India sends foreign minister to China after Obama visit

[Hamartia Antidote]

OMG
what I am saying is there is never a "quiet" Russia on the world's theatre
A lot of things have been going on well away from the UN spotlights

I think most Europeans and Americans consider that quiet when it comes to Russia.

 

[Shotgunner51]

@Keel
@Peter C

What are you guys arguing? You are saying the same bloody thing.

Overall speaking Russia has been quiet to world affairs for the past 24 years except those concern their vital interests, in general Russia takes a defensive approach on global geopolitics. And even more Moscow has been very tolerant to US interference in their turf e.g. Chechnya, Syria, Georgia, nationalization of oil assets, eastward expansion of NATO, until now. Ukraine is Russia's red-line.

I don't think strategist in Washington ignore Russia, rather they are taking steps to further contain Russia despite the Voldermot has become their primary concern. Eastward expansion of NATO, color revolutions, are some of the means deployed we have seen, and now Ukraine. The other benefit of this strategy is to keep EU at check, or more specifically, keep the Euro at bay.

 

[Keel]

@Keel
@Peter C

What are you guys arguing? You are saying the same bloody thing.

Overall speaking Russia has been quiet to world affairs for the past 24 years except those concern their vital interests, in general Russia takes a defensive approach on global geopolitics. And even more Moscow has been very tolerant to US interference in their turf e.g. Chechnya, Syria, Georgia, nationalization of oil assets, eastward expansion of NATO, until now. Ukraine is Russia's red-line.

I don't think strategist in Washington ignore Russia, rather they are taking steps to further contain Russia despite the Voldermot has become their primary concern. Eastward expansion of NATO, color revolutions, are some of the means deployed we have seen, and now Ukraine. The other benefit of this strategy is to keep EU at check, or more specifically, keep the Euro at bay.

What do you mean "quiet" Russia for the last "24" years?
Do you think Russians' annexation of of Abkhazia and S Ossetia was quiet?
Do you think Russia's loud support of Syria is quiet?
Do you think the US deployment of missile shields in Europe has made Russians quiet?
I would have thought you are better than the very naive!

 

[Shotgunner51]

What do you mean "quiet" Russia for the last "24" years?
Do you think Russians' annexation of of Abkhazia and S Ossetia was quiet?
Do you think Russia's loud support of Syria is quiet?
Do you think the US deployment of missiles in Europe has made Russians quiet?
I would have thought you are better than the very naive!

That's exactly what I meant dear bro, these agenda matter to Russia's vital interests, and of course they react rigorously. Other than that Russia is not actively participating in world affairs any more, acting relatively quiet as compared to US or USSR, because they just don't have that influence, don't have that muscle any more.

Coming back to this very moment, Russia is not just cornered by proxy war in Ukraine, Moscow is now taking heavy waves of economic weapons thrown upon them, destroying the very center of a country's capability - the economy. What's their way out?

 

[Keel]

That's exactly what I meant dear bro, these agenda matter to Russia's vital interests, and of course they react rigorously. Other than that Russia is not actively participating in world affairs any more, acting relatively quiet as compared to US or USSR, because they just don't have that influence, don't have that muscle any more.

Coming back to this very moment, Russia is not just cornered by proxy war in Ukraine, Moscow is now taking heavy waves of economic weapons thrown upon them, destroying the very center of a country's capability - the economy. What's their way out?

Ok
My apology for over reacting

 

[deckingraj]

i know dude....but in future .....if india starts playin an important role in world's politics..if we become tat powerful and relevent...then such a trend like playing both the sides is impossible......china willl seize all its trade with india....and our capital will be under immense threat...china is strong.....more spending on military will affect our economy....and if we choose china...then america will put sanctions on india...endangering our semi-capitalistic economy ...with many projects depending upon us, japan, eu, etc etc

Friend i would suggest you to read a bit more on this subject...When we will become powerful why would be need to play any side?? In fact we would be even more powerful to carry on with our interests...sanctions by China or US will hit their interests as well...otherwise by now US would have put sanctions on China and there was no need for any geo-political maneuver, no?

 

[MohitV]

Friend i would suggest you to read a bit more on this subject...When we will become powerful why would be need to play any side??

