Connect with us

DIPLOMACY

Indian academician: ‘BRICS is a platform to defuse India-China tensions’

Published

on

Dr. Rajiv Ranjan, Associate Professor, East Asian Studies at the University of Delhi, commented on India’s expectations regarding the BRICS Summit to Harici: “I think it is wrong to think that India-China rivalry or disagreements are weakening BRICS. From the Xiamen Summit in 2017 to the Kazan Summit in 2024, BRICS has emerged as one of the international platforms to defuse tensions between India and China. The India-China tension has not affected BRICS in any way.”

While the West is eyeing the points of ‘disagreement’ at the 16th BRICS Summit that started in Kazan, hosted by Russia, an important step came from China and India, two rival countries in the grouping that have been at the forefront of disagreement and conflict between them.

Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said the agreement on military patrols in certain areas brings the situation back to where it was before the deadly border clash in 2020, adding that the “distancing process” with China has been completed. Beijing confirmed that the two sides had “reached a settlement” as a result of “close communication on relevant border issues through diplomatic and military channels”.

This was seen as a development that would pave the way for a meeting between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Kazan. It is expected to be the first official meeting between Xi and Modi since the 2020 conflict, which created a lasting strain in relations between the two countries.

Prior to the summit, Western experts had said that it would be difficult for BRICS to develop a common position and adopt a common stance, especially in light of the conflict between the two countries. However, this development shows that BRICS is playing a positive role in resolving conflicts between member countries.

We discussed the meaning and importance of BRICS for India and New Delhi’s expectations from the Kazan Summit with Assoc. Prof. Rajiv Ranjan from East Asian Studies at the University of Delhi.

What do BRICS mean for India? What are India’s expectations from this summit?

BRICS for India is a grouping of countries which reflects their aspiration to build better world, which is equitable and just. BRICS also represents new reality of these new emerging countries in the world. BRICS is united to help and assist countries of Global South to develop, both economically and politically.

From this summit , which is after recent expansion of BRICS, India hopes to get better voice for countries of Global South. Prime Minister is expected to meet both Russian President Putin and Chinese president Xi Jinping on sidelines of the summit too. This is essential for India to usher the multipolar Asia and world order. India promote trade and economic development, protect interests of global south in climate change negotiations and fight against terrorism.

For Putin, this summit is considered important both symbolically and practically. What do you think? How do you evaluate the importance of this summit for Russia?

Since Russia -Ukraine war, Russia is under sanctions both political and economically by united West. Russia may like to garner support to counter these pressures.

The dispute and competition between China and India is seen as one of the weaknesses of BRICS. Do you agree? On what issues might the two countries clash at this BRICS summit? Is the expansion agenda one of them?

I think this is the wrong way to project and infer that India – China competition or disputes any way weakens BRICS. In fact, BRICS has emerged as one of the international platforms which defuses the tension between India and China, from Xiamen Summit 2017 to Kazan Summit 2024. In no way India China tension has impacted BRICS.

BRICS expansion had enabled India to reach to greater audiences in Global South. As we know that expansion of BRICS is not decided by one member but all so it wrong to say that any one can have more influences or dictate the terms to other.

China had called for BRICS to “transform into a new type of multilateral cooperation mechanism”. China is said to see BRICS as a tool for its political and strategic goals towards the international system. Do you agree?

Ans. Every member countries has its own agenda and objectives. But remember that BRICS is a collective identity and not foreign policy of one country. BRICS is formed to enlarge and protect the interests of its member countries. As PRIME Minister Modi had remarked earlier BRICS is not against any other country. We have to see BRICS as a positive voice in international system and not anti west grouping.

So don’t you agree with the approach that BRICS is an alternative to Western-centered institutions and functioning?

BRICS is an alternative but not necessarily against the west. It is designed to protect and create more equitable and just order. It is not designed to oppose but create complementary to the existing institutions and structures.

BRICS has an important place in the world economy. De-dollarization in trade and alternative payment systems between member countries are on the agenda of this summit. How do you evaluate this? Do you see it realistic?

BRICS, if it can come up with its own currency, then it will provide alternative to existing payment system. Domination of one currency is not good for global south. The world is moving towards multipolar order and thereby it’s natural that there are payment systems which is not controlled and exploited by few institutions or countries. Thereby having more payment alternatives in fact, usher economic multipolarity.

Well, it looks little complicated given the very nature of BRICS and above all of would be united efforts of a group of countries leading to a payment system not dominated by one but true multilateral payment system.

DIPLOMACY

UK considers post-war air patrols over Ukraine

Published

on

Sources in the British government and the Royal Air Force have told The Times that Britain may deploy Typhoon fighter jets to patrol the skies over Ukraine after the war ends and a peace agreement is signed.

London is reportedly considering setting up an “air police” mission similar to the NATO program that has protected the airspace of the Baltic states since 2004.

One of the sources told The Times that this option was more likely than establishing a no-fly zone over the country, which would require aircraft to patrol the skies over Ukraine 24 hours a day.

