Russia - General Discussion.

[koxinga]

Whether you are democracy or authoritarian regime, public opinion is something you need to manage when you conducting prolong warfare.

In Western democracies, public opinions is less easy to manage. In the case of the Ukraine war, there were considerable ground up support and emotion well before any official government response. Thus they follow the flow of the opinion because this is what the people want.

European psyche is deeply shaped by WWII and the only reason why there is such tight integration from EEC in the 1950s to EU, and NATO was due to it. The Russian invasion is viewed in that lens and is existential to them. If people demand sanctions, remove business from Russia, no politicians will say no, or say there is a better way to apply pressure.

Indeed, they are starting to wake up and find out that they blindly believed that their own propoganda that the whole world is against Russia. It might be true that the world (UN GA ES‑11/1 resolution) condemns the invasion, but it does not mean following through on the same level of sanctions, as well as the cost to their wallets this will take.

Western people would argue that trading with Russia means funding the Russian war machine that is killing the Ukrainian mother/child/families and lecture the rest of the world about our morality. But what about the starving Sri Lankan family, or a street vendor in Jarkata struggling with food prices?

It is not an argument that destroying Russia and saving Ukraine is not important. But the world is interconnected. Achieving those goals but at the expense of the rest of the world is not a strategy that people will follow.

 

[T.C.P]

I put the emphasis on this one. Because the West Politicians and mainstream media, are they telling the truth or are they 'building' public opinion on the direction with what they want ?

Even dictatorship like Russia, they don't disregard public opinion. It is just they are have more forcefull tools to control it. I just see both side politicians are building their own agenda to move public opinion on the direction they want.

Russia already in begining prepared their public on economic hardship, while West much less so. Thus when the cost of economic war hit them larger then expected, I do see Western public (on some section) begin to complaint. This is not a good way to do prolong economic war, as you have to prepared your population from the begining of the economic costs.

The dictactorial Russia seems more preparing their population from begining, and not so with the West. Is it because miss calculation and over confidence? Time will tell.

Off course emotional factors in Euro public and Russian are high on this war. My point is to make prolong succesfull economic war, is not much different with war in the ground. You have to calculate your own strength and weaknesses, then work it out around that base on your advantage. This include preparing your public toward the costs, in order not getting surprise turn around on their opinion. Whether you are democracy or authoritarian regime, public opinion is something you need to manage when you conducting prolong warfare.

Like Koxinga mentioned its easier for Russia to manage the populations anger after they have done something that the population does not agree with.

The level of vehemence against Russia from Western liberals (previously the least anti russian demographic) has been quite something.

I will be honest I did not expect this level of grit from the European populace. They know their economy is getting hit, but they dont care and want even harder sanctions against Russia. Only in Italy have I seen the people slightly waver. In Germany, UK etc, I see the people angry at the govt yes, but most still prefer sanctions over economic relief of accepting removal of sanctions. If you had told me before the invasion, that the European populace would have remained so resolute, I would not have believed you, I really did expect them to fold once their lifestyles started getting affected. But so far their anger at Russia shows no sign of abating.

The level of pressure the populace can put on their elected officials is much more intense in Europe than almost anywhere else. If the officials dont feed the rhetoric, their opponents will do it and unseat them.

I agree with your sentiment, that the West should have treated the economic war just as strategically as the military war, but the anti Russian wave is too strong for that.

 

[Ananda]

@koxinga and @T.C.P I don't argue on the emotional drive from EU public to punish Russia. My post basically put question on two point:

1. Is it wise decision to conduct prolong economic war (as this one is going to be prolong one), drive mostly by emotional consideration ? There are better preparation that West politicians can do on conducting this sanctions while still confine with public emotions toward Russia.
2. Are Western leadership realy only following public emotions or tweek public emotions toward their own goal (against Putin regime). Are they telling the truth from begining on the costs Western public need to beared ?

Off course what I put is the ideal way to conduct prolong economic war. I also agree with both of you it is very difficult for many in West especially EU zone not to be emotional. For that, I just point out why their economic war so far not giving them, the result they are hoping. Because no good will come out on any action doing hastily and emotionally. That's my point from begining.