Russia is militarily powerful but still is with china to counter western sanction...powerful yet sided

In fact we would be even more powerful to carry on with our interests...sanctions by China or US will hit their interests as well

Chinese sanction will not affect china...it can easily recover all that by investing/trading in africa or rough ME states

...otherwise by now US would have put sanctions on China and there was no need for any geo-political maneuver, no?

Unlike Russia, China so far has never made any actual gesture that can be taken as a threat...a threat to USA or EU
hence no valid point to back sanctions against china

i understand the overconfidence of my fellow indians........but being big does not mean u can handle such an immense pressure....economically EU is big...bigger than india but is sided with US...militarily powerful russia is now with china....both EU and Russia have high geopolitical value

being realistic will help us tackle this predicament....not by being overconfident

and by siding...i do not mean usa or china...it means...either china or not china ....or either west or not west....keep in mind i am not talking about trade .......i am talking about geopolitical importance which we do not have right now..not tat much....that is why there is no problem b/w us and china and us and USA...for now

 

[deckingraj]

Now either you are not articulating your points properly or you lack knowledge in this subject...i will assume the former...

Russia is militarily powerful but still is with china to counter western sanction...powerful yet sided

So you divide countries based on their military muscle and economic muscle...A country which doesn't have both can't be powerful...

Chinese sanction will not affect china...it can easily recover all that by investing/trading in africa or rough ME states..Unlike Russia, China so far has never made any actual gesture that can be taken as a threat...a threat to USA or EU
hence no valid point to back sanctions against china i understand the overconfidence of my fellow indians........

even though your reasoning is flawed yet for the sake of argument please tell me why would be make any gesture to China or US that can be taken as threat and thereby result in possible sanctions??

 

[Shotgunner51]

Ok
My apology for over reacting

It's OK bro, both you and @Peter C over reacts, you two were actually on the same page.

That's why I think Lavrov is bringing a huge agenda to Beijing, Russia needs to find a way out.

I am a bit confused on US uniformity in its strategy implementation. It's actually a disadvantage to US if they concurrently open three fronts, isn't it? Pivot to Asia (with Japan), Ukraine (vs Russia), and ISIS-ME (vs Muslim world), all three at the same time? And a consequence of a US initiated economic warfare is oil price fall, which also drag down the price of commodities, and China benefit hugely for being the largest importer/consumer of these, then why? Probably there is a lack of concensus between different schools of thought in Washington, we never know, just that we might be able to make use of it. Think about it.

 

[Keel]

It's OK bro, both you and @Peter C over reacts, you two were actually on the same page.

That's why I think Lavrov is bringing a huge agenda to Beijing, Russia needs to find a way out.

I am a bit confused on US uniformity in its strategy implementation. It's actually a disadvantage to US if they concurrently open three fronts, isn't it? Pivot to Asia (with Japan), Ukraine (vs Russia), and ISIS-ME (vs Muslim world), all three at the same time? And a consequence of a US initiated economic warfare is oil price fall, which also drag down the price of commodities, and China benefit hugely for being the largest importer/consumer of these, then why? Probably there is a lack of concensus between different schools of thought in Washington, we never know, just that we might be able to make use of it. Think about it.

Hmm that is America and now only under the rein of Obama who is not a hawkish fellow
Imagine if either Clinton or McCain becomes the next president, I think there is already a direct military confrontation of US v Russia in Ukraine or Syria right now

 

[Yizhi]

It's OK bro, both you and @Peter C over reacts, you two were actually on the same page.

That's why I think Lavrov is bringing a huge agenda to Beijing, Russia needs to find a way out.

I am a bit confused on US uniformity in its strategy implementation. It's actually a disadvantage to US if they concurrently open three fronts, isn't it? Pivot to Asia (with Japan), Ukraine (vs Russia), and ISIS-ME (vs Muslim world), all three at the same time? And a consequence of a US initiated economic warfare is oil price fall, which also drag down the price of commodities, and China benefit hugely for being the largest importer/consumer of these, then why? Probably there is a lack of concensus between different schools of thought in Washington, we never know, just that we might be able to make use of it. Think about it.

i'm a little baffled by the action of US. why they keep poking Russia right in the sore spot even after Russia's relatively 'nice and quiet' behavior? Russia doesn't matter any more? US even pushed Europe to do the sanctions which Europeans clearly were very reluctant to do. and Russia was pushed into China's arms which should've been the last thing US wanted to see.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

It's OK bro, both you and @Peter C over reacts, you two were actually on the same page.