Dozens of “heavily armed” fighter jets, planned to be stationed in Poland and ready to take off at any time, are expected to take part in this “police mission.”

According to The Times, this solution could be part of the security guarantees for Ukraine and allow for a smaller military contingent to be brought in to monitor compliance with the peace agreements on the ground.

This would require the UK to deploy a significant number of aircraft and air defense systems.

“We are prepared to do whatever we are told to do,” said The Times’ source in the Royal Air Force, adding that discussions on the matter were still at an early stage.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has previously stated that his country needs 100,000 European peacekeepers to prevent Russia from attacking again after the end of the military conflict.

According to The Washington Post, however, the European Union (EU) is only able to send 25,000 to 30,000 troops.

Germany, Italy, and Poland doubted the appropriateness of this decision, while France suggested that the peacekeepers should not be sent to the line of contact with the Russian army, but to the rear of Ukraine, where they would train soldiers and supply the Ukrainian army.

US President Donald Trump supported the idea of deploying European peacekeepers in Ukraine but emphasized that there would be no US contingent.

In the first official talks between the US and Russia since the start of the military intervention in Ukraine, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov expressed Moscow’s dissatisfaction with the proposals for the deployment of European forces in Ukraine.

Lavrov said that the Russian side conveyed to the American officials that the appearance of NATO troops on the territory of Ukraine, even “under a foreign flag, the flag of the European Union or national flags,” is unacceptable.

Continue Reading

DIPLOMACY

First official Russia-US talks since Ukraine war begin in Riyadh

Published

on

Representatives from Russia and the United States (US) have commenced their first official high-level talks since the onset of the Ukrainian war in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

The meeting is being held at the Diriyah Palace, a residence of the Saudi royal family. The Russian delegation includes Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Deputy President Yuri Ushakov, and Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) President Kirill Dmitriev. Representing the US are Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, and White House Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff.

Discussions are anticipated to cover preparations for potential negotiations to end the Russia-Ukraine war, as well as the arrangement of a direct meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump.

Before the talks began, RDIF President Dmitriev indicated that Russia had presented the US with several proposals in the trade and economic sectors, anticipating progress within two to three months.

“The American business community has lost over $300 billion by withdrawing from the Russian market. Thus, identifying mutual economic avenues and constructive solutions is crucial for the United States and other nations, which are recognizing the Russian market’s appeal and the necessity of maintaining a presence there,” Dmitriev stated.

Dmitriev further mentioned that Russia and the US should initiate joint projects, particularly in the Arctic.

A Washington Post source revealed that the Kremlin’s primary objective in the negotiations is the removal of sanctions against Russia, including those impacting senior officials and prominent Russian billionaires.

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky previously stated that Kyiv would not acknowledge the outcomes of the Russia-US talks in Riyadh.

“Ukraine views any discussions about Ukraine without Ukraine’s participation as unproductive. We cannot accept any outcomes or agreements made about us without our involvement,” Zelensky asserted.

NBC News television sources reported that the US plans to conduct a separate meeting with Ukrainian officials prior to direct negotiations between Moscow and Kyiv.

Continue Reading

DIPLOMACY

NATO criticizes Ukrainian army’s ‘wasteful’ use of Western weapons

Published

on

The Sunday Telegraph, citing a source, reported that NATO is dissatisfied with the Ukrainian army’s use of Western-supplied weapons alongside Soviet ones.

This is resulting in the wasteful use of weapons provided by allies due to their different approaches to using weapons.

According to the newspaper, NATO advocates the use of high-precision weapons from different sources, while the Soviet approach calls for intensive use of cheap firepower.

An official involved in the training of Ukrainian soldiers told the newspaper that the Ukrainians were using British-supplied NLAW anti-tank missiles (around 5,000) as hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers (RPGs).

It was reported that the soldiers were firing salvos of five or six rockets, but that each rocket cost around £20,000 (2.2 million rubles at the time).

It was emphasized that using RPGs was not that costly. The launch of the rockets was reportedly recorded on video, and Ukraine provided the footage for reporting purposes.

Other sources told the newspaper that Ukrainian troops often abandon their equipment during withdrawals and that NATO’s principle is to “leave nothing behind” due to the cost of the weapons.

In particular, it was noted that the Ukrainian army did not take the launchers of the Javelin anti-tank missiles, which cost $100,000, from the abandoned positions.

“The Russian army probably has more Javelins than the British army,” one of the newspaper’s sources said. The Russian side has been reporting the seizure of such anti-tank missile systems since 2022.

The Telegraph listed the reasons for Kiev’s departure from Western tactics as the lack of time to train Ukrainians and disagreements with instructors who were unfamiliar with real combat conditions.

It was stated that this situation caused Ukraine to demand cheaper firepower and that the West was forced to turn to former Warsaw Pact countries for Soviet weapons.

“Foreign training is not only ineffective, but also dangerous, unless it is adapted to Ukrainian conditions and integrated into existing unit practices,” said Sergey Filimonov, commander of Ukraine’s 108th battalion.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey