With its new pact with North Korea, Russia raises the stakes with the West over Ukraine

In this photo provided by the North Korean government, Russia's President Vladimir Putin, right, drives a car with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un sitting in front passenger seat at a garden of the Kumsusan State Guest House in Pyongyang, North Korea Wednesday, June 19, 2024. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 24 June 2024
Follow

With its new pact with North Korea, Russia raises the stakes with the West over Ukraine

  • The new agreement with Pyongyang marked the strongest link between Moscow and Pyongyang since the end of the Cold War

MOSCOW: Behind the smiles, the balloons and the red-carpet pageantry of President Vladimir Putin’s visit to North Korea last week, a strong signal came through: In the spiraling confrontation with the US and its allies over Ukraine, the Russian leader is willing to challenge Western interests like never before.
The pact that he signed with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un envisions mutual military assistance between Moscow and Pyongyang if either is attacked. Putin also announced for the first time that Russia could provide weapons to the isolated country, a move that could destabilize the Korean Peninsula and reverberate far beyond.
He described the potential arms shipments as a response to NATO allies providing Ukraine with longer-range weapons to attack Russia. He bluntly declared that Moscow has nothing to lose and is prepared to go “to the end” to achieve its goals in Ukraine.
Putin’s moves added to concerns in Washington and Seoul about what they see as an alliance in which North Korea provides Moscow with badly needed munitions for its war in Ukraine in exchange for economic assistance and technology transfers that would enhance the threat posed by Kim’s nuclear weapons and missile program.
A landmark pact
The new agreement with Pyongyang marked the strongest link between Moscow and Pyongyang since the end of the Cold War.
Kim said it raised bilateral relations to the level of an alliance, while Putin was more cautious, noting the pledge of mutual military assistance mirrored a 1961 treaty between the Soviet Union and North Korea. That agreement was discarded after the Soviet collapse and replaced with a weaker one in 2000 when Putin first visited Pyongyang.
Stephen Sestanovich, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations noted that when Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev signed the deal with Pyongyang in 1961, he also tested the world’s biggest nuclear bomb, built the Berlin Wall and probably started thinking about moves that led to the Cuban missile crisis in 1962.
“The question for Western policymakers now is whether Putin is becoming comparably reckless,” Sestanovich said in a commentary. “His language in North Korea — where he denounced the United States as a ‘worldwide neocolonialist dictatorship’ — might make you think so.”
South Korea responded by declaring it would consider sending arms to Ukraine in a major policy change for Seoul, which so far only has sent humanitarian assistance to Kyiv under a longstanding policy of not supplying weapons to countries engaged in conflict.
Putin insisted Seoul has nothing to worry about, since the new pact only envisions military assistance in case of aggression and should act as a deterrent to prevent a conflict. He strongly warned South Korea against providing lethal weapons to Ukraine, saying it would be a “very big mistake.”
“If that happens, then we will also make corresponding decisions that will hardly please the current leadership of South Korea,” he said.
Asked whether North Korean troops could fight alongside Russian forces in Ukraine under the pact, Putin said there was no need for that.
Potential weapons for Pyongyang
Last month, Putin warned that Russia could provide long-range weapons to others to hit Western targets in response to NATO allies allowing Ukraine to use its allies’ arms to make limited attacks inside Russian territory.
He followed up on that warning Thursday with an explicit threat to provide weapons to North Korea.
“I wouldn’t exclude that in view of our agreements with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” Putin said, adding that Moscow could mirror the arguments by NATO allies that it’s up to Ukraine to decide how to use Western weapons.
“We can similarly say that we supply something to somebody but have no control over what happens afterward,” Putin said. “Let them think about it.”
Sue Mi Terry, senior fellow for Korea studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, warned that Moscow could share weapons technologies with Pyongyang to help improve its ballistic missile capabilities, noting there is evidence of this happening already, with Russia possibly providing help to North Korea with its successful satellite launch in November, two months after Kim last met Putin.
“This is deeply concerning because of the substantial overlap between the technologies used for space launches and intercontinental ballistic missiles,” Terry said in a commentary. “Russia can also provide North Korea with critical help in areas where its capabilities are still nascent, such as submarine-launched ballistic missiles.”
While raising the prospect of arms supplies to Pyongyang that would violate UN sanctions, Putin also said Russia would take efforts at the world body to ease the restrictions — an apparent signal that Moscow may try to keep arms supplies to Pyongyang under the radar and maintain a degree of deniability to avoid accusations of breaching the sanctions.
Russia and North Korea have rejected assertions by the US and its allies that Pyongyang has given Moscow ballistic missiles and millions of artillery shells for use in Ukraine.
Going ‘to the end’ in a confrontation with the West
By explicitly linking prospective arms shipments to Pyongyang to Western moves on Ukraine, Putin warned Kyiv’s allies to back off as he pushes his goals in the war — or face a new round of confrontation.
“They are escalating the situation, apparently expecting that we will get scared at some point, and at the same time, they say that they want to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield,” Putin said. “For Russia, it will mean an end to its statehood, an end to the millennium-long history of the Russian state. And a question arises: Why should we be afraid? Isn’t it better, then, to go to the end?”
Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin, said Putin’s statement reflected an attempt to discourage the US and its allies from ramping up support for Kyiv as Russia pushes new offensives in several sectors of the front line.
“The situation is becoming increasingly dangerous, and Russia believes that it should quickly rap the West over its knuckles to show that its deeper engagement in the war will have a price,” he said in remarks carried by Dozhd, an independent Russian broadcaster.
He noted that Putin’s statement that Moscow wouldn’t know where its arms end up if sent to Pyongyang could have been a hint at North Korea’s role as an arms exporter.
Treading cautiously with China
Putin’s visits to North Korea handed a new challenge to Pyongyang’s top ally, China, potentially allowing Kim to hedge his bets and reduce his excessive reliance on Beijing.
China so far has avoided comment on the new pact, but many experts argue that Beijing won’t like losing sway over its neighbor.
Ever since Putin invaded Ukraine, Russia has come to increasingly depend on China as the main market for its energy exports and the source of high-tech technologies in the face of Western sanctions. While forging a revamped relationship with Pyongyang, the Kremlin will likely tread cautiously to avoid angering Beijing.
“Whether this upgraded Russia–North Korea relationship will be without limits depends upon China,” which will watch events closely, said Edward Howell of Chatham House in a commentary. “Beijing will have taken stern note of Kim Jong Un’s claim that Russia is North Korea’s ‘most honest friend.’ Despite the likely increase in cooperation in advanced military technology between Moscow and Pyongyang, China remains North Korea’s largest economic partner.”

