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.)

When Growth Confuses Markets

In business, growth is often associated with expansion. As companies evolve, founders naturally begin exploring additional services, new verticals, and complementary offerings that can strengthen revenue and create larger opportunities. From a business standpoint, this progression appears logical. The entrepreneur sees the connection clearly because the new service often emerges directly from existing expertise.


However, markets do not always interpret expansion the way founders expect them to.


Recently, during a conversation with an entrepreneur, this reality became particularly evident. She explained that despite putting significant effort into growing her business and introducing additional services connected to her current work, she was struggling to attract clients for these newer offerings. What surprised her most was not the lack of effort being made, but the lack of understanding from the market itself.


People were becoming uncertain. Existing clients no longer clearly understood what exactly she should now be known for. And in business, the moment perception becomes unclear, trust begins weakening faster than most founders realise. The services were related, the value proposition made sense internally, and from her perspective the transition felt natural. Yet externally, the audience struggled to clearly understand what exactly she now represented. Existing clients knew her for one thing, while her newer positioning was attempting to communicate something broader.


This is becoming increasingly common among founders and business owners operating at substantial levels of turnover.


At earlier stages of business, growth is often driven by activity. More services, more offerings, and more visibility appear to create momentum. But as businesses scale, particularly beyond the ₹5 crore mark, perception begins playing a far more significant role in determining growth.


The challenge is not always capability. Very often, the challenge is clarity.


Many entrepreneurs underestimate how quickly confusion weakens trust. Audiences today process information rapidly and make judgments even faster. They do not spend long periods trying to decode a founder’s positioning. The moment the messaging feels inconsistent or overly broad, attention begins to drift elsewhere.


This creates a hidden business problem that many founders fail to recognise immediately.


The entrepreneur continues investing more effort. More meetings are scheduled, more marketing is executed, more content is created, and more explanations are repeatedly given to the market. Yet despite all this activity, conversions remain inconsistent because the underlying issue has not been addressed.


The market does not clearly understand where to place the individual. This is where personal branding becomes a business necessity rather than a visibility exercise.


A strong personal brand creates strategic clarity. It allows people to immediately understand not only what an entrepreneur does, but why the additional services make sense within the larger


identity of the founder and the business itself. Without this alignment, even valuable offerings begin to feel disconnected. Over time, this confusion creates broader consequences.


Opportunities become slower to materialise. Referrals reduce because people struggle to explain the business clearly to others. Premium positioning weakens because clarity is directly connected to authority. In many cases, founders begin questioning their marketing strategies when the actual issue lies in how their positioning is being perceived.


This becomes particularly dangerous in today’s environment where visibility is abundant but attention is limited.


The founders who continue to grow are rarely the ones trying to communicate everything simultaneously. They are the ones who build a clear identity first and then strategically expand around it. Their audience understands not only what they currently offer, but also why future offerings naturally belong within their ecosystem.


This distinction changes everything. Because in business, people rarely buy what confuses them. They buy what they can quickly understand and confidently trust.


For founders and business owners who feel they are putting in increasing effort yet still struggling to position newer services effectively, this may be an important moment for reflection. Sometimes the issue is not the quality of the offering, but the clarity of the perception surrounding it. I work with a select group of founders and entrepreneurs to help them identify these positioning gaps, refine how they are perceived in the market, and build personal brands that create stronger authority, trust, and business growth. Those who wish to explore this further may book a complimentary 30-minute Founder Brand Audit here: https://calendly.com/divyaaadvaani/founder-brand-audit


In the end, businesses rarely lose only because of weak services. Increasingly, they lose because the market understands someone else faster. In a world overwhelmed by options, clarity is no longer just a branding advantage. It is becoming one of the strongest competitive advantages a founder can build.


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

Views personal.)



Comments

bottom of page