logo
Geopolitical exposure: US-Russia-China dynamics have spelt a nightmare for India

Geopolitical exposure: US-Russia-China dynamics have spelt a nightmare for India

Mint3 days ago
Kunal Singh New Delhi's ties with Moscow and Washington and their ties with each other were manageable for a long time, but India has suddenly been pushed out of its comfort zone by a sudden shake-up. Today, we face a threat from China even as Russia has weakened and America is bent on punishing India. Since independence, India has hardly ever enjoyed such an ideal world for its safety and prosperity.
Gift this article
The United States of America, Russia and China—the state of relations among these three countries tends to determine how safe the world generally is for India. India feels threatened by China at its doorstep, with which it also has a territorial dispute that has turned bloody on a few occasions. India, therefore, seeks good relations with both the US and Russia.
The United States of America, Russia and China—the state of relations among these three countries tends to determine how safe the world generally is for India. India feels threatened by China at its doorstep, with which it also has a territorial dispute that has turned bloody on a few occasions. India, therefore, seeks good relations with both the US and Russia.
An ideal world for India would be one in which it has good relations with both of them, and those two, the US and Russia, also have good relations with each other. In this world, India could build defence ties with both the US and Russia, and its relations with either will not be looked at with suspicion by the other. However, even if it can attempt to build good relations with both Washington and Moscow, bilateral relations between those two are beyond New Delhi's control.
Since independence, India has hardly ever enjoyed such an ideal world for its safety and prosperity. During the Cold War, the US and Soviet Union were two superpowers engaged in an intense security competition. Despite not wanting to choose sides, India was forced to do so—and it chose better relations with the Soviet Union over the US for a variety of reasons.
This choice had mixed results. It did not work in 1962, when Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev was still hopeful of salvaging Sino-Soviet ties and hence chose to remain neutral in the China-India war despite fearing that New Delhi might defect to the Western camp as a result of China's aggression. India's choice, however, worked in 1971, when the Beijing-Moscow split was complete and the Soviet leadership did not hesitate to sign a quasi-military alliance with India to deter China. The lesson was that India needed a great power partner fully committed to balancing China.
After the Cold War and collapse of the Soviet Union, India's old choice set no longer existed. The US was now the sole great power. In 1991, it was not clear if China would truly emerge as a challenger to America's global hegemony or if Russia would regain its old strategic power and reach. By the beginning of the new century, the contours of a new world order were beginning to emerge. Russia might gain back some of its old power and glory, but China was going to be the real contender for great power status.
This world was more dangerous for India. New Delhi's threat would now come not from a poverty-stricken People's Republic, dangerous as it was, but from a China that sported a modernized military, giant economy and the status of a tech superpower. Russia was a shadow of the erstwhile Soviet Union and was increasingly reliant on Beijing.
The saving grace for India was that its economy had begun doing well and it fielded a nuclear arsenal that came to acquire the capability to threaten Shanghai and Beijing with long-range missiles. However, the growing power deficit vis-à-vis China meant India still needed a great-power partner that saw a common interest in deterring Chinese aggression, if not mitigating other adverse implications of its rise.
This was the logic that gave birth to an India-US strategic partnership. Since China was rapidly growing to become America's strategic competitor, New Delhi and Washington had a shared interest in dealing with China's rise and providing security in the Indo-Pacific.
What about Russia, though? It is here that the interests of India and the US diverged. India still saw Russia as an important defence partner. The Indian armed forces needed Russian military platforms and Moscow was the only partner willing to part with certain assets that no one else would—for example, leasing a nuclear-powered attack submarine.
The US, however, could not move beyond looking at Russia as an adversary. Of course, Russia continued to pose a threat to American allies in Europe, but one thought the US would shift the burden of European defence to its trans-Atlantic allies and shift focus to its bigger threat in the Indo-Pacific.
If American attention and resources could be secured for Indo-Pacific security, a close-to-ideal setting could be obtained for India through the confluence of the following: a growing economy at home that could over time be converted into military power, a strategic partnership with a US that is committed to balancing China, a defence partnership with Russia that could part with high-tech weapons that no one else would, and, finally, a China-focused US that would not mind India-Russia defence cooperation.
Perhaps this was too much to ask. The US has made the right noises and written stacks of strategy documents talking about shifting its focus to the Indo-Pacific. However, all this talk and text faltered at the first hurdle in 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine. Since then, while US strategy documents still talk about China, the actual American strategy targets Russia.
Indians had by and large believed that the election of Donald Trump as US president would change Washington's geo-strategic orientation and a change did seem to be happening for his first few months in office. As of August 2025, however, Trump is back to targeting Russia and has gone to the extent of punishing India for its ties with Moscow.
Today, India faces a great power threat in China, a weakened Russia distracted by a war in Ukraine and a US bent on punishing it for its relations with Russia. Far from ideal, it's closer to a nightmare.
The author is a Stanton Nuclear Security post-doctoral research fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Topics You May Be Interested In
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Khalistanis vandalise Hindu temple in US yet again, India seeks strict action
Khalistanis vandalise Hindu temple in US yet again, India seeks strict action