 


Pope to preside over interfaith meeting in Indonesian mosque during longest, most challenging trip

Updated 4 sec ago
Follow

Pope to preside over interfaith meeting in Indonesian mosque during longest, most challenging trip

ROME: Pope Francis will preside over an interfaith meeting in a mosque in the world’s largest predominantly Muslim country during a four-nation Asian visit in September that will be the longest and most complicated foreign trip of his pontificate.
The Vatican on Friday released the itinerary for Francis’ Sept. 2-13 trip to Indonesia, East Timor, Papua New Guinea and Singapore. The packed schedule makes clear that the 87-year-old pontiff, who has battled health problems and is increasingly reliant on a wheelchair, has no plans to slow down.
After a day of rest upon arrival in Jakarta on Sept. 3, Francis launches into a typically rigorous round of protocol visits to the four countries’ heads of state and government, speeches to diplomats and meetings with clergy and public Masses in each location. In Jakarta, he’ll preside over an interfaith meeting at the capital’s Istiqlal Mosque.
Sprinkled in the mix are encounters with young people, poor and disabled people, elderly people and Francis’ regular meetings with his Jesuit confreres.
The trip was originally planned for 2020 but was called off because of the COVID-19 pandemic. At 11 full days, it’s the longest of Francis’ 11-year papacy, outpacing by a few days some of his long trips to the Americas and recalling some of the strenuous, globe-hopping trips of St. John Paul II.
It will bring the Argentine Jesuit to the world’s most populous predominantly Muslim nation, Indonesia, as well as the former Portuguese colony of East Timor, where the Catholic Church wields enormous influence.
In East Timor, however, Francis may also have to reckon with the legacy of independence hero Bishop Carlos Ximenes Belo. The Nobel Peace Prize winner was sanctioned by the Vatican in 2020 for having sexually abused young Timorese boys and is currently believed to be living in Portugal.
Francis had to cancel his last planned foreign visit -– a quick trip to Dubai last year to participate in the UN climate conference -– because of a recurring case of bronchitis. He has seemed in relatively good form in recent months, including during day trips to Italian cities and visits to Roman parishes.
But in recent years, as his mobility has been limited by bad knee ligaments, he has generally stuck closer to home and kept his trips relatively short.
After he returns to Rome in mid-September, he has a four-day visit to Belgium before the end of the month, the only other foreign trip that has been confirmed for the year.

