The trifecta of global power

The foreign ministers of Russia, India, and China will meet in Delhi on 11 December 2017 for their regular meeting in which they will take stock of the developing global and regional situation. What can we expect from this meeting?

Their last meeting was held in Moscow in April 2016. Since then the international and regional scene has changed dramatically. The election of President Trump in the US has coincided with a new low in US-Russia relations. ISIS is on retreat partly because of the Russian military pressure in Syria. Russia’s influence in the Middle East has increased.

The Chinese have held their 19th Party Congress. Present Xi has emerged as the strongest leader of China since Mao and is expected to pursue a strongly nationalistic agenda. 

There has been some turbulence in Sino-Indian relations. Due to sovereignty concerns over China-Pakistan Corridor passing through Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, India did not attend the much-hyped Beijing meeting of nations in which President Xi launched his pet Belt and Road Initiative. India and China faced unprecedented 70-day troops face off in Doklam in the disputed territory in Bhutan. Although resolved via diplomatic channels it has left behind many apprehensions.  

Post-Doklam, and September 2016 cross-LOC “surgical strikes” against Pakistan, PM Modi’s image as a firm and decisive leader has been strengthened. This has been further refurbished by his bold though controversial decisions like demonetization and GST. 

The US under President Trump is wooing India. A concept of Indo-Pacific alliance, endorsed by India, Australia, US, and Japan, is taking shape making China uncomfortable. But India seems to be at ease with being both with the US and Japan on one side and with Russia and China on the other. India is now experimenting with new configurations like India-Japan-US trilateral and India-Japan-US-Australia quadrilateral of simply the Quad.

What do the RIC countries stand for? The joint statements issued by the RIC leaders give some clues. For instance in the April 2016 Moscow joint statement the three countries see the world as transitioning to a “just and democratic multi-polar world with a central role for UN and international law”. Being among the largest emerging economies in the world, they see themselves as wielding significant influence on the regional and international level. They are opposed to “forced regime change from the outside in any country in violation of norms of international law.” RIC positions are often at variance with the positions taken by the US and western countries on key issues. 

Cybersecurity is one such issue. The west promotes a multistakeholder model of Internet governance in which the UN and the governments have a minimal role. In contrast, RIC countries emphasise the role of states and multilateralism in internet governance while not discarding multistakeholder-ism altogether. They emphasise the “need to internationalise Internet governance and to enhance in this regard the role of International Telecommunication Union.”

Terrorism is an important point of discussion at the RIC forum. The three countries “oppose terrorism in all its forms and manifestation” and are in favour of early conclusion initiation of negotiations in the Comprehensive Convention on International terrorism. This is the well-known Indian position. 

It is also interesting to see what is not explicitly stated in the joint declarations. RIC did not make any mention of bilateral issues. Thus, India-China boundary dispute is not mentioned. Nor is there a mention of India’s concerns about China’s role in blocking the UN to declare Masood Azhar as a global terrorist. China has ensured that RIC does not contain anything that is critical of Pakistan.

It is to be noted that RIC joint declaration shies away from openly endorsing India’s membership of the UNSC. This is because of China’s reservations. RIC joint statement goes only as far as recognising the “status of India in international affairs and its aspiration to play a greater role in the United Nations.”

It is interesting to ask why RIC has endured for so long despite uneven relations between India and China. This is because the three countries take pride in their independent policies and are in sync with the notion of multipolarity. The RIC, which began as an informal exchange of view among three foreign ministers in 2002, was an attempt to move away from the US-dominated unipolar world that existed until the early years of the 21st century. They seek to present a global model of governance based on international law and norms which the west has often flouted at will. 

RIC serves as a platform for an exchange of views and as well as practical cooperation among themselves. For instance, Russia and India had rushed relief assistance to China after the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. The positions taken at RIC helped the three countries in coordinating their stances at BRICS and SCO.

It remains to be seen whether any big ideas will emerge from Delhi meeting of the RIC. It will be interesting to see the formulation on Asia Pacific in the context of the rise of the idea of Indo-Pacific and the Quad. Second, will the RIC joint declaration mention by name the terrorist groups based in Pakistan? That will be a great plus for India if that happens. Third, will BRI be mentioned explicitly? Fourth, what will be their position on Afghanistan considering that security situation there is deteriorating?  Some nuances in the formulations can be expected. Otherwise, the Delhi meeting may turn out to be a routine exchange of views. Known positions will be reiterated.

The author is Director, Vivekananda International Foundation