on conflicts and foreign relations.
Question: Do you think that Russia has a just cause in launching its “special military operation” in Ukraine on February 24?
Scott Ritter: I believe Russia has articulated a cognizable claim of preemptive collective self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. The threat posed by NATO expansion, and Ukraine’s eight-year bombardment of the civilians of the Donbass fall under this umbrella.
Question: Do you think Russia has legitimate concerns about the Pentagon sponsoring biological weapons programs in laboratories in Ukraine?
Scott Ritter: The Pentagon denies any biological weapons program, but admits biological research programs on Ukrainian soil. Documents captured by Russia have allegedly uncovered the existence of programs the components of which could be construed as having offensive biological warfare applications. The U.S. should be required to explain the purpose of these programs.
Question: What do you make of allegations in Western media that Russian troops committed war crimes in Bucha and other Ukrainian cities? It is claimed that Russian forces summarily executed civilians.
Scott Ritter: All claims of war crimes must be thoroughly investigated, including Ukrainian allegations that Russia killed Ukrainian civilians in Bucha. However, the data available about the Bucha incident does not sustain the Ukrainian claims, and as such, the media should refrain from echoing these claims as fact until a proper investigation of the evidence is conducted, either by the media, or unbiased authorities.
Question: Do you think the alleged Russian bombing of a hospital and an art theater in Mariupol were false-flag provocations?
Scott Ritter: Both locations are available for detailed forensic examination that would either confirm or refute Ukrainian allegations that these locations were struck by Russian aerial bombs. Other data, such as the existence of any NATO radar data that would put Russian aircraft over these two locations at the time of the alleged attack, should be collected. A detailed forensic examination of each site would go a long way in proving or disproving the Ukrainian claims through the collection of weapons fragments and the evaluation of environmental samples which would show the chemical composition of any explosive used, thereby allowing a better idea of what weapon or explosive was used to destroy the sites.
Question: Western governments and mainstream media have denigrated Russian objectives to “demilitarize and deNazify” Ukraine. The West says Russia has invented or grossly exaggerated these problems as a pretext for invasion. Do you think this Western denialism is because it doesn’t want to acknowledge that Russia may indeed have legitimate concerns, and secondly that to acknowledge would mean admitting that the West is part of the problem in the current war?
Scott Ritter: The irony is that the West had thoroughly documented the extent of the Nazi ideology in Ukraine’s civil, political, and military structures during and after the 2014 Maidan coup. This documented reality was deliberately obscured by the same sources that had previously documented its existence once the Russian invasion occurred. To acknowledge the existence of this odious ideology by NATO would require NATO to acknowledge the role it played in training and equipping Azov regiment personnel since 2015. The Russian documentation of its ongoing de-Nazification effort in Ukraine is a source of continual embarrassment to NATO, as it exposes the scope and scale of NATO’s role in empowering the militarization of Nazi ideology in Ukraine.
Question: For about four months before the Russian intervention in Ukraine, the Biden administration was asserting non-stop that Moscow was planning an invasion. Do you think this is a case of great intelligence on the part of Washington or the culmination of provocation by Washington resulting in Russian military action in Ukraine?
Scott Ritter: We now know that the U.S. intelligence community under the Biden administration is committed to a policy of haphazardly “declassifying” intelligence for the purpose of shaping public opinion (so-called “getting ahead of the story”). There is no evidence that the intelligence regarding potential Russian military action was based upon anything other than politicized speculation derived from a crude analysis of Russian military dispositions void of any context. Any genuine intelligence assessment regarding the timing of any Russian military action would have incorporated the domestic political imperative of getting Duma [Russian parliamentary] approval for the deployment of Russian forces outside the borders of Russia, which carries with it the requirement of a cognizable justification for this military action under the UN Charter. This required political steps such as Donetsk and Lugansk declaring independence, and then petitioning the Russian parliament to recognize this independence, so that Russia could legitimately invoke Article 51. None of these factors was knowable when the Biden administration was issuing its warnings of imminent attack, thereby certifying the “intelligence” as being derived from fact-free speculation, and not intelligence at all.
Question: The Western media are reporting that the Russian military operation in Ukraine is floundering because it has not over-run Ukraine entirely. As a military expert, how do you see the Russian operation proceeding?
