5985 words in this article
Estimated reading time: 15 minutes
Author | Pravin Sawhney
Translated by | Jiang Wenxuan
Translation Reviewer | Hu Keyi
Editor of This Issue | Dai Sijia
Reviewer of This Issue | Jiang Yi
Editor's Note
This article argues that India should no longer adhere to its current strategy of aligning with the United States, but instead should rely on countries such as China and Russia, and take root in the "Global South" to achieve national rise. The article first points out that the Modi government's efforts to align closely with the United States after Trump won the U.S. election have not only been futile but also further marginalized India within the "Global South" system. The author believes that a confrontation between the "Global North" led by the United States and the "Global South" led by China and Russia has emerged globally. As an important middle power, India faces a key strategic opportunity. However, the Modi government's foreign policy has more inclined India towards the "Global North," while relatively neglecting the "Global South." The author suggests that India's current orientation misjudges the U.S. foreign strategy based on self-interest and zero-sum thinking, leading India to be further entangled in the U.S. system, possibly missing the opportunity for the rise of the "Global South" countries. If India yields to the U.S. government's self-serving diplomatic policies, it may further harm its important interests in trade, energy security, and military equipment, isolating India from the regional trends dominated by China and Russia in terms of geopolitical security and economic connectivity. Finally, the author advocates that India should adjust its strategic direction, partner with China and Russia, and take root in the "Global South" to achieve its own rise. The South Asia Research Communication translates this article for readers to critically refer to.
Image Source: The Wire website
As the saying goes, "Uninvited guests are not only impolite, but for a country, the cost is even heavier." Prime Minister Modi of India hurriedly visited the United States just weeks after President Trump took office, and India will later deeply realize the principle that "uninvited guests damage national dignity."
Modi's visit to the United States from February 12 to 13, 2025, was a commitment made by Indian Foreign Minister Sujan Singh at Trump's inauguration on January 20. Although Modi's mission was honorable and responsible, Trump responded with only hollow rhetoric, demanding more concessions from India without offering any substantial benefits.
Modi's hasty actions put India at risk of marginalization within the BRICS organization and reduced its geopolitical importance. This stems from India's failure to understand the essence of Trump's "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) agenda during his second term, which has completely changed the direction of U.S. foreign policy since 2012.
Since the Obama administration proposed the "Rebalance to Asia" strategy in 2012, the United States has focused on competing with China in security by strengthening regional security alliances and cooperating with strategic partners like India. The Biden administration hoped to expand NATO's influence from Europe to Asia, countering China and Russia through the "globalization" of NATO, while neither China nor Russia recognizes the U.S. concept of balance of power or the zero-sum security concept based on military strength.
Therefore, China and Russia advocate building a new world order based on the principle of indivisible security, aiming to meet the security and development needs of all countries, especially the "Global South" group, which accounts for 80% of the world's population. These two ideologies have given rise to different global governance models: one is a system led by the United States, with "Global North" countries as the main body; the other is a system supported by China and Russia, relying on the "Global South" countries.
India is located in a crucial "middle region" of geopolitics, which is positioned differently from the perspectives of China, the United States, and Russia - the U.S. calls it the "Indo-Pacific region," while China and Russia refer to it as the "Asia-Pacific region." This region spans the Western Pacific and the Indian Ocean, becoming an important arena for geopolitical games among the three major powers, China, the United States, and Russia. Thanks to its unique geographical location, India has, for the first time since independence, the opportunity to effectively use the global geopolitical landscape to benefit its development. Since China, the United States, and Russia all need India's participation and support in advancing their respective strategic visions, this situation presents new geopolitical opportunities for India. It must be clear that a "great power" is one that can influence the course of major global events and maintain its sovereignty independently through its own strength.
The United States needs India to serve as a vanguard against China in the Indo-Pacific region, while China and Russia hope that India will strengthen the BRICS cooperation mechanism, thereby solidifying a global governance system that promotes common prosperity through connectivity.