India Today

time35 minutes ago

  • India Today

Khalistanis vandalise Hindu temple in US yet again, India seeks strict action

In the fourth such incident targeting Hindu places of worship in the US this year, a Hindu temple of the Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha (BAPS) in Greenwood, Indiana, has been desecrated, allegedly by pro-Khalistanis, according to the Hindu American Foundation (HAF). The organisation said the temple's walls were defaced with anti-India and anti-Prime Minister Narendra Modi an advocacy group, linked the desecration to pro-Khalistan extremists. Meanwhile, another group, the Coalition of Hindus of North America (CoHNA), urged authorities to classify the incident as the fourth such hate Public Affairs, in a social media post, said the latest incident has only strengthened the community's resolve to stand united against anti-religious behaviour. "For the 4th time in less than a year, one of our Mandirs has been desecrated by a hateful act. The anti-Hindu hate crime against the BAPS Mandir in Greenwood, IN has only strengthened our community's resolve, and we remain united in our stand against anti-religious behavior," BAPS said in the post on X on Hindu American Foundation denounced the incident, attributing it to pro-Khalistan extremists known for employing similar methods Consulate General of India in Chicago said it was in touch with the local community and law enforcement agencies."Desecration of the main signboard of the BAPS Swaminarayan Temple in Greenwood, Indiana is reprehensible. The Consulate is in touch with the community and has raised the matter with law enforcement authorities for prompt action. Today Consul General addressed a gathering of devotees," wrote the Consulate General of India in Chicago, US on DESECRATED WITH SLURS AGAINST AMERICAN HINDUS"For the 4th time in less than a year, a Hindu Mandir (temple) has been desecrated—this time the BAPS Mandir in Greenwood, IN. Vandalising temples with anti-India graffiti is a tactic often used by pro-Khalistan separatist activists—and a stark reminder of how slurring American Hindus as 'Hindutva' fuels hate like this," the Hindu American Foundation said in a group also urged officials to act beyond condemnations to hold the attackers accountable."It's time elected officials move beyond empty condemnations and ensure perpetrators are held accountable," it group posted a video with the post, revealing temple walls defaced with graffiti expressing anti-India temple's walls were desecrated on August 10, according to BAPS. A MESSAGE OF HATE AND INTOLERANCE AGAINST HINDUSMarmik Brahmbhatt, a volunteer with BAPS, described the graffiti as "a message of hate and intolerance against Hindus," according to the Indy Star news offending message was removed after it was reported to the Greenwood Police Department, Indy Star, which is part of the USA Today Network, characterised the offence as a hate crime, according to the urged the authorities to treat this as a hate crime and to study this crime against the background of a growing national event is the latest in a string of attacks targeting Hindu temples across the U.S., prompting strong criticism from Indian officials and community on March 8, the BAPS Shri Swaminarayan Mandir in Chino Hills was defaced with anti-India graffiti, less than five months after a similar act of vandalism at another Hindu temple in to the incident, the External Affairs Ministry in March condemned the "despicable act in the strongest terms."In an official statement, the Ministry also called upon "local law enforcement authorities to take stringent action against those responsible for these acts, and also ensure adequate security to places of worship."A report filed with the Greenwood Police Department confirms that an active investigation is underway into "criminal mischief" at the mandir located on South Madison Street, according to the Indy September 25, 2024, the BAPS Hindu temple in Sacramento, California's capital, was vandalised with offensive graffiti, including messages like "Hindus go back."Just days earlier, a BAPS Shri Swaminarayan Mandir in Melville, New York, was similarly defaced with hateful Consulate General of India in New York strongly condemned the incident and raised the matter with US authorities- EndsMust Watch