That's why I think Lavrov is bringing a huge agenda to Beijing, Russia needs to find a way out.

I am a bit confused on US uniformity in its strategy implementation. It's actually a disadvantage to US if they concurrently open three fronts, isn't it? Pivot to Asia (with Japan), Ukraine (vs Russia), and ISIS-ME (vs Muslim world), all three at the same time? And a consequence of a US initiated economic warfare is oil price fall, which also drag down the price of commodities, and China benefit hugely for being the largest importer/consumer of these, then why? Probably there is a lack of concensus between different schools of thought in Washington, we never know, just that we might be able to make use of it. Think about it.

I think the US Pivot had an expectation that the Europeans could take care of themselves (since Russia was quiet) and the US could shift forces from Europe to Asia. With NATO expanding and slowly swallowing up the Eastern bloc there was an expected "Well it is now pretty much all of us against you now..so please behave". Ukraine may have been one of the last pieces in that puzzle.

ISIS is something that won't be permanent.

With China the US will pull the same thing. They'll get many of the countries that surround China all unified and paranoid. So now China will have a group that says "Well it is now pretty much all of us against you now..so please behave".

It was expected China and Russia would eventually get together. It was to show Europe that China will pick Russia over them and show India that Russia will pick China over them. Back to 1950ish.

 

[Keel]

i'm a little baffled by the action of US. why they keep poking Russia right in the sore spot even after Russia's relatively 'nice and quiet' behavior? Russia doesn't matter any more? US even pushed Europe to do the sanctions which Europeans clearly were very reluctant to do. and Russia was pushed into China's arms which should've been the last thing US wanted to see.

Obama has threatened Syria about his "red line" even after Russia's backing but nothing has happened other then covert / proxy actions instituted by USA

Georgia is another one in which NATO and US camp have lost their full protection against Russian invasion

Russia has never been "quiet" as I quoted on some more incidences above

Putin wont allow Russia to back down on territorial confrontations or when the core interest of Russia is jeopardized

The tussel of powers between Russia and USA have been going on non stop when NATO and US have been wrestling the old USSR associated countries out of the Russian influence

Ukraine is a classic point - first the orange revolution, then the change of presidency and another revolution so called Revolution of Dignity and the ousting of a pro-Russia democratically elected president Yanukovych - all events bear the significant involvement of Russia and NATO even before the current Ukrainian civil war

 

[Shotgunner51]

i'm a little baffled by the action of US. why they keep poking Russia right in the sore spot even after Russia's relatively 'nice and quiet' behavior? Russia doesn't matter any more? US even pushed Europe to do the sanctions which Europeans clearly were very reluctant to do. and Russia was pushed into China's arms which should've been the last thing US wanted to see.

That's why I suspect that's kinda like a compromise between different schools in Washington, end up doing both China and Russia at the same time.

 

[MohitV]

Now either you are not articulating your points properly or you lack knowledge in this subject...i will assume the former...

So you divide countries based on their military muscle and economic muscle...A country which doesn't have both can't be powerful...

a country which dosn have both is usually of no geopolitical importance

even though your reasoning is flawed yet for the sake of argument please tell me why would be make any gesture to China or US that can be taken as threat and thereby result in possible sanctions??

look...we will not make any such gesture....but south korea is USA's ally...an american fleet is always stationed in SK...which can be targeted if a war breaks out

do not just focus on sanctions ......the chinese response can be anything from skirmishes to sanctions and both will hurt us

and full on siding with china will also have its own repercussions u cannot deny that

all i am saying is....we have to be extra careful here.....economic relations are ok...but india eyes regional dominance and geopolitical importance in future... ....obama visiting india when he has not visited many other much more trusted western allies twice sends out a message....china calling putin just after obama's visit sends out another message(message not to india but to usa)...and india sending FM to china just after obama's visit clearly shows that india is desperately trying to make up with both the sides.....

i do not care wat u think about me.....or how confident u r about the country or ur knowledge of the subject or watever.......but this playing with both the sides gets more and more dangerous as indian influence in world politics grows