Home

Featured Articles

Aug 19, 2025
Viren S Doshi

Historical Bonds and Broken Trusts: The Russia-Ukraine Saga

Why CCP-Occupied China enjoys the bloodbath as President Donald Trump and PM Narendra Modi Seek Resolution… Introduction The conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which erupted into full-scale war in 2022, has roots in a complex tapestry of shared history, shattered by geopolitical divisive forces, and internal differences. This fratricidal struggle highlights how unbreakable geographical proximity — neighbours cannot be changed — can get fractured by divisive forces defeating nationalist forces that foster unity. While conservatives like U.S. President Donald Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have pursued diplomatic avenues to end the hostilities, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-occupied China has pursued “strategic ambiguity”, offering rhetorical support for peace without committing to substantive mediation and fuelling this gruesome war behind the curtains. This analysis explores the historical bonhomie between Russia and Ukraine, focuses on violations of the Minsk agreements, details on authoritarianism of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, critiques NATO's role from multiple perspectives, including Russian concerns over warmongering, and addresses the European Union's (EU) anti-Russia posture amid calls for recalibration, particularly through President Trump's efforts. The analysis incorporates updated data, including recent diplomatic developments, tries to enlist the shrewd “beneficiaries” of the war, examines money laundering allegations and makes general assumptions on future projections. Russian-Ukrainian Brotherhood: Historical Ties and Recent Fractures Russian-Ukrainian brotherhood is embedded in shared origins dating back to Kievan Rus', a medieval East Slavic federation from the 9th to 13th centuries, the common ancestor of Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians. This state, centred in what is now Kyiv, fostered linguistic, cultural and religious unity; with Orthodox Christianity connecting the peoples. This historical unity was fractured time and again since the 17th century. Ukraine's history includes autonomous periods like the Cossack Hetmanate (1648–1764), which endured partitions due to the Russian Empire and Austro-Hungarian Empire till the formation of the Soviet Republic in 1922. The Soviet era witnessed a tragedy - the Holodomor (1932–1933), a famine that claimed millions of Ukrainian lives. Post-1991 independence, Ukraine's population of 44 million (pre-war estimate) comprised of Ethnic Russians, making up about 17%, primarily in the east. The events of the last decade have left the divisive force - nexus of Leftists on one hand and strangely the Nazis on the other hand - with the upper hand as detailed hereunder. Chronology: From Shared Roots to Broken Families 1991: Ukraine's independence referendum passes with 92% support amid Soviet dissolution. 1994: Budapest Memorandum—Ukraine relinquishes nuclear arsenal for security guarantees from Russia, the U.S. and the U.K. 2004–2005: Orange Revolution protests, ushering in pro-NATO leadership that couldn't last longer, ultimately giving way to pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych. 2013–2014: Euromaidan uprising at the behest of leftist deep state and European leftist forces topples Yanukovych; rattled, Russia annexes Crimea and supports Donbas activists. Under the Barack Hussein Obama Administration, U.S. diplomat Victoria Nuland's support for Euromaidan and a leaked 2014 call discussing Ukraine's government fuelled claims of NATO instigation. Critics link this to a leftist deep state agenda. NATO's eastward expansion since 1999—adding 14 members—represents warmongering, breaching the alleged 1990 assurances to Mikhail Gorbachev against expansion. President Putin cites this as encircling Russia, with Ukraine's potential membership as a red line. 2014–2015: Minsk I and II Agreements signed to enforce ceasefire, political reforms and withdrawal of forces; mediated by Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine. Violations