Japanese freelance journalist Alan Callow’s suspiciously timed article series and the outlets that he relied upon thus far to help his pieces go viral strongly suggest that he’s motivated to mislead his audience into lending false credence to the debunked story of India deliberately arming Ukraine via indirect means.
Asia-Pacific is a sister site of Global Research, if you do a CTRL+F keyword search you'll see it pop up four times at the bottom.
Neither Global Research nor Eurasia Review pay for contributions, and while ThePrint might pay some, they don't pay all (I've contributed there before pro bono).
Plus the portal that he published it on at ThePrint required him to be a subscriber so he literally paid them to publish it, or more specifically, to have publication rights on their blog site.
What I meant was that he wasn't paid by the sites that published his work, but I personally suspect that he might have still been paid under the table by someone else.
It doesn't work that way as far as I'm aware: the US doesn't just pressure people into writing devious divide-and-rule articles about third countries.
Such cooperation is voluntary, it's not done under duress, and he's either doing this out of ideological motivation (since those sites aren't paying him) or per someone's commission.
"...it’s a low-quality information product that appeals to emotions and speculation."
I can't find it on 'Global Research'. It comes up on 'Asia-Pacific Research' (https://www.asia-pacificresearch.com/india-supplies-ammunition-ukraine/5632178) which looks like something of a lower-drawer product to me.
"His intent is clearly to stir trouble..."
You don't think he's just hoping to make money?
"It can’t be ruled out that he was commissioned..."
Really?
"...[by] an undercover agent of a foreign intelligence service that has an interest in stirring trouble in Russo-Indo ties..."
No!!!
Asia-Pacific is a sister site of Global Research, if you do a CTRL+F keyword search you'll see it pop up four times at the bottom.
Neither Global Research nor Eurasia Review pay for contributions, and while ThePrint might pay some, they don't pay all (I've contributed there before pro bono).
Plus the portal that he published it on at ThePrint required him to be a subscriber so he literally paid them to publish it, or more specifically, to have publication rights on their blog site.
Here are my pieces for ThePrint if you or anyone else were interested:
https://theprint.in/author/andrew-korybko/
"...he literally paid them to publish it..."
You don't reckon he got the cost reimbursed?
What I meant was that he wasn't paid by the sites that published his work, but I personally suspect that he might have still been paid under the table by someone else.
In which case, the cost(s) would have been reimbursed.
Or simply under American pressure ?
It doesn't work that way as far as I'm aware: the US doesn't just pressure people into writing devious divide-and-rule articles about third countries.
Such cooperation is voluntary, it's not done under duress, and he's either doing this out of ideological motivation (since those sites aren't paying him) or per someone's commission.