London is known for its open intellectual climate, where no idea is off-limits. But even in this dynamic city – and indeed in Washington too – it’s almost blasphemous to suggest that Russia and the West can be partners, or that the US and China can coexist as global powers. Recently, Nigel Farage, the Reform Party leader in the UK, faced a storm for urging the West to negotiate sensibly with Russia over Ukraine, calling the war a ‘complete stalemate’. People accused him of “echoing Russian propaganda”.

In India, we often hear that we don’t cultivate a society where all ideas are welcome. But let’s hope that suggesting a new chapter of “Hindi-Cheeni bhai-bhai” (India-China brotherhood) isn’t seen as blasphemy. The strong anti-China sentiment after the Galwan Valley clash in 2020 seems to have subsided. We’re buying more Chinese goods now than ever. In 2023, our bilateral trade hit over $136 billion. Hopefully, even those who burnt Chinese products in Gujarat and Delhi following the border skirmishes are more open to the idea now.

Sure, it might sound crazy to suggest that India and China should become trusted partners like the US and India, or Russia and China. But, it’s not entirely out of the question.

Sure, it might sound crazy to suggest that India and China should become trusted partners like the US and India, or Russia and China. But, it’s not entirely out of the question.

Major Geopolitical Shifts

India’s rise to become a global power is unstoppable; even China knows that. Talking to Chinese academics and journalists, you get the sense that they’re open to establishing long-term ties based on mutual respect. They like India, they want more people-to-people interactions, and one of them even wondered recently why India does not try to cast its spell over the dragon through its soft power of Bollywood  

Both countries have the responsibility to lift millions of their combined 2.8 billion people out of poverty. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has pledged to make India a developed country by 2047, which is a huge task. There are challenges, but if India and China team up and leverage each other’s strengths, it could be a major geopolitical shift, with far-reaching implications for global politics. 

Read | Modi-Hasina Should Worry About China, But Not Too Much

The US and its allies might be shocked and deeply concerned by a close India-China partnership. The West has benefited from the rivalry between the two countries as it aligns with their strategy of counterbalancing China’s rise. A partnership between these two Asian giants could undermine the West’s strategic interests in the region. Kishore Mahbubani, former Singaporean ambassador to the UN, has often said that most of Asia would cheer if this were to happen.

So, can India and China find common ground despite tensions over their disputed border? Prof. Mahbubani believes that while the two may never be best friends, they can have a good working relationship. He even says the 21st century belongs to the CIA (China, India, and ASEAN) countries. With US power on the decline, these countries will drive the world’s economic growth.

A Rollercoaster Ride

The idea of India and China being close friends isn’t new. Historically, they’ve acted like quarrelsome neighbours who fight and make up repeatedly. They share a long history of cultural and economic exchange dating back over two millennia. The Silk Road facilitated trade, and Buddhism, which started in India, found a significant following in China. These ancient ties laid a foundation of mutual respect and cultural affinity. During the colonial era, both countries faced subjugation by Western powers, fostering a sense of shared struggle. 

After gaining independence from the British, India faced border issues with China, and they continue to strain their relationship. In the early 1950s, the relationship was marked by camaraderie, epitomised by the slogan “Hindi-Chini Bhai-Bhai“. However, this period of cooperation was short-lived. The border dispute escalated into a full-scale war in 1962, leaving a lasting scar on bilateral relations. The disputed borders, particularly in the Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh regions, remain contentious issues.

The rivalry between the US and China will continue, and India will remain under US pressure in its effort to manage China. However, India’s strategic positioning between the US and China can work to its advantage.

Before the Galwan incident, Prime Minister Narendra Modi naturally leaned towards engaging with China. As Gujarat’s Chief Minister, he made four trips to the country to attract investment. As Prime Minister, he has visited China twice, and President Xi Jinping reciprocated with two visits to India. Both countries have emerged as major global economic powers, engaging in significant economic competition and areas of cooperation within multilateral frameworks like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO).

Strategic Rivalry

Strategically, India and China view each other with suspicion. The latter’s close ties with Pakistan, its infrastructure projects in South Asia under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and its military presence in the Indian Ocean have heightened India’s security concerns.