Only in Italy have I seen the people slightly waver. In Germany, UK etc, I see the people angry at the govt yes, but most still prefer sanctions over economic relief of accepting removal of sanctions. If you had told me before the invasion, that the European populace would have remained so resolute,

As an Asian like you, I also don't think most EU public will still want to punish Russia after riding costs due to the economic war. However will every one still in line ? Bulgaria just sack the most pro west government they have. We know by choosing Orban, Hungarian still want to make their own negotiation with Russia outside Brussels directed concenssus.

This related toward what koxinga put:

Indeed, they are starting to wake up and find out that they blindly believed that their own propoganda that the whole world is against Russia.

For me, will the wholle EU still resolute against Russian sanctions or the crack against those members with less economic prosperity in South and East (except Poland and Baltics) will happen more ?

I understand your arguments and sometimes when I talk with Colleugue from Western Euro market, those emotions clearly shown on their judgement making. However even now some of them (that has hard disdain toward Russia) begin to have second opinion on this economic war cause two thing:

1. Outside collective west and close allies, practically no other want to support West economic war against Russia,
2. The incremental costs on Western buying power if continue the level of sanctions as this moment.

Time will tell whose going to "blink" first. Just war in the ground that reach determining factor, the economic war between collective West and Russia seems moving in to that direction too.

There will be no turning back on Russia and West/ (especially) EU economic trade. No doubt about that. Question will remain if this is going total decoupling from all EU members toward Russia or we are going to see continues relationship from some of them.

 

[Vivendi]

Many good observations -- just one minor point about the economic war: we should keep in mind it goes both ways. Take Russian gas as an example. Russia has been using gas as a weapon in the past (by turning off/reducing deliveries), and specifically related to this particular conflict, second half of last year, when very few in Europe saw a war brewing, Russia refused to deliver gas to Europe even if prices were extremely high. Now Russia has been proactively cutting gas deliveries to many European countries, before a ban has been put in place.

Those who warned against relying on Russian gas have been proven right -- this was a huge mistake, going back many years. In particular Germany has screwed up big time by also starting to shut down nuclear power plants, a massive mistake, they should at least keep the ones not yet closed open, and producing as much electricity as possible. Hopefully EU will build more nuclear power plants in the future.

Some good news: The LNG production facility in Northern Norway is up and running, producing at maximum capacity for 2 weeks already:

First tanker in 20 months embarks to energy hungry Europe

Hammerfest LNG resumes production and the tanker 'Arctic Voyager' is first in line to bring liquid natural gas, equivalent to 1 TW of energy, to markets in Europe striving to achieve full independence from Russian supplies.

thebarentsobserver.com

Norway is strengthening energy cooperation with the EU, according to a statement released yesterday:

Joint EU-Norway statement on strengthening energy cooperation

On 23 June, EU and Norway agreed to further strengthen their close cooperation in the field of energy, with a view to deepen their long-term energy partnership, acknowledging the urgency to increase energy independence and to work towards reducing energy prices.

ec.europa.eu

Norwegian export to EU is set to remain at record levels for years to come.

Another piece of good news: Ukraine has been accepted as a EU candidate country:

‘A good day for Europe’: EU grants Ukraine candidate status

EU’s 27 nations unanimously voted for Ukraine candidate status in a moral victory for the war-torn country.

www.aljazeera.com

So after a bit more than 100 days of war, Putin has achieved the following:
1. Finland and Sweden has applied for NATO membership
2. Ukraine has been accepted as a EU candidate country
3. European NATO countries have increased their defence spending to record levels, including Germany with a 100billion Euro extra funding.
4. NATO is more united than ever since the end of the cold war.
5. Nordstream 2 has been terminated, and Russian gas will soon stop flowing to Europe
6. More than a hundred thousand highly educated Russians have fled the country in a massive brain drain.

 

[Ananda]

just one minor point about the economic war: we should keep in mind it goes both ways.

