top of page

By:

Rajiv Shah

22 September 2025 at 8:32:23 pm

New Alliances, New Pressures, New Fault Lines

To its west, old relationships in the Gulf are acquiring new strategic and military dimensions. Across the Atlantic, Washington is increasingly using tariffs as an instrument of foreign policy. At the same time, India holds the BRICS presidency in 2026 and prepares to host its summit when the grouping is being watched in the West as a potential challenge to the American-dominated global financial order. Individually, these developments may appear unrelated. Put together, they reveal a larger...

New Alliances, New Pressures, New Fault Lines

To its west, old relationships in the Gulf are acquiring new strategic and military dimensions. Across the Atlantic, Washington is increasingly using tariffs as an instrument of foreign policy. At the same time, India holds the BRICS presidency in 2026 and prepares to host its summit when the grouping is being watched in the West as a potential challenge to the American-dominated global financial order. Individually, these developments may appear unrelated. Put together, they reveal a larger geopolitical churn in which alliances, energy, trade, currencies and economic coercion are becoming interconnected. India finds itself almost at its centre. The emerging Saudi Arabia–Türkiye–Pakistan security equation deserves particular attention. Saudi Arabia brings enormous financial and energy influence; Türkiye possesses considerable military strength, NATO experience and an expanding defence industry; Pakistan brings a large military establishment and nuclear capability with the open support of Washington. Any arrangement containing a collective-defence commitment naturally acquires significance beyond ordinary diplomatic cooperation. Alongside it, another strategic convergence has gradually developed among India, Israel and the UAE. It would be incorrect to describe this as a formal military alliance. Yet geopolitics does not operate through defence treaties alone. India's extensive defence and technology relationship with Israel, its rapidly expanding economic and strategic partnership with the UAE, and the UAE-Israel relationship following the Abraham Accords have created considerable common ground. I2U2—bringing together India, Israel, the UAE and the United States—added another institutional dimension. Thus, without necessarily becoming opposing military camps, two interesting strategic formations are visible across West Asia: Saudi Arabia–Türkiye–Pakistan and the looser India–UAE–Israel convergence. Balancing Challenge India faces a similar balancing challenge. The Gulf is not a distant geopolitical theatre for New Delhi. Nearly nine million Indians live and work there. India's energy security, investments, trade and remittance flows are closely connected with the region. The proposed India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor also requires relative stability across this geography. Polarisation in West Asia can therefore rapidly become an Indian economic and strategic problem. There is another question Indian planners cannot ignore. If a future India-Pakistan confrontation escalates, how would any collective-defence commitment involving Pakistan be interpreted by Saudi Arabia and Türkiye? It would be alarmist to assume that either country would automatically enter a conflict against India. Saudi Arabia, in particular, has substantial economic and strategic interests in maintaining good relations with New Delhi. Nevertheless, defence planners are paid to examine possibilities before they become crises. While these equations develop in India's neighbourhood, economic pressure is emerging from Washington. The US Senate has voted 86–11 for legislation intended to increase pressure on Russia by targeting major purchasers of Russian energy. The measure could authorise tariffs reaching 100 per cent against goods from countries continuing large-scale purchases of Russian oil and gas, with India among those potentially exposed. China is powerful enough to shrug off similar challenges from the West." However this does not mean that America has already imposed a 100 per cent tariff on India. Further legislative steps remain necessary, and presidential waiver provisions are important. But the overwhelming Senate vote carries a political message that New Delhi cannot dismiss. Tariffs are no longer merely tools of trade protection; they have become instruments of geopolitical coercion. Washington's argument is understandable: revenues from Russian petroleum help sustain Moscow's economy during the Ukraine war, and reducing those revenues increases pressure on Russia. But in that case what about European countries who too were/are customers of Russian oil? India's question is equally legitimate: who should determine where India purchases the energy required by more than 1.4 billion people? If Russian crude remains commercially advantageous and helps contain domestic energy costs, New Delhi cannot reasonably be expected to make every energy decision according to another country's geopolitical priorities. Strategic partnership cannot become strategic obedience. This is where BRICS enters the larger picture. India holds the BRICS presidency in 2026 and will host its leaders at an unusually sensitive moment. BRICS is no longer merely the original grouping of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Its expansion has considerably increased its demographic, energy and geopolitical weight. More importantly, discussions around BRICS increasingly touch a sensitive nerve in Washington: alternative payment mechanisms, local-currency trade, development finance and the possibility of gradually reducing dependence upon the dollar-dominated international financial system. The BRICS Summit this time is poised to take some decisive steps which may affect western interests especially US. (The writer is an advocate, legal, geopolitical and public policy analyst. Views personal.)