Conversely, India’s growing partnership with the US and its participation in the Quad (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) is viewed warily by China. The 2020 Galwan Valley clash exacerbated tensions and highlighted the fragility of the relationship. Despite several rounds of military and diplomatic talks, a comprehensive resolution to the border disputes remains elusive.

Mumbai’s Shanghai Dreams

Many youth in India might not know that not too long ago, India used to compare itself with Pakistan in all spheres. This attitude changed around the turn of the millennium, when the Maharashtra government launched a mega project to revamp Mumbai in 2004, based on the “Vision Mumbai” report by Bombay First, an organisation comprising some of Mumbai’s super-rich stakeholders. The report outlined strategies for transforming Mumbai into “another Shanghai”. While the project to transform Mumbai is still a “work in progress”, it marked the beginning of India’s comparisons with China. Today, China sees India as its great rival, at least in Asia.

Read | China Is Revamping Its Military, And India Must Not Take It Lightly

Projections show that the Indian economy will surpass Germany and Japan’s to become the world’s third-largest one by 2027. Currently, however, India’s economy is only 19% the size of China’s, even though it feeds nearly the same number of people. According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), India’s nominal GDP in 2023 stood at $3.5 trillion, compared to China’s $18.2 trillion. India’s per capita income was $2,411, while China’s was $12,720. China’s exports last year exceeded $3.38 trillion, while India’s exports were $778 billion.

Collaboration Possibilities

Since China opened its economy in 1978, it has lifted 800 million people out of poverty – a feat that hasn’t been matched by any regime in history. India has also succeeded in reducing poverty significantly. Both nations have many more millions to help. Collaborating in economic development, technology, infrastructure, environmental initiatives, healthcare, cultural exchange, and geopolitical stability can benefit both countries and the world. Overcoming historical tensions and building trust through consistent dialogue will be crucial.

The intense rivalry between the US and China will continue, and India will remain under pressure from the US to stay a reliable partner in its effort to manage China. However, India’s strategic positioning between the US and China can work to its advantage. Ultimately, New Delhi’s strategic interests are best served by a balanced approach that navigates the complex dynamics of US-China relations while advancing its own national objectives. 

India knows that neighbours with shared borders may fight at times, but they can still continue to believe in the ‘love thy neighbour’ dictum.

(Syed Zubair Ahmed is a London-based senior Indian journalist with three decades of experience with the Western media)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un walk during a farewell ceremony upon Mr. Putin’s departure at an airport in Pyongyang, North Korea June 19, 2024.
| Photo Credit: via Reuters

A new agreement between Russia and North Korea reached by their leaders requires the countries to use all available means to provide immediate military assistance in the event of war, North Korean state media said.

The North’s official Korean Central News Agency on Thursday reported the language of the comprehensive strategic partnership agreement reached by its leader Kim Jong Un and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Pyongyang on Wednesday. The agency said Article 4 of the agreement states that if one of the countries gets invaded and is pushed into a state of war, the other must deploy “all means at its disposal without delay” to provide “military and other assistance”.

The deal could mark the strongest connection between Moscow and Pyongyang since the end of the Cold War. Both Mr. Kim and Mr. Putin described it as a major upgrade of their relations, covering security, trade, investment, cultural and humanitarian ties.

The summit came as the U.S. and its allies expressed growing concerns over a possible arms arrangement in which Pyongyang provides Moscow with badly needed munitions for its war in Ukraine, in exchange for economic assistance and technology transfers that could enhance the threat posed by Mr. Kim’s nuclear weapons and missile programme.

Following their summit, Mr. Kim said the two countries had a “fiery friendship”, and that the deal was their “strongest-ever treaty”, putting the relationship at the level of an alliance. He vowed full support for Russia’s war in Ukraine. Mr. Putin called it a “breakthrough document” reflecting shared desires to move relations to a higher level.

North Korea and the former Soviet Union signed a treaty in 1961, which experts say necessitated Moscow’s military intervention if the North came under attack. The deal was discarded after the collapse of the USSR, replaced by one in 2000 that offered weaker security assurances.

South Korean officials said they were still interpreting the results of the summit, including what Russia’s response might be if the North comes under attack, and whether the new deal promises a similar level of protection with the 1961 treaty. South Korean officials didn’t immediately comment on the North Korean report about the details of the deal.