It is not minor points, it is undisputable fact that I have talk over and over in this thread when talking of Economic War. The way I see, it is the west that "downplay" that fact. Afterall they (west politicians) begin this economic war with arrogance that they will crush Russia economy, because West economy is much bigger and powerful then "tiny" Russian Economy.

Turn out that tiny economy can still give some punch toward collective West economy, or the Western Politicians and Mainstream media now already full of Gloating of their success.

In particular Germany has screwed up big time by also starting to shut down nuclear power plants, a massive mistake, they should at least keep the ones not yet closed open, and producing as much electricity as possible. Hopefully EU will b

Well EU 'Green" lobby that push away EU nuclear and their biggest chances to be fully independent on Energy. This BS of those green energy of wind, solar etc will not give them enough capacity toward that independence from Hydrocarbon.

Another piece of good news: Ukraine has been accepted as a EU candidate country:

That's will be different with actually accepting Ukraine as members country. Because the next part come to hard part, how much EU need to subsidise Ukraine on whatever left of Ukraine teritory and economy. More importantly whose going take the bill.

The longer the war taking the more EU and US need to continue supporting what's left of Ukraine. Biden's team talk on prolong the war to keep Russia bleeding. Now Collective West has to bleed economically in supporting Ukraine with this war, and after the war (whatever the result will be).

So the bleeding also coming from both ways.

 

[kato]

In particular Germany has screwed up big time by also starting to shut down nuclear power plants, a massive mistake, they should at least keep the ones not yet closed open, and producing as much electricity as possible.

That would be until the end of this year, at the exact same time when continueing to run them becomes illegal. Because that's also when they run out of fuel. The entire remaining runtime of the reactors was laid out around the end date a decade ago - despite whatever a few right-wingers including in the government demand, it is not possible to extend their runtime without what would amount to a complete renewal of reactor cores taking up to a year time plus considerable financial investment.

In addition the three still active nuclear power plants only provide 5% of Germany's electricity. They are simply not relevant.

 

[STURM]

Strong remarks made by India.

Why are some nations neutral on the Russia-Ukraine war?

Countries in Asia, Africa and the Middle East have refused to isolate Moscow, despite the EU’s lobbying efforts.

www.aljazeera.com

"But speaking at the GLOBSEC forum in Bratislava earlier this month, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, the Indian foreign minister, said that Europe should grow out of the mindset that its problems are the world’s problems' The world cannot be that Eurocentric that it used to be in the past,” he said."

“If I were to take Europe collectively, which has been singularly silent on many things which were happening, for example in Asia, you could ask why would anybody in Asia trust Europe on anything at all,” he added"

Meanwhile the Kazakhs have said something totally unexpected; something which undoubtedly annoyed Putin

Ukraine war: Is Kazakhstan going cool on Russia?

President Tokayev publicly refused to recognise separatist regions in Ukraine, enraging some Kremlin officials.

www.aljazeera.com

"And then he said something that seemed to have shattered Kazakhstan’s post-Soviet “strategic partnership” with its former imperial master.;

“That’s why we won’t recognise Taiwan, Kosovo, [the breakaway Georgian regions of] South Ossetia and Abkhazia,” Tokayev said with a faint smile"

“Apparently, the same principle will be applied to the quasi-state territories that are, in our view, Luhansk and Donetsk,” the two breakaway regions in southeastern Ukraine, he said"

 

[Vivendi]

"But speaking at the GLOBSEC forum in Bratislava earlier this month, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, the Indian foreign minister, said that Europe should grow out of the mindset that its problems are the world’s problems' The world cannot be that Eurocentric that it used to be in the past,” he said."

“If I were to take Europe collectively, which has been singularly silent on many things which were happening, for example in Asia, you could ask why would anybody in Asia trust Europe on anything at all,” he added"

I disagree that Europe "has been singularly silent on many things which were happening"!

Instead I would say that many Asian countries are "silent on many things..."!

