India’s role in evolving global landscape

British journalist Gideon Rachman’s opinion piece for the Financial Times reflects a contrast between European anxiety over global peace and stability and India’s relatively calm and opportunistic stance. 

Rachman notes how the world is increasingly divided into “safe spots” and conflict-ridden regions, highlighting a growing sense of foreboding in Europe, particularly in Germany and Bulgaria, about Russia's aggression in Ukraine and its broader implications for NATO and European security.

Rachman begins by recounting his recent travel from London to New Delhi, metaphorically describing it as a journey between two "safe spots" separated by a sea of global conflicts. His route passed over conflict zones in Ukraine, Russia, and Afghanistan, underlining how war-torn areas now dominate large parts of the world.

The article underscores divergent European perspectives on how to address Russia’s aggression. In Germany, the defence minister, Boris Pistorius, warns of future Russian attacks on NATO, while others like Norbert Röttgen advocate defeating Russia by supporting Ukraine militarily. However, political factions on Germany’s far right and far left see NATO and the US as the real threats, a sentiment echoed by Bulgaria's pro-Russian populists.

Rachman contrasts these European concerns with India's outlook. Despite warnings from Western policymakers that Russia’s victory in Ukraine could embolden China, Indian elites downplay the idea that Putin threatens their security. Instead, New Delhi continues to see Russia as a necessary balance against China. Rachman points out how this mindset prevails across much of the Global South, where Western arguments about Russian aggression are often dismissed as hypocritical due to US support for Israel. Interestingly, India’s pro-Israel stance aligns with its strategic and political interests, as reflected in its abstentions on UN resolutions condemning Israel and its close military ties with Tel Aviv.

Rachman argues that India’s strategic calculus sees potential upsides in the current geopolitical climate, particularly as Western multinationals seek to reduce dependence on China. This shift benefits India economically and strategically, with initiatives like the US-India Critical and Emerging Technology partnership deepening cooperation in key areas like AI and semiconductors.

However, Rachman cautions that India’s optimism may be premature. He raises the unsettling possibility that the world’s various regional conflicts—such as those in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia—could become increasingly interconnected. Russia, China, and Iran are already cooperating on various fronts, and a more entangled global conflict could eventually reach India’s doorstep.

In conclusion, Rachman’s analysis highlights India’s pragmatic but potentially risky view of global conflicts. While Europe’s alarm about the future reflects a deep sense of vulnerability, India’s position is more focused on leveraging geopolitical shifts for strategic gains, despite the looming danger of conflict escalation that could ultimately involve the country.