Although the United States has not explicitly stated its ultimate intentions, its "small yard, high wall" strategy and the U.S.-China technological competition have already demonstrated a firm determination to prevent China from taking the lead in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Historically, the First and Second Industrial Revolutions originated in Europe, while the Third Industrial Revolution arose in the United States. For the West, if China leads the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the "impact" would be immeasurable - this would shift the global center of gravity eastward, i.e., the "once-in-a-century great change" mentioned by China. In addition, the United States attempts to delay (even if it cannot completely stop) China's military expansion from the western Pacific to the Indian Ocean, because controlling these two oceans with the highest global trade volume is of great significance to China.
Since 1991, NATO's eastward expansion strategy aimed to weaken Russia's military and economic strength. Putin's leadership style differs from Yeltsin's, and under Putin's leadership, Russia has regained its great power influence.
The Trump administration made significant adjustments to the previous U.S. foreign policy of using alliance systems and strategic partnerships for group confrontation. Trump intended to reshape the U.S. hegemony by controlling the triangular relationship between the U.S., China, and Russia. At the same time, he tried to divide the Sino-Russian partnership to reduce obstacles for U.S. actions in international affairs. Moreover, the Trump administration continued its trade, tariff, and technology disputes with China. Currently, the U.S. has temporarily set aside its security competition with China in the Indo-Pacific region and shifted its focus to enhancing its own deterrence and combat capabilities. This is because the U.S. military leadership assessed that compared to the Chinese military, the U.S. military has declined in these aspects.
In Trump's planning layout, Europe and India are gradually losing influence in their respective geopolitical regions. Trump knows that Russia, as a great power, cannot be completely defeated on the battlefield through military means. Therefore, he bypassed European countries and directly negotiated with Russia to end the Ukraine conflict.
The EU's influence on the geopolitical stage has significantly declined, not due to a lack of technical capabilities. Indeed, compared to China and the United States, Europe lags in computing power and specialized talent, and its technological strength is slightly inferior, but this is not the key factor. The fundamental reason is that Europe has long failed to prioritize building its own security architecture, effective deterrent forces, and combat capabilities. In the context of accelerated changes in the global geopolitical landscape, a foreign policy lacking key security elements has caused Europe to gradually become a dependent of the United States, losing independent voice and decision-making power in international affairs.
India's situation is becoming increasingly severe. In the field of technology, it lacks strong support; facing what it considers its main threat - China, India has obvious shortcomings in its security architecture, deterrent capabilities, and combat level.
After the Galwan Valley incident in June 2020, India signed a series of agreements with the United States, effectively becoming a U.S. military ally, and also establishing partnerships with northern countries. In choosing international organizations and cooperation mechanisms, India has paid more attention to the Group of Seven (G7) and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD), while its emphasis on the BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organization is relatively limited.
In 2023, when India served as the G20 chair, it actively shaped its image as a leader of the "Global South." Unlike China, India claims to pursue a "multi-directional alliance" policy, positioning itself as a bridge connecting the "Global South" and the "Global North." Based on this, India positions itself as a competitor to China. Overall, the strong support from the United States plays a key role in India's effort to shape a great power image and move toward becoming a developed country by 2047.
This diplomatic policy of striving for U.S. support is based on the argument of India's Foreign Minister Sujan Singh in his book "Why Bharat Matters," which states that "the United States is undoubtedly the leading power of our era and will remain so for a long time." This view also aligns with Prime Minister Modi's ideas, as the largest overseas support base of the RSS (the ideological mother organization of the BJP) is the United States. Additionally, given the colonial mentality of India's leaders, establishing close ties with the United States helps enhance their standing in the eyes of domestic citizens.
However, Modi and Sujan Singh did not realize that Trump's goal of achieving "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) is to create a triangular competition with China and Russia, which makes the idea that "the United States is the leading power of the world" lose its basis. Therefore, Trump placed the "Global North" countries, the Group of Seven (G7), and the G20 in a relatively secondary position.
Sujan Singh failed to grasp Trump's worldview. On January 20, he attended Trump's inauguration as a special envoy of the Prime Minister and met with U.S. Senator Marco Rubio, conveying Modi's ideas to the new U.S. government. India hoped to push bilateral relations to a higher level through more weighty, bold, and ambitious actions.
