Russia and the West

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
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.
I am not an economist and did not know that Russia could not pay this due to sanctions -- my understanding was that Russia has found ways to accept payment in USD (for Russian products) and I thought perhaps they could then also find a way to pay their debt in USD. Clearly I was wrong. Thanks for explaining this to me.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Problem is US block any USD payment for Bond Holders. Since most International bond payable in USD or Euro denomination, means even you have money in USD or Euro, but US Federal Reserve or Euro Central Bank control the payment system of their currency. Thus they can block any parties who want to transacted with that currency.

If Russia say pay with other currency whether Ruble or Yuan for example, technically it is breaching contract because the bonds contract payable in USD. Thus it is technically a default anyway. That's why I say it is technical default force by US. Some of bond holders are US Investors, and latest info they push legal proceedings to allow US authority to let Russia paying them in USD as contract.

However it will take time, and it is small chances they (investors and Russian Central bank) can get legal work around before June 30. This is more an effort by US and Western to destroy Russian credibility in future bond market for one thing.
 

koxinga

Well-Known Member
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

-snip-
I think where you are getting negative vibes from STURM is your very point that Europe has done something versus "Asian countries". (Putting aside the accuracy of 4 items for now)

Where do you want to go with that? The implication of your statement is there is a "right" or "better standard level of behavior" being expected and somehow, Asian countries are falling short of it.

From an Asian perspective, it would appear remarkably condescending and tone deaf because (1) we do understand those situations far better than is implied (it is our region after all, sharing the common cultural nuances), (2) it ignores the geopolitical/economic reality of the region.

That reality is... we do not have the luxury of complaining and boycotting fabric from China because it was made from cotton picked from the Xinjiang region. Or put high tariffs on imports from China because the human rights situation is no good, or to cut all economic ties, sanction Myanmar generals because of the coup. We don't do absolutely nothing but there are limits and good reasons why Asian countries can't take the same approaches.

Europe is free to decide how it wants to deal with those issues (public statements, sanctions, blah blah). It is European right and their choice, which we have no problems with.

But don't apply your yard stick to Asian (or any other) countries. If we don't judge Europe, why should Europe judge us?
 
Last edited:

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
I think where you are getting negative vibes from STURM is your very point that Europe has done something versus "Asian countries". (Putting aside the accuracy of 4 items for now)
[...]
But don't apply your yard stick to Asian (or any other) countries. If we don't judge Europe, why should Europe judge us?
Point taken, but it seems you (and STURM) fail to appreciate that there were "negative vibes" already from the first posting from STURM. STURM pointed to an Indian politician that was "judging Europe", i.e., doing exactly the opposite of what you claim "we" are not doing. Not only that, the Indian politician made a claim I disagreed with, and I provided concrete examples why I disagreed with him.

Anyway I suggest (again) that we stop here. You have made your point, so has STURM, and so have I.
 

koxinga

Well-Known Member
Anyway I suggest (again) that we stop here. You have made your point, so has STURM, and so have I.
@Vivendi, we might well have a difference of opinions on the level of response and more can be done, but it doesn't change the fact that the broad statement that Asian nations are silent is not entirely factual, with a simple google search. (w.r.t Myanmar, terrorism)
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group

This is not adding too much from what I've wrote. However this is just shown how several plan by collective west to squeeze out Russian oil from Global market (including the latest 'dream' of capping Russian Oil Prices), will never work fully.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
the fact that the broad statement that Asian nations are silent is not entirely factual, with a simple google search. (w.r.t Myanmar, terrorism)
Indeed; it's incorrect and IMO self serving. ASEAN [which is far from flawless] may not be as homogeneous and united as the EU but on some issues it has taken a clear stand and has done what it can; irrespective of the fact that it may not have solved anything. The stand of certain countries [Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia] regarding Myanmar had the danger of creating a rift within ASEAN and Malaysia's criticism of Myanmar over the Rohingya issue some years ago did not go well with other members. Another issue is that unlike the EU; ASEAN is not in the business of preaching human rights and democracy to others; it has its own issues to focus on.

