Latest news with #Russia-India-China
The Diplomat
a day ago
- Politics
- The Diplomat
Is the Russia-India-China Troika Making a Comeback?
In May, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Moscow was interested in reviving the Russia-India-China (RIC) troika. Speaking at a security conference on May 29, Russia's top diplomat said 'I would like to confirm our genuine interest in the earliest resumption of the work within the format of troika – Russia, India, China,' noting that the format, since its launch had 'organized meetings more than 20 times at the ministerial level… not only at the level of foreign policy chiefs, but also the heads of other economic, trade, and financial agencies of three countries.' The idea of triliteral cooperation was first floated in the 1990s and was institutionalized in 2002, which Lavrov credited to Yevgeny Primakov, the late chair of the Russian International Affairs Council. Since then, as the Russian foreign minister pointed out, the RIC had convened nearly two dozen times – but not in the recent past. The last meeting of the RIC leaders took place in 2019 on the sidelines of the G-20 Summit in Osaka, Japan. Before that, the leaders of three countries held an informal summit on the sidelines of the G-20 meeting in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The RIC troika has been inactive since November 2021, following a virtual meeting of the RIC foreign ministers. Initially, the format was put on hold due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and it was further stalled by the military standoff between China and India in Eastern Ladakh in 2020. However, with China-India relations undergoing a relative thaw, Russia now appears to be keen on reviving the trilateral grouping. In this context, last week, Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko stated that he was in negotiations with both Beijing and New Delhi on the revival of the RIC troika. 'This topic appears in our negotiations with both of them,' Rudenko said. 'We are interested in making this format work because these three countries are important partners. The absence of this format, in my opinion, looks inappropriate.' This manifests the clear Russian push to revive the troika, which could provide Moscow with a platform to advance and secure its national interests. Besides Russia, China has also shown interest in the RIC's return. Responding to a question regarding Russia's intentions to revive the bloc, China's Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian said that 'China is willing to maintain communication with Russia and India to advance trilateral cooperation.' He added, 'The cooperation among China, Russia, and India not only aligns with the respective interests of the three countries, but also contributes to regional and global peace, security, stability, and progress.' In light of Beijing's regional rivalry with New Delhi, Moscow believes that India is being drawn into the West's anti-Chinese strategies. Reviving the troika format would enable Beijing to have more direct contact with New Delhi and potentially allay concerns about India joining the 'China containment' bloc. India, on the other hand, as of now, seems non-committal on the revival of the RIC format. When asked about the group's revival, Randhir Jaiswal, the Indian External Affairs Ministry spokesperson, gave a bland answer: 'This consultative format is a mechanism where the three countries come and discuss global issues and regional issues of interest to them.' He continued: '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, and we will let you know as and when that happens at an appropriate time when the meeting is to take place.' Indian media sources report that no RIC troika meeting has been agreed upon, and there are currently no discussions about scheduling a meeting in this format. Still, given the slow but steady progress on normalizing relations between China and India in recent months, including External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar's recent visit to Beijing, the revival of the RIC troika is quite plausible. Russia, struggling with sanctions over its war in Ukraine, would go to any length to revive this bloc. China's support would certainly provide a boost to Russian ambitions and interests. Russia's strategic relations with both China and India can play an important role vis-à-vis the format's revival and Moscow will hope to successfully bring both countries to the table. However, the role of the U.S., particularly under President Donald Trump, may be the most significant factor for the revival of the RIC troika. Since his return to the White House, Trump has resumed his strategy of imposing tariffs, which has sparked a trade war, particularly with China. His protectionist ideals do not align with those of India, as ongoing tariff uncertainties could harm New Delhi's economic and political interests. The last meeting among the RIC leaders in Osaka in 2019 took place under a similar context. Back then, India's Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale, stated, 'All three leaders have agreed that in an era of economic and global change, it is important to uphold the trend of globalization. Maintaining the liberalization of trade, a free trading system, an open trading system, and a rules-based trading system is essential to counter the tendency toward protectionism.' While the situation and circumstances may not be exactly the same as they were in 2019, Trump's trade strategy remains unchanged, which could lead to the revival of the RIC troika. Together, China, India, and Russia could form a Eurasian power that balances Western dominance. These three countries are already part of organizations like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which are also seen as efforts to counter Western influence. The RIC troika could certainly contribute to the promotion of a multipolar world with multiple centers of power, potentially undermining Western dominance. But for this to occur, all three countries must discuss their global and regional priorities. Until that happens, the RIC troika will remain in a state of uncertainty.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
5 days ago
- Business
- First Post
RIC redux: How India should navigate old groupings in a new world order