Scott Ritter: Russia is fighting a very difficult campaign hampered by its own constraint designed to limit civilian casualties and damage to infrastructure and the fact that Ukraine possesses a very well-trained military that is well led and equipped. Russia deployed some 200,000 troops in support of this operation. They are facing some 600,000 Ukrainian forces. The first phase of the Russian operation was designed to shape the battlefield to Russia’s advantage while diminishing the size and capacity of the Ukrainian ability to wage large-scale conflict. The second phase is focused on destroying the main Ukrainian force concentration in eastern Ukraine. Russia is well on its way to accomplishing this task.
Question: Do you see danger from Ukraine being turned into a proxy war by the United States and NATO partners against Russia in a way that attempts to repeat the West’s covert war in Syria or the Afghanistan war (1979-89) with the Soviet Union? There are reports of foreign legions being sent to Ukraine via NATO countries. Do you think there is a Western plan to embroil Russia in a proxy war that is aimed at sapping Russia politically, economically, and militarily?
Scott Ritter: The Ukrainian conflict is a proxy war, but one which Russia is poised to win decisively. While there appears to be a NATO/western plan to embroil Russia in a “new Afghanistan”, I don’t see any risk of this conflict dragging on for more than a few more weeks at the most before Russia accomplishes a strategic victory over Ukraine.
Question: There is an arrogant assumption among Western governments that they can impose crippling economic sanctions on Russia in a similar way to what they did on Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea among others. But would you agree that if Russia begins to impose its own counter-sanctions by restricting oil and gas exports then the Western states may end up reaping a whirlwind that is devastating to their societies?
Scott Ritter: Russia was warned well in advance about the scope and scale of U.S.-led sanctions that would be imposed if Russia were to invade Ukraine. Russia has prepared its own counter-sanction strategy which will not only defeat the Western sanctions but further strengthen Russia’s economy by decoupling it from the West and Western control/influence. We see evidence of the effectiveness of this counter-campaign as the Russian ruble is strengthened, the Russian stock market enjoys positive traction, and Europe and the U.S. flounder economically. The West has sown the wind in sanctioning Russia; Russia will not reap the whirlwind.
oscow denies the claims, as have other independent analysts who point to evidence that the incident was a false-flag provocation perpetrated by NATO-backed Ukrainian Nazi regiments to undermine Russia internationally and bolster Western objectives. It is a foreboding sign of the times that Ritter should be banned for daring to question dubious narratives. (He was later reinstated following a public outcry against censorship.)
Scott Ritter is a critical commentator on U.S. conflicts and foreign relations. He is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the Soviet Union implementing nuclear arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and as a UN inspector in Iraq (1991-98) overseeing the disarmament of weapons of mass destruction. He is the author of Scorpion King: America’s Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump (Clarity Press, 2020).
Unheeded US warning toward India highlights antipathy of non-Western countries
Global Times | April 7, 2022
The US warned India once again. White House top economic adviser Brian Deese claimed on Wednesday that the consequences of New Delhi’s “more explicit strategic alignment” with Moscow would be “significant and long-term.”
What a bullying manner! This is an open threat by the US toward India on the latter’s own business. When it comes to the Ukraine crisis, the US is blatantly displaying its hegemonic mentality – either you are with the US, or against the US. This echoes exactly the same slogan of George W. Bush, made in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, said Zhao Gancheng, a research fellow at the Shanghai Institute for International Studies.
The US is again telling the world: As a superpower, it has the right to define who you are.
Even if India has not “aligned” with Russia, and has kept a relatively balanced position during the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the US does not buy it.
“Remaining neutral makes no sense to the US. What Washington wants from New Delhi is completely standing by the side of the US,” Zhao said.
The US is afraid that ties among China, Russia and India may further develop due to the Ukraine crisis, although systematic cooperation of the three countries is not rare.
Moreover, the US expects that everything goes well in terms of the Quad summit, which is schedule to be held in Japan, tentatively by the end of June. Yet, if India does not make a statement in line with the US expectation, the summit may hardly take place. Constant warnings over “consequences” against India emerged from the US, revealing Washington’s anxiety.
Before Deese’s remarks, the US has already warned India more than once against constructing alternate payment mechanisms with Russia or buying more oil from Russia. Yet the threats turned out to be in vain, as India benefits from its ties with Russia, which can’t be substituted by the US.
