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.)

The Day the Sausages Got Salsa’d

In what can only be described as football’s version of a fever dream after too many questionable street tacos, Ecuador defeated Germany 2-1 in a Group Stage thriller at the 2026 FIFA World Cup. Yes, you read that right. The team that once gave us the Wunderteam and precision engineering got outplayed by a squad whose tactical masterplan appeared to involve “run fast, celebrate harder, and maybe pray to the mountain gods.”


The match, held in a sweltering stadium in the American Midwest that somehow combined European expectations with Midwestern humidity, was billed as a formality. Germany, four-time champions and perennial overachievers, entered as heavy favorites. Their starting XI looked like it had been assembled in a Stuttgart laboratory: efficient, ruthless, and slightly intimidating. Ecuador? They were the plucky underdogs who qualified after a campaign best remembered for dramatic penalty shootouts and a goalkeeper who moonlights as a part-time shaman.


Pre-match, German coach Julian Nagelsmann wore the serene expression of a man who had already planned the victory parade. Ecuador’s coach, meanwhile, looked like he’d just won the lottery and was worried someone would ask for the ticket back. Social media was awash with memes: “Ecuador vs Germany = Ant vs Boot.”


Then the game kicked off and reality filed for divorce.


The first half belonged to the Germans in theory but Ecuador in spirit. Germany dominated possession (68% at one point), threading elegant passes like they were knitting a very expensive scarf. But Ecuador defended like a group of cousins protecting their abuela’s secret recipe—ferocious, disorganized, and strangely effective. Every German attack met a wall of sliding tackles, desperate clearances, and the occasional theatrical dive that would make Oscar winners blush.


Then, in the 28th minute, the impossible happened. Ecuador broke on a counter-attack that looked more like a chaotic family getaway than a football move. Midfielder Kendry Páez, who played like he’d had three espressos and a motivational speech from a llama, surged forward and slipped a delightful through-ball to Enner Valencia. The veteran striker, defying both age and German logic, rounded the keeper and slotted home. 1-0 Ecuador.


The stadium fell into a stunned silence broken only by confused German fans muttering “Was zum Teufel?” and Ecuadorian supporters erupting into what can only be described as a spontaneous street party complete with invisible horns.


Germany responded with typical Teutonic grit. In the 52nd minute, they equalized through a beautifully worked goal by Jamal Musiala, who danced through three defenders like they owed him money. The equalizer was so aesthetically pleasing it briefly made everyone forget the scoreline and appreciate modern football. For five glorious minutes, order was restored. The Germans passed the ball with arrogant precision. Ecuador looked momentarily like they’d remembered they were supposed to lose.


But this Ecuador side had clearly not read the script. In the 71st minute, disaster struck for the Europeans—or comedy gold, depending on your passport. A seemingly innocuous cross from Ecuador’s right-back (who shall remain nameless because even he looked shocked) sailed into the box. German defender Antonio Rüdiger, usually as reliable as a BMW, attempted a clearance that somehow ricocheted off his knee, the turf, and the post before trickling into his own net. Own goal. 2-1 Ecuador.


Pandemonium. Ecuadorian players sprinted to the corner flag performing a dance that looked suspiciously like a victory ritual involving invisible potatoes. German players stood motionless, faces frozen in expressions usually reserved for discovering your IKEA furniture is missing one crucial Allen key.


The final twenty minutes were pure theater. Germany threw everything forward, including the kitchen sink, two tactical subs, and what appeared to be their national pride. Ecuador sat deep, defended heroically, and launched occasional breakaways that terrified the Germans more than any economic downturn. Goalkeeper Hernán Galíndez pulled off saves that can only be described as “miraculous” or “statistically improbable,” depending on whether you believe in divine intervention or just really good positioning.


Full time: Ecuador 2, Germany 1.


Post-match, the reactions were priceless. Nagelsmann, looking like he’d aged ten years in ninety minutes, mumbled something about “needing to analyze” and “unexpected intensity.” Ecuador’s coach, beaming like he’d just discovered oil in the Andes, praised his players’ “heart, passion, and ability to make Europeans question their life choices.”


Social media exploded. #EcuadorVsGermany trended alongside memes of German efficiency failing spectacularly. One viral clip showed a German fan in traditional lederhosen slowly removing his hat in solemn defeat while an Ecuadorian supporter offered him a consolatory empanada.


(The writer is a senior journalist based in Mumbai.)

Comments

bottom of page