India takes a Huge steps, says NO to Russia's Su-57 Jets, S-500 Air Defense System, INS Tamal and S-400 likely to be...,Putin now plans to...
During the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Qingdao, Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh held talks with his Russian counterpart Andrei Belousov to enhance bilateral defense cooperation between the two countries.
According to Sputnik, citing the Russian Ministry of Defense (RuMoD), Belousov told Rajnath Singh during their meeting, 'India is an extremely important strategic partner for us, a traditional friend, and a collaborator in military and military-technical areas.' Meanwhile, Rajnath Singh posted on X (formerly Twitter) that he and Belousov had 'a practical discussion on promoting India-Russia defense relations.' All you need to know about INS Tamal: INS Tamal is part of the Admiral Grigorovich-class
INS Tamal will now patrol the Arabian Sea.
It is stealthy, multi-role and formidable but also marks the end of an era when Russia was India's most trusted arms partner.
India has decided that all major naval ships will be built at home from now on. S-400 Air Defence System:
It is important to note that the S-400 air defense system remains another crucial Russian asset still in the pipeline. India ordered five units. Three have arrived. The last two are expected next year.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to visit India soon. In preparation for the visit, Moscow has reportedly offered a range of high-value defence deals — including the Su-57 stealth fighter, the S-500 missile defence system, nuclear submarines on lease, and long-range Kalibr missiles. However, New Delhi appears reluctant to take the bait.
Notably, India has already said no to a joint helicopter production deal. No movement has followed Russia's offer to lease another nuclear-powered submarine. And despite speculation after the recent India-Pakistan military standoff – where the S-400 performed exceptionally – there has been no momentum on acquiring additional S-400 units or upgrading to the S-500.
What's unfolding behind closed doors? Indian officials seem to be not interested and looking inward. It is important to note that the country's Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) project — a homegrown fifth-generation fighter jet — is gaining pace. As a top-priority indigenous program, it has reduced the appeal of the Su-57 deal, even with the offer of technology transfer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
India's liquidity surplus unlikely to lift credit growth, says JP Morgan
Bank lending to the Indian economy may not see a meaningful boost despite the large liquidity surplus in the banking system, economists at J.P. Morgan said in a report on Friday. While surplus liquidity influences overnight borrowing costs, a recent analysis by the firm showed it does not impact credit or deposit growth in the economy. The Indian central bank has cut rates steeply and flooded the banking system with liquidity since December as it sought to counter signs of a slowdown in the Indian economy amid modest inflation. The Reserve Bank of India has said it hopes the combination of rate cuts and easy liquidity would help transmit lower interest rates across the economy and prompt individuals and firms to borrow more. Bank credit growth slipped to below 10 per cent in May. "We find that the role of liquidity in boosting monetary policy transmission occurs primarily through influencing overnight market rates, within the policy corridor," J.P. Morgan economists Toshi Jain, Sajjid Z Chinoy and Divyanit Sood said in the study dated July 4. "There is no evidence of a 'credit channel' on deposit and lending growth beyond this." The economists added that the findings suggest the central bank should inject or withdraw only as much liquidity as needed to keep overnight rates aligned with the policy repo rate, adding that excess liquidity operations have no independent effect on credit growth. A large surplus of liquidity in the Indian market pushed overnight rates down to below the policy repo rate in recent months and, in some cases, even below the floor of the interest rate corridor. The RBI withdrew 1 trillion rupees ($11.7 billion) from the banking system on Friday through a seven-day variable rate reverse repo, rolling over an operation from last week, to ensure rates don't fall too low. India's policy repo rate, the mid-point of the corridor, stands at 5.50 per cent, while the standing deposit facility (SDF) rate, the floor of the corridor, is at 5.25 per cent. "Pushing up the overnight rate will constitute a tightening of monetary policy at a delicate time. Yet, eventually, the sanctity of the operating target will need to be adhered to," J.P. Morgan economists said.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Cultural appropriation isn't just colonial, it's casteist
