[Andrew Korybko] Ambassador Alipov Confirmed That India Understands The Causes Of The NATO-Russian Proxy War
Keep up to Date & Bypass the Big Tech Censorship
Get uncensored news and updates, subscribe to our daily FREE newsletter!
The polar opposite approaches of fellow BRICS members Brazil and India towards the most geostrategically significant conflict since World War II show that they’re aligning themselves with different de facto New Cold War blocs ahead of the impending trifurcation of International Relations. Lula is placing Brazil under the influence of the US-led West’s Golden Billion while Prime Minister Modi envisages India leading the Global South and then helping it balance between the West and the Sino-Russo Entente.
Liberal–globalist members of the Indian intelligentsia and their Mainstream Media (MSM) allies have maliciously speculated over the past year that this globally significant Great Power is secretly opposed to Russia’s special operation despite its strictly neutral position towards it in public. The purpose behind artificially manufacturing this information warfare narrative is to sow doubts about India’s stance in the minds of their targeted audience, but Russian Ambassador Denis Alipov just discredited their campaign.
He said during a Soloviev Live TV broadcast on Thursday that “the Indians have a very good idea of this conflict in all its complexity. They understand perfectly well what caused our actions in Ukraine, and, understanding this, as we see it, they do not condemn Russia.” This position sharply contrasts with that of fellow BRICS member Brazil, whose newly re-elected and now three-time leader downplayed the causes of the NATO-Russian proxy war by claiming that it’s fought “over small things”.
| Recommended Books [ see all ] | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |
 |
In fact, President Lula doesn’t even seem to acknowledge that any such proxy war exists, instead having ordered Brazil to vote in support of a fiercely anti-Russian resolution at the UN demanding his partner’s full and immediate withdrawal without preconditions from all the territory that Kiev claims as its own. Prime Minister Modi, meanwhile, never ordered his government to vote against Russia at that global body and instead always ensures that it abstains from such hostile resolutions.
The polar opposite approaches of these fellow BRICS members towards the most geostrategically significant conflict since World War II show that they’re aligning themselves with different de facto New Cold War blocs ahead of the impending trifurcation of International Relations. Lula is placing Brazil under the influence of the US-led West’s Golden Billion while Prime Minister Modi envisages India leading the Global South and then helping it balance between the West and the Sino-Russo Entente.
The difference between Brazil and India’s grand strategic trajectories at this defining moment in the global systemic transition is crucial for all observers to accept in order to avoid being misled by information warfare campaigns. Elite members of Brazil’s ruling party and their political allies lie that Lula is “neutral” towards the NATO-Russian proxy war while Indian liberal-globalists and their MSM allies lie that Prime Minister Modi is secretly against Russia.
The first-mentioned want to preemptively avert a revolt among their rank and file that could powerfully pressure Lula to change his worldview, which could take the form of abstaining from anti-Russian resolutions at the UN and thus aligning Brazil closer with the Global South than with the Golden Billion. As for the second-mentioned, they’re driven by the desire to dupe Russian policymakers into thinking that India is plotting to abandon it so that they preemptively take counterproductively punitive action.
The basis of both information warfare campaigns is debunked by objectively existing and easily verifiable facts, which Russian policymakers are obviously well aware of in each case but the general public might not be. This means that the Indian dimension of these Hybrid War provocations has absolutely zero chance of affecting real-life change, unlike the Brazilian one, which is aimed at reinforcing the US-aligned grand strategic trajectory that Lula placed it on by politically supporting Kiev.