of the Minsk Agreements The Minsk agreements (2014–2015) aimed to end the Donbas fighting through ceasefires, heavy weapons withdrawal, and political decentralisation in Ukraine. However, implementation faltered due to violations by Ukraine, followed by Russia. OSCE reports from 2016 noted over 320,000 ceasefire breaches, including gunfire and shelling. In 2018, daily averages reached 860 violations, mostly small arms fire. A 2022 report recorded 333 violations in 24 hours near disengagement areas. Ukraine accused Russian-backed separatists of initiating attacks and obstructing OSCE access, with Russia preventing full monitoring in occupied zones. Russia countered that Ukraine failed to enact political reforms like amnesty and special status for Donbas, and used drones and artillery in violation. Ultimately, mutual distrust and lack of enforcement doomed the accords, with parties sharing blame amid escalating tensions. 2019 Zelensky: Democratic Leader or Emerging Dictator? Elected in 2019 in the second round after an indecisive first round, Zelensky transitioned from comedian to wartime president. Critics label him a "dictator without elections" due to his actions like martial law extensions and postponement of polls, suppression of opponents and minorities and media consolidations. Reports of his alleged connection with Nazis have been circulating. Approval ratings of Zelensky quickly dipped amid war fatigue. 2021–2022: Russia demands that NATO halt expansion; full invasion begins February 24, 2022. 2022–2024: Ukrainian gains in Kherson and Kharkiv; Russian mobilisation; stalemate in Donbas. Casualties surpass 1 million combined; Ukraine loses 18% eastern territory where Russian Ukrainians are in concentrated numbers. 2025: As of August 18, President Trump hosts President Zelensky and European leaders in Washington after an Alaska summit with President Putin, urging Ukraine to abandon NATO membership aspirations and recognise Crimea as Russian for peace. PM Narendra Modi continues mediation, emphasising dialogue. Finally, peace accord seems on the horizon. Economic impact: U.S. funding alone exceeds $350 billion, reportedly, besides huge money spent by Europe and Ukraine; Russia's war spending reportedly hits $250 billion annually. Defence industries saw a revenue hike in arms to Ukraine. President Donald Trump and PM Narendra Modi's Peace Push Amid EU's Firm Stance President Donald Trump vows to resolve the war swiftly, recently urging concessions on Crimea and NATO in meetings with President Zelensky and President Putin. PM Modi, stressing "no era for war," has visited both capitals and held extensive confidence-building talks. The EU maintains sanctions against Russia and continues to provide aid to Ukraine, but faces calls for "correction" to prioritise diplomacy. Trump critiques EU reliance on U.S. support, pushing for burden-sharing. CCP-Occupied China's Reluctance: Strategic Benefits Over Mediation Despite Russia ties, CCP-occupied China avoids involvement, benefiting from discounted energy ($240 billion trade in 2023) and the U.S. as well as Europe’s distraction from CCP expansionism in all directions and also from sales of weapons to warring parties. Its 2023 peace plan lacks enforcement. Beneficiaries and Money Laundering U.S.: Defence arms surge. $68 billion to Ukraine. CCP-Occupied China: Cheap oil; strategic leverage. Billions of USD. Sale of weapons. Russia rerouted trade- 3.6% GDP growth (2023). (India did buy discounted crude oil, but it had no option, and it sincerely tries to end the war. The US, under the Trump Administration, too, has been making efforts to end the war.) Laundering allegations target U.S. aid, with claims of billions of USD. Future Projections Trump's talks with Zelensky and EU leaders could yield a deal, with security guarantees for Ukraine. The Zaporizhzhia nuclear site, under Russian control, would be a point for negotiation along with other territories. Negotiated peace via Trump-Modi efforts is likely despite the CCP wanting the continuation of war. While brotherhood evokes nostalgia, reality demands pragmatic reconciliation.