When Italian luxury house Prada recently unveiled its version of the Kolhapuri chappal, Indian social media was quick to react. Accusations of cultural appropriation and erasure followed, accompanied by demands for proper attribution and a wider call to 'decolonise fashion'. But what if the cultural erasure didn't start with Prada, or with the West? What if the deeper, older story is not just about colonial appropriation, but about caste-based appropriation from within? Beneath the Indian diaspora's outrage lies a deeper, more uncomfortable truth: the issue isn't just about what is being borrowed, but who gets to borrow and who doesn't. The Kolhapuri controversy exposes not only colonial legacies but also the casteist dynamics embedded within India's cultural economy. Not just Indian, but Dalit in origin Originating in Maharashtra's Kolhapur region and its neighbouring districts, the Kolhapuri chappal is known for its durability and distinct structure. What is less commonly discussed is who makes them. Historical accounts of Kolhapuri craftsmanship often mention specific sub-castes such as the Chamar, Dhor, and Matang: scheduled caste communities historically assigned the task of leatherwork, a practice stigmatised due to its contact with animal hides. These artisans, often from marginalised backgrounds, tan, dye, and stitch the leather by hand, creating a product celebrated for its durability and aesthetic. Yet, mainstream narratives often generalise Kolhapuris as a 'Maharashtrian' or 'Indian' craft, erasing the caste-specific labour behind them. Appropriation marketed as 'revival' Within India, cultural appropriation often wears the mask of reverence. Many Indian artforms, textiles, jewellery, and crafts originate from Dalit-Adivasi aesthetics, labour, and design but commercialised by upper caste (Savarna) owned businesses. When a luxury Indian label collaborates with artisans, it is seen as uplifting tradition. But these collaborations rarely involve co-authorship or equity. Artisans are paid per piece. Designs are owned by the brand. The origin story is softened into a marketing stunt. While artisans toil for minimal wages, the profits and prestige accrue to brands. Artisans, often from marginalised social backgrounds, form the backbone of India's handicraft sector but lack control over branding or distribution. Savarna designers and brands act as gatekeepers, curating and profiting from these crafts while framing their role as 'saviours of craft'. Who owns the means of design? Indian fashion runways feature designers predominantly from Savarna castes. The narratives in Indian fashion are largely shaped by editorials run by upper-caste surnames. The leadership roles in the Indian fashion and textile sector are disproportionately represented by upper castes. Meanwhile, Bahujans remain largely invisible in decision-making roles, often limited to labour roles. Their labour, when filtered through a Savarna designer's lens, becomes 'art.' When done independently, it remains 'ethnic' or 'rural.' Many traditional artisans lack access to formal design education, capital investment, or English-language fluency. Such barriers make it difficult for Bahujans to participate in the elite circuits of fashion. Bahujans are often reduced to tokenistic roles: a one season's showstopper or a lookbook model, to signal performative inclusivity without ceding power. Bahujans are rarely seen in leadership roles, such as creative directors or brand owners, yet their identity is exploited in marketing campaigns that romanticise their poverty and struggles as 'hardwork' or 'heritage.' This tokenism commodifies Bahujan struggle while denying them agency, perpetuating a cycle where their labour is celebrated, but their voices are silenced. The diaspora and the blind spot The Indian diaspora's calls to decolonise fashion often overlook these internal caste hierarchies. This blind spot is telling. National pride tends to eclipse caste critique. In calling out foreign appropriation, many forget to examine who within India controls narrative, capital, and authorship. The act is the same. The reaction shifts from outrage to celebration depending on who borrows and who gets to author the narrative. What cultural equity actually requires The question isn't whether Kolhapuris or any Indian craft should evolve. They must. But the more urgent question is: who gets to decide how they evolve? Who profits? Who gets cited in design schools and magazines, and who remains a footnote? True cultural equity is about fair wages, credit, representation in leadership roles and platforms for co-authorship in design and storytelling which rebalance historic exclusion. The Prada-Kolhapuri controversy is more than a clash over sandals; it's a mirror reflecting how global and local systems both flatten the histories of marginalised makers while uplifting those with socio-economic capital. Within the Indian fashion ecosystem, the intersections of caste and class dictate who gets to be the 'designer' and who remains the uncredited, underpaid and exploited 'artisan.' Until credit, compensation, and representation are equitably shared, cultural appropriation — whether by Prada or privileged Indian elites — will remain a form of theft, rooted in both colonial and casteist legacies. The writer is a Chennai based fashion designer, artist and educator
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Not an ‘enemy': How India's ties with Russia reflect the West's past choices