Growing interest in RIC among Indians is not about rejecting the US or embracing China—it's about building leverage through diversified partnerships, given today's fragmented global order further disrupted by Trump-era unpredictability read more In recent times, there has been a noticeable resurgence of interest among Indians in the Russia-India-China (RIC) grouping. This renewed attention stems in large part from a growing sense of unease—if not disillusionment—with the United States, particularly during the Trump presidency, where abrupt policy shifts and erratic rhetoric left New Delhi confused, concerned, and confounded. Once regarded as a staunch ally of New Delhi, Donald Trump's sudden, unpredictable tilt toward Islamabad—his public praise for Pakistan's military and even his offer to mediate on Kashmir, a diplomatic red line for India—was seen as either dangerously naïve or strategically duplicitous. For a country that had embraced Trump as a potential ally and viewed the US as a strategic partner in countering growing Chinese hegemony, this U-turn was jarring. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This perceived betrayal has triggered growing introspection within New Delhi's strategic circles. Has India placed too many eggs in the American basket? Is the time ripe for recalibrating and revisiting older platforms like RIC—not out of ideological affinity, but as a pragmatic counterbalance in a turbulent world? RIC: Rhetoric vs Reality The RIC grouping, first conceptualised in the 1990s, was designed as a forum for three major Eurasian powers to coordinate on global and regional affairs. Though often overshadowed by broader groupings such as Brics and the SCO, RIC still offers potential as a platform for strategic dialogue—especially as global power dynamics shift toward multipolarity. Russia remains a steadfast partner for India, despite its increasing dependence on China in the wake of Western sanctions over the ongoing Ukraine war. The Indo-Russian partnership has stood the test of time, rooted in mutual trust and decades of cooperation. China, by contrast, presents a complex duality: it is both a vital economic partner and a strategic adversary. Border tensions—including the standoffs in Doklam and Galwan—and broader concerns about China's activities in the Indian Ocean and South Asia underscore the trust deficit. China's growing alliance with Pakistan, vividly manifested during Operation Sindoor, further deepens India's apprehensions. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD While RIC presents an opportunity to engage China in structured dialogue, India must approach such forums with realism. New Delhi cannot afford to fall for the 'Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai' narrative—even when American perfidy becomes too obvious to ignore. Playing Both Sides, Committing to None Given today's fragmented global order—further disrupted by Trump-era unpredictability—India must resist aligning fully with any single bloc. This isn't about returning to Nehruvian non-alignment, but about pursuing interest-based alignment rooted in realism. India must engage all major powers—but on its own terms. From the West, India can leverage defence technology, economic investment, and support on global platforms. And from Russia and China, it can secure energy cooperation, regional stability dialogues, and support for a multipolar global order. This two-track diplomacy should not be viewed as indecision but as pragmatic statecraft. In this scheme of things, no one is a pariah. What matters is India's supreme national interest—a fact that the Ministry of External Affairs reminded Nato's secretary-general of this week when he threatened New Delhi with 'secondary sanctions' over its ties with Moscow. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The goal is not to choose sides but to make choices that serve India's long-term interests and aspirations. Significance of Strategic Autonomy Since Independence, strategic autonomy has been the cornerstone of India's foreign policy. Since 2014, this policy has been reoriented from 'non-alignment' to 'all-alignment', with the country's strategic autonomy intact. Whether it is forging closer ties with the US, buying arms and oil from Russia, or even standing by Israel without abandoning the Palestinian cause—India has consistently asserted its right to act independently. That tradition must continue. Groupings like the Quad or RIC should be treated as platforms for engagement, not as binding alliances. India must adopt a model of issue-based alignment—collaborating where interests converge, disengaging where they don't. New Delhi's rising global profile brings both opportunities and challenges. India must recognise that while partnerships are helpful, its rise will largely depend on its own internal strength—economic resilience, military modernisation, and political stability. The truth is that neither Washington nor Beijing truly wants New Delhi to emerge as a rival power. Both offer engagement—but often attach strategic strings. Recognising this reality is essential. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In today's volatile global order, which is akin to a 3D chessboard of overlapping alliances and competing interests, India must therefore act like a fox rather than a hedgehog. The fox, as the old saying goes, knows many things, while the hedgehog knows one big thing. India cannot afford to get locked into any singular worldview or alliance structure. It must embrace complexity and prepare for multiple contingencies. In this scenario, India's best bet is to stay pragmatic and relentlessly focused on its own interests. The growing interest of Indians in RIC must be viewed through this lens. It is not about rejecting the US or embracing China—it's about building leverage through diversified partnerships. A Lonely but Glorious Rise This stand comes with a price. India often finds itself alone in a bloc-oriented world order. Both sides see it as suspect. Recently, following the Brics summit in Brazil, some geopolitical analysts went so far as to call India an outlier—or worse, a Trojan horse in the grouping. Conversely, the US-led West finds India's engagement with countries like Russia and Iran, as well as its presence in Brics and the SCO, problematic. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD What both sides don't realise is that it is the presence of a country like India that helps keep the volatility of the world in check—whether political or economic. It helps maintain some degree of balance in a bloc-based global order. India's journey toward great-power status may be lonely—but it can also be glorious, provided it is navigated with strategic wisdom and restraint. The world respects strength and consistency—not dependence or ideological rigidity. New Delhi must continue to walk its own path: open to all, beholden to none. In the global power game, there are no permanent friends or enemies—only permanent interests. This, however, does not mean that India's foreign policy should become unethically Nixonian in nature. For India, a civilisational state steeped in dharmic consciousness, foreign policy must be more than transactional—dictated largely through the wider lens of dharma. It is this timeless principle that must guide India's foreign policy. And in this worldview, there's always space—and scope—for both Quad and RIC. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
News18
5 days ago
- Politics
- News18
Can India Sail In Both RIC With Quad Boats, Balancing US, China And Russia?