Hungary’s Orban meets Putin in Moscow, drawing EU rebukes

Updated 5 min 24 sec ago
Follow

Hungary’s Orban meets Putin in Moscow, drawing EU rebukes

  • EU leaders warn Hungary against ‘appeasing’ Russia on Ukraine
  • EU says Orban does not speak for EU in meeting Putin
  • Orban: Ukraine peace can’t be brokered from ‘armchair in Brussels’

BUDAPEST/MOSCOW: Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban met Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday to discuss peace in Ukraine, drawing warnings from fellow European Union leaders against appeasement and an insistence that he did not speak for the EU.
Hungary assumed the six-month rotating presidency of the bloc on Monday. Five days in and Orban has visited Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Kyiv and formed the “Patriots for Europe” alliance with other right-wing nationalists.
Now, he has chosen to go to Moscow on a “peace mission,” days before a NATO summit that will address further military aid for Ukraine against what the Western defense alliance has called Russia’s “unprovoked war of aggression.”
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that only unity and determination within the 27-nation EU would pave the way to a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.”
“Appeasement will not stop Putin,” she said on X.


Putin, who received Orban in the Kremlin, told him that he was ready to discuss the “nuances” of peace proposals to end the two-and-a-half-year-old war.
Putin said last month that Russia would end the war in Ukraine, which Moscow calls a special military operation, only if Kyiv agreed to drop its NATO ambitions and hand over the entirety of four provinces claimed by Moscow — demands Kyiv swiftly rejected as tantamount to surrender.

’Sceptism’ of Hungary’s motivations
An EU diplomat said that, in Orban’s decision to meet Putin in Moscow, Hungary’s presidency of the EU — which will run until Dec. 31 — had effectively ended before it had really begun.
“The skepticism of EU member states was unfortunately justified – it’s all about promoting Budapest’s interests,” the diplomat said, asking for anonymity due to political sensitivities.
Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda accused Orban of undermining the EU presidency. “If you truly seek peace, you don’t shake hands with a bloody dictator, you put all your efforts to support Ukraine,” he wrote on X.
EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said Orban in Moscow was “not representing the EU in any form” and Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo said the visit undermined EU interests.
Pavel Havlicek, research fellow at the Association for International Affairs, said Orban’s visit was an abuse of a power vacuum in Brussels and a dangerous undermining of the common European position.
Orban, a critic of Western military aid to Ukraine who has the warmest relations of any EU leader with Putin, said he recognized he had no EU mandate for the trip, but that peace could not be made “from a comfortable armchair in Brussels.”
“We cannot sit back and wait for the war to miraculously end,” he wrote on X.
The EU presidency’s role is to chair meetings of member states, seek consensus and broker agreements on legislation with the European Parliament.
At a time of transition, with a new European Commission only set to take office in November, analysts said Budapest’s actions at the forefront of EU policy-making were
likely to be restricted.
Ministers said Hungary wanted to make an impact with its presidency, which it launched with a striking call to “Make Europe Great Again,” echoing former US president Donald Trump, an Orban ally.
“We intend to leave a mark,” Orban’s spokesman Zoltán Kovacs said on Thursday, before reports of the Moscow trip emerged. “The prime minister is going to use the presidency in a political way.”

