Russia - General Discussion.

[ngatimozart]

Russian state owned news outlining the meaning behind denazification published 3rd April;

What should Russia do with Ukraine?

...

The closing paragraphs of the article talk about moving away from the West and taking a new place of leadership on its own in the developing world. Given Western sanctions and Russia's pariah state diplomatically, I am concerned for the future of Russia deepening its authoritarian control, and dare I say fascist-victim-strongman character. What a tragedy for humanity and the Russian people.

Yes I think it's been posted before, but that's of no matter. IMHO the claims of Ukraine being a Nazi state is very much the pot calling the kettle black. Ukraine is far from it, but modern day Russian state is exhibiting the symptoms of a full on fascist kleptocracy. It is not fighting Nazis; it is the Nazis. The general population; the average Ivan and Ludmilla aren't the problem but the Russian state, and it is the average Ivan and Ludmilla who pay the price, not the politicians and oligarchs, bureaucrats, police, security forces, and generals, who support them. Unfortunately the average Ivan and Ludmilla most likely are unaware of the evils that their government commits in their name because they only see on the TV, hear on the radio, read in the newspapers, or access on the internet, what their government allows / wants them too. If by some circumstance they circumvent government restrictions and disagree with government policy out loud, they are then punished severely for speaking their mind. So generally the average Ivan and Ludmilla will keep quiet and accept whatever the government says at face value. What they truly think is kept very close. Yet regardless they are still the ones who pay the price.

The Russians have had this vision of being world leaders by conquest and diplomacy for centuries. It's something in their genetics because after they are Vikings at heart, who haven't grown up and moved on. (@Feanor is going to choke on his tea. Don't throw the samovar across the room ) I don't know whether its because of visions of grandeur or an inferiority complex. In this they are much like the Americans. Yet the Russians are also a highly cultured and intellectual people with the likes of Tchaikovsky, Tolstoy, Sikorsky, Popov, Pavlov and Cherenkov, all of whom have contributed much to humanity.

However as much as the current Russian leadership may think that it will lead an anti western coalition, they are dreaming because they have already shot their bolt. They no longer have the prestige, funding, or ability to achieve that. The poor performance of the Russian military has pricked the myth of Russian military strength and capability. The CCP / PRC will be the probable leader of any authoritarian grouping against liberal democracies after this Russian shambles. They only advantage that they have over the PRC is in their nuclear weapons capability, submarine capability, advanced aero-engine capability especially in metallurgy, space capability, and resources.

 

[STURM]

In the context of these votes, I can't seem to find an explanation of the difference between not voting and abstaining to vote. Do you know where the difference is explained?

Not voting or abstaining means one is taking a neutral or non aligned stand. Some countries abstain because even though they are against the invasion and the huge suffering; voting in favour might mean they are taking sides.

 

[Ananda]

The CCP / PRC will be the probable leader of any authoritarian grouping against liberal democracies after this Russian shambles. They only advantage that they have over the PRC is in their nuclear weapons capability, submarine capability, advanced aero-engine capability especially in metallurgy, space capability, and resources.

I do believe it is not probable but more to certainty. Beginning of Cold War 1.0, the East has Stalin as the leader and Mao as junior leader This Cold War 2.0 bit reverse with Xi as Senior Partner and Putin the Junior Partner.

The sign in the trade tendencies already there. US and Allies will have current financial market, PRC will lead Russia and those who already shun by US and Allies like Venezuela, Iran, etc, on providing different market. The rest of emerging market like India, Brazil, Saudis, South Africa, Indonesia, SEA will play in both market, but not committed to either one.

This supposedly happen before 2040, but this War seems going to fasten it before 2030. Something that being call Multipolar Globalisation. So potentially it will be bit more complex with Cold War 1.0 as this is combine globalisation needs with Geopolitical segmentation. PRC will be one of the main node, US on other one, while smaller nodes exists in place like UK, EU, Japan, ROK, Australia and Emerging Markets. Russia will become just one of the smaller nodes.

Difference between Cold War 1.0, those smaller nodes potentially interact more Independently to each other outside influence of two main nodes. Differ with previous Cold War main take of isolationist to each other. Basically it is one of the essence of Multipolar Globalisation that many big market investors predicted.