Sujan Singh also actively showed loyalty to the U.S. side at the strategic level, informing Rubio that the Modi government intended to cooperate with the Trump administration in various fields. One of the key objectives of this move was to urge Trump to visit India soon and attend the QUAD summit held in Delhi. However, the QUAD was not a priority for Trump, so Modi decided to personally visit the United States to strengthen bilateral relations.
Faced with Trump's accusations of India as the "biggest user of tariffs" and the humiliating treatment of Indian illegal immigrants being shackled and returned by U.S. military aircraft, PM Modi showed an unusually restrained attitude. India signed a joint statement with the U.S. that clearly favored American interests, and in the joint press conference with Trump, the U.S. side dominated the discourse.
The lengthy joint statement has deep implications, with its core content summarized into four areas: trade, defense, energy, and emerging technologies. Trump required India to adjust the bilateral trade structure to favor the U.S. side by $45 billion, while claiming to implement equivalent tariff policies on Indian goods, conflicting with the World Trade Organization's rules that grant developing countries preferential treatment. Furthermore, the U.S. instructed India to use the dollar payment system exclusively in trade with BRICS countries, requiring India to strive for the "5000 billion-dollar target," i.e., increasing Indo-U.S. bilateral trade from $190 billion in 2023 to $500 billion by 2030. India fully accepted all the U.S. proposed trade conditions.
In the defense sector, the U.S. required India to purchase military equipment worth billions of dollars, paving the way for the final procurement of F-35 fighters. This so-called "joint production" (the U.S. never provides basic technology to allies) is essentially moving U.S. equipment to India for assembly. The list of military procurement includes "Javelin" anti-tank missiles, six or more P-8I patrol aircraft, GE404 and GE414 engines, "Stryker" wheeled armored vehicles, and various technologies for warfare in air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace.
Additionally, in drafting a 10-year defense partnership framework, the U.S. and India agreed on a new initiative called the "Autonomous Systems Industry Alliance" (ASIA), aiming to expand the application of new technologies such as drones, anti-drone systems, and underwater systems in the Indo-Pacific region. This brings three changes: first, India will completely depend on the U.S. for key equipment and technology, allowing the U.S. to influence India's military choices in the future; second, India's "self-reliance" strategy will come to an end; third, capital expenditure in India's defense sector will increase.
In the energy sector, Trump required India to purchase more crude oil and natural gas from the U.S. Currently, the main sources of India's crude oil imports are Russia (40%), Iraq, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and the U.S. If India purchases most of its crude oil from the U.S., it will result in higher fuel prices for Indian citizens. Furthermore, according to the "U.S.-India 123 Civil Nuclear Agreement" (Note: The official name is the "U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement," which was initiated by the U.S. and India in 2005 and finally signed in 2008. The "123" in the name comes from Section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act, which outlines the legal framework for nuclear cooperation between the U.S. and foreign governments), the Modi government relaxed the liability clauses that had hindered the purchase of U.S. nuclear reactors, allowing the U.S. to hope that India would buy its small modular nuclear reactors. Currently, France and Russia provide support for India's civil nuclear energy needs.
In the technology sector, India will completely rely on the U.S. in emerging technologies driving the Fourth Industrial Revolution. These technologies include artificial intelligence infrastructure, quantum technology, network technology, submarine cables, etc. Meta (Facebook's parent company) has announced the "Project Waterworth" plan, which aims to lay a 50,000-kilometer submarine cable connecting five continents, promoting the development of the internet and artificial intelligence, with India being the only country in South Asia that has achieved digital connectivity with the U.S. In addition, Elon Musk's U.S. company SpaceX will provide satellite internet through Starlink to India. After Modi's recent meeting with Musk at the White House, Musk has confirmed plans to establish Tesla production lines in Delhi and Mumbai.