 


Starmer heckled as pro-Gaza candidates snatch safe Labour seats in UK election

Updated 17 min 21 sec ago
Follow

Starmer heckled as pro-Gaza candidates snatch safe Labour seats in UK election

  • Party leader’s victory speech accompanied by ‘free Palestine’ shouts
  • 5 pro-Palestine independent candidates elected, including ex-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn

LONDON: Labour leader Keir Starmer faced heckles of “free Palestine” as independent candidates took a number of seats from his party during the UK general election over anger at its stance on Gaza.

In a major upset, shadow minister Jonathan Ashworth, a key Starmer ally, was defeated in the formerly safe seat of Leicester South.

The shadow health secretary, Wes Streeting, survived by just 528 votes, having previously commanded a majority of more than 9,000, after a strong campaign by Leanne Mohamed, the granddaughter of Palestinian refugees.

In areas with a Muslim population of over 10 percent, the party’s vote dropped by an average of 11 points, despite Labour winning a significant majority of seats nationwide ahead of forming the next UK government.

Though enjoying a comfortable win, Starmer was heckled at his victory speech after independent candidate Andrew Feinsten won 7,312 votes.

Five independent candidates running on pro-Gaza tickets were returned as MPs, including former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

The party also lost Leicester East to the Conservatives after an independent — vocal pro-Palestine supporter and former Labour MP Claudia Webbe — split the Labour vote.

In Leicester South, Shockat Adam unseated Ashworth, who previously had a 22,000 majority and had held the seat for 13 years. Adam announced “this is for Gaza” during his victory speech, winning by 979 votes.

Labour also lost seats in Dewsbury and Batley to independent Iqbal Mohamed by nearly 7,000 votes, Blackburn to Adnan Hussain by 132 votes, and Birmingham Perry Bar, where Khalid Mahmoud was defeated by independent candidate Ayoub Khan by 507 votes.

A number of senior Labour MPs only narrowly retained their seats in the face of independents, including Shabana Mahmood in Birmingham Ladywood, who saw her majority slashed from 32,000 to 3,421.

Fellow Birmingham MP Jess Phillips saw her majority reduced from 13,141 to 693 despite having resigned from a shadow ministerial role in order to vote for a ceasefire in Gaza earlier this year.

In Birmingham Hodge Hill, former minister Liam Byrne retained his seat by just over 1,500 votes.

In the London constituency of Bethnal Green and Stepney, the shadow small business minister, Rushnara Ali, saw her majority of more than 31,000 go down to 1,689.

In north London, Corbyn, a long-time champion of the Palestinian cause, won his Islington North seat as an independent, beating his Labour opponent by more than 7,000 votes.

However, Labour claimed a major pro-Palestine scalp in Rochdale, unseating former MP George Galloway, who took the seat from Labour in a by-election earlier this year.

The party has struggled with its position on Gaza since Israel launched its invasion of the enclave last October.

It faced criticism from its own members for initially backing the Israeli government, and since then has backed a humanitarian ceasefire.

In the party’s manifesto, it said it would move to recognize a Palestinian state if elected, but there have since been suggestions that the move could be shelved over fears of jeopardizing Labour’s relationship with the US government.


Keir Starmer: Who is the UK’s new PM and what has he promised?

Updated 05 July 2024
Follow

Keir Starmer: Who is the UK’s new PM and what has he promised?

  • Starmer faces immediate tests with few resources, slow change could shorten ‘honeymoon period’
  • Former lawyer is known for his cautious approach, on campaign trail, Starmer was keen not to raise high hopes