Easy Money, Costly Brand

In recent years, the idea of work has undergone a visible transformation. The rise of digital platforms has created opportunities that were once unimaginable, allowing individuals to build visibility, generate income, and establish a presence without the traditional pathways that once defined professional success. This shift has, in many ways, democratised opportunity. Yet, it has also introduced a subtle complexity that is not always immediately recognised.


A growing number of individuals are now able to earn without necessarily engaging in what would traditionally be described as rigorous or demanding work. Content creation, in particular, has emerged as a space where visibility can translate into income with relative speed. For some, this has led to a redefinition of effort itself. The idea that work must be demanding or disciplined is increasingly being questioned, and in certain cases, openly dismissed.


At a surface level, this may appear to be a sign of progress. Efficiency has improved, barriers to entry have reduced, and new forms of creativity have found expression. However, beneath this shift lies a more important question, particularly for those operating in business and leadership roles.


What is the long-term impact of building success without depth?


In professional environments, perception is rarely formed solely on the basis of income or visibility. It is shaped by what those outcomes represent. The manner in which success is achieved often becomes as important as the success itself. Individuals who build their presence on immediate engagement may find that while attention is abundant, credibility can be more difficult to establish.


This distinction becomes particularly relevant for founders and entrepreneurs.


In the early stages of growth, the pursuit of quick wins can be tempting. Markets reward speed, platforms reward visibility, and the ability to monetise quickly can create a sense of validation. However, what is often overlooked is how these choices contribute to a broader narrative.

A personal brand, whether intentionally crafted or not, is continuously being formed through behaviour, decisions, and the standards one chooses to uphold. When the focus remains solely on ease and immediate reward, the resulting perception may lack the depth required for long-term influence.


In contrast, those who invest in building substance alongside visibility tend to create a very different impression.


Their work reflects thought, effort, and a commitment to quality. Over time, this not only strengthens their position but also expands the range of opportunities available to them. They are not merely seen; they are taken seriously.


It is important to note that the distinction here is not between traditional and modern forms of work. Innovation and new-age careers are not inherently lacking in value. The difference lies in intent. Two individuals may operate within the same domain, yet be perceived very differently based on the depth and discipline they bring to their work.


This is where personal branding plays a critical role.


A personal brand is not simply a reflection of what one does. It is a reflection of how one chooses to do it. It communicates priorities, signals standards, and shapes how others interpret both capability and character. Over time, it determines not just the opportunities one attracts, but the level at which those opportunities exist.


For those navigating growth, particularly in an environment that increasingly rewards speed, this becomes an important consideration. The ease with which something can be achieved should not be the only measure of its value.


Sustainable influence is rarely built on what is easy. It is built on what endures.


For professionals and founders who are seeking to build a personal brand that extends beyond visibility and translates into long-term credibility and meaningful opportunities, it may be worthwhile to reflect on the signals their work is currently sending.


I engage in a limited number of in-depth conversations with individuals who are looking to refine this aspect of their professional presence and build it into something more enduring. Those who find this perspective relevant may explore this further here: https://sprect.com/pro/divyaaadvaani


In a landscape defined by rapid visibility, it is ultimately depth that determines who remains relevant.


(The author is a personal branding expert. She has clients from 14+ countries. Views personal.)

Comments


bottom of page