Also, India’s response mirrors an increasingly obvious trend – the US has underestimated the antipathy the rest of the world holds for it. Not only India, but the majority of the general public in China and Latin American countries and other developing world have not taken sides with the US in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, even if the US believes it is standing on the moral high ground. They do not support sanctioning Russia. As Gérard Araud, former French ambassador to the US, put it, even if they don’t particularly like Russia, a lot of non-Westerners are supporting it only because they are confronting with the West.
Quite a few countries have long been bullied by the US. They have long developed a rebellious psychology. This time, the more sanctions Washington imposes on Russia due to the conflict, the more aversion the US will have to face.
The US has long believed it masters superior strength, values, and civilization, which in turn has given birth to its overbearing arrogance. As a result, when interacting with non-Western countries, the US either coerces them or issues warnings to them. Since Washington is accustomed to dealing with others from a position of strength, its relations with other countries have never been on an equal footing, Li Haidong, a professor from the China Foreign Affairs University in Beijing, told the Global Times.
That’s why the world has been witnessing the US talking about the so-called democracy while it makes dictatorial orders toward other countries.
The resentment from non-Western countries toward such hegemonic arrogance has long been lurking. It is now surfacing during the ongoing Ukraine crisis, along with the real status of the US in international society – It has imposed sanctions on Russia yet has failed to reach expected effects; It claims to be on the justified side, but most countries believe it is the US-led NATO that has turned Ukraine into a pawn, threw it under the bus, and worse, attempted to prolong the war; It pushed India, one of its closest partners, to take sides, but only gained India’s cold shoulder.
Since the outbreak of the conflict, Indian people seem to have been fed up with the US putting pressure on or threatening India. Many of them asked: What kind of a partner is this? New Delhi’s current balanced diplomacy is thus warmly welcomed by the Indian public. This is a sign of their repugnance toward Washington.
Today, the US would be self-defeating if it stubbornly believes that whoever it cozies up to would feel honored and dance to its tune. Gone is the time when US warnings work.
Russia, Iran hold major economic forum to expand ties
Press TV – April 7, 2022
Russia has hosted a major economic forum attended by a large Iranian delegation as the two countries seek to expand their trade and economic cooperation.
Iran’s official IRNA news agency said in a Thursday report that representatives from more than 300 Russian businesses and companies had attended the gathering held earlier in the day at the conference hall of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation (TPPRF) in Moscow.
An Iranian economic delegation attended the meeting which authorities said was aimed at studying new capacities for economic and trade cooperation between Iran and Russia, said the report.
It said that more than 53 Iranian private businesses were represented in the forum where TPPRF President Sergey Katyrin highlighted the importance of the close cooperation between Iran and Russia in light of the current political and economic circumstances in the region.
Russia has been facing a raft of economic sanctions from the US and European countries since it started a military operation in Ukraine in February.
The sanctions are much similar to a series of bans imposed on Iran by the United States since 2018 when Washington pulled out of an international deal on Iran’s nuclear program and started a campaign of maximum economic pressure on Tehran.
Iran decided to increase its trade ties with Russia since US sanctions were imposed through signing an agreement with the Russia-led EAEU bloc of Eurasian economies.
Trade ties between Iran and Russia exceeded $4 billion in value terms over the Iranian calendar year to March. However, the two countries have insisted the figure could more than double because of new geopolitical situation in the region.
“The goal of the Islamic Republic of Iran is to increase our trade turnover to at least $10 billion in the short-term,” Iranian deputy trade minister Alireza Peymanpak said on Wednesday while addressing Iranian and Russian delegates in Moscow.
US withdraws from cybersecurity dialogue – Russia
Samizdat – April 7, 2022
The United States has unilaterally closed communication channels with Russia regarding cybersecurity, Russian Security Council Deputy Secretary Oleg Khramov has said.
The two nations previously exchanged lists of critical internet infrastructure under the auspices of the Russian Security Council and the US National Security Council, after Moscow sent Washington proposals aimed at taking joint measures to protect both countries’ critical infrastructure from cyberattacks.
“The White House has now notified us that it is unilaterally withdrawing from the negotiation process and closing the communication channel,” Khramov announced.
Russia and the US previously agreed that it was “critically important” for the two countries to work together and “combine our efforts to fight cybercrime instead of barking at one another like dogs,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said after his summit with US President Joe Biden last summer.
Khramov claims that US Cyber Command is being actively pumped up with taxpayer dollars and intends to launch a preemptive cyberattack against Russia.
