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.)

Silent Predators in the Boardroom

The TCS Nashik incident and its grim revelations show that India Inc. needs an urgent cultural reckoning.

 

India’s corporate sector has long been celebrated as a beacon of meritocracy, diversity, and opportunity. Gleaming office towers in Mumbai, Pune, Bengaluru, Hyderabad and Gurugram house millions of working professionals who arrive each morning with ambitions and the presumed expectation of a safe workplace. But beneath the polished surface of this world, a deeply troubling pattern is emerging that strikes at the very foundation of workplace safety and dignity.


Across industries, from information technology to finance, from media houses to manufacturing conglomerates, there is a growing and alarming trend of sexual misconduct, harassment and even assault in corporate employment, often with little scrutiny of employees who may have had a criminal background. Once inside, such individuals they frequently target women in subordinate positions. Disturbing accounts suggest that Hindu women, particularly those from smaller towns who relocate to metro cities for work, are disproportionately among the victims.


The urgency of this issue has been underscored by the recent shocking incident in Nashik, where seven people, including an HR manager, from TCS were arrested on charges involving sexual exploitation, coercion and religious conversion of junior female staff. What stands out is not merely the brutality of the alleged acts, but the systemic failure that allowed such behaviour to persist unchecked within a reputed corporate environment. Reports have suggested prolonged misconduct despite internal awareness of the situation and a worrying delay in decisive HR intervention, raising uncomfortable questions about whether corporate processes are designed more to contain reputational damage than to protect vulnerable employees.


Blind Spot

The recruitment process in most Indian corporations, despite its layers of interviews and assessments, has a glaring blind spot, namely the near-total absence of robust background verification related to sexual misconduct. Criminal records for harassment or assault are rarely checked and references given are often cursory. Their social media histories go unexamined. And critically, there is no centralized national registry in India where a company can verify whether a prospective employee has faced credible complaints of sexual misconduct at a previous workplace.


Many companies outsource their background checks to third-party agencies that focus almost exclusively on academic credentials, employment history, and financial records. Questions about behavioural history, restraining orders, or past Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) proceedings which are mandated under the Prevention of Sexual Harassment at the Workplace Act, 2013 (POSH Act) are rarely part of the checklist.


The result is a revolving door where a predator dismissed from one company for harassment simply moves to the next, carrying no visible mark of his conduct. Victims are silenced by settlements and non-disclosure agreements. Human Resource departments, wary of defamation suits and bad publicity, offer neutral ‘exit certificates’ even to offenders. The irony here is that the system often ends up protecting the perpetrator far more than the survivor.


Troubling Pattern

While sexual harassment in the workplace is a crime regardless of the victim's identity, field reports, independent investigations and survivor testimonies from multiple cities point to a troubling pattern where Hindu women, particularly those who are young, new to the city, and without strong social networks, are being specifically targeted.


These women, often from conservative or middle-class families in Tier-2 and Tier-3 cities, migrate to metros chasing professional growth. Many are unfamiliar with the legal safeguards available to them. Some come from backgrounds where speaking about harassment is culturally stigmatised. Perpetrators, acutely aware of this vulnerability, exploit it deliberately. They offer mentorship, professional guidance, and social support as bait, creating dependency before the harassment begins. The targeting is calculated, not incidental.


Several of these factors were at play in the TCS Nashik case.


There have also been documented instances where the perpetrators belong to communities or networks that operate as informal protection shields within office environments, making it harder for victims to speak out without fearing professional isolation or being labelled ‘troublemakers.’


India enacted the POSH Act over a decade ago, following the landmark Vishakha guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court. On paper, it is a comprehensive law. Every organisation with more than ten employees is required to constitute an Internal Complaints Committee. Yet its implementation remains deeply uneven.


A significant number of companies, particularly small and medium enterprises, have never constituted an ICC. Even where committees exist, members are often undertrained, and proceedings are frequently tilted in favour of the accused when he holds a senior position. Victims are pressured to ‘settle quietly’ to avoid disrupting team dynamics. The fear of being transferred, demoted or sidelined after filing a complaint keeps most survivors silent.


The solution demands action on multiple fronts. First, the government must consider establishing a centralized, privacy-compliant digital database of confirmed workplace sexual harassment offenders which is accessible to verified HR departments - similar to sex offender registries in several Western countries. Second, background verification norms must be legally mandated to include POSH-related inquiries. Third, the POSH Act must be strictly enforced with regular audits and meaningful penalties for non-compliant organizations.


The Nashik incident and its grim revelations prove that corporate India must undergo an urgent cultural reckoning. Bystander intervention training, anonymous reporting mechanisms and genuine leadership accountability are no longer optional add-ons but moral imperatives.


The boardroom should be a place of ambition and growth for every Indian woman. Until the invisible gates that let predators walk in unchallenged are firmly shut, that promise remains broken.


Comments


bottom of page