Europe has taken a clear stance on:

1. The situation in Myanmar (unlike many Asian countries)
2. The treatment of Uighurs in China (unlike many Asian countries)
3. Terrorism in various Asian countries, including Philippines, Indonesia, etc.
4. Suppression of dissidents in various Asian countries and regions, e.g., Hong Kong

In addition EU has provided
5. Disaster relief and building resilience
6. Promote gender equality and women's rights globally, including Asia
7. Environmental and climate change cooperation activities in Asia

Regarding item 5, see e.g., European-Union-funded project supports Bishkek’s detailed disaster resilience assessment

European Union-funded project strengthens resilience of Dushanbe

Through financial support from the European Union, the city of Dushanbe and the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) conducted two self-assessment workshops focused on disaster resilience.

www.undrr.org

European Union-funded project helps to make Central Asian cities safer and sustainable

Local administrations of 9 Central Asian cities have been introduced today to the Making Cities Resilient 2030 (MCR2030) global initiative, which helps to access and prevent disasters and create safe and sustainable conditions for city residents.

www.undrr.org

Regarding item 6, see e.g., Promoting gender equality & women's rights beyond the EU

Regarding item 7, see e.g., About - WECOOP

Eastern Europe and Central Asia

www.iucn.org

European Union - Central Asia Water, Environment and Climate Change Cooperation (WECOOP)

The project aims to enhance environment, climate change and water policies in Central Asia through approximation to EU standards and to promote green investments in relevant sectors with the aim of contributing to measurable reductions in man-made pollution, including CO2 emission.

www.eeas.europa.eu

See also: Asia

These are just some examples "off the top of my head", for sure there are many other things and activities that could be mentioned.

 

[Feanor]

So after a bit more than 100 days of war, Putin has achieved the following:
1. Finland and Sweden has applied for NATO membership
2. Ukraine has been accepted as a EU candidate country
3. European NATO countries have increased their defence spending to record levels, including Germany with a 100billion Euro extra funding.
4. NATO is more united than ever since the end of the cold war.
5. Nordstream 2 has been terminated, and Russian gas will soon stop flowing to Europe
6. More than a hundred thousand highly educated Russians have fled the country in a massive brain drain.

Neither Finnish nor Swedish NATO membership is a particularly major threat, Finland marignally more so. NATO being united is certainly bad for Russia, and very much a forseeable consequence, but not necessarily immediately impactful. Nord Stream 2 was on the rocks before this, and I wouldn't be surprised if Russia had written it off before the war. The brain drain spike certainly isn't good, I've seen it first hand somewhat, but the impending isolation is worse.

In my opinion all these are dwarfed by the issues for the Russian economy. I think the best case scenario is a slow and painful adaptation of the Russian economy to new realities, loss of traditional trading partners, loss of access to certain technologies, and an eventual, slow, return to growth under new, more difficult conditions. This means years of growth and development lost. Then there's the staggering cost of the war itself, including replacing destroyed equipment, funding the various irregular formations, and rebel reservists. Finally there's the cost of the newly occupied/annexed areas. How many infrastructural projects did Russia have to cancel to pay for the peaceful annexation of Crimea? How much will this annexation/occupation cost?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

Analysis: Russians feel little economic pain now, long-term outlook darkens

For Oleg Kechin, owner of a chain of barbershops, forecasts that Russia will be plunged into its deepest economic crisis in a generation feel overdone.

www.reuters.com

 

[STURM]

I disagree that Europe "has been singularly silent on many things which were happening"!

Instead I would say that many Asian countries are "silent on many things..."!

It was the Indian Foreign Minister's stance and I'm pretty sure he had good grounds from his perspective [whether you agree or not] to say what he did. Unfortunately he didn't go into greater detail. If he did we'd know more on what he was referring to.

Europe has taken a clear stance on:

1. The situation in Myanmar (unlike many Asian countries)
2. The treatment of Uighurs in China (unlike many Asian countries)

Commendable but ultimately what has that solved? Has the military government in Myanmar taken notice? Has the lot of the Uighurs improved? If the Asian countries you're referring to had done the same by openly criticising others would it have made a difference? Also, what "many Asian countries" are you specifically referring to?

