Outside of China, India's position in the Russia-Ukraine conflict has also drawn significant attention from the West. The UK's Daily Telegraph published an article that characterized India's "neutral" stance as equivalent to supporting Russia and labeled it as an "enemy." The author of the article is Tom Sharpe, a former Royal Navy officer from the UK. He wrote, "There is a major country armed by Russia, which funds Putin. How else can you call it?" Therefore, "India is the enemy of the West, not a friend or neutral country." He analyzed it from three aspects:

First, India's energy trade with Russia is accused of being "hypocritical."

The article states, "India's trade with Russian oil is full of hypocrisy. Despite Western sanctions, Indian refiners still purchase large amounts of discounted crude oil, usually transported by ships operating in secret, which avoid and falsify AIS tracking."

The author believes that India helps Russia bypass Western sanctions by purchasing discounted Russian crude oil and refining it for export to Western countries. This behavior is described as "duplicity," because India maintains a superficially neutral stance while providing economic support to Russia through energy trade, indirectly funding its war in Ukraine.

Second, India's military reliance on Russia is criticized as unethical. The article states, "India's dependence on Russian warships is at least decreasing, but shouldn't it have been nearly zero by now?" The author criticizes India for continuing to rely on Russian-made military equipment, such as the "Tamil" frigate, and considers this dependence technically outdated and morally indefensible, as it indirectly supports Russia's military industry. Moreover, the author implies that India should accelerate its transition away from Russian military reliance and questions why it hasn't fully shifted to Western technology.

Third, India is accused of "selective silence" and lacking a moral stance. The article states, "Modi refuses to address insurance loopholes or ship transparency issues, indicating he doesn't care about right or wrong, only money." The author accuses India's policies of focusing solely on economic interests rather than the global moral standards. The author even warns that if India does not clearly side with the West, it will be seen as an "enemy."

How to analyze the author's view?

The tone of the article shows a clear Western-centric bias, imposing Western sanctions and values as global moral standards on other countries, demanding India to "take a side." The author uses extreme labels like "enemy," which are clearly provocative and emotionally charged.

Western critics accuse India of buying Russian oil, yet they ignore the EU's continued import of Russian energy. An EU energy report on July 4 showed that the EU is still importing Russian liquefied natural gas, although it has decreased by 70%, it still accounts for 13% of its imports. British media criticizes India while importing Indian-refined Russian oil. The US also threatens to impose a 500% tariff on countries buying Russian oil. This approach exposes the bullying nature of the West.

The West fears the formation of a partnership between India, Russia, and China. From July 6 to 7, Brazil will host the BRICS summit. These three countries are strengthening their connections through the BRICS, conducting trade using their own currencies, and moving away from the dollar. As India refuses to comply, the influence of the West is fading.

The West demands India to "take a side," but New Delhi believes there is no reason to abandon its independent and self-reliant path unaffected by Western pressure. Although India and China have territorial disputes, in resisting Western hegemony, it is our ally. We support India's position in the Russia-Ukraine conflict and refuse to be a follower of the West.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7523415038820925988/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking the [Up/Down] buttons below.