Last Updated: 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.
Time of India
6 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
RIC reboot: Can Trump threats revive Russia-India-China troika?
The geopolitical winds in Eurasia appear to be shifting again. After years of dormancy, Russia has renewed its push to revive the Russia-India-China (RIC) trilateral mechanism, with China quickly endorsing the idea. India , though more cautious, has signaled a tentative openness to such an initiative. This rekindling of interest in the RIC dialogue comes at a critical juncture when all three nations are facing varying degrees of pressure from the West—most notably in the energy trade domain. How RIC began and how it went dormant The RIC framework was first proposed in the late 1990s by former Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov, envisioning a strategic counterbalance to the unipolarity that followed the Cold War. The logic was straightforward: three large Eurasian powers with significant regional influence could work together to shape a multipolar world order. Through the 2000s and early 2010s, RIC held regular meetings at ministerial and senior official levels. While it never evolved into a military or economic bloc like NATO or the EU, it served as a valuable backchannel and coordination forum—especially on multilateral platforms like the UN and WTO . It also acted as a conceptual forerunner to newer groupings such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). The RIC mechanism gradually fell into disuse for two main reasons. The pandemic led to the suspension of many multilateral forums, and RIC meetings were no exception. In-person diplomacy came to a halt, and virtual summits were largely prioritized for more urgent formats like G20 or BRICS. Secondly, the Galwan Valley clashes in eastern Ladakh in 2020 marked a major downturn in India-China relations. Trust eroded sharply, and any trilateral format involving both countries became politically unviable for New Delhi. Joint work under RIC was effectively frozen, with India unwilling to share a forum with Beijing amid unresolved border issues. Live Events Oil sanctions have become a common pressure point The West's response to Russia's continued military operations in Ukraine has intensified, with renewed secondary sanctions threats --- led by US President Donald Trump and NATO - targeting countries that continue to purchase Russian oil. The talk of RIC revival comes right amid threats of sanctions. Interestingly, it is the three RIC countries - Russia, India and China - which are on target because China and India are the biggest buyers of Russian oil. Much before Trump's threatened secondary sanctions kick in after the grace period, the EU has fired a warning shot. As part of its fresh sanctions package on Russia, the EU has imposed sanctions on the Indian oil refinery Vadinar in which Russian energy giant Rosneft holds a stake and lowered the oil price cap. The European Union's recent move has sent a clear signal. The West is no longer merely warning but it has intention to act. This shared economic vulnerability is pushing Russia, India and China to reconsider closer coordination. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov put it, the need for "strategic autonomy" and "multipolarity" is more relevant than ever. Can India afford to become part of an anti-West axis? China's support for reviving RIC follows a subtle but unmistakable thaw in India-China relations. Indian External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar recently visited China for the SCO Foreign Ministers' meeting and held bilateral talks with both Wang Yi and Sergey Lavrov. Significantly, Dr. Jaishankar also met President Xi Jinping, an indication of top-level political intent to stabilize ties. While New Delhi remains wary of Beijing, both sides understand the limitations of permanent hostility. India wants to avoid a two-front confrontation (with China and Pakistan) while also maintaining room to maneuver in a highly fluid global order. Re-engaging through RIC, even cautiously, fits this appraoch. There are clear drivers for reviving RIC. These would be counterbalancing Western dominance in sanctions and global rule-making; energy security coordination, especially on payment mechanisms, shipping logistics, and price caps; and promoting multipolarity, where emerging powers like India don't have to "choose sides" in the US-China competition. But there are equally strong limitations. The US-India strategic relationship is at an all-time high, covering defense, technology, intelligence-sharing and semiconductors. India is a member of the Quad (with the US, Japan, and Australia) and I2U2 (India, Israel, UAE, US), and it has growing trade ties with the EU. Importantly, India is unlikely to trust Beijing fully unless there is meaningful progress on the border dispute. RIC cannot function if India sees it merely as a vehicle for Chinese or Russian strategic interests. Full-fledged participation in a revived RIC could be perceived in Washington and Brussels as a tilt toward the Russia-China axis --- something New Delhi has carefully avoided even while buying Russian oil. India's official statement that any decision on RIC will be taken "in a mutually convenient manner" is telling. It shows New Delhi is not closing the door but is also not walking in without evaluating the consequences. If RIC is revived, it will likely be in a limited and issue-specific format, focusing perhaps on energy coordination, climate policy and regional connectivity. A full-spectrum trilateral strategic alignment is unlikely unless geopolitical conditions change drastically. The revival of RIC is not merely symbolic. It reflects deeper realignments in a world where traditional alliances are shifting. For Russia and China, it's about finding solidarity amid sanctions. For India, it's about preserving space for independent foreign policy when its strategic choices are being limited by Trump and the EU. But RIC's future will depend on whether the three nations can build mutual trust, and not just over oil, but on the broader canvas . The troika may be reviving, but its path will be cautious, transactional and far from smooth, given the wide cracks that persist in India-China relations and India's strong ties with the US and major European powers.