There's several other prediction on what the rule of game on Multipolar Globalisation will be. However the way I see it, more or less have similar tendencies. For one thing big players in US market it self believe the days of USD hegemony ending fasten. USD will still big player but not the all mighty ones anymore.

 

[tonyget]

The west wants to ruin Russia's credit rating which Russia still cherish even after sanction

Russia threatens legal action if forced into sovereign debt default

Russia will take legal action if the West tries to force it to default on its sovereign debt, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov told the pro-Kremlin Izvestia newspaper on Monday, sharpening Moscow's tone in its financial wrestle with the West.

www.reuters.com

 

[Ananda]

The west wants to ruin Russia's credit rating which Russia still cherish even after sanction

Doesn't matter anymore actually on credit rating. Most credit agencies under Western Market regulatory convined.

EU bans top credit rating agencies from rating Russia and Russian firms

The European Union has banned top credit rating firms from rating Russia's sovereign debt and the country's companies as part of its latest sanctions package, the European Commission said on Tuesday.

www.reuters.com

It is more for potential partner outside Western Market anyway. Russia want to shown that any default is Politically forced on them, as West put every hurdles on their/Russia effort to pay/services the installment.

Also it's to provide legal ground, facing legal wrangling after default, in sense talk that the default is not because Russia unwillingness to pay,but by third parties (in here Western market regulators) unfair practices. This provide legal negotiations for payment on Russian Medium choose.

 

[tonyget]

Too bad for Russia's creditors，they cannot get their money back because of this US decision

 

[Ananda]

Theoritically they still can. However it will take much longer routes. What happen now, US regulators forbid US bank that act as facility payment agent to received USD payment from Russia to pay the creditors.

By putting legal action, Russia as the debtor can sue the Facility Agent in US on blocking of their payment. Thus force unfair technical default. If they won the legal action especialy if they can bring the creditors to back them, then Russia can call the facility agent for breach of contract.

That way they can ask new agent to take over (most probable in Hong Kong or Shanghai) and handle the facilities payment. Potentially change the currency from USD to say Yuan, on base that US regulators block any using of USD as payment thus the usage for USD as currency payment on facility become irelevant.

This off course must got approval from majority creditors. It will take time, and during the legal wrangling Russia facility will got technical default.

 

[hauritz]

However as much as the current Russian leadership may think that it will lead an anti western coalition, they are dreaming because they have already shot their bolt. They no longer have the prestige, funding, or ability to achieve that. The poor performance of the Russian military has pricked the myth of Russian military strength and capability. The CCP / PRC will be the probable leader of any authoritarian grouping against liberal democracies after this Russian shambles. They only advantage that they have over the PRC is in their nuclear weapons capability, submarine capability, advanced aero-engine capability especially in metallurgy, space capability, and resources.

It has always puzzled me that the Chinese even tolerate the presence of Russia in their region. It must irk them to some extent that a European nation controls huge tracts of Asian territory. In fact historically the Chinese do seem to have a claim to large chunks of land from the Russians. Certainly these claims are no less valid than Russia's own claims against the Ukraine.

If the Russian state is left in economic ruins by the end of this conflict you may see China take a different attitude towards them.

Was China Betting on Russian Defeat All Along? | Geopolitical Monitor

The best outcome of the Ukraine invasion for Beijing is a weakened, isolated, and dependent Russia. Perhaps this was the plan all along.

www.geopoliticalmonitor.com

 

[Ananda]

Airbus Defends Russian Titanium Use, Says Sanctions Won’t Work

www.bloomberg.com

This perhaps come only from one company and only talking one comodity. However this shown how some in West going to use the sanctions if it is afforded by them. If it is not, them they will find way to circumstance the sanction.

That's why by context India also claim that buying Russian Oil is justifiable for Indian energy security.

How Indian Foreign miniter claim that what India buy on Russian oil is much smaller then what Europe continues buy, I do see as bit cynical remark to Western Media attack to India.

Russia’s Oil Production Slips Below 10 Million Bpd | OilPrice.com

For the first time since July 2020, Russia’s crude oil production has slipped below the 10 million bpd mark on Monday, two anonymous Reuters sources suggested

oilprice.com

So yes, as some of Market closing to Russian Hydrocarbon, there's bit adjustment on Russian Hydrocarbon. However it is small enough and not indication yet on continue detoriation on Russian Hydrocarbon export (as some in Washington hope for).

