I just don't see how the West has somehow lost India or Africa in exchange for "gaining" Finland and Sweden.
I seriously doubt India, or countries in Africa, are going to stop trading with the West just because of the West's treatment of Russia. They might, to some degree, sympathize with Russia's position, for whatever reason, but they're not going to go to great lengths in order to defend a country that quite frankly is doing some rather indefensible shit right now, to the point where even China isn't outright taking up for them. Business will continue as usual pretty much, except for Russia obviously.
This is very much over-simplified stuff, and you're taking a very Western-centric perspective here, with these TV-friendly short-term outcomes.
That India is going to further diversify their trade and investments away from the West isn't even a question anymore (that's something that their central bank was already doing, but that Western actions against Russia have accelerated the necessity of). That African nations have been made nervous by the West's irresponsible and childish behaviour is also not actually a question, from Nigeria to Kenya, news outlets have been hosting pretty regular debates on the topic.
(Also, consder the West's other general dumbshit fuckery over the years, the AUKUS deal, for example, which made the Asia-Pacific nations nervous - and that also pissed India off).
No, they're not going to form military alliances against the West or completely and immediately stop trading. That's just silly. And if you're thinking in such immediate and black-and-white terms, you're lost.
But they are moving away from the perception of the West as the world's central economic power. And, at least in the case of India, they are going to continue working and trading closely with Russia. You can believe that threatening India with sanctions will be quickly forgiven and forgotten, without any preparations or countermeasures, but that's also kinda silly.
Likewise, you can believe that threatening to sanction Africa if they don't sanction Russia, essentially starving themselves at the West's behest, is going to have no medium- to long-term impact, but I don't understand how you can think that. It seems incredibly stupid, even though you're not a stupid poster.
Sympathy for Russia's actions is not a requirement for drifting away from the West, but sympathy for and fear of being being targeted by illegal Western sanctions is. Russia's actions have simply exposed the West for what it is on a larger scale than ever before: unreliable, volatile and petty.
How do you not understand that when bankers openly steal from a patron, others might start moving their money to different banks? it doesn't matter what Russia did, open thievery as a response is going to make others wonder exactly what the standard is before the leading financial powers employ gangster tactics against their nation.
This is exactly why central banks are not meant to become political targets and tools. But that's how the West's used them, proving that they're not even able to abide by their own rules and cannot be trusted as a financial guarantor. They are criminals on an absurd scale, and they've no moral high ground left to retreat to.
It doesn't help the West's case that Russia provides actual necessities, while the West provides debt and headaches - the two are not even close, when it comes to their respective importance to the world outside of the Western bubble.
The West has created a situation in which avoiding economic reliance on them is the most reasonable decision, and you're not sure how that might create problems for a collection of nations that have small and shrinking populations and next-to no natural resources?
I don't think that you're being entirely honest.
You're also buying into Western propaganda with this whole "doing some rather indefensible shit right now."
Are you really under the impression that, in a world that contains the United States, anyone outside of the West thinks that Russia's current actions are indefensible? Seriously? NATO, being an aggressive and expansionist military alliance, already has a poor reputation as it is, and the West's always been pretty open to waging brutal war on a larger scale, and with far less consideration for international law than Russia's currently showing. Russia's actually been remarkably careful and tender-footed, all things considered. And it's the West who're dragging out the conflict by flooding Ukraine with weapons and demanding they not surrender. Try to look at that from a non-Western perspective: this is a conflict that has a global impact, and the West is going out of its way to make sure it lasts as long as possible - even if that means the complete annihilation of Ukraine as well as a crippling and extended famine across the global South.
The idea that Russia is "doing some indefensible shit" is actually laughable. The West needs to start taking a long, hard look in the mirror if you guys really believe that.
And the fact that you think China isn't "outright taking up for them" is pretty good evidence that your opinion on the matter is probably almost entirely based on either your anti-Russian bias (given your location) or your exposure to Western propaganda (also, given your location). Or both.
Do you actually follow Chinese news, from the Chinese? Or do you just read Western interpretations of how some idiot politician or "journalist" wants you to believe the Chinese feel?
Read the Global Times - yes, it's propaganda. But being a mouthpiece of the CCP means that they offer a good idea of the Chinese perspective - and the Chinese perspective is that this is all NATO's fault (something that the Chinese leadership has directly said to Western leadership - though, Western outlets are very bad at comprehensively reporting both sides of such interactions).
Stop reading Western news outlets that are trying to convince you that your enemies are falling apart. Self-delusion is self-defeating. And you're deluding yourself if you think that China's not fully in Russia's corner.
Aside from having to balance their own anti-secessionist stance with support for Russia's support for secessionist movements (something that India also has to do), China's pretty all-in on Team Russia.
At the end of the day, when this is all said and done, the West is going to come out of this conflict incredibly weakened. Europe especially so. Close friendships with countries like India - who are clearly willing to support their friends through tough times - will be far more beneficial than friendships with either Sweden or Finland, who don't actually serve any larger or longer term purpose - other than as bait for Russian missiles.
I guess maybe, from the Western perspective, that
is the benefit. Sweden and Finland can weaken Russia by sitting back and absorbing their missiles. Still, I think it's obvious that a close relationship with India would be more important than adding a pair of bullet-sponges to the alliance.
There is certainly a need for countries to be polite to the West, but don't mistake that for a reflection of reality. Most of the world would celebrate and support the rise of a secondary financial system. Neither Sweden nor Finland exert any influence whatsoever over that situation. Outside of their value as propaganda centerpieces (which they'll be used as both by the West and by their enemies) and as bullet-sponges for NATO, neither makes any difference to anything.
Finally, do you really think that business is currently continuing as normal? That sounds a little bit insane. Considering covid-19, the war, and the sanctions. I don't think you or anyone else currently has a firm grip on what "business as usual" actually is. And, given that you get your news from the West, there's a good chance that you would still think that business was continuing as normal, even if Russia became an economic hyperpower and China started a space empire.
