Roie Yellinek
Two recent trilateral meetings hosted by Chinese President Xi Jinping captured global attention. In one, Xi stood with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In the other, with Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong-un. On the surface, both scenes suggested a tightening axis against the West. But beneath the symbolism lie very different dynamics. For Western policymakers, failing to distinguish between them would be a costly mistake.
The Xi–Putin–Kim meeting represents a classic coalition of grievance. Russia, isolated by its war in Ukraine, leans heavily on Chinese markets and political cover. North Korea supplies Russia with munitions and receives food and energy in return. China gains leverage over both by allowing the relationship to flourish. This triangle is held together by shared hostility to the United States and a common interest in undermining Western dominance. Its logic is defensive but durable, and it is likely to endure as long as Russia’s dependence and Kim’s isolation persist.
The meeting with Modi looked similar, but rests on much weaker foundations. India’s participation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and BRICS reflects a long tradition of hedging rather than alignment. Modi shook hands with Xi and Putin not because he trusts them but because he wants to signal independence from Washington after recent frictions. U.S. tariffs on Indian oil exports and loose talk of mediating in Kashmir played directly into Beijing’s hands. Still, New Delhi has no illusions about China’s intentions. Border clashes, economic rivalry, and Beijing’s partnership with Pakistan ensure that trust will remain elusive.
India has always valued room to maneuver. During the Cold War, it led the Non-Aligned Movement. Today, it balances multiple partnerships: joining the Quad with the U.S., Japan, and Australia, while also maintaining seats at the SCO and BRICS. Modi calls this “strategic autonomy”; critics call it opportunism. In practice, it is India’s way of extracting maximum benefit without binding commitments. Xi’s “dragon and elephant” metaphor conceals the reality that the two countries’ interests collide more often than they converge.
No comments:
Post a Comment