LONDON: Keir Starmer enters power with one of the longest lists of problems ever to face an incoming prime minister and few resources to deal with them — a situation that could curtail any “honeymoon period” offered by the British people.
It is a situation not lost on the 61-year-old Labour leader and former lawyer, who spent much of the election campaign listening to voters’ concerns about health care, education, and the cost of living, but promising only to try to make the lives of British voters a little better — over time.
“I’m not going to stand here and say there’s some magic wand that I can wave the day after the election and find money that isn’t there,” he said in a head-to-head debate with his predecessor Rishi Sunak before the election. “Huge damage has been done to our economy. It is going to take time.”
It is not an easy sell.
Despite being on course for a massive majority in the parliamentary election, many voters are disenchanted with politicians after years of what became an increasingly chaotic and scandal-ridden Conservative government and what was an often divided Labour opposition, dogged antisemitism accusations.
Hailing his party’s victory at a speech to supporters, Starmer said on Friday: “We did it. Change begins now, and it feels good. I have to be honest.”
“Today, we start the next chapter, begin the work of change, the mission of national renewal and start to rebuild our country.”
Starmer says he leads a changed Labour Party, having instilled a sense of discipline after it all but tore itself apart during the Brexit years under his predecessor, veteran left-winger Jeremy Corbyn.
That message dominated the six-week campaign, with no really new policy offerings beyond those which had been, according to Labour, fully funded and costed. He has tried not to raise hopes for swift change too high, putting wealth creation and political and economic stability at the heart of his pitch to voters.
CAUTIOUS AND METHODICAL
The strategy is very much a product of Starmer, who turned to politics in his 50s in a career that has been marked by a cautious and methodical approach, relying on competence and pragmatism rather than being driven by an overriding ideology.
Named after the founder of the Labour Party, Keir Hardie, Starmer was brought up in a left-wing household. As a barrister, he often defended underdogs and worked to get people off death row around the world.
He became a Labour lawmaker in 2015, a year after he received a knighthood for his services to law and criminal justice and was appointed Labour leader in 2020 following the party’s worst election showing since 1935.
He implemented a plan to turn the party around and guide its priorities, with one person who worked with Starmer saying: “He thinks about the best way to take people with him.”
This approach has led to the charge that he is dull. He has drawn negative comparisons with Tony Blair, who led the party to victory with a landslide majority in 1997.
“I think he’s got a good heart but he’s got no charisma. And people do buy charisma. That’s how Tony Blair got in,” said Valerie Palmer, 80, a voter in the seaside town of Clacton-on-Sea.
NOT IN LOVE WITH LABOUR
Unwilling to make promises that could not be costed, his approach has also prompted critics to say the party’s manifesto offered only a partial view of what Labour would do in government — something the Conservatives tried to capitalize on by saying Starmer would raise taxes.
Starmer denied this, saying he would not raise income tax rates, employees’ national insurance contributions, value-added tax or corporation tax.
Some businesses say they look forward to a period of calm after 14 years of turbulent Conservative government, marked by Britain’s vote to leave the European Union in 2016 and the cost of living crisis that followed the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
One FTSE-100 CEO told Reuters they had met Labour’s top team several times and the party had made a strong “pitch” to business.
Laura Foll, portfolio manager at Janus Henderson Investors, said it looked like Britain was returning to an era when “boring is good.”
But for voters, real-life difficulties are more of a pressing concern, with people crying out for Labour to tackle the ailing health service, widen educational opportunities and improve living standards.
For some, although they wanted the Conservatives out of power, they had not fallen in love with Labour, or with Starmer.
“I’m excited about change, but I don’t really love the Labour Party,” said Ellie O’Connell, 28, at the Glastonbury music festival.
Sitting in the courtyard of a doctors’ surgery, Starmer sipped tea with patients before the election, listening to them complain about how difficult it was to get an appointment.
His offer of helping train more doctors, reducing bureaucracy and getting better control over budgets missed out one thing that might help — more money, something his new government will not have much of.
Asked by Reuters how he would better retain doctors who say their salaries are uncompetitive internationally, he said: “I don’t have a wand that I can wave to fix all the problems when it comes to salaries overnight if we win the election.”
With only 9 billion pounds ($11 billion) of so-called fiscal headroom — barely a third of the average for governments since 2010 — Starmer might have to keep pressing the message that change will take time.
That may cut short any political honeymoon — the respite voters and newspapers offer incoming administrations from criticism.
This cautious approach has also alienated some on the left of the party. Asked how he thought Starmer would be as prime minister, James Schneider, former director of communications for Corbyn, said: “When push comes to shove, he will be on the side of bosses over workers.”