Tensions on the Korean Peninsula are at their highest point in years, with the pace of both Kim’s weapons tests and combined military exercises involving the US, South Korea and Japan intensifying in a tit-for-tat cycle.

The Koreas also have engaged in Cold War-style psychological warfare that involved North Korea dropping tons of trash on the South with balloons, and the South broadcasting anti-North Korean propaganda with its loudspeakers.

File picture of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
| Photo Credit: AP

Turkey has halted all exports and imports to and from Israel, citing the escalating humanitarian situation in Gaza, announced the Turkish Ministry of Trade, Al Jazeera reported.

“Export and import transactions related to Israel have been stopped, covering all products,” the Ministry said in a statement on May 3.

“Turkey will strictly and decisively implement these new measures until the Israeli Government allows an uninterrupted and sufficient flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza.

“The decision follows remarks by Israel’s foreign minister, who accused Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of violating agreements by obstructing Israeli imports and exports from ports.

“This is how a dictator behaves, disregarding the interests of the Turkish people and businessmen, and ignoring international trade agreements,” Foreign Minister Israel Katz posted on X.

Mr. Katz disclosed that he has directed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to explore alternative trade options with Turkey, focusing on domestic production and imports from other nations. In 2023, the trade volume between the two nations amounted to $6.8 billion.

Last month, Turkey imposed trade restrictions on Israel, alleging Israel’s obstruction of Ankara’s participation in Gaza aid airdrops and its military actions in the region.

When questioned about Turkey’s continued trade relations with Israel despite Ankara’s strong rhetoric, Mr. Erdogan responded last month by stating that Turkey no longer engages in “intense trade” with Israel, asserting, “That is done.”

However, he did not explicitly state that Ankara had completely ceased all trade with Israel, Al Jazeera reported.

Palestinian baby girl, Sabreen Jouda, who was delivered prematurely after her mother was killed in an Israeli strike along with her husband and daughter, lies in an incubator in the Emirati hospital in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip on April 21, 2024.
| Photo Credit: AP

A premature Palestinian infant, rescued from her mother’s womb shortly after the woman was killed in an Israeli airstrike, has died, her uncle said on April 26.

Sabreen Jouda died in a Gaza hospital on April 25 after her health deteriorated and medical teams were unable to save her, said her uncle, Rami al-Sheikh.

Israel-Palestine Conflict

Ms. Sabreen’s home in the southern Gaza city of Rafah was hit by an Israeli airstrike shortly before midnight on April 20. Her parents and 4-year-old sister were killed.

First responders took the bodies to a nearby hospital, where medical workers performed an emergency cesarean section on her mother, Sabreen al-Sakani, who was 30 weeks’ pregnant. The infant was kept in an incubator in a neonatal intensive care unit at another hospital until she died five days later.

Mr. Al-Sheikh told The Associated Press that Ms. Sabreen was buried next to her father on April 25.

More than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed during the Israel-Hamas war, according to local health officials, who say about two-thirds of the dead are women and children. The health officials don’t differentiate among combatants and civilians in their count.

Israel declared war on Hamas and unleashed a pulverizing air and ground offensive in Gaza in response to the militants’ Oct. 7 attack on southern Israel. The militants killed about 1,200 people in Israel and took another 250 hostage.

More than half of Gaza’s 2.3 million people have sought refuge in Rafah, where Israel has conducted near-daily raids as it prepares for a possible offensive in the city.

The remains of a rocket booster that, according to Israeli authorities critically injured a 7-year-old girl, after Iran launched drones and missiles towards Israel, near Arad, Israel, April 14, 2024.

(These article is part of the View From India newsletter curated by The Hindu’s foreign affairs experts. To get the newsletter in your inbox every Monday, subscribe here.)