Aug 19, 2025
Khushi Mishra & Dr. A. Adityanjee

BRICS Currency and Dedollarisation

Introduction When a 70-year-old financial empire begins to crack, watch how swiftly the world rethinks money. For decades, the US dollar stood unchallenged as the backbone of global finance as the international reserve currency. Despite delinking from the gold standard in 1971, the dollar maintained its hegemony in international trade and finance because of the US geopolitical clout. But in 2025, the mood in the Global South has shifted. On a geopolitical chessboard riven by unpredictable tariffs, unilateral financial sanctions, and weakening trust, the BRICS bloc is no longer merely hedging its bets. Still, it is willing to rewrite the rules of international finance, challenging an order the United States has long dominated. BRIC - coined initially as an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China, - once a loose acronym for emerging economies, has transformed into the BRICS Plus. Initially perceived as an inconsequential grouping fraught with internal inconsistencies, BRICS Plus has now emerged as a political and economic force representing over half the world’s population and GDP, surpassing that of the G7. It is no longer debating the idea of alternatives in academic circles. It is taking concrete steps to reduce the dollar’s hegemony. The one single country that has contributed majorly to this push for de-dollarisation happens to be the US. The US government has indulged in quantitative easing on numerous occasions, printing dollars at the drop of a hat, to safeguard its own mercantile interests. Unilateral decision in 2022 to exclude the Russian Federation from the SWIFT network (a global messaging system used for financial transactions mainly under US and European oversight) catalysed the process of finding international monetary alternatives to the dollar’s hegemony. This process is not an overnight revolution but a slow, reactive, deliberate restructuring of how other countries trade, invest, and settle their accounts. The drivers of the change are as much geopolitical as economic, rooted in the tensions of a more fragmented, multipolar world. Diverging Positions Within BRICS The push has many triggers. In February, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva bluntly stated that while Brazil would not pursue a unified BRICS currency for now, it could not keep relying on the “mighty” dollar forever. His comments came after US President Donald Trump threatened steep tariffs on BRICS nations, signalling that Washington’s economic pressure tools remain sharp. Lula’s solution was pragmatic: convene an urgent online BRICS meeting to discuss a collective response. India has been very cautious about de-dollarisation. India clarified this August that de-dollarisation is “not on its financial agenda,” but stressed its commitment to expanding local-currency trade within the bloc. This reflects a broader Indian emphasis on “strategic autonomy,” diversifying economic ties while avoiding entanglement in any one financial camp. For India, the aim is slow de-risking, not outright decoupling from the dollar. Other members are taking more aggressive positions. Russia, under heavy sanctions since its invasion of Ukraine, has every incentive to bypass dollar channels. The only BRICS country that is aggressively pushing for de-dollarisation and its replacement by the BRICS currency is China. Wary of US financial leverage, China sees de-dollarisation as a path to expand the renminbi’s global role. China has been persistent in pushing for Yuanisation of international trade since the 2008 currency crisis and banking sector meltdown. South Africa has framed the financial sovereignty and fairness debate, arguing that a multipolar political world needs a multipolar monetary system. Concrete Steps Toward De-dollarisation Concrete actions follow the rhetoric. BRICS central banks are shifting their reserves into gold at a pace not seen in decades, i.e., 166 tons purchased in just the second quarter of this year, a 41% jump from the previous quarter. Gold’s share in global reserves is approaching 20%, while the dollar’s share has slipped below 47%. The appeal is obvious: gold is no one’s liability and immune to sanctions. Alongside, the bloc is building financial plumbing to bypass dollar-dominated systems. BRICS Pay, a decentralised payment messaging platform launched in 2018, has gained new momentum. Designed to enable trade settlement in local currencies, it sidesteps the SWIFT network (a global messaging system used for financial transactions), mainly under US and European oversight. At the Rio Summit in July 2025, leaders endorsed developing further payment infrastructure, with the New Development Bank committing to issuing loans in local currencies rather than the dollar. Limits of a Unified Currency Despite progress, unity is far from perfect. The idea of a single BRICS currency, which has been repeatedly floated in media headlines, remains unattainable. Brazil rejected the proposal earlier this year, citing the complexities of aligning monetary policies across economies as diverse as Russia’s sanctions-hit financial system and India’s heavily regulated capital markets. Even China, often assumed to be pushing hardest for such a currency, has now been very careful not to alienate partners who see it as premature or risky while not drawing the wrath of the US. Instead, the immediate strategy is a mosaic of multidimensional interventions: expanding bilateral trade in local currencies, creating shared payment systems, boosting