Best EAM we could ever have! We are so proud of him (SJS) and honoured to have him as India's  EAM

INFINITE ADDICTIONS ♾  THANKS FOR ALL YOUR GUIDANCE MOTIVATION AND BRIEFING TO ALL THE NEW ASPIRANTS & PROFESSIONALS BATCHES OF INDIA 🇮🇳 🎉SEETA RAAM VANDEY MATARAM

Hell this on me, Jaishankar sir, the most powerful talking leader.
   Action to reaction wonderful speker.
     jAISTA in Konidhala,

Multi-alignment works only as long as systemic friction remains manageable.

19:07 The US doesn't want India to grow or do well. The US Deputy Secretary of State clearly articulated this at the Raisina Dialogue in 2026, saying that India should understand that "we're not going to make the same mistakes with India that we made with China 20 years ago in terms of saying, 'We're going to let you develop all these markets,' and then the next thing we know, you're beating us in a lot of commercial things. We're going to make sure that whatever we do, it's fair to our people

Even if S. Jaishankar were the most eloquent diplomat in the world, his rhetoric could not conceal the fundamental poverty of India’s diplomatic strategy. India’s biggest misconception is that it treats diplomacy as a shortcut to economic development, rather than concentrating its energy on strengthening its own foundations.

The so-called doctrine of “multi-alignment” does not really exist in the real world. It runs against both the logic of physical systems and the logic of human society. Strategic alignments are inherently selective and, to varying degrees, exclusionary. Trying to be “fully aligned” with rival great powers at the same time is therefore largely an exercise in self-deception. It achieves little and, ultimately, risks backfiring by eroding strategic trust on all sides.

Effective diplomacy is not about empty rhetoric of alignment. It is about multi-touch, multi-connectivity, and multi-cooperation: engaging many countries, building multiple channels of connectivity, and pursuing practical cooperation wherever interests genuinely overlap.

Egypt provides an excellent example. It occupies one of the world’s most strategically important locations, yet it does not constantly proclaim a doctrine of “multi-alignment.” Instead, it maintains security engagement with the West, builds deep infrastructure and economic connectivity with China, and pursues pragmatic energy cooperation with regional partners. This kind of project-based, interest-driven multi-connectivity is diplomacy grounded in reality.

India, by contrast, too often mistakes opportunism for strategic sophistication. It seems perpetually preoccupied with maneuvering among competing powers in the hope of extracting advantages from all sides, instead of building the domestic economic, industrial, technological, and institutional capabilities that ultimately determine national power.

And that is precisely why, when the international environment becomes genuinely complicated, the limitations of this approach are suddenly exposed: what looked clever in calm waters quickly turns into confusion when the currents change.

苏杰生即便口若悬河，也掩盖不了印度外交策略的匮乏。印度最大的误区，在于误把外交当成经济发展的捷径，而不是集中精力苦练内功。所谓的“多方对齐”，本质上并非成熟的外交战略，不过是盲人摸象、投机取巧罢了。整天只想在国际局势中浑水摸鱼，结果只要地缘政治稍有风吹草动，便瞬间沦为热锅上的蚂蚁，不知所措。

作为印度任期最长的驻华大使之一，苏杰生的表现只能说是“白当了”。他似乎完全误读了中国乃至全球大国的发展路径——真正的强国都是集中精力苦练内功，而不是靠外交上的巧言令色和短视投机。印度把外交当成发展的“快捷键”，整天想着在各大国之间左右逢源，结果国际局势稍有变动，立马沦为热锅上的蚂蚁。

Beneath the sharp rhetoric, Jaishankar’s multi-aligned approach reflects a fundamentally flawed view of global affairs. Driven more by short-term leverage than real vision, this strategy miscalculates the direction the world is actually moving in.

Jaishankar’s approach isn't strategic diplomacy; it’s short-sighted opportunism. By misjudging global realities and evolving dynamics, his style risks damaging India's long-term standing for short-term gain.

let's call him the chinese speaker as that what he clearly thinks of himself. he is delusional to think China can run the system replacing the USA and everyone will also agree to that. because as he himself said, trade is voluntary so is every other type of participation. and Since China has only to offer an nothing to give, nobody is naive enough to choose China over everyone else. he is in a dream of his own.

Now, under its so-called “multi-alignment” doctrine, India refuses meaningful cooperation with China, refuses to stand by Russia on key issues, yet at the same time refuses to make a firm strategic commitment to the United States. The result is not strategic autonomy but a deficit of strategic trust: none of the major powers can be certain where India will stand when their core interests are at stake. India wanted to play all sides. Instead, it has ended up being pushed around by all sides.

The current U.S.–India tariff dispute and the troubled trade negotiations are a perfect illustration of this dilemma. India expected its strategic importance to Washington to translate into preferential economic treatment. But geopolitics is not a substitute for economic bargaining power. When Washington imposed tariff pressure, India discovered that being called a “strategic partner” did not exempt it from American economic interests.

India is now caught in a contradiction of its own making: it does not want to align with the United States, it does not want genuine strategic cooperation with China, and it does not want to distance itself from Russia. Yet it still expects all three relationships to generate economic and strategic benefits for India. That is not multi-alignment. It is an attempt to maximize benefits while minimizing commitments.

And that model works only as long as everyone else is willing to play along. Once the major powers begin demanding reciprocity, commitments, or concessions, “multi-alignment” stops looking like strategic sophistication and starts revealing its fundamental weakness: India has relationships everywhere, but deep strategic trust almost nowhere.

Leaders have followers. India self-claimed the leader of the Global South. Does any country now in the Global South look up to India for guidance? India can’t even get along with all its neighbors. 🤣

杨荣文都懵逼了，印度外交部长想法设法阴阳中国，但又看到杨荣文是中国后裔，又不说是中国。

Great Achievements of Vishwaguru 🫏

*Financial Corruption
1. Demonetisation
2. PM Chorr Fund
3. Electoral Bonds
4. Deals with cronies
5. Increase in corruption in all spheres of life
*Moral Corruption
1. Name in Epstein Files
2. Named by Madhu Kushwar and Subramaiam Swamy
3. Mansi Soni affair
4. Increase in crimes against women
*Ethical Corruption
1. Write off of bank loans
2. Unwanted foreign tours
3. Waste of resources on international nautakis
4. Capture of media
5. False propaganda / numerous lies in every speech
6. Capture and Immasculation of Institutions, including SC
7. 2002 Gujarat Genoside
*Electoral Corruption
1.Fraud in election
2.Fraud in selection of EC
3.SIR
4.Use of religion for political gain

*Action of Treason on national boarders with China

Look at the crimes and chaos around the country and person responsible is ...

#NarendraModi
#NarendraModi_primeminister