Personally I don't see in long run there's going to be much changes. As market will make adjustment, and if Russian Eurozone customers goes to other supplier, other customers will shift to Russia.

 

[John Fedup]

It has always puzzled me that the Chinese even tolerate the presence of Russia in their region. It must irk them to some extent that a European nation controls huge tracts of Asian territory. In fact historically the Chinese do seem to have a claim to large chunks of land from the Russians. Certainly these claims are no less valid than Russia's own claims against the Ukraine.

If the Russian state is left in economic ruins by the end of this conflict you may see China take a different attitude towards them.

Was China Betting on Russian Defeat All Along? | Geopolitical Monitor

The best outcome of the Ukraine invasion for Beijing is a weakened, isolated, and dependent Russia. Perhaps this was the plan all along.

www.geopoliticalmonitor.com

The world’s largest nuclear arsenal forces China to tolerate Russia’s claim on “historical territory”. An interesting question would be the condition of Russia’s nuclear arsenal, the assumption is much better than their conventional arsenal.

 

[ngatimozart]

It has always puzzled me that the Chinese even tolerate the presence of Russia in their region. It must irk them to some extent that a European nation controls huge tracts of Asian territory. In fact historically the Chinese do seem to have a claim to large chunks of land from the Russians. Certainly these claims are no less valid than Russia's own claims against the Ukraine.

If the Russian state is left in economic ruins by the end of this conflict you may see China take a different attitude towards them.

Was China Betting on Russian Defeat All Along? | Geopolitical Monitor

The best outcome of the Ukraine invasion for Beijing is a weakened, isolated, and dependent Russia. Perhaps this was the plan all along.

www.geopoliticalmonitor.com

The Chinese have never really been in a position to do anything about for a couple or three centuries. The Japanese when they were in Manchuria had a go in 1939 and Stalin ordered Gen Zhukov to teach them a lesson, which he promptly did only as Zhukov could. The pride and joy of the elite of the Imperial Japanese Army were sent packing with their tails between their legs, and never again during WW2 did they even look at the Russians the wrong way.

In 1968 there was some argy bargy over an island in the middle of one of the rivers on the border. Think that the Chinese started this one because it was during the Cultural Revolution when they were in their politically weird nutting off stage. The Russians taught them a harsh lesson then too. On both occasions the Russians had the power, reputation, and wherewithal to back themselves. However in 2022 it's a different story and their military reputation has taken a beating with their ground performance in Ukraine. Their economy is in freefall, they are international pariahs, and are beginning to have trouble replacing destroyed and damaged equipment, personnel and replenish munitions, which is only going to get worse.

Because of the threat of secondary sanctions it's not in the CCPs interest to help Russia by supplying it with war stocks and other comforts. To do so would severely damage the PRC economy and cause significant political problems for the CCP. People might start getting the idea that they might be better off without the CCP and that would be a disastrous and terrible idea to let take root amongst the masses. Some within the upper echelons of the CCP may get the idea that because the Kremlin is so invested in its war in the Ukraine, it won't have the ability to provide any resistance to the CCP recovery of traditional Chinese lands to the north of the PRC and Mongolia. They could be right and the Kremlin have been moving forces from Siberia to the west to fight the war. It could also be good for us because whilst the CCP are picking on the Russians and digesting Siberia, they will be leaving us alone.

The world’s largest nuclear arsenal forces China to tolerate Russia’s claim on “historical territory”. An interesting question would be the condition of Russia’s nuclear arsenal, the assumption is much better than their conventional arsenal.

Yes I suspect that the Russian nuclear arsenal would be fully serviceable and capable at all times, apart from the normal number of weapons down for routine servicing and maintenance, which is standard operating procedure. And therein lies the problem. Would they threaten the PRC with nuclear retaliation if the PRC doesn't resile from it's march north?

 

[John Fedup]

Siberia’s resources are essential for Russia so I think they would pull the trigger for at least the next decade. Once China builds up its own nuclear arsenal the decision comes harder.

