Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Don Tzu's avatar

While Pakistan has skilfully steered a friendly course between all the key antagonists*, India has on the other hand nailed their colours to the mast of the Zionists, the US, and now the UAE - making their potential as a mediator untenable.

I would therefore interpret Lavrov's comment as a casual diplomatic aside, made for no better reason than it was in a BRICS forum, and India happens to be the current BRICS chair.

* except Israel, whom they condemn

Nakayama's avatar

I do think there is a reason for Lavrov's statement, but his words do not represent the official long-term policy. (1) The Anti-China faction in Russia prefers India over Pakistan, as they consider Pakistan being too close to the US and China. (2) Pakistan has a military alliance with KSA although Pakistan remains on good terms with Iran. India is an important customer of Gulf resources and a non-Muslim country. Therefore, India might be more neutral in preference and more eager to push for peace.

However, I also think this position is far from a strong or final policy decision because (1) pro-China faction seems to be more dominant in Russia. I suspect the pro-China faction would prefer Pakistan over India as the mediator. (2) Not only is Lavrov too old for front-line diplomatic duty and may have been delegated to semi-retirement status (see Andrew's comments above), but also Putin has to consider if he is to retire or stay on another term. I think Putin would choose to retire as well. If so, it is better to let next-generation leaders have more say in pinning down the real policy. Lavrov, given his status and experience, can play a decoy role very well. At least, it is not an issue if Lavrov drifts off orbit once in a while.

21 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?