Rather than cast New Delhi as a liability, the West should view it as a potential bridge between democratic alliances and Eurasian realities read more A recent Telegraph article by Tom Sharpe has stirred controversy by branding India an 'enemy' over its continued partnership with Russia—a nation blamed for fuelling the Ukraine war through oil exports and defence cooperation. As a long-time observer of India's strategic calculus, I believe this framing is dangerously simplistic. Rather than vilify India, the West must reckon with how its own historical choices—and geography—shaped India's ties with Moscow. A Relationship Forged by Strategy, Not Defiance STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India's ties with Russia are not born of hostility toward the West, but of historical necessity and geographic logic. During the Cold War, India's non-alignment masked a tilt towards the Soviet Union, which proved decisive during the 1971 war with Pakistan—a US-backed ally. Soviet support then was not merely symbolic; it was strategic, helping India in a conflict that played out more than 4,000 miles from Moscow's borders. That partnership matured into robust defence cooperation. The 2009 renewal of a Soviet-era agreement, joint projects like the BrahMos cruise missile, and India's $5.43 billion S-400 Triumf deal in 2018—pursued despite US CAATSA sanctions—reflect more than nostalgia. They represent a calculated hedge: Russia as a steady supplier and a counterweight to China, India's northern adversary. Sharpe's article fails to engage with this layered history. India's position was not forged in defiance of the West but shaped by the West's Cold War choices and India's need to manage its precarious neighbourhood. Moscow offered what Washington would not: reliable arms without conditionality. Oil, Ukraine, and West's Reaction Russia's war in Ukraine has sharpened scrutiny of India's neutrality. By May 2025, India was importing 1.96 million barrels of Russian crude daily—roughly 40–44 per cent of its oil supply, a 40 per cent increase since 2022, according to OPEC. This surge reflects economic pragmatism: Russian oil is cheap, plentiful, and accessible. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD But economic logic has met political backlash. US Senator Lindsey Graham recently proposed a 500 per cent tariff on nations trading with Russia, aiming to cut off the lifeblood of what he calls Putin's war machine—estimated to have cost Ukraine $400 billion, per the Kiel Institute. Sharpe leans into this narrative, interpreting India's oil purchases and naval cooperation as alignment with Moscow against the West. Yet this interpretation overlooks a critical point: geography. India is nearly 4,000 miles from the front lines of Europe's war. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has consistently urged peace in Ukraine, but India's interests remain regional—focused on border security, energy access, and economic resilience. Unlike Europe, India does not have a belligerent Russia on its doorstep. To Europe, Russia is a bad neighbour. With 80 per cent of Russians living west of the Ural Mountains, Europe faces a persistent neighbourly threat. India, however, is separated by vast distances, with no territorial disputes or shared battlefields with Russia. This geographical divide shapes a pragmatic alignment, not rivalry, challenging the West's projection of its neighbourly anxieties onto India. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Russia: A Neighbourly Threat to Europe, Not to India To understand the West's frustrations, one must also understand its geography. For Europe, Russia is not a distant actor—it is a revisionist power next door. The 2014 annexation of Crimea and the 2022 invasion of Ukraine displaced over 8 million people, as the UN notes. Hybrid attacks like the 2022 Nord Stream sabotage and simmering conflicts in Georgia and Moldova have intensified European insecurity. A 2023 Chatham House report underscored this tension, pointing to Russia's proximity and history of destabilisation as central to the EU's hardened stance. This is Europe's reality—and it is not India's. New Delhi is separated from Moscow by vast geography and divergent histories. It has no territorial disputes with Russia, no competing security pacts, and no shared battlefield. Its relationship with Moscow is not one of rivalry but of steady, if pragmatic, alignment. To conflate Europe's neighbourly anxieties with India's strategic autonomy is to miss the point entirely. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Not a Pawn, Not an Enemy Branding India an enemy because of its Russia ties ignores the role the West itself played in shaping that very relationship. During the Cold War, it was Western hesitation and alignment with Pakistan that pushed India closer to Moscow. In the decades since, India has maintained a careful, multipolar approach—balancing its partnerships with Russia, the US, and other regional actors through institutions like Brics, SCO, and the Quad. India's decisions are guided not by loyalty or betrayal, but by national interest. Just as Britain acts to safeguard its own security and energy needs, so does India. Its approach to Russia reflects long-term calculations shaped by history, geography, and economic necessity—not ideological sympathy for Moscow's adventurism. The West's Opportunity: Respect India's Perspective The United States has thus far tolerated India's neutrality because it values India's role in balancing China in the Indo-Pacific. But as domestic pressure mounts in Washington, London, and Brussels, proposals like Graham's tariff threaten to upend this fragile balance. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Sharpe's article, though provocative, should be seen as a warning: the West risks alienating India by failing to understand its perspective. Rather than cast New Delhi as a liability, the West should view it as a potential bridge between democratic alliances and Eurasian realities. With its unique vantage point, India could help moderate tensions, not exacerbate them—if only it is treated as a partner, not a problem. The author is a strategist in international relations and economic development. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