Can you say for certain that various or your "many" Asian countries have not communicated their concerns quietly via back door channels? Are you aware that Asian countries [I'm assuming you mean those in the Indian sub continent and South East Asia - "Asia" is a large place] do things differently and they may have concerns that may not be relevant or applicable to European countries when it comes to openly criticising others in Asia; including China with which they are linked to a very large degree economically?

Do you have to reminded that "Asian" countries are not as united or integrated as the EU; different forms of governance; different policies; different geo political/strategic concerns; etc and that despite ASEAN's policy of non interference in the domestic affairs of member states that the likes of Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia have been vocal on the situation in Myanmar with regards to the military take over? If a EU country criticises China and there are consequences it has the institutionalised security and diplomatic backing of the EU to fall back on; this is not the case with Asian countries which don't have their version of the EU.

These are just some examples "off the top of my head", for sure there are many other things and activities that could be mentioned.

I don't doubt it.

Ultimately countries in Asia and Africa have their own interests to watch out for; their own concerns as well. Just because they haven't jumped on the Western bandwagon in criticising Russia and in participating in efforts to isolate and weaken Russia because of its invasion doesn't mean they approve of it and aren't concerned. Doesn't mean they don't subscribe to the rules based order; self determination, human rights and democracy.

 

[SolarWind]

An interesting article on the thread title topic.

How Far Do Putin’s Imperial Ambitions Go?

The Russian president and his inner circle speak openly about retaking the vast lands that Moscow once controlled. As the war continues in Ukraine, Russia’s neighbors are taking the threats seriously.

www.wsj.com

Discusses the Russian point of view and shows that its expansionist ambitions might not likely end with Ukraine. A good question is alluded to on what Europe should do for its self-defense should the US have another isolationist administration in the future. Pondering over this seems to hint that Russia's plan for this war may have started developing some number of years back and what their real motives could have been for covert election interference in the US.

 

[swerve]

Strong remarks made by India.

Why are some nations neutral on the Russia-Ukraine war?

Countries in Asia, Africa and the Middle East have refused to isolate Moscow, despite the EU’s lobbying efforts.

www.aljazeera.com

"But speaking at the GLOBSEC forum in Bratislava earlier this month, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, the Indian foreign minister, said that Europe should grow out of the mindset that its problems are the world’s problems' The world cannot be that Eurocentric that it used to be in the past,” he said."

“If I were to take Europe collectively, which has been singularly silent on many things which were happening, for example in Asia, you could ask why would anybody in Asia trust Europe on anything at all,” he added"

Meanwhile the Kazakhs have said something totally unexpected; something which undoubtedly annoyed Putin

Ukraine war: Is Kazakhstan going cool on Russia?

President Tokayev publicly refused to recognise separatist regions in Ukraine, enraging some Kremlin officials.

www.aljazeera.com

"And then he said something that seemed to have shattered Kazakhstan’s post-Soviet “strategic partnership” with its former imperial master.;

“That’s why we won’t recognise Taiwan, Kosovo, [the breakaway Georgian regions of] South Ossetia and Abkhazia,” Tokayev said with a faint smile"

“Apparently, the same principle will be applied to the quasi-state territories that are, in our view, Luhansk and Donetsk,” the two breakaway regions in southeastern Ukraine, he said"

I'm sure the Kazakhs are keenly aware of the large Russian minority in Kazakhstan & where much of it is concentrated.

 

[STURM]

Only a few months ago such a statement from Kazakhstan would have been unthinkable. To be expected; there are deep cultural and historical ties between Russia and Central Asia but as things stand the coming years might see a lessening of Russian influence there and an increased Chinese presence.

Up to a few years ago Russian troops safeguarded Tajikistan's border; no idea if this is still the cause. In the mid 1990's the Russian Military Attache here was an ethnic Russian but was born in Uzbekistan and still called it home. He joined the Soviet army and when the Berlin wall came down he was commanding a Motor Rifle Battalion in Sibeia. We had a few dinners paid for by the Russian government. Anyway; for him during that period; as an ethnic Russian from Uzbekistan; he still saw the ex Soviet Central States [who unlike other Soviet republics were not eager for independence] as part of Russia.

