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.)

Lost on Everest: A Century of Unsolved Mystery

Updated: Oct 21, 2024

Lost on Everest: A Century of Unsolved Mystery

More than a century ago, a man was asked a question at a lecture he was giving in the United States. The answer to that question defined the closing stages of the golden age of adventure and exploration. The question was ‘Why climb Everest?’. The answer was ‘Because it’s there’. The man who gave this answer defined future generations of mountaineers and gave birth to one of most enduring mysteries of the 20th Century - one which still endures in the 21st, and more importantly remains unsolved.

Lost on Everest: A Century of Unsolved Mystery

The man was George Leigh Mallory, who, along with his young climbing partner Andrew ‘Sandy’ Irvine attempted in 1924 to summit Mount Everest from the treacherous North Face on the Tibetan side. They were seen for the last time on June 8, 1924, a few hundred feet short of the summit. According to Noell Odell, the man who saw them, they were going strong. Then the clouds rolled in and Mallory and Irvine were never seen again.


In 1999, an expedition was launched to try to find the bodies of Mallory and Irvine and the camera carried by Irvine, which carried a roll of Kodak film. Kodak believed the film, preserved by the extreme cold, could still be developed, potentially solving the mystery of whether they reached Everest's summit 29 years before Hillary and Norgay's successful ascent in 1953.


American mountaineer Conrad Anker, part of the team, made an astounding discovery - the body of Mallory sprawled on the


. Although Mallory’s remains were remarkably well preserved, the expedition failed to find the clue that could solve the mystery - the camera. However, other clues suggested Mallory and Irvine were able to summit Everest.


Mallory’s snow goggles were in his pocket, which suggested he (and possibly Irvine) were on their descent. But here, a significant clue was missing - a photograph of Mallory’s wife Ruth. He had promised Ruth if he made it to the summit, he would place her photograph there.


Last month, exactly 100 years on, another expedition came across a foot on the slopes of the North Face. A closer examination of that revealed a name tag - A. Irvine. It was Sandy Irvine’s foot.


The tale of Mallory and Irvine’s 1924 expedition to Everest has continued to fascinate and flummox mountaineers and historians. Mallory was perhaps the best climber of his generation. The 1924 expedition was his third Everest foray. Mallory first visited Everest in 1921, where he discovered a potential route to the summit. In 1922, he and his team reached 27,000 feet - the highest altitude achieved at that time - but a monsoon thwarted their ascent. The expedition ended tragically when an avalanche struck during their descent from the North Col, claiming the lives of seven climbers - the first fatalities on the mountain.


In 1924, Mallory was 37, and he knew that this would be his final chance to conquer Everest. He chose the inexperienced 22-year-old Irvine as his climbing partner. Mallory knew that supplemental oxygen would be key for a successful summit. Irvine was just the man for the job as he knew how to work the rather primitive oxygen apparatus. After going through the motions of establishing camps along the way the pair finally reached the camp from which they would make the final assault. In their path lay the second step - a hundred-foot cliff which they would have to free climb. The second step was the crux of the climb. Today climbers scale it with the help of a ladder. But Mallory and Irvine had to do it in a free climb at 28,000 feet with 7,000 feet drop to the bottom of the mountain. And there lies the heart of the myth (or mystery) - did they do it or not?


But what is it that drove that generation to take these incredible risks? Why do it in face of such overwhelming odds? Why be away from one’s family and home for months and months? The answer perhaps lies in the gruesome experience that the First World War, of ‘The Great War’ of 1914-18 had offered such men. An entire generation had been wiped out in the trenches of Europe and the far-flung corners of the British Empire. For the survivors, it was perhaps a sense to make the most of what life had to offer. Mallory had served in the trenches of the Western Front and saw the carnage of the Somme. The quest for Everest offered a final frontier, a higher purpose. Wade Davis, in his monumental book ‘Into the Silence,’ suggests this pursuit of transcendence was what propelled Mallory and others from his generation.


Mallory and Irvin1e till this day lie on the North Face. But the mystery still demands a final answer.


(The author is a practising advocate at the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh and a military history enthusiast. Views personal.)

Comments


bottom of page