The statement by the Indian Foreign Minister was his personal opinion and indicative that Asian countries may not appreciate the way the EU preaches certain things and expects others to follow - ''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''. I fail to see how it was ''negative'' unless of course one is under the impression that the EU/Europeans are beyond reproach/criticism.

I also posted comments attributed to the Kazakhs which were totally unexpected and would have deeply annoyed the Russians. That was not viewed as ''negative'' by others; probably because it referenced the Russians not the EU/Europeans.


''Kazakhstan and Russia share the world's longest continuous land border and have been regarded as staunch allies, but Russia's invasion of Ukraine has fractured this alliance. Earlier this month, during a televised press conference, Kassym Jomart Tokayev, the Kazakh president, embarrassed Vladimir Putin during the final session of an economic forum by explaining that he did not support the independence of pro-Russia regions in Donbas.''
 
Last edited:

Dead Money

New Member
Indeed; it's incorrect and IMO self serving. ASEAN [which is far from flawless] may not be as homogeneous and united as the EU but on some issues it has taken a clear stand and has done what it can; irrespective of the fact that it may not have solved anything. The stand of certain countries [Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia] regarding Myanmar had the danger of creating a rift within ASEAN and Malaysia's criticism of Myanmar over the Rohingya issue some years ago did not go well with other members. Another issue is that unlike the EU; ASEAN is not in the business of preaching human rights and democracy to others; it has its own issues to focus on.

The statement by the Indian Foreign Minister was his personal opinion and indicative that Asian countries may not appreciate the way the EU preaches certain things and expects others to follow - ''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''. I fail to see how it was ''negative'' unless of course one is under the impression that the EU/Europeans are beyond reproach/criticism.

I also posted comments attributed to the Kazakhs which were totally unexpected and would have deeply annoyed the Russians. That was not viewed as ''negative'' by others; probably because it referenced the Russians not the EU/Europeans.


''Kazakhstan and Russia share the world's longest continuous land border and have been regarded as staunch allies, but Russia's invasion of Ukraine has fractured this alliance. Earlier this month, during a televised press conference, Kassym Jomart Tokayev, the Kazakh president, embarrassed Vladimir Putin during the final session of an economic forum by explaining that he did not support the independence of pro-Russia regions in Donbas.''
Sturm, you have almost reposted your post 1,087 - with the exception of the specific line where Jaishankar said negative things about Europe. Which is the line Vivendi took issue with.

Was this intentional on your part?
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
Whatever was written was indeed intentional and I didn't repeat it word for word verbatim. Also there was a difference between 1,087 and 1,107.

The post was also in reference to koxinga's post; which I agree with. He got it spot on.
 
Last edited:

SolarWind

Active Member
India is undoubtedly a sovereign country with a right to its opinion. The problem here is this seems way off-topic for the thread. The only tangential points of current discussion are that Russia itself is or at least a decent portion of it a part of Asia. Russian point of view and opinion will undoubtedly find more support in Asia than in Europe, especially as much as Russia is careful to craft it in such a way to please the East but displease the West at the same time, seeking after its purpose.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
The problem here is it seems way off-topic for this thread.
Maybe, maybe not but ultimately the comments made by the senioe Indian government official was in reference to events in the Ukraine; as such; to me they were relevant. Whether one personally agrees with the comments or not is an altogether different issue.

Russian point of view and opinion will undoubtedly find more support in Asia than in Europe,
A number of Asian [and non Asian] countries are more vulnerable when it comes to food security compared to European countries; who are in a better position to diversify their sources; they have no choice but to continue maintaining cordial relations with Russia as for them survival is of far more importance that what's happening in the Ukraine.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
A great speech given by Chief of the General Staff General Sir Patrick Sanders at the RUSI Land Warfare Conference. A lot about the Army of course but I felt there were so many other elements that it justifies putting it here, not least because the main focus of the Operation MOBILISE is deterring Russian aggression.

