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.)

Iceland’s Political Upheaval: A Snap Election Amid Policy Disagreements

Iceland’s Political Upheaval: A Snap Election Amid Policy Disagreements

Iceland, a small island nation in the North Atlantic Ocean near the Arctic Circle between Greenland and Norway, is one of the most geographically isolated countries in Europe. Its tiny population, with just over 370,000 inhabitants, is a stark contrast to India’s population of over 1.4 billion. Geographically, Iceland covers an area of approximately 1 lakh square kilometres, making it much smaller than India, which spans around 33 lakh square kilometers. Iceland is known for its stunning landscapes, active volcanoes, and pioneering use of geothermal energy.


This tiny island nation is now unexpectedly heading towards a snap election, a pivotal moment in the country’s political landscape. Internal disputes within the coalition government led to its collapse on 13th October. Prime Minister of Iceland Bjarni Benediktsson announced the dissolution of the government, setting the stage for elections taking place on 30th November. The election comes at a time when Iceland faces critical challenges—ranging from economic uncertainty to complex debates over immigration and energy policy.


The Collapse of the Coalition

The current political crisis in Iceland stems from deep divisions within the three-party coalition government, which has been in place since 2021. The coalition comprised the conservative Independence Party (led by Benediktsson), the centrist Progressive Party, and the left-leaning Left-Green Movement. Though these parties initially found common ground, the disagreements on key issues, particularly immigration and energy policy, became irreconcilable.


Prime Minister Benediktsson stated that it was impossible to move forward given the lack of unity on critical policies. He highlighted the growing rift on matters that impact Iceland’s future, such as how to manage the inflow of immigrants and the development of Iceland’s renewable energy sector. This division ultimately left the coalition unable to provide coherent leadership, prompting Benediktsson to request the dissolution of the parliament.


Key Contenders in the Election

Several political parties will compete in the upcoming election, representing different ideologies and policy proposals. The major contenders include:


Independence Party (Centre-right): Prime Minister Benediktsson’s party remains one of the leading forces. They focus on economic stability, conservative immigration policies, and energy resource development. Despite the collapse of the coalition, Benediktsson is expected to be the PM candidate once again.


Progressive Party (Centrist): Led by Sigurður Ingi Jóhannsson, this party traditionally champions rural and agricultural issues. The party is known for its pragmatic approach to governance and is expected to play a key role in the election.


Left-Green Movement (Centre-left): The Left-Green Movement advocates for environmental sustainability and a more progressive stance on immigration. Its departure from the coalition was driven by disagreements over energy policy and the handling of asylum seekers.


Pirate Party (Syncretic): Known for its focus on digital rights and transparency, the Pirate Party could attract voters disillusioned with the traditional parties.


Social Democratic Alliance (Centre-left): Another significant player, this party pushes for stronger social welfare policies and is expected to appeal to voters seeking more inclusive economic reforms.


Key Issues at Stake

The upcoming election will centre on several crucial issues that have divided Iceland’s political landscape:


Immigration Policy: One of the most contentious points of debate is how Iceland should handle immigration and asylum seekers. The Independence Party advocates for stricter controls, while the Left-Green Movement and other progressive parties call for more open and humanitarian policies. This divide reflects broader European discussions on immigration.


Energy Policy: Iceland, a leader in renewable energy due to its geothermal and hydroelectric resources, is also facing internal debates on how to develop these resources further. The Independence Party and its allies support expanding energy projects, while the Left-Green Movement is more cautious, focusing on sustainability and environmental protection.


Economic Recovery and Inflation: Like many other nations, Iceland is grappling with inflation, partly driven by recent volcanic eruptions and disruptions to public life in the country’s southwest. Voters will be looking for parties that can address these economic challenges effectively.


Iceland’s Role in Europe

Although Iceland is not a member of the European Union, it is part of the European Economic Area (EEA), maintaining close ties with the EU, particularly in trade and regulatory matters. The outcome of this election could influence Iceland’s approach to its relationships within Europe, particularly concerning energy markets and immigration policy.


The outcome of Iceland’s snap election on 30 November remains uncertain, as major parties compete for dominance after the coalition government’s collapse. The election’s results will not only shape Iceland’s future but may also influence its position within the broader European context, particularly in areas like immigration and energy policy.


(The author is a foreign affairs expert. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page