Munir's Nuclear Threat Is About Involving A 'Third' Player In India-Pak Game
Munir's Nuclear Threat Is About Involving A 'Third' Player In India-Pak Game

NDTV

time36 minutes ago

  • NDTV

Munir's Nuclear Threat Is About Involving A 'Third' Player In India-Pak Game

Field Marshal of the Pakistan army, General Asim Munir, recently raised the spectre of a nuclear contestation in the subcontinent during his trip to the United States. Munir highlighted the element of mutually assured destruction, an assured strike against India's existing and upcoming critical infrastructure in the near future. This latest act of theatrics is worth examining in the new strategic environment defined by Operation Sindoor, an initiative by New Delhi against Islamabad's decades-old sponsorship of terrorism. It is aimed at securing support in both the domestic and international community to delegitimise and constrain India's conventional military options against Pakistan's misadventures. Why Are Munir's Remarks (In)significant? Munir's remarks and his nuclear threats are both rhetorical and simultaneously critical for four reasons. First, Pakistan, primarily its elites and the military, has drawn both its existence and policy initiatives from its sentiments against India-based existential security threats. The Pakistan military, primarily with its army as the most dominant constituency, leads the narrative within the country and abroad. Hence, Munir's words as Field Marshal matter, as they shape the discourse within the domestic constituency to reestablish the image of the military as an institution and its readiness to safeguard the sovereignty of the as a senior-most official in the Pakistan army, Munir's speech on a foreign soil, the US at that, is a move to re-emphasise the threat of asymmetric escalation, an inherent part of Pakistani nuclear doctrine. The underlying motive is intertwined with Munir's religious doctrinal leanings to perceive India's image as a Hindutva ideology-based state threatening Pakistan. In this regard, the emphasis on nuclear weapons is to recalibrate and restore the element of strategic stability vis-a-vis India. Islamabad, since its overt nuclearisation in 1998, has been attempting to impose structural conditions on New Delhi to push its sub-conventional warfare, marked by cost infliction through the sponsorship of terrorism. India, in response, has been adopting a more risk-acceptance approach to restore deterrence and reestablish new contours of engagement in the nuclear environment, evident through its conventional military response. Pakistan is making all possible attempts to overplay the (in)stability element to pressurise New Delhi. As a result, it establishes the narrative that if India undertakes an 'Operation Sindoor 2.0' or any military initiative in the future, Pakistan will be compelled to use (tactical) nuclear weapons. However, the challenge for Pakistan to risk nuclear escalation with an assured retaliation from the Indian side remains a serious one. Mutual Vulnerability Third, Munir's statements aim to reinforce Pakistan's conception of the idea of 'mutual vulnerability', aiming to deny India the space for a conventional level response by India. However, this construction of mutual vulnerability was already shattered by the Indian response to some degree and extent through an evolutionary strategy followed in Operation Sindoor. In such a scenario, the constraints of vulnerability in the conventional domain at the lower rung of the escalation ladder, and the responsibility for the maintenance of stability, have fallen more upon Pakistan. Fourth, the Pakistan army, as the guardian of its ideological state, has adopted an asymmetric nuclear posture against India's superiority in the domain of strategy. Pakistan holds a full-spectrum deterrence posture, including tactical nuclear weapons for employment, providing a lower threshold against India's aggression. However, India has managed to challenge this imposition through its response to terrorist attacks in the form of the Uri surgical strikes, the Balakot air strikes, and the latest Operation Sindoor. Munir's threats against India and the plausibility of a mutually assured destruction are to construct a structural third-party element in the India-Pakistan nuclear dyad. His stress on nuclear dangers is aimed at roping in the international community, particularly the US, to intervene as a structural constraint against India's response and deterrence policy. This catalytic nuclear posture could be seen as an effort to develop a safety valve for Islamabad against India's redefined approach of 'any attack on Indian soil will be considered as an act of war'. New Realities Deterrence starts and ends within the cognitive-cum-psychological domain of strategy. Pakistan's historical track record to exacerbate the nuclear element against India and to court the attention of the international community only validates the old French adage: the more it changes, the more it remains the same. Pakistan maintains a deliberate element of ambiguity, flirting with first use, but its operationalisation is muddled by a paradox that casts nuclear weapons simultaneously as a first-use option and a last resort in itself. India has leveraged this paradox to restore deterrence in the Balakot and Operation Sindoor episodes. Hence, Munir's words are a part of a rhetoric emanating from the exasperation over Pakistan's overdeterministic reliance on nuclear posture and his quest to restore his domestic constituency. To this end, there is a likelihood of the development of new capabilities by Pakistan against India's 'new normal' post Operation Sindoor. Latest US intelligence estimates predict that Pakistan is developing intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capability to both match and challenge India's growing strength. China may play the invisible hand to support Pakistan, given their historical cooperation in nuclear proliferation and acquisition of missile technology. The end goal is to deny India the initiative to establish a credible deterrence vis-a-vis Pakistan in the conventional nuclear spectrum. Against these developments, New Delhi must not shy away from amassing both nuclear and strategic non-nuclear capabilities as part of its growing arsenal and overall base. Indian policymakers will have to calmly counter the rhetoric, as it otherwise helps Pakistan enhance its catalytic nuclear posture by bringing in the US as a structural factor in the India-Pakistan nuclear dyad. Though Washington has reaffirmed that its relationship with both India and Pakistan "remains unchanged" and that its diplomats are "committed to both nations," New Delhi will have to delegitimise, both in the short and long term, efforts by Pakistan to centre stability and security around nuclear weapons.