 

[T.C.P]

Israel, the one major US ally that does not need either tens of thousands of American troops on its soil or a defensive treaty, is the one most dependent on the US military. Okay.

I am replying here as this thread might be more appropriate.

My original reply was not meant as a dig at Israel. Israel's position of not supplying Ukraine with weapons is absolutely understandable as they are geographically close to two Russian partners/proxies, whom Russia can use to retaliate or cause trouble for Israel. Russia and Israel have an 'understanding' betwen them that is more important to Israel than Ukraine. My point was that South Korea is in a similar position. They gain nothing from supplying Ukraine with weapons and unnecessarily goading Russia. And criticism of SOuth Korea is unwarranted. Every country has to look out for their interests first.

 

[Ananda]

Because of the threat of secondary sanctions it's not in the CCPs interest to help Russia by supplying it with war stocks and other comforts. To do so would severely damage the PRC economy and cause significant political problems for the CCP. People might start getting the idea that they might be better off without the CCP and that would be a disastrous and terrible idea to let take root amongst the masses.

China’s support for Russia galvanises West as US examines action against Beijing

Chinese leaders get a look at what can be possible when Western allies unite to hobble the economy of a major power.

www.scmp.com

Put it the link of this article, just to shown another dimension that China see. They see what happens on US lead sanction to Russia is just preliminary action that the end game is to China anyway. Sooner or later US will move to contain China economics machine.

This kind of thinking prevailed in Chinese media or more importantly on Chinese social media. Thus how they see China support for Russia, is the matter of strategic survival. With US already lead it's allies on Russian isolation, just matter of times before US going to do the same against China.

Assessment on Greater China market also shown what China going to do. As China (and basically some in emerging markets) also don't mind with Multipolar Globalisation. India included in that, despite their apprehension with China. India wants emerging markets development (including themselves) assending momentum maintain. For that Russia and more Importantly China will be needed.

Looking on how Chinese in media and social media react so far, how their Market react so far, absorbing Russian Far East is not what they want so far. On contrary they see supporting Russia and keep Russia affloat is important for Chinese Geopolitical aim on Multipolar Globalisation. For China destroying Russia is only benefit US continuous hegemony power. Something that many Chinese seems believe it's going to be aim to them sooner or later, no matter how Taiwan issue resolve anyway.

 

[Stuart M]

Yes I suspect that the Russian nuclear arsenal would be fully serviceable and capable at all times, apart from the normal number of weapons down for routine servicing and maintenance, which is standard operating procedure. And therein lies the problem. Would they threaten the PRC with nuclear retaliation if the PRC doesn't resile from it's march north?

If Russia lacks the conventional means to repel a CCP attack on Siberia, and as Russia has been quite clear that something they see as an existential threat to Russia's existence justifies Nuclear release, then I have no doubts that China would glow in the dark if they try it on with Siberia.

 

[tonyget]

Because of the threat of secondary sanctions it's not in the CCPs interest to help Russia by supplying it with war stocks and other comforts. To do so would severely damage the PRC economy and cause significant political problems for the CCP. People might start getting the idea that they might be better off without the CCP and that would be a disastrous and terrible idea to let take root amongst the masses.

And what exactly are these "secondary sanctions" the west is going to impose on China？Cutting off trade with China like they did to Russia？I don't think the west can afford to do so in light of current economic circumstances，the inflation is already on the sky，to do so would push inflation to the moon. As for the perception of CCP of the masses，would it be worse than 1989？Because the west resumed trade with China few years after 1989.

Some within the upper echelons of the CCP may get the idea that because the Kremlin is so invested in its war in the Ukraine, it won't have the ability to provide any resistance to the CCP recovery of traditional Chinese lands to the north of the PRC and Mongolia. They could be right and the Kremlin have been moving forces from Siberia to the west to fight the war. It could also be good for us because whilst the CCP are picking on the Russians and digesting Siberia, they will be leaving us alone.

Taiwan is of strategic importance to China to break first island chain because of it's location. Siberia on the other hand is mere natural resources，something which China can get cheaply from Russia because of Russia's dire situation thanks to the west，and I don't know any resources in that area is not for sell. Plus China can acquire those resources using RMB，so no need to touch foreign-exchange reserves. It would cost China more to grab Siberia resources by force even if we ignore nukes.