Looking back, let us re-examine the serious geopolitical and strategic consequences of India's gamble, mortgaging its present and future to the U.S. From a geopolitical perspective, the U.S. elite has been carefully maneuvering with sinister intent. In July 2024, then-Senator Rubio (now U.S. Secretary of State) proposed the "U.S.-India Defense Cooperation Act," one of whose key objectives was to provide limited exemptions for India to purchase Russian military equipment, exempting it from sanctions under the CAATSA (Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act), while accelerating the arms sale process to India.
Undoubtedly, apart from the defense sector, India still heavily relies on Russia in energy, military technology, and BRICS trade - the Brahmos missile is an example. Russia can provide advanced technology that other countries cannot offer, and throughout the Soviet period to the present under Putin's leadership, India and Russia have always maintained good relations. Moreover, Russia has played a key role in maintaining peace between China and India (for example, facilitating the 2018 Sochi Summit, previously pushing for an informal meeting between Chinese and Indian leaders in Wuhan, and assisting in the joint statement on peace along the Line of Actual Control between China and India on September 10, 2020). More importantly, it was Russia that facilitated dialogue between China and India under the trilateral cooperation framework, which eventually evolved into the BRICS organization.
Given India's series of commitments in defense, energy, military technology, and BRICS trade, the relationship between India and Russia is difficult to maintain the previous friendly status, yet India still pretends nothing happened, hoping everything remains the same. One of the purposes of the BRICS organization is to coordinate the payment systems of member states, replacing the dominant role of the U.S. dollar in settlements with local currencies. China, Russia, and Iran have taken the initiative, and more countries will follow. If India does not keep up, its position in the BRICS will be difficult to stabilize.
If China loses confidence in India's full participation in BRICS cooperation, the Sino-Indian relationship will rapidly deteriorate. Currently, China is making extra efforts to promote the normalization of Sino-Indian bilateral relations. This is not due to dependence on the Indian market - in 2024, China's trade with "Global South" countries has brought a $1 trillion surplus - but because China and Russia hope to promote India's active participation, consolidating the BRICS, which is the core platform supporting the global governance layout of China and Russia.
If this hope is shattered, China will seek closer relationships with other South Asian countries and strictly prevent India's interference. This will have substantial impacts on India's national security and economic security.
Moreover, Trump's distancing from Europe is beneficial for China and Russia. Unstable European countries are considering expanding trade with China. Soon, Europe will realize that without including Russia in the "tent," its security architecture cannot be long-term stable. In the uncertain future of NATO, Europeans need to build autonomous deterrence and combat capabilities without U.S. military support, which is crucial for ensuring European peace.
Therefore, if India is determined to establish an unreliable partnership with the United States, which is 12,000 kilometers away and solely focused on the MAGA vision, it will ultimately be forced to survive alone in a turbulent neighboring environment. India is caught in border confrontations with China and Pakistan, and if a crisis erupts one day, India will have to seek assistance from European and West Asian countries, but both sides will be in trouble themselves and uncertain about their future. Additionally, as the "decoupling" between the U.S. and China in trade, technology, internet, and critical supply chains continues to deepen, India, which adopts U.S. technology standards, will find it increasingly difficult to effectively communicate and trade with countries in its vicinity that adopt Chinese standards.
Therefore, the key is that if India sincerely pursues the MIGA (Make India Great Again) vision, rather than becoming a subordinate of MAGA, Modi must abandon the "joke" he said to the U.S. - "MAGA plus MIGA equals MEGA (i.e., Super Partner)." To achieve MIGA, the Modi government needs to find a stable foothold in the geopolitical situation based on its geographical location, i.e., to partner with China and Russia, and take root in the collective strength of the "Global South."
About the Author: Pravin Sawhney is the Editor-in-Chief of the Indian military magazine FORCE.
This article was translated from the article titled "MIGA or MAGA: How Modi's Haste to Please Trump May Backfire" published on the "TheWire" website on February 2, 2025. Original link:
https://thewire.in/diplomacy/miga-or-maga-how-modis-haste-to-please-trump-may-backfire。
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7565910123420369414/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author and is welcome to express your opinion below [Up/Down] buttons.