Highly recommended reading, invoking history and lessons from history, putting things in context, and will (hopefully) serve as a strong motivation for decisions makers in the UK and elsewhere. Well done Sir Sanders!

Chief of the General Staff Speech at RUSI Land Warfare Conference - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
India is undoubtedly a sovereign country with a right to its opinion. The problem here is this seems way off-topic for the thread. The only tangential points of current discussion are that Russia itself is or at least a decent portion of it a part of Asia. Russian point of view and opinion will undoubtedly find more support in Asia than in Europe, especially as much as Russia is careful to craft it in such a way to please the East but displease the West at the same time, seeking after its purpose.
I don't think Russia will find support for its actual invasion of Ukraine in Asia. I think Russia will find countries that need Russian products and trade more, and therefore are willing to overlook something that they nonetheless are far from happy with. This is of course better for Russian, then total solidarity with the west. But it's far from good.

''Kazakhstan and Russia share the world's longest continuous land border and have been regarded as staunch allies, but Russia's invasion of Ukraine has fractured this alliance. Earlier this month, during a televised press conference, Kassym Jomart Tokayev, the Kazakh president, embarrassed Vladimir Putin during the final session of an economic forum by explaining that he did not support the independence of pro-Russia regions in Donbas.''
I'm not sure why so much is being made of this. Kazakhstan and Russia are not staunch allies. Kazakhstan and Belarus are the closest thing Russia has to allies, but both are flaky allies at best. In each case they're tied to Russia primarily by mutual interest. Interests shift and so do allegiances. Kazakhstan of course was never particularly happy with Russia's course in Ukraine, every since 2014.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
Apologies if this has been posted before -- I saw it just this week. Bellingcat, OCCRP, El Periódico, IRPI, Il Fatto Quotidiano, and iStories have collaborated on an investigation into Russian attempts at weaken Spain by fueling Catalonian independence, including an offer of 10,000 soldiers if Catalonia went "independent". This attempt at weaking Spain has been known since 2020, however, in May this year these investigative journalists presented new findings: Fueling Secession, Promising Bitcoins: How a Russian Operator Urged Catalonian Leaders to Break With Madrid - OCCRP

Key Findings:
  • On a trip to Barcelona in 2017, Nikolai Sadovnikov offered to give the Catalonians $500 billion to aid their attempts to make the region an independent state.
  • In return, he asked them to turn Catalonia into a haven for cryptocurrencies.
  • A Western intelligence agency described him as “an actor of Russian parallel diplomacy” who accompanied Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on trips around the Middle East.
  • After Sadovnikov left Barcelona, text messages show the Catalonians stayed in touch through an intermediary.
  • The intermediary kept promising money, sending the Catalonians photographs of a suitcase full of cash and a certificate of deposit worth $500 billion. But reporters could only confirm he ever sent them a single bitcoin.
  • Sadovnikov held shares in four companies registered in a government-owned building in Red Square.
Keir Giles, a Russia expert at the British think tank Chatham House, said Russia has a “zero-sum view of security,” believing that there’s only so much to go around.

“Therefore, if Russia weakens another country by eroding the population’s faith in institutions, by devolving its regions, by challenging its constitution, its democratic processes, its legal systems, then by comparison, Russian by default becomes stronger,” he said.

That Russia would do so by reaching out to separatist leaders in Spain is consistent with past behavior, said Louise Shelley, director of the Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption Center at George Mason University in Virginia.
This is another example of the malignant behavior of Russia.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Russia has armed and strengthen its enclave in the last years....
...and according to this article Russia has also placed recently 3K60 Bal (Kh-35) and K300P Bastion (P800 Oniks) installations on Kaliningrad.
But weren't these systems already placed for a long time there?
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Russia has armed and strengthen its

Well it had to happen and it's basically SOP.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure why so much is being made of this. Kazakhstan and Russia are not staunch allies. Kazakhstan and Belarus are the closest thing Russia has to allies, but both are flaky allies at best. In each case they're tied to Russia primarily by mutual interest. Interests shift and so do allegiances. Kazakhstan of course was never particularly happy with Russia's course in Ukraine, every since 2014.
I think what really caused all the hoo ha is that despite Kazakhstan and Russia not being staunch allies the last thing anyone expected was
the statement about not recognising certain territories. Eveyone took it for granted that the issue would be skirted.