On April 19, five days after Iran launched an unprecedented missile and drone attack on Israel, Tel Aviv struck a base in the central Iranian province of Isfahan, unnamed American and Israeli officials told the U.S. media. Iran’s April 14 attack, involving over 300 drones, cruise and ballistic missiles, was a retaliation against an attack on its embassy complex on April 1 in which seven IRGC officers, including two senior Generals, were killed. Israeli leadership had vowed to respond to the Iranian attack, despite growing calls from its allies in the West for restraint. On April 19, Iranian state media reported explosions in Isfahan but ruled out any foreign attack. Israel did not publicly acknowledge that it carried out attack inside Iran. Its government remained tight-lipped while the only public response was from Itamar Ben Gvir, a far-right Minister, who left a one-word post on X, calling the attack ‘feeble’. U.S. officials spoke to the media only anonymously. In a public comment, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. was not involved in any retaliatory strike without confirming or dismissing reports that Israel carried out a strike inside Iran.

Compared to the massive barrage of the Iranian strike, Israel’s reported attack was largely symbolic. And by not claiming the attack, Israel offered an off-ramp to Iran. When Iranian officials dismissed reports an Israeli attack inside its territory, they actually took the de-escalation path. Both sides do not want a full-blown war, at least for now. The Biden administration reportedly worked behind the scene to avoid a regional war. According to the U.S. media, Israel carried out the April 1 bombing of Iran’s embassy complex in Damascus without prior consultation with the U.S. Immediately after Iran’s attack, Biden officials told the media that the President informed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the U.S. would not join any Israeli retaliatory attack on Iran. Mr. Biden’s argument was that Israeli, American, British, French and Jordanian defence systems and aircraft had intercepted “99%” of Iranian projectiles. Mr. Biden asked Mr. Netanyahu “to take the win” and do not escalate the crisis into a regional war, which is not in America’s interest. This practically limited Mr. Netanyahu’s options. The challenge before him was to retaliate without escalation. And that’s what he did with the symbolic strike with a path towards de-escalation.

But it doesn’t mean that the pre-April 1 status quo in the Iran-Israel shadow war can continue. In fact, the message from Tehran, when it launched a direct attack on Israel, was that it wanted to alter the status quo which allowed Israel to attack Iranian interests in Syria and Lebanon cost-free. Iran wanted to make it costly for Israel. Mr. Netanyahu, probably under American pressure or due to other strategic challenges he is facing today, backed off from hitting Iran hard. But does that mean that he would stop targeting Iranian interests in Syria? Rolling back Iran’s influence in its immediate neighbourhood has been a security priority for Israeli governments. If Israel continues to attack IRGC commanders in Syria, can Iran ignore them, especially after it launched such a heavy attack on Israel over the killing of IRGC officers? So the fault lines remain intact in the shadow war, even though both sides have backed off from the brink, for now.

Big win for Muizzu

Maldives’ ruling People’s National Congress (PNC) has secured a big win in the parliamentary elections on Sunday, giving President Mohamed Muizzu, who came to power last year on an anti-India campaign plank, significant control over the legislature. The leader, who wanted Indian military out of the island nation, has pledged to elevate strategic ties with China. Six political parties and several independent groups had fielded some 368 candidates for the 93 seats in Parliament or the People’s Majlis. The PNC, according to local media, was headed for a “super majority” in Parliament, with a likely win in nearly 60 out of the 93 seats, my colleague Meera Srinivasan reports. The Maldivian Parliament was earlier controlled by the Opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP). The results appear to have strengthened the President’s hands.

The top five

1. Israel, a two-state solution, some recent perceptions

Writings and official Israeli assertions offer an idea of what ‘a Jewish national home’ and a long-standing dispute constitute, writes Hamid Ansari

2. A world in disarray, a concern about the future

The absence of leaders who command influence across the world, new alliances, economic issues and the progress of current technologies are some of the factors, writes M.K. Narayanan.

3. India’s Arctic imperative

While the Indian government seems keen to benefit from seabed mining and resource exploitation in the Arctic, it ought to unequivocally back a sustainable mode of extraction, write Abhijit Singh and Adreas Osthagen.

4. Lawrence Wong | Designated successor

Singapore’s new leader is now tasked with fortifying the ruling party’s walls and earning back the trust of the public that took a hit by scandals before next year’s general elections, writes Saumya Kalia.

5. Priyamvada Natarajan | Universe’s cartographer

The Coimbatore-born astrophysicist, whose works on black holes won global recognition, is on TIME magazine’s list of 100 most influential people in 2024, writes Arkatapa Basu.