It is not in China's interest to let Russia collapse or bend under western pressure，nor is it in China's interest to see a quick ending of this war（regardless which side wins）. The ideal outcome for China is this war become a prolonged mess，like Afghanistan war.

 

[ngatimozart]

And what exactly are these "secondary sanctions" the west is going to impose on China？Cutting off trade with China like they did to Russia？I don't think the west can afford to do so in light of current economic circumstances，the inflation is already on the sky，to do so would push inflation to the moon. As for the perception of CCP of the masses，would it be worse than 1989？Because the west resumed trade with China few years after 1989.

Taiwan is of strategic importance to China to break first island chain because of it's location. Siberia on the other hand is mere natural resources，something which China can get cheaply from Russia because of Russia's dire situation thanks to the west，and I don't know any resources in that area is not for sell. Plus China can acquire those resources using RMB，so no need to touch foreign-exchange reserves. It would cost China more to grab Siberia resources by force even if we ignore nukes.

It is not in China's interest to let Russia collapse or bend under western pressure，nor is it in China's interest to see a quick ending of this war（regardless which side wins）. The ideal outcome for China is this war become a prolonged mess，like Afghanistan war.

Yep, cut trade with the PRC. It would hurt the PRC more than the west in the long run. Politically and strategically it is better for the west to diversify it's economies away from the PRC and towards other countries, such as India, Vietnam etc. Companies already are with multinationals pulling out of the PRC because of the political interference and demands by the CCP. It's no longer business friendly so why stay.

WRT Russia's situation it only has itself to blame, primarily Putin to be precise. Taiwan is a strategic island but it isn't the CCP's to claim at all. It was never under CCP control and it's up to the people of Taiwan to choose their future and if they want independence then it's their choice, not the CCP. If the Taiwanese wish to join the PRC then again that's their choice. BUT the CCP does not have the right to force that choice on them by guile, cunning or the force of arms.

 

[ngatimozart]

Russia is threaten to deploy nukes in the Baltic region if Sweden or Finland join NATO. This is a standard Russian fear / bullying ploy and Putin has only himself to blame for the two Nordic nations actively considering such an action.

Bloomberg on Twitter: "Russia threatened to deploy nuclear weapons in the Baltic Sea region if Finland and Sweden join NATO https://t.co/8KHcJTB1cE" / Twitter

One Twitterati tweeted: "A mad man (Putin) that fought a comedian and failed is about to fight two women. Isn’t he truly mad?" I think perfectly sums Putin up. What guy in his right mind would want to fight two shelias at the same time. Margaret Thatcher beat up the Argentinians all on her lonesome and spat out iron filings afterwards.

 

[MotorManiac]

Text deleted. Post irrelevant to discussion because it is political and discussion of domestic American politics is not allowed. Don't go near this again.

Ngatimozart.

 

[Ananda]

This guy video I put the link cause he also provide simplified commodity market work, on this matter Russian Coal.

Altough I agree on his assesment that it will increase energy prices in Euro Zone. However I'm not going to agree with his assumption it will be (for near future) on Global level.

Cause he is right on one thing that commodities supply more or less are finite. However he seems bit discounted on market adjustment. Market adjustment will happen because supply is finite, thus if Eurozone take away Asian, Middle East America commidities contract by outbidding their current customers, those customers will going to go to the othervsupplier (that'd being left out by Euro Zone). Which is Russia.

So if Eurozone outbid Asian customers especially the developing ones (due to Eurozone bigger purchasing power), the Asian customers will go to Russia, "regartless" what Washinton going to say. Cause it is the matter of their economic survival.

If that happen, US then can have a choice whether to practically going to punish the developing countries (that go to Russia for better prices), and let them move to Russia (and thus means China influences). Or let it go, and take the reality on market adjustment.

After buying cheap Russian oil, India is now setting sights on its coal

India's hunger for coal is growing. As the world shuns Russian goods, India is setting its sights on Russian coal – after already buying up its discounted oil.

www.cnbc.com

And that'd already begin to happen. The moment Eurozone or Japan, ROK and other US allies take supply from other supplier that used to supply other customers, those other customers will switch to supplier that they left behind. Just simple matket adjustment, and economics survival.