 

[STURM]

Contrasting views here amongst the Russians interviewed in Kaliningrad. Some believe Bucha was staged; others talk about fascists; others are not keen on the war but chose their words carefully and others openly state their opposition to it and joke about being detained.

 

[Vivendi]

It was the Indian Foreign Minister's stance and I'm pretty sure he had good grounds from his perspective [whether you agree or not] to say what he did. Unfortunately he didn't go into greater detail. If he did we'd know more on what he was referring to.

I don't know this specific politician but my general experience with politicians from various countries, is that it's not always the case that they have "good grounds [...] to say" what they say. So quoting a single politician out of context is not by itself very convincing to say the least.

Commendable but ultimately what has that solved? Has the military government in Myanmar taken notice? Has the lot of the Uighurs improved? If the Asian countries you're referring to had done the same by openly criticising others would it have made a difference? Also, what "many Asian countries" are you specifically referring to?

Can you say for certain that various or your "many" Asian countries have not communicated their concerns quietly via back door channels? Are you aware that Asian countries [I'm assuming you mean those in the Indian sub continent and South East Asia - "Asia" is a large place] do things differently and they may have concerns that may not be relevant or applicable to European countries when it comes to openly criticising others in Asia; including China with which they are linked to a very large degree economically?

And what have those Asian countries that do things differently solved? Has the Military government in Myanmar taken notice? Has the lot of the Uighurs improved due to all this "back channel" activities that you claim? Also have you considered that also Western countries are using back channels in many instances?

Just because they haven't jumped on the Western bandwagon in criticising Russia and in participating in efforts to isolate and weaken Russia because of its invasion doesn't mean they approve of it and aren't concerned. Doesn't mean they don't subscribe to the rules based order; self determination, human rights and democracy.

Well as you keep reminding us Asian countries are a mixed bag. Some no doubt subscribe to "rules based order, self determination human rights and democracy" whereas others clearly don't.

 

[Vivendi]

Although not yet confirmed by international rating agencies, it seems Russia has defaulted on it's debt, for the first time in more than one hundred years: Russia defaults on foreign debt for first time since 1917 revolution – reports | Russia | The Guardian

This is somewhat odd -- I thought the market would rebalance itself and that the sanctions would have only limited impact on Russia? Or is this some kind of Russian "sanction"? I notice Taiwan is considered an "unfriendly country" by Russia. Russia adds Taiwan to list of ‘unfriendly’ nations | Taiwan News | 2022-03-08 14:17:00

 

[Ananda]

thought the market would rebalance itself and that the sanctions would have only limited impact on Russia? Or is this some kind of Russian "sanction"?

O come on, you know well they can not pay the bond because Bidden forbid any USD payment to bomd holders. It is default force by US to Russia.

Market reballance never means there's no Impact om sanctiom to Russia. I don't where you got that idea.

 

[STURM]

So quoting a single politician out of context is not by itself very convincing to say the least.

Because you might not agree with him; I've quoted something 'out of context'? I merely posted a link to a statement made by a senior Indian government official which has some bearing to this thread; whether it meets your approval or is to your liking is something is irrelevant to me.

And what have those Asian countries that do things differently solved? Has the Military government in Myanmar taken notice? Has the lot of the Uighurs improved due to all this "back channel" activities that you claim? Also have you considered that also Western countries are using back channels in many instances?

Did I claim that the lot of the Uighurs has improved as a result of Asian intervention - if so when and where? Did I that by doing ''things differently'' solved the issues you brought up up - if so when and where? Also this may be of surprise to you but back door dealings or quiet diplomacy has worked in the past in solving issues or easing tensions within ASEAN; if you want examples; ask...

Also have you considered that also Western countries are using back channels in many instances?

Does the fact that I didn't mention it; indicate that Western countries are not doing the same? Note that in this context when I say the 'West' I'm referring to various countries which are EU/NATO members and no this is not a criticism of the West. Neither is this a ''this vs that'' debate which judging from your comments this is starting to look like.

Well as you keep reminding us Asian countries are a mixed bag.

And I'll keep reminding you; not ''us'' but ''you'. Also; if I recall correctly I'm not the only on who has reminded you.

