Ram Agarwal, a shopkeeper, does not forgive the loss of civilians, but neither can he criticize Russia. He grew up in the 1950s and 1960s, when India and the Soviet Union were so close allies that Nikita Khrushchev coined the slogan “Hindi Rusi bhai bhai” (Indians and Russians are brothers). “I am 74 and my generation grew up with Hindi Rusi bhai bhai. “It’s like attacking a dear old friend,” he said. Arvind Maurya, an electrician, also expressed the balance that has marked much of the audience response. “I hear that Ukraine was part of Russia, but instead of respecting it, NATO is pulling Ukraine into its own trajectory. But war is never good for anyone, and Russian bombing of civilians is not the way to resolve these differences. “They have to sit down and talk.” But far from the road, the emotions are stronger. Indians from the right and left have converged on the war, the former because of their dislike of Western culture and the latter because of their anti-Americanism, especially in relation to foreign policy. For these two groups, the war has revealed what they see as double standards and two measures and hypocrisy of the West. Its interventions in other countries and regime change campaigns are acceptable, but not to Russia. In one column, Abhijit Iyer-Mitra, a senior fellow at the Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies, contrasted Western support for pre-2003 sanctions against Iraq, which he said had killed “hundreds of thousands of children”, with indignation over Ukraine. . “Compare the anger over the bombings in Ukraine, which resulted in about 200 civilian deaths (as of February 22) – not a fraction of the deaths caused by the US invasions, occupations and attacks in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya. ” He wrote. There is strong support for the claim that Ukraine and NATO challenged Russia to the point where it had no choice but to invade. These views, expressed by analysts, politicians and retired military men, have emerged prominently in televised debates. Vinod Bhatia, a former air force general, said NATO had promised Soviet leaders and later Putin that it would not continue to expand eastward, but had denied that promise, a claim made by the Kremlin. NATO denies ever making such an agreement. “The West is just as responsible, as Putin, for this war that can be completely avoided and is not necessary,” Batia said. Allegations of hypocrisy also extend to how European countries continue to buy Russian oil and gas, while expecting India to impose sanctions on Russia. “Why should India pay for the nonsense of the US attracting Ukraine to NATO? “Are US sanctions hurting us and should we support them?” asked former Foreign Minister Kanwal Sibal to the Times of India. Given the mood, Monti is under minimal public pressure at home to get out of the fence, although some articles have described India’s position as “tragic” and “unfounded”. India has refrained from condemning Russia at the United Nations while trying to keep the West happy with peace talks. It is an act of balancing with which Joe Biden can lose his patience. Last week, Biden described India’s stance as “shaky.” India’s US urge to support the West Line and denounce Russia could provoke an angry response. Brahma Chellaney, a strategic affairs analyst, asked why India should align with the West when no one, especially the United States, is talking about India for Chinese aggression on the border with India, where the confrontation has lasted for almost two years. “At a time when India is facing China’s border aggression, including the threat of full-scale war, Biden will not open his mouth to it, but calls India ‘s response’ trembling ‘to a distant war that has helped provoke “, Chelaney wrote on Twitter. . War rhetoric has alarmed some commentators who are reluctant to portray Putin and Russia as bad guys. First, the adjective has no resonance among Indians, where China is considered the biggest threat. Parsa Venkateshwar Rao Jr., a columnist, has been frustrated by how the United States is turning Putin into Saddam Hussein and how, when Biden calls Putin a “war criminal,” he leaves no room for negotiation. American rhetoric is deeply troubling, because unlike Saddam, who did not have weapons of mass destruction, Putin does. The whole stadium is reaching the limits of hysteria “. To some extent, Pratap Bhanu Mehta, one of India’s leading commentators, agrees with these criticisms. Europe, he says, is caught between its desire to send a strong message to Russia and its sacred morality. Its credibility is questioned because it is simply not willing to pay the slightest financial price for a strong position. However, for the Indians, exposing Western hypocrisy is not enough for Mehta because it fails to answer the broader question of what kind of world order the Indians want to build. Writing to the Indian Express, he said: “An America that is losing capital outside the West because of its hypocrisy, a Europe that still speaks in forked languages, a Russia that would rather see the world and its own citizens suffer and “Hypocrisy as a cover for pure cynicism is not a good sign for a world order.”
