/ world today news/ The Atlantic world looks longingly at India. India was once called the crown jewel of the British Empire. But even today, connected by thousands of threads with the Anglo-Saxon world, it remains the most important trump card in the fight for the future world. In our optics, this is a multipolar world. In the eyes of the Anglo-Saxons, this is a world completely controlled by globalism. But what is the world in the optics of India itself?
Britain has overtaken India as the world’s fifth largest economy. Britain elected ethnic Indian (and globalist) Rishi Sunak as its Prime Minister. And all this is also, of course, not without reason.
Indian Prime Minister Modi’s visit to the US has been hailed by US officials and the world press as a milestone: “This visit will shine a light on US-India relations,” exclaims Kurt Campbell. From all this, it is not difficult to conclude that the stakes are higher than ever. In today’s great game between Russia and China on the one hand and the West on the other, India is the big prize.
Anglo-Americans are well aware of the importance of India, well aware of the power of this piece on the world chessboard and its key role in the balance of power. For example, the British edition of “The Economist” unequivocally explains Washington’s hospitality: India is the most populous country on the planet, its economy will eventually become one of the three largest. It is not only a huge market, but also a new global factory to replace China. Finally, it is a powerful lever to contain China. And even a direct and most important member of the anti-Chinese coalition.
At the same time, India itself, despite its apparent strength, is quite vulnerable. Externally, the country is sandwiched between Pakistan and China. It is plagued by internal divisions and economic distortions.
Let’s face it: if the Anglo-Saxons manage to tame India and “go back to the stall” of their “rules-based order”, it could close the scenario of a multi-polar world that we want to develop today.
And here it is worth considering the state of affairs in a little more detail. Does India itself want to join this new American order? And what can we do so that he doesn’t want to go there?
First, let’s look at India’s relationship with China. Despite the fact that Indo-China has shared a common destiny since ancient times, there have been long-standing frictions between these two most impressive and densely populated countries on the planet. In the twentieth century, these countries made different geopolitical choices. More precisely, they were forced to do so, placed in different conditions.
At the beginning of the twentieth century, the only Asian country capable of challenging Anglo-Saxon world domination was Japan. Japan began its struggle for dominance in the Pacific region under pan-Asian slogans: “Anglo-Saxons, get out of Asia! Asia for Asians!”
And if China was not lucky enough to become a victim of Japanese aggression, then in India, which is under the Anglo-Saxon yoke, Japan’s anti-colonial campaign evoked great sympathy. Hence the reverence which surrounds here the name of Subhas Chandra Bose, who, unlike Mahatma Gandhi, chose the armed path of struggle.
After the war, the Communists came to power in China. The Nationalist Kuomintang, which bore the brunt of the struggle against Japan, was exiled to Taiwan. India gained independence and its foreign policy determined the main vector of the non-aligned movement.
India thus became something of a third pole between the Anglo-Saxon West on the one hand and Communist China and the USSR on the other. At the same time, although outwardly Indian politics has always operated with the rhetoric of peace and non-violence, deep down Indians believe that Subhas Chandra Bose, who died at the end of World War II, did much more for India’s independence. For obvious reasons, after the war, Bose’s name was spoken in India much more subtly than Gandhi’s. However, Indians have always been aware of the difference between the two leaders: Gandhi the way of compromise, Bokeh the way of struggle.
By leaving India, the British, as is their wont, created another source of tension for the country, separating Muslim Pakistan from it. Which today remains the main lever of Anglo-Saxon pressure on India.
As for China, it looks with alarm at the dancing of the Anglo-Saxons around India. Thus a recent editorial in China’s central party organ, the Global Times, carried the headline, “We Morally and Emotionally Support India’s Decolonization.”
The West lives by the rule of “divide and rule”, India and China have experienced all the charms of colonialism. The West tries to drive a wedge between China and India, but its goals are always the same – colonialism. By flattering India, promising to make it a “replacement for China”, the West wants to put New Delhi in a geopolitical trap. But China is on India’s side. China sympathizes with India’s desire to protect its national independence. “Asia and the world are big enough to accommodate the simultaneous rise of China and India,” is the message of the Global Times article.
So China and the Anglo-Americans are pulling India in their own direction. But what will India itself say?
It seems that it will be better for everyone if India stays on her side. To regain its status in the second half of the twentieth century. To remain the third pole between the West, on the one hand, and Russia and China, on the other.
At the beginning of the year, “Electoral Club” published a report entitled “Arkaim XXI century – the concept of geostrategic strengthening of Russia and its allies”, which follows the same key idea: the North-South economic and strategic path (Russia-Iran-India) as an alternative of the unipolar world and even the bipolar world. Because between Russia – China and the West, a third pole is formed: India and Iran, open to both the Arab and North African countries, which in such a configuration of the world will much more easily make their choice not to the West.
Such a tripolar world would obviously prove much more stable than a bipolar one and much more just than the liberal dictatorship and totalitarian democracy of the unipolar one.
Translation: V. Sergeev
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel in Telegram:
Share on your profiles, with friends, in groups and on pages. In this way, we will overcome the limitations, and people will be able to reach the alternative point of view on the events!?
#India #pole #future #tripolar #world