Minta Devi, face of Congress' T-shirt protest against ‘vote chori', fumes: ‘Who gave Rahul Gandhi the right…'
Minta Devi, face of Congress' T-shirt protest against ‘vote chori', fumes: ‘Who gave Rahul Gandhi the right…'

Mint

timean hour ago

  • Mint

Minta Devi, face of Congress' T-shirt protest against ‘vote chori', fumes: ‘Who gave Rahul Gandhi the right…'

'Vote chori' row: Minta Devi, a woman from Bihar's Siwan district, hit out at Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi, and other INDIA bloc MPs for wearing t-shirts featuring her during 'voter theft' protest at Parliament House on 12 August. She angrily asked who gave them the right to do so while dismissing the opposition's use of her name and age for political motives. "I came to know about this 2-4 days back... Who are they (Opposition MPs) to me? Who is Priyanka Gandhi or Rahul Gandhi to me? Who gave them the right to wear T-shirts featuring me?... I think there are discrepancies (in the list)... I did not get anyone's (from the administration) phone call... Why are they becoming my well-wisher over my age?... This should not be done, I do not want this..." Minta stated. She added, 'I want my details to be corrected... Whoever entered the details, did they do so with their eyes closed?... If I am 124 years old in the eyes of the government, why are they not giving me old age pension? My Aadhaar Card mentions 15-07-1990 as my date of birth." The INDIA bloc MPs wore '124 Not Out' t-shirts with her name to showcase errors in the electoral roll and alleged discrepancies in the voter list. She was named Gandhi's presentation on the alleged vote theft issue. Her alleged age is nine years more than Ethel Caterham, 115, the verified oldest person in the world. Minta, 35, further mentioned that if the government considers her age as 124-years-old, they should begin offering the benefits of an old-age pension to her. She has reportedly been registered on the state's voter list, marking her first time on the electoral roll despite being eligible to vote for several years. Minta declared her birthdate as July 15, 1990, and submitted the necessary documents to support her application for enrollment. In poll-bound Bihar, there have been widespread protests over the revision of the voter list, with parties from the INDIA bloc accusing the Election Commission of India (ECI) of working in favour of the ruling BJP by selectively deleting voters' names to benefit them. The ECI has firmly denied these accusations, asserting that the revision of the voter rolls was carried out with complete transparency.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store