India’s Modi heads to Moscow for first visit since Ukraine invasion

Updated 05 July 2024
Follow

India’s Modi heads to Moscow for first visit since Ukraine invasion

  • Russia is a key supplier of cut-price oil and weapons to India, but its isolation from West and growing friendship with China have impacted partnership with New Delhi
  • The United States and its Western allies have in recent years cultivated ties with India as a bulwark against Beijing and its growing influence in the Asia-Pacific region

MUMBAI: Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday makes his first visit to Russia since the invasion of Ukraine, walking a fine line between maintaining a longstanding Moscow alliance while courting closer Western security ties.
Russia is a key supplier of cut-price oil and weapons to India, but its isolation from the West and growing friendship with China have impacted its time-honored partnership with New Delhi.
The United States and its Western allies have in recent years cultivated ties with India as a bulwark against Beijing and its growing influence in the Asia-Pacific, while also pressuring it to distance itself from Russia.
Modi, who was returned to power last month as leader of the world’s most populous country, last visited Russia in 2019 and hosted President Vladimir Putin in New Delhi two years later, weeks before the invasion.
Russia’s war in Ukraine has “transformed” ties with India, said Swasti Rao, from a think tank funded by India’s defense ministry, the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defense Studies and Analyzes.
“There is no decline in goodwill between India and Russia per se,” she said. “But there are challenges that have cropped up.
“These are external factors, which have been strong enough to bring in a paradigm shift in India-Russia bilateral issues,” she added.
Nandan Unnikrishnan of the New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation said the upcoming in-person meeting showed the two sides were looking for ways forward.
“There have been pressures on India, and there have been pressures on the India-Russia relationship,” Unnikrishnan said.
“Face-to-face interactions help in working out positions,” he added. “I’m sure Mr.Modi would like an assessment from Putin on the Ukraine war.”
New Delhi has shied away from explicit condemnation of Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and has abstained on United Nations resolutions censuring Moscow.
But Russia’s war in Ukraine has also had a human cost for India.
New Delhi said in February it was pushing Russia to release some of its citizens who had signed up for “support jobs” with the Russian military, following reports some were killed after being forced to fight in Ukraine.
Moscow’s deepening ties with Beijing have also raised concerns for New Delhi.
China and India, the world’s two most populous nations, are intense rivals competing for strategic influence across South Asia.
India is part of the Quad grouping with the United States, Japan and Australia that positions itself against China’s growing assertiveness in the Asia-Pacific region.
The United States and the European Union accuse China of selling components and equipment that have strengthened Russia’s military industry — allegations Beijing strenuously denies.
That leaves India with a dilemma.
Their “relationship has to evolve,” said Rao.
“Some say India should strongly engage with Russia so it doesn’t fall into the lap of China,” said Rao. “Others would say, that ship has sailed.”
New Delhi and Moscow have forged a tight relationship since the Cold War, and Russia was for a long time India’s biggest arms supplier.
But Ukraine has stretched Russia’s arms supplies, and India is eyeing other sources — including growing its own defense industry.
Russia’s share of Indian imports of weapons has shrunk considerably in recent years, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
It dropped from 76 percent in 2009-13 to 36 percent in 2019-23, SIPRI said, noting France is now a close second, providing 33 percent.
“India has instead looked to Western suppliers, most notably France and the USA, and its own arms industry,” SIPRI said, adding that its arms procurement plans “seemingly do not include any Russian options.”
Rao said the Ukraine war had “accelerated” India’s push to diversify its defense purchases.
“The Ukraine war has become one of grinding attrition,” she said.
“There are genuine concerns about Russia’s export capabilities, and its focus and priorities.”
At the same time, India has also become a major buyer of discounted Russian oil, providing a much-needed export market for Moscow after it was cut off from traditional buyers in Europe.
That has dramatically reshaped energy ties, with India saving itself billions of dollars while bolstering Moscow’s war coffers.
India’s month-on-month imports of Russian crude “increased by eight percent in May, to the highest levels since July 2023,” according to commodity tracking data compiled by the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air.
“Russian crude comprised 41 percent of India’s total crude imports in May, and with new agreements in place to conduct payments in rubles, the trade might grow significantly,” the research center said.
But this has also resulted in India’s trade deficit with Russia rising to a little over $57 billion in the past financial year.
From Moscow, Modi will travel to Vienna for the first visit to the Austrian capital by an Indian leader since Indira Gandhi in 1983.