Washington previously accused Moscow of planning cyberattacks against the US out of “revenge” for the West’s sanctions; however, Khramov said Russia’s doctrine prevents it from carrying out these attacks, and that it is in fact the US that has forward “cyberbases” in countries such as Germany and the Baltic states, where he said there are hundreds of professional hackers working for the US.
Khramov also quoted a statement from the chief of the US Central Security Service, who stated that the US must “defend forward” and take the cyberspace war to the adversary, as is the case with traditional warfare, adding that “Persistent engagement of our adversaries in cyberspace cannot be successful if our actions are limited to DOD networks.”
Interpreting The US’ Threat Of “Significant & Long-Term Consequences” For India

By Andrew Korybko | One World Press | April 7, 2022
Director of the White House National Economic Council Brian Deese told reporters on Wednesday that there will be “significant and long-term consequences” if his country assesses that India has engaged in a so-called “more explicit strategic alignment” with Russia. New Delhi has thus far impressively practiced a policy of principled neutrality towards Moscow’s ongoing special military operation in Ukraine and the New Cold War more broadly between the US on one hand and Russia and China on the other. This South Asian state is the world’s largest and most important non-aligned country that’s setting a proud example for the rest of its Global South peers. The US is afraid that countless more countries will follow India’s lead by continuing to bravely defy Washington’s unilateral hegemonic pressure to sanction Russia.
Deese’s remarks represent the most ominous American threat to India yet since ties between these two Great Powers became complicated from summer 2020 onwards into the present day. Considering the context of the rolling “South Asian Spring” regime change scenario that the US simultaneously activated against Pakistan and Sri Lanka over the weekend, his statement adds credence to suspicions that India is actually the ultimate target of this campaign. It’s unclear what “significant and long-term consequences” will befall Indian-American relations, but it certainly seems like their ties will at the very least continue deteriorating if the US continues aggressively pressuring India to sacrifice its objective national interests for its supposed partner’s sake.
The sudden onset of regional stability along India’s periphery is intended to destabilize that country itself, both immediately and over time. In the event that the Pakistan and/or Sri Lanka’s multipolar governments are replaced by American puppets, then US bases might pop up in those neighboring countries. The so-called “anti-Indian hawks” in Islamabad’s “establishment” might become emboldened to violate the year-long ceasefire with New Delhi in order to punish that country by proxy at Washington’s behest for its policy of principled neutrality. With respect to Colombo, a US naval base could threaten India’s Sea Lines Of Communication (SLOC). Washington might even use the island as a base to encourage separatist movements in Southern India.
To be absolutely clear, India is not engaging in a so-called “explicit strategic alignment” with Russia, it’s simply advancing its objective national interests by remaining neutral in the Ukrainian Conflict and refusing to sacrifice its own for America’s sake. By default, however, the zero-sum unipolar hegemonic perspective embraced by US strategists influences them to regard this balanced policy as supposedly “taking Russia’s side” in the New Cold War. This false assessment is then in turn incorporated into its policy formulation towards that country, thus resulting in Deese’s ominous threat. Given the US’ decades-long track record of betraying former partners in the worst ways possible by orchestrating regime changes and even waging Hybrid Wars against them, India should be very concerned by what he just said.
America seems to be preparing for a fundamental change in its relationship with India, which will certainly affect the balance of interests in Eurasia. Thus far, New Delhi has been doing its utmost to retain that balance between itself, Russia, and China, ergo its policy of principled neutrality in order to ensure that Moscow doesn’t become disproportionately dependent on Beijing in response to the US-led West’s unprecedented pressure campaign. Nevertheless, India also hoped to retain excellent relations with the US at the same time in order to further synchronize the geo-economic aspects of their respective Indo-Pacific strategies. This grand strategic balancing act is now at risk of becoming unbalanced if the US unilaterally decides to worsen relations with India.
The form that this could take remains unclear, but the reader should remember that an intensification of information warfare against India as well as potential economic warfare and possibly even other more dangerous forms of Hybrid Warfare can’t be discounted due to the US’ track record. Security threats will spike in the event that the Pakistani and/or Sri Lankan governments are overthrown throughout the course of the ongoing “South Asian Spring” regime change campaign that the US has unleashed throughout the region. With these forecasts in mind, it’s of the highest importance that the South Asian states seriously consider reviving the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) in order to advance “regional solutions for regional problems” and thus thwart the US’ plots.
Andrew Korybko is an American political analyst.

If you regard the United States as perhaps flawed but overall a force for good in the world . . .