This article helps us better understand why it was said; the context and Kazakh/Russian bilateral relationship.


''In some Western media sources there is a clear urge to frame Putin as weakening, losing power and influence. Tokayev refusing to support the Kremlin’s visions for Luhansk and Donetsk, in person, is seen as an example of how low Russia has fallen even among its closest allies. But if you watch the whole panel, the Russian and Kazakh presidents agreed on many points, even those that fell beyond economic discussions. Tokayev was courteous and friendly in his expressions, and he stressed numerous times how important it is for Russia and Kazakhstan to work together in the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) to overcome the challenging economic state the region finds itself in. Moreover, Tokayev’s presence at SPIEF in the first place is suggestive of Kazakhstan’s clear intentions not to “betray” or “humiliate” Russia, but rather to try to find ways for mutually beneficial economic cooperation.''

''Still, in its current position, Russia needs Kazakhstan. And Kazakhstan wants to keep relations with Russia on good terms for its own reasons. On the June 23, Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Mariya Zaharova said that “Russia respects Kazakhstan’s point of view on the conflict in Ukraine.” Overall, the war in Ukraine has seemed to make Kazakhstan more vocal on the global stage in expressing its position and national interests in relation to Russia, but despite the difficult geopolitical and economic conditions Russia has created, it is in both countries’ interests to keep their good relations afloat.''
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group

The article talking about new oil reserve that Russia found in Artic. The amount is quite significant, however it is not what I'm focusing on.

Western politicians based on assesment from some of Western Hydrocarbon analysts, claim and hoping that not only Russian hydrocarbon industrial output will drop but also their infrastructure will be deteriorating without Western Materials imports.

Similar thing already happen in Iran and Venezuella. No spare parts imports, thus reducing maintenance capabilities and hindered them for upgradimg new capacities. Something West hope will happen with Russian hydrocarbon production facilities.

However Rosneft claim otherwise. Not only they can maintain them but also building new ones including in Artics where Western Analysts (especially those being hired by mainstream media), claim that it will be impossible for Russian to build and upgrade without Western Tech and materials Imports.

I'm no Hydrocarbon Industrial Analyst. However talking to some more reasonable ones, they say it is simply Western 'arrogance' on claiming Russian Industry can not build their own Import Substitutions parts and materials. They are buying Western parts before because it is more efficients, however with embargoes they will be force to build their own stuff. After all if USSR can do it, why Russia can not do it ? It is just matter how long they are going to refocus their import substitutions capabilities.

This is related to basic question, how good Russia to build their own import substitution or source it from friendlier sources. Especially with hydrocarbon industrial capacities, personally I do tend to sided with Rosneft claim. Because simply they have that capabilities before. Perhaps their quality will not be at par all with Western Parts, however does not mean it will not work.

So the Western perceptions that Russia hydrocarbon infrastructure will be deteriorating as some in West predict (and hope), i doubt will be happen. Their support Industry basically is not in similar stage as Iran and Venezuella.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
From satellite imaging we know that Russian gas production & transport is very leaky by western standards. That suggests low standards in operations, or maintenance, or installation - or all of them. That's with a lot of the same equipment as western operators.

Given that, I doubt that it'll keep up on its own.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Time will tell how effective their import substitution industry will be. This Artic reserve find will also going to tell whether they will be capable to build and operate base on their own industry or friendly supplier (China) support.

Just like with Chinese semiconductor drive, I'm still wait to see how either one of them can work out with out getting much support from Western suppliers and tech. Desperate situation when you're being cornered in many occasions provide results. Especially when you already have the basic tech to work it out.
 
Top