The “Ukrainian Front” account tweeted footage on 30 December of what some experts have claimed are Indian 155-mm artillery shells being loaded into a Polish-made Krab self-propelled howitzer, which prompted several days later Delhi to deny that it exported any such ammo to that country. The timing of this scandal coincided with the end of External Affairs Minister (EAM) Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar’s impromptu trip to Moscow that recalibrated India’s multi–alignment policy and rankled the West.
Leading influencers like former American Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul and British journalist Isabel Oakeshott fearmongered about Indian-Russian ties immediately after his visit, which they falsely portrayed as a betrayal of its values and an alleged pivot towards Russia instead of a rebalancing. The larger context was that Indo-US ties had deteriorated over the latter’s hosting of a Delhi-designated terrorist-separatist that the Justice Department claimed was the target of an Indian assassination plot.
Biden had also declined Prime Minister Modi’s invitation from September to participate in mid-January’s Republic Day celebrations in the middle of December at the same time as his government hosted Pakistani Chief Of Army Staff Asim Munir, both of which further boded ill for bilateral ties. Over the past month, two major information warfare narratives were unveiled against India after the Washington Post claimed that it’s meddling in US affairs while Semafor claimed that its leader “purged” the parliament.
Neither is true and both are misportayals of reality, but they still served to establish the false pretext for justifying the US’ own meddling in India ahead of its national elections in spring, the operation of which is driven by the desire to punish Prime Minister Modi for his independent foreign policy. McFaul and Oakeshott’s follow-up pieces were therefore the latest manifestations of these newfound Western smears against India’s international reputation.
This backdrop is important to keep in mind since it helps explain the latest scandal about Ukraine’s alleged use of Indian shells against Russia. The Eurasian Times reported that “The United Arab Emirates and Armenia have been the known customers of 155 mm shells. An unnamed European country, most probably Poland or Slovenia, recently purchased the artillery shells”, which are leads worth pursuing. Both have close ties with India, but Armenia is pivoting towards the West while the UAE remains neutral.
At the end of last year, “Lavrov Warned Armenia Against Ceding Its National Security To NATO”, which was Russia’s most detailed and harshest response yet to its formal CSTO mutual defense ally’s pivot towards that enemy bloc following the years-long process that accelerated since last September. By contrast, Emirati President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan defied the West to accept President Putin’s invitation to be his guest of honor at June’s St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF).
The Russian leader then described the UAE as his country’s “main trade partner in the Arab world” last month, while just last week the UAE put its excellent relations with Russia to good use in mediate a prisoner swap between Moscow and Kiev, after which it reaffirmed its desire to mediate peace talks. Emirati entities have also been sanctioned by the US for allegedly violating that country’s anti-Russian sanctions regime.
Given this state of affairs, it’s unimaginable that the UAE would have re-exported Indian shells to Poland or Slovenia to pass along to Ukraine at the US’ behest, and much more believable that Armenia was the one that did this instead. If that’s the case, then this would mean that Armenia was only pretending to practice a clumsy balancing act between NATO and India, but was only manipulating the second into sending it more equipment that it then intended to indirectly transfer to Ukraine to help the first.
India innocently thought that Armenia was increasingly relying on it as a replacement for Russia amidst the Western-instigated tiff with its traditional security partner in order to maintain some element of sovereignty during this process instead of becoming disproportionately dependent on NATO. Having projected its own multi-alignment paradigm onto its partner, India accordingly provided Armenia with a widening array of defense equipment (presumably via Iran), only for Yerevan to ultimately betray Delhi.
Poland was likely the third party that passed along these shells to Ukraine considering its leading role as NATO’s military conduit for waging its proxy war on Russia through that former Soviet Republic. It’s possible in theory though that they were passed along by Slovenia, but even in that case, they would have likely transited across Poland anyhow. For all intents and purposes, it’s a safe to assume that Poland was most responsible for facilitating Armenia’s transfer of Indian shells to Ukraine at the US’ behest.
Regardless of however long they were in that country, it’s worth reminding the reader that the footage was only shared on social media immediately after EAM Jaishankar’s trip to Moscow where he recalibrated India’s multi-alignment policy in light of newfound troubles in its ties with the US. This scandal also occurred against the backdrop of the US’ increasingly intense information warfare campaign against India ahead of this spring’s national elections.
It’s therefore possible that the US orchestrated the timing of this footage’s release in a desperate attempt to sow divisions in the decades-long special and privileged Indian-Russian strategic partnership that was immensely strengthened after that visit. This working hypothesis aligns with the recently established precedent of American meddling and smears against India as revenge for Prime Minister Modi’s independent foreign policy, particularly his refusal to condemn and sanction Russia.
Armenia is unlikely to have decided on its own to betray India, nor to have devised this complicated logistics scheme all by itself for indirectly arming Ukraine in support of NATO’s proxy war on Russia. Rather, it’s much more likely that the US told Armenia to do this in exchange for either something tangible or more vague promises of support, which in any case was agreed to by Prime Minister Pashinyan since this couldn’t have taken place without his authorization.
His in-person participation in the informal CIS heads of state meeting in St. Petersburg late last month, which was a notable exception to his informal boycott of Russian-organized economic, political, and security events amidst his Western-instigated tiff with that country, could have therefore been a ruse. Knowing now what probably took place before that with respect to Armenia’s indirect arming of Ukraine via Poland at the US’ behest, he probably participated in order to preemptively deflect accusations.
By pretending to reconsider his country’s pro-Western pivot and making a pretense of appearing to be pragmatic by taking part in that meeting, Pashinyan thought that he could strategically disarm President Putin, though the Russian leader is much too wise to be fooled by this charlatan. Prime Minister Modi is also a very wise leader too and is accordingly expected to reconsider his country’s military ties with Armenia if evidence emerges in support of the hypothesis that it transferred Indian shells to Ukraine.
In that event, this incident could serve to push through the Indian-Azeri rapprochement that was proposed here at the start of the year, thus unlocking those two’s geo-economic potential and making the North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) in which they both participate more strategic than ever. If that happens, then Armenia would lose its reliable Indian military partner and become completely dependent on NATO, though it should have thought about that before going along with this scheme.
While the West would be delighted to solidify its full-spectrum control over Armenia, its perception managers will likely spin any Indian complaints against that country and possible downscaling of their military ties (if not outright abolishment) as supposed “proof” of its “anti-Western agenda”. This false narrative would build upon the emerging one pushed by McFaul and Oakeshott misportraying India as “pro-Russian, anti-Western, and therefore a rogue state” in order to justify more meddling and smears.
With that scenario in mind, it might very well have been the case that the US orchestrated this scandal not only to help complete Armenia’s pro-Western pivot and stir trouble in Indo-Russo ties, but also to provoke the aforesaid response in order to make its anti-Indian campaign more believable. The resultant optics could manipulate Westerners into supporting more muscular moves against India in the future, perhaps even as far as sanctions, which could further worsen bilateral relations across the coming year.