First Post
6 days ago
- Politics
- First Post
RIC vs reality: Why India is cautious of a troika with China and Russia
Perhaps India should privately share its concerns with the Russian leadership and tell them that for the moment, Delhi sees Brics and the SCO as providing enough scope for trilateral cooperation between Russia, India, and China read more 'If a diplomat says yes, he means maybe. If he says maybe, he means no. If he says no, he's not a diplomat.' I was reminded of this old saying by the remarks made by the Official Spokesperson of India's Ministry of External Affairs in the context of the revival of the Russia-India-China (RIC) troika. Russia's deputy foreign minister, Andrei Rudenko, had said recently that Moscow wants the resumption of the RIC format and is negotiating on this issue with Beijing and New Delhi. He said, 'We are interested in making this format work, because these three countries are important partners, besides being the founders of Brics.' He added that 'in this regard, we expect that these countries will agree to resume work within the framework of the RIC'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Asked for his reaction to Rudenko's comments, the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian expressed support for Russia's initiative and 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.' On the other hand, India responded to the Russian proposal in a cautious manner. Randhir Jaiswal, spokesperson for India's Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), said that the RIC is considered a valuable platform for discussing global and regional issues of shared interest, and India's decision to resume the dialogue hinges on finding a 'mutually convenient manner' for all three nations involved. Thus, without responding negatively to the Russian proposal, India's response is akin to saying 'maybe' in a skilful and diplomatic manner. It is important to note that the RIC framework has been largely inactive in recent years, primarily due to the military tensions between India and China at the Line of Actual Control (LAC). While Russia and China have publicly expressed strong support for revitalising the group, India's stance reflects the need to navigate the delicate balance of its relationships with both countries, particularly in light of unresolved border disputes with China. It would be recalled that speaking at a Conference on Security and Cooperation in Eurasia in the city of Perm in the Ural Mountains on May 29, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov had also conveyed Russia's interest in reviving the Russia-India-China Troika (RIC). Lavrov had said, 'I would like to confirm our genuine interest in the earliest resumption of the work within the format of the troika—Russia, India, and China—which was established many years ago on the initiative of (ex-Russian prime minister) Yevgeny Primakov and which has organised meetings more than 20 times at the ministerial level since then, not only at the level of foreign policy chiefs but also the heads of other economic, trade, and financial agencies of the three countries.' He also said, 'Now that, as I understand, an understanding has been reached between India and China on how to calm the situation on the border, it seems to me that the time has come to revive this RIC troika.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Contrary to what Lavrov had said, tensions remain high along the India-China border, particularly in eastern Ladakh, despite recent agreements and de-escalation efforts. While both sides have shown a willingness to engage in dialogue and reduce the potential for clashes, the underlying territorial disputes and the buildup of military forces continue to fuel concerns about potential escalation. In essence, while there have been some positive steps towards de-escalation, the India-China border situation remains complex and potentially volatile, with the risk of future clashes and escalation as long as the underlying territorial and strategic issues remain unresolved. Increased infrastructure development and troop deployments along the border by China in recent years have further exacerbated tensions. The 2020 Galwan Valley clashes and ongoing border disputes have continued to strain the relationship between India and China. As General Upendra Dwivedi, the Indian Army Chief, said earlier this year, India will not reduce the number of its troops deployed along the Line of Actual Control with China anytime soon, asserting there is still 'a degree of standoff' persisting between the rival armies and the two countries need to rebuild trust to de-escalate overall tensions. General Dwivedi's statement makes it quite clear that there is a lack of trust for China. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The India-China territorial dispute stems from differing interpretations of the border, with China continuing to dispute India's claims over regions like Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh. China has issued maps showing Aksai Chin—an area of India's state of Jammu and Kashmir mostly controlled by China since the 1962 war—and the northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh within Chinese territory. As recently as May 14 this year, China has reasserted its territorial claims in Arunachal Pradesh. Despite professed claims about efforts to improve diplomatic ties with India, the Chinese Ministry of Civil Affairs published its latest names for places in Arunachal Pradesh, which China calls Zangnan and says is part of the Tibetan autonomous region. The renaming of 27 places covered an array of geographical features: 15 mountains, five residential areas, four mountain passes, two rivers, and one lake. India rejected the new Chinese names for places in Arunachal Pradesh as a 'preposterous' attempt to alter the 'undeniable' reality that the state 'was, is, and will' always be an integral part of India. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD It is, in fact, an old Chinese habit to periodically issue lists of new names for locations in Arunachal Pradesh. India describes the names as 'inventions' by China and has consistently and unequivocally dismissed them. China's renaming of places in Arunachal Pradesh is a strategic move to assert unilateral claims, which India firmly rejects, emphasising Arunachal's integral status. Strengthening infrastructure, military deterrence, and global alliances is crucial for India to counter China's tactics and safeguard sovereignty. There are important geopolitical considerations that also need to be taken into account. China supports Pakistan against India through various means, including providing military equipment, intelligence, and economic assistance. This support is often seen as part of a strategic alliance aimed at countering India's influence in the region. Consequently, India feels that the China-Pakistan axis, characterised by strong military and economic ties, poses a strategic challenge for India. This axis is working against Indian interests, particularly due to China's support for Pakistan in regional disputes. China is a major supplier of military equipment and technology to Pakistan, further strengthening their relationship but escalating mistrust with India. China has emerged as Pakistan's largest arms supplier, accounting for almost 81 per cent of Islamabad's weapon systems inventory. Among the weapons supplied by China to Pakistan are fighter jets, missiles, drones, radar systems, warships, and submarines. China has also been implicated in assisting Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Following the Pahalgam terror attack, China moved swiftly to arm Pakistan. Reports suggest Beijing delivered advanced PL-15 air-to-air missiles to Pakistan's air force within days. Debris from one such missile, found undetonated in India's Punjab, points to Chinese involvement in Pakistan's latest assault. Pakistani jets used in combat were also Chinese-made. During the recent clashes with India, China reportedly provided Pakistan with air defence and satellite support, including adjusting satellite passes to monitor Indian troop movements. China's support for Pakistan, particularly in the context of terrorist groups, further fuels India's concerns. China and Pakistan reportedly objected to the inclusion of The Resistance Front (TRF) and its parent organisation Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) in a UN Security Council statement condemning the April 22, 2025, Pahalgam attack. This aligns with a past pattern where China has blocked India's attempts to designate Pakistan-based terrorists and outfits under the UN's 1267 sanctions regime. China had blocked India's proposal at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to ban five Pakistan-based terrorists who carried out terrorist acts against India. These five terrorists are Abdul Rauf Asghar, Sajid Mir, Abdur Rehman Makki, Talha Saeed, and Shahid Mehmood Rehmatullah, who have been involved in several terror attacks in India, including the 26/11 attacks, the 2019 Pulwama attacks, the 2016 Pathankot attack, the 2001 Parliament attack, and the IC 814 hijack. India wanted to get them designated by the UN Security Council as global terrorists, but China blocked this effort. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In conclusion, it needs to be said that the state of the bilateral relationship is not yet such that we should let ourselves be drawn into a closer embrace of China, whose policies are harmful to us beyond doubt. India's approach towards China needs to be a cautious blend of security, economic, and geopolitical considerations. While both countries recognise the benefits of economic engagement, India must remain wary of China's intentions and its policies aimed at undermining India's strategic interests and regional standing. Perhaps we should privately share our concerns with the Russian leadership and tell them that for the moment, we see Brics and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) as providing enough scope for trilateral cooperation between Russia, India, and China. The writer is a retired Indian diplomat and had previously served as Consul General in New York. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
