Can India Sail In Both RIC With Quad Boats, Balancing US, China And Russia?
While Russia and China are keen to wean India away from the US, is India ready to spoil relations with America? The US is India's biggest trade partner.
There are unexpected friendly noises from India's otherwise hostile and mighty neighbour's house. And a gentle invitation to do an almost impossible trapeze: resuscitate the RIC (Russia-India-China) axis.
Nevermind India is still in the Quad with the US, Australia, and Japan.
It started mid-July with Russian media quoting their deputy foreign minister Andrei Rudenko as saying that Moscow expects the resumption of the RIC format and is deliberating on it with Beijing and New Delhi.
'This topic appears in our negotiations with both of them. We are interested in making this format work, because these three countries are important partners, besides being the founders of BRICS," Rudenko reportedly said.
Russia's foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, is also eager to restart the RIC dialogue. 'I would like to confirm our genuine interest in the earliest resumption of the work within the format of the troika — Russia, India, China — which was established many years ago on the initiative of Yevgeny Primakov (former Russian Prime Minister)," Lavrov is quoted as saying.
Beijing immediately seemed to warm up to the idea. Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said: 'China-Russia-India cooperation not only serves the respective interests of the three countries but also helps uphold peace, security, stability and progress in the region and the world."
Should it hasten into RIC's embrace and upset its biggest trade partner and fellow democracy, America?
Or should it fritter away the opportunity to forge a powerful global alliance that mellows China's hostility towards it and hedges against America's hegemony and Trump's mercurial politics?
India has wisely chosen to buy time, mull, and act in its own best interest.
'This consultative format is a mechanism where the three countries come and discuss global issues and regional issues of interest to them," India's external affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said at his weekly media briefing. 'As to when this particular RIC format meeting is going to be held, it is something that will be worked out among the three countries in a mutually convenient manner."
Meanwhile, a SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity, threat) analysis of reactivating the RIC must undoubtedly be on in the foreign office. Let us first examine the potential weaknesses and threats.
The obvious one is whether India can balance the Quad and RIC. It is immensely tricky because, notwithstanding public utterances, the central idea of the Quad is to contain China's influence in the Indian Ocean. By being part of RIC, India will risk the most acute conflict of interest in today's geopolitics.
While Russia and China are keen to wean India away from the US, is India ready to spoil relations with America? The US is India's biggest trade partner.
Also, ideologically and culturally, India fits more comfortably with a liberal democracy like the US than a Communist dictatorship or a one-man rule.
Besides, given China's track record of backstabbing and waiting for the right moment to strike, it is inadvisable to trust the Dragon or take it at face value.
And lastly, it seems unlikely that China will stop using Pakistan and its jihad factory as a strategic tool against India. It is also fattening the worst Islamist elements in Bangladesh with money and junkets, knowing fully well they will create trouble for India. Indian agencies believe Chinese money is widely used in manufacturing so-called 'dissent' and internal security challenges for India.
But there are considerable positives linked to RIC.
If the three massive economies and militaries of China, India, and Russia come together, they can easily rival NATO. Recently, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte threatened India and China with sanctions if they continue to buy Russian oil, seeing no irony in the fact that the European Union bought USD 22 billion worth of Russian oil in a year and sent just USD 19 billion of aid to Ukraine. Even NATO member Turkey, by Rutte's logic, stands to be sanctioned.
Also, the world's two most populous countries form a vast talent pool as well as massive domestic markets.
RIC may work as a bulwark against US President Donald Trump's whimsical and disruptive policies like retaliatory tariffs and meddling uninvited in regional conflicts.
The US also fears that BRICS, which has all three as its founding members, may challenge the dollar hegemony with its own currency. But ending the monopoly of the dollar may actually be good for a multipolar world.
China, India, and Russia working more closely could be a massive regional stabilising force in Asia, Middle East, and Africa.
Also, a India-China strategic alliance with common friend Russia in the middle may make China less bent on using Pakistan and other irritants against India.
The positives might sound fanciful, but RIC is definitely worth giving a long thought. If India can convince the US and Europe that cooperation with its adversaries does not mean hostility and that its huge market and talent pool is available for mutual trade and growth, it can pull off the near-impossible.
Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated!
view comments
Location :
New Delhi, India, India
First Published:
July 20, 2025, 10:01 IST
News india Can India Sail In Both RIC With Quad Boats, Balancing US, China And Russia?