gold holdings, and lobbying for reforms in global financial institutions. This multi-pronged approach is less likely to provoke direct retaliation from the US than a sudden currency launch, but it also means progress will be incremental. External Pressures External factors continue to sharpen the debate. The Trump 2.0 administration has already announced additional tariffs on Brazil for its decision to prosecute Jair Bolsonaro, the former president and a friend of Trump, for sedition and trying to overthrow the newly elected government. The US has warned of additional secondary tariffs on India if Trump–Putin talks in Alaska collapse, underscoring how quickly geopolitical disputes can spill into trade and finance. This is a double-edged reality for BRICS members: the risk of being economically cornered by the dollar strengthens the case for alternatives, but the potential cost of moving too quickly is equally clear. Meanwhile, geopolitical thawing among members may open new pathways. This year, after a five-year freeze, China and India resumed talks on reopening border trade through Lipulekh, Shipki La, and Nathu La. These routes, if operational, could facilitate greater use of local currencies in cross-border exchanges. For reducing the salience of the dollar in international trade, economic cooperation between the bloc’s most prominent members is not optional but essential. India and China are nowhere near that level geopolitically at this juncture. Yet even as BRICS builds momentum, the structural barriers to dethroning the dollar remain tough. The US dollar continues to enjoy deep liquidity, a vast banking network, and dominance in commodities pricing. Many BRICS economies still borrow and trade in dollars. Replacing this system will take decades of institutional work. The BRICS Plus bloc knows this. De-dollarisation is framed not as an abrupt break but as a gradual push toward balance. Calls at the Rio Summit to reform the IMF, World Bank, and even the UN underline that the real goal is not just replacing one currency with another but reshaping the rules themselves. Conclusion A generation ago, dollar dominance was seen as a permanent fixture of the global economy. Today, serious policymakers openly discuss and act on life beyond the dollar. Gold reserves, local-currency trade, and alternatives to SWIFT are no longer fringe ideas—they are the first bricks of an emerging alternative system for international trade. Brazil’s rejection of a single currency, India’s cautious pragmatism, Russia’s urgency, and China’s relentless promotion of renminbi as an international currency show that de-dollarisation will be slow, messy and uneven. From an Indian perspective, replacing the dollar with yuan is not a desirable goal, keeping in view the baggage that comes with Chinese hegemony. Yet the fact that such debates are happening at the highest levels signals the end of unquestioned dollar supremacy. In the end, BRICS is not seeking to trigger a sudden dollar collapse. That would be destabilising for all, including themselves. It builds a flexible architecture that shields members from economic coercion and political shocks. The likely future is not one currency replacing another, but a patchwork world where the dollar shares space with regional and bilateral systems. For BRICS Plus, that is not just a financial strategy but sovereignty. Global finance is unlikely to become unipolar again. The ultimate responsibility for this situation lies with the US when it overextended its geopolitical might to make arbitrary decisions to impose unilateral tariffs, financial sanctions outside the umbrella of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The cracks in the old order are widening. BRICS may not yet have the blueprint for a new one, but it is laying the bricks- one gold bar, one local-currency deal, and one payment channel at a time. When the architecture of global finance finally shifts, the groundwork will already be in place. The prospect of a BRICS currency is not merely a financial experiment but a broader attempt to reshape the global order. While the US dollar’s dominance will not crumble overnight, the steady push from BRICS reflects a long-term strategy to erode the dollar’s monopoly and US hegemony while strengthening multipolarity. What we are witnessing, therefore, is less about an abrupt dethroning of the dollar and more about a quiet, persistent rebalancing - one that may, over time, redraw the map of global finance.

Alaska Summit: Putin Gets the Better of Trump

Is the UK a Safe Haven for Economic Offenders and International Criminals?

Pakistan: The Rogue Jihadi Terror State and Its Nuclear Threats – Global Imperatives

Featured Articles

Historical Bonds and Broken Trusts: The Russia-Ukraine Saga

BRICS Currency and Dedollarisation

Reports View All

Israel-France diplomatic row deepens as Netanyahu accuses Macron of fuelling ‘anti-Semitic fire’

‘If Indian goods cannot go to US market, they can head to Russia’, Russia slams Trump’s ‘unjustified’ tariffs

NCERT launches module on Operation Sindoor, terms it ‘a military success, technological breakthrough’

Draft Bill on removal of arrested PM, CMs and ministers sent to joint parliamentary committee amid opposition protests

‘Can SC take a pen and paper and rewrite the constitution’: Attorney General on timelines for Governors and President

NESO protests across Northeast demanding curbs on illegal Bangladeshi immigration

Search

Top Authors

Archives

Featured Articles

Reports View All

Search

Podcast / Videos

Popular Posts

Top Authors

Archives