This may be hard for you to grasp but ''Asian'' countries do have a a different way of doing things and this is because of historical/political/economic reasons. South East Asia is not as united or politically homegeneous as say the nations that comprise the EU; different priorities; different concerns; different forms of governance; a short history as sovereign nation states, etc - all these factors have a bearing.

The notion that various non Western [and poorer] countries should adopt the same position as the Europeans or the West has with regards to Russia is simply preposterous given that these countries will put their interests first and are already grappling with issues in obtaining grain. Not only that but their ability to pay Russia for food exports has also been effected.

Poorer nations in Asia, Africa, Middle East face food crisis: UN

Export and trade disruptions caused by war in Ukraine are sure to drive up already soaring food prices, the UN warned.

www.aljazeera.com

India bans wheat exports, invites G7 criticism

Agriculture ministers from the G7 industrialised nations immediately condemned India’s ban on wheat exports.

www.aljazeera.com

Why are some nations neutral on the Russia-Ukraine war?

Countries in Asia, Africa and the Middle East have refused to isolate Moscow, despite the EU’s lobbying efforts.

www.aljazeera.com

“I understand the sentiment of these regions, because when countries in Africa and Asia have had wars, Europe has sometimes played a one-sided game,” Jacob F Kirkegaard, senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund, told Al Jazeera.''

''Concerned about the global food crisis, at a recent meeting with EU leaders, Macky Sall, the president of Senegal and chairperson of the African Union (AU), said that the bloc’s sanctions on Russia threatened the import of grains and fertilisers to Africa.''

''In an interview with the French weekly newspaper Le Journal du Dimanche, Sall said that the AU wants to pay (for imports of grains and fertilisers) but it was now “becoming impossible''.

 

[Vivendi]

Because you might not agree with him; I've quoted something 'out of context'? I merely posted a link to a statement made by a senior Indian government official which has some bearing to this thread; whether it meets your approval or is to your liking is something is irrelevant to me.

How did you reach the conclusion that I don't agree with him it means that he was quoted out of context? I never made such a claim.
However no doubt his statement was given in a local political context -- of which we don't know.

Did I claim that the lot of the Uighurs has improved as a result of Asian intervention - if so when and where? Did I that by doing ''things differently'' solved the issues you brought up up - if so when and where? Also this may be of surprise to you but back door dealings or quiet diplomacy has worked in the past in solving issues or easing tensions within ASEAN; if you want examples; ask...

You read too much into this -- you "merely" quoted an Indian politician that made a statement about Western policy in Asia; I "merely" provided some examples to prove him wrong. Whether it works or not was not really the topic of discussion, that was something you started to bring into the discussion.

This may be hard for you to grasp but ''Asian'' countries do have a a different way of doing things and this is because of historical/political/economic reasons. South East Asia is not as united or politically homegeneous as say the nations that comprise the EU; different priorities; different concerns; different forms of governance; a short history as sovereign nation states, etc, - all these factors have a bearing.

It is not hard for me to grasp -- you claiming so does not make it any more true. As I said above, you and others keep repeating this, so I am fully aware of it. You respond to me saying that this has been stated by before by repeating it one more time, this demonstrates that clearly we are no communicating well right now. I will not respond further to your postings on this particular topic since we clearly have a communication breakdown.

 

[STURM]

You read too much into this -- you "merely" quoted an Indian politician that made a statement about Western policy in Asia

I don't think I 'read too much'' into it. I merely said that various Asian countries have reasons not to jump on the Western/European bandwagon with regards to Russia. The Indian Foreign Minister was merely giving his opinion and it's an example of why some non Western/European countries have adopted the position they have with Russia.

you claiming so does not make it any more true.

Does it make it untrue?

You respond to me saying that this has been stated by before by repeating it one more time, this demonstrates

This ''demonstrates' [the way I see it] that you expect Asian countries [in this context when I say ''Asia'' I mean the countries on the Indian sub continent and South East Asia] to follow suit in what others are doing when they can't.

I will not respond further to your postings on this particular topic since we clearly have a communication breakdown.

No skin off my back.