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
5 minutes ago
- The Hindu
U.S. not rushing trade deals ahead of August deadline, will talk with China: U.S. Treasury Secretary
The Trump administration is more concerned with the quality of trade agreements rather than their timing, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Monday (July 21, 2025) ahead of an August 1 deadline for securing a trade deal or facing steep tariffs. "We're not going to rush for the sake of doing deals," Bessent told CNBC in an interview. Asked whether the deadline could be extended for countries engaged in productive talks with Washington, Mr. Bessent said U.S. President Donald Trump would decide. "We'll see what the President wants to do. But again, if we somehow boomerang back to the August 1 tariff, I would think that a higher tariff level will put more pressure on those countries to come with better agreements," he said. On China, Mr. Bessent said there would be "talks in the very near future." "I think trade is in a good place and, I think, now we can start talking about other things. The Chinese unfortunately ... are very large purchasers of sanctioned Iranian oil, sanctioned Russian oil," he said. "We could also discuss the elephant in the room, which is this great rebalancing that the Chinese need to do." Mr. Bessent told CNBC he would encourage Europe to follow the United States if it implements secondary tariffs on Russia. On Japan, Mr. Bessent said the administration was less concerned with its domestic politics than with getting the best deal for Americans.
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘It's actually a Delhi Hindi': External affairs minister S Jaishankar is a polyglot, know what languages he can speak
When we think of politicians with a command over language, Shashi Tharoor — known for his eloquence and famously expansive vocabulary — often comes to mind. But Dr S Jaishankar, India's External Affairs Minister, stands not far behind. The career diplomat is a polyglot too, juggling a surprising mix of languages that reflect both his diplomatic career and personal life. In a recent candid chat, Dr Jaishankar spoke about the languages he knows.'Obviously, I speak English,' he said with a smile, a given for someone in his role. But the conversation quickly became more personal as he opened up about his connection to other tongues. When it comes to Hindi, he said: 'I speak Hindi… not at a very high standard, but with a kind of street smart fluency.' Then, with a bit of humour, he clarified what kind of Hindi that is — not the literary kind, not even the academic JNU kind — 'It's actually a Delhi Hindi. I was born in Delhi, so it's a very Delhi person's Hindi.' Though his roots are Tamil, Dr Jaishankar admitted that he never formally learnt the language. 'I can speak Tamil, but not with the kind of fluency and command of vocabulary that I would like,' he said honestly, showing the humility of someone who still wants to learn more. But his journey with languages didn't stop there. His time in the Foreign Service introduced him to Russian. 'Russian is different because I actually studied it in the Foreign Service,' he shared, showing that some languages entered his life through duty, not birth. In a moment that made everyone smile, he revealed that he even knew some Japanese. 'I have a working, rudimentary sense of Japanese… because I do need to talk to my wife from time to time,' he said, chuckling.
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
How BRICS is chipping away at the Western order
The recent 2025 BRICS summit, held in Brazil, did not appear dramatic on the surface. There were no loud declarations or confrontations. However, the agenda was quietly ambitious, and the message it sent was unmistakable – the West no longer has a monopoly on how the world should work. BRICS is quietly rewriting some of the rules of global politics. From de-dollarisation to alternative development models, it is increasingly positioning itself as a challenger to the Western-led liberal international order. One of the fundamental starting points in international relations is the simple truth that there is no world government. Countries can agree on rules, but no one can force them to follow them. This is what some international relations scholars call an 'anarchic system,' not because it's disorderly, but because there is no overarching authority to enforce rules. Countries act in their own interests. Cooperation happens, but it's often fragile. Power matters. Strong states often do what they can. Weak ones suffer what they must (Recall the Melian Dialogue from Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War). Power is distributed unevenly, and when a few countries have more of it, they tend to shape the rules in their favour. The Western-led liberal international order grew out of this system after World War II. The US, along with its allies, built a network of institutions, like the IMF, World Bank, and WTO, that reflected its values and priorities. This order was based on free markets, democracy, and above all, the dominance of the US dollar in global finance. For a while, that order worked – at least for the West. But now, the rest of the world is starting to ask why a system created in 1945 should still define the rules of the 21st century. For a long time, emerging powers like Brazil, China, India, and South Africa largely accepted this structure. However, with the global economic landscape shifting and the world becoming more multipolar, they are pushing back. BRICS is the most visible platform for that push. One of the loudest messages from the BRICS summit in Brazil was about de-dollarisation. It sounds technical, but it's deeply political. This idea has been gaining ground for some years, but recent events, especially the weaponisation of financial systems through sanctions, have brought it to the forefront. The issue is that most global trade and finance depend on the US dollar. When India buys oil from Russia, it usually has to pay in dollars. When Brazil takes a loan, it often does so in dollars. When China invests abroad, the transaction typically moves through dollar-based systems like SWIFT. This gives the US not just financial influence but also political leverage. At the Brazil summit, countries once again floated the idea of a BRICS currency – not an immediate project, but a signal of intent. In the meantime, they are promoting trade in local currencies. Russia and China already conduct over 80 per cent of their trade in Roubles and Yuan. India has begun using rupees for some transactions with Iran and Sri Lanka. India and the UAE have begun settling some oil deals in rupees and dirhams. The New Development Bank, created by BRICS, is now issuing loans in local currencies to avoid dollar exposure. This is not just about saving on transaction costs. It's about creating freedom from a system that many in the Global South see as tilted against them. This is not going to be easy. The US dollar dominates because it is stable, widely accepted, and backed by a deep financial system. But the fact that BRICS countries keep returning to this topic shows how deep the frustration runs. De-dollarisation may not happen overnight, but the intent is clear – reduce exposure to a system controlled by Washington. BRICS claims to be a platform for those countries that didn't have a seat at the table when the post-war world order was designed. The group presents itself as a voice for the Global South. It talks about fairer development, more inclusive trade rules, and reforms in global institutions. It also backs concrete alternatives. The NDB offers loans without the political strings often attached to IMF or World Bank funding. BRICS countries are exploring joint investments in infrastructure and clean energy. There's talk of creating a BRICS rating agency to counter the dominance of Western credit rating firms. BRICS also pushes for reforms in the UN Security Council and the World Bank's voting rules to give more voice to emerging powers. Here, Brazil, India, and South Africa play a bridging role. They are democracies with growing economies, often seen as more acceptable faces of BRICS to other developing countries. China brings deep pockets and strategic weight. Russia, increasingly isolated from the West, is strengthening its ties with non-Western partners. This effort to build new platforms and institutions reflects a shared frustration that the rules of the global system are often written elsewhere, by people who don't face the same challenges as those in the Global South. Together, BRICS is trying to change not just policies but also the narrative about what kind of development is legitimate and who should lead. Notably, international relations theory can help us understand why the BRICS came about, what it aims for, and why it matters. Realism Realism, one of the oldest schools of international relations, sees power as the main force shaping global affairs. States act primarily in their own interest. Institutions and alliances matter only if they help countries protect or expand their power. From this perspective, BRICS is not a community of like-minded nations but a strategic arrangement – a balancing act against Western dominance. When Russia promotes de-dollarisation or China supports the NDB, they are not guided by ideals of fairness or cooperation. They are responding to the realities of power politics. A good example of this logic came after the US froze Russian central bank assets following the Ukraine war. Many countries saw how exposed they were if their reserves were held in dollars. The concern wasn't ethical. It was practical. It was about survival. Liber theory On the other hand, liberal theory, which posits that cooperation is possible and institutions matter, would argue that if the global order is unfair, countries will attempt to establish new institutions. That's exactly what BRICS is doing by creating alternatives to Western-run systems, not through war, but through investment, banking, and trade. It believes that the way to change the system is to create better alternatives within it. The NDB isn't just a protest against the World Bank. It's a real bank giving loans, financing projects, and developing regulations. That's classic liberal theory in action – solving global problems through cooperative institutions. Constructivism Constructivist theorists go a step further. They argue that power is not just about money or military strength, but about ideas. It's also about whose story is seen as legitimate. BRICS challenges the idea that Western liberal democracy is the only valid model of progress. It says there are many ways to grow and that the West doesn't have a moral monopoly. BRICS is trying to shape new meanings about sovereignty, about development, about who gets to lead. It wants to change how the world imagines power, not just how it distributes it. When BRICS leaders speak of 'mutual respect' and 'non-interference,' they are offering a different political culture – one that appeals to countries tired of lectures from the West about democracy and governance. Whether this rhetoric matches reality is debatable, but the narrative matters. These theoretical perspectives are not mutually exclusive views. They all help explain why BRICS is doing what it's doing and why the West is starting to take it more seriously. However, none of this means that the Western-led order is collapsing. The US dollar still dominates global trade and finance. Western-led institutions still make the rules. The US still has unmatched military power. Western technology and capital continue to dominate global supply chains. At the same time, BRICS has its own internal differences. China and India are locked in border tensions. Russia is diplomatically isolated. Brazil and South Africa are wary of being seen as backing an anti-Western front. The NDB is still small compared to the World Bank. However, the system is no longer a one-way street. Something is shifting. The fact that major economies are even talking about bypassing the dollar or creating their own financial systems was unthinkable two decades ago. The fact that they are acting on it, even though cautiously, means the world is entering a new phase. This isn't about tearing down the West. It's about making space for the rest. The BRICS summit in Brazil didn't create headlines because it didn't need to. It was not designed to shock. It was designed to show that the world is no longer waiting for change from the West. It is building change elsewhere. One of the fundamental starting points in international relations is the simple truth that there is no world government, prompting some international relations scholars to call the international system 'anarchic'. Comment. How is BRICS rewriting some of the rules of global politics, and increasingly positioning itself as a challenger to the Western-led liberal international order? BRICS is trying to shape new meanings about sovereignty, about development, about who gets to lead. It wants to change how the world imagines power, not just how it distributes it. Evaluate. By claiming to be a platform for those countries that didn't have a seat at the table when the post-war world order was designed, BRICS presents itself as a voice for the Global South. Do you agree? How do theoretical perspectives, realist, liberal, and constructivist, help explain why the BRICS came about, what it aims for, and why the West is starting to take it more seriously? (The author is a Professor at MMAJ Academy of International Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.) Share your thoughts and ideas on UPSC Special articles with Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.
