Indias

New Delhi, India – Indian democracy has been shaken by new revelations showing divisions within the body that is in charge of conducting its elections over controversial policies that critics say have disenfranchised tens of millions of people.

India’s Election Commission, a supposedly autonomous constitutional body, is tasked with administering elections in the world’s largest democracy, and in recent decades, had won admirers across the globe for its success in conducting a voting process unmatched in scale and complexity.

But an investigation by The Indian Express newspaper reported that the current chief of the commission frequently overruled concerns raised by his two other equally ranked commissioners about the integrity of ongoing changes in the voter database.

These revelations come after a months-long struggle by India’s opposition parties to bring what they have described as the “sabotaging” conduct of the election commission to the fore, which they say is dictated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s party for its electoral benefit.

For decades, India has grappled with deep inequality; divisions along caste, religious and ethnic lines; and the growing role of money in its elections. Yet through it all, the actual conduct of its elections was largely viewed as “free” domestically and by global monitors.

But leading opposition leaders have, in recent months and years, for the first time, questioned whether elections can be trusted and whether votes are counted accurately, as well as whether rights decide who gets to be a voter or if those in authority take the decision arbitrarily. Those concerns, say analysts, are likely to only be amplified by the latest revelations.

“Today, that faith [in the election process] has shaken. It is very shocking for the nation,” SY Quraishi, who headed India’s election commission between 2010 and 2012, told Al Jazeera. “The Election Commission used to be a very reputed institution. Now, it is totally dysfunctional – and that’s an understatement.”

So, what does this mean for India and its democracy?

What are the latest revelations about India’s Election Commission?

Earlier this week, the Indian Express newspaper published a series of stories, based on internal documents and interviews, laying bare divisions within the poll panel – consisting of three commissioners, Gyanesh Kumar, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, and Vivek Joshi. Kumar is the commission’s chief.

Indian law requires the commission to decide by a majority. Reports revealed that Sandhu and Joshi resisted and questioned the legality of measures Kumar took unilaterally.

Since June last year, the commission has been revising and updating the voters list state-wise. It has struck off more than 13 million names during the exercise since then, which the critics say targeted economically weaker sections, minorities, and other vulnerable groups of Indian society disproportionately.

Opposition parties took the matter to the country’s top court, which largely signed off on the process to decide on who gets to vote in India. For India’s more than 1.4 billion population, a voting right does not end merely on ballots – rather, several government welfare schemes are tied to voting rights.

Now, reports reveal that some of the strongest resistance to the three-member commission’s decisions was coming from within. In fact, Sandhu and Joshi formally objected on record at least 14 times over the last 10 months to measures issued by circumventing them. Sandhu called it “unauthorised and illegal”.

Those objections related to the new voter registration mandate; deletion and restoration of voters in the rolls; appeals by people against deletions; and the security of the list. In short, everything the commission undertook.

The opposition has alleged that the additions and deletions of the voters are undertaken as an exercise to disenfranchise a section of voters to benefit Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The commission maintained that access to the voters’ list is highly secured and decentralised, meaning that even in the remotest parts of the country, a local officer made the judgement and decision.

But the latest revelations show that the commission relied on ECINet, a digital platform that logs nearly a billion voters, which was increasingly centralised, giving more control to New Delhi over editing calls.

In one instance, the newspaper reported that officials in the coastal state of Goa flagged nearly a hundred voters who were mistakenly taken out. Editing access was limited to New Delhi.

So, Goa’s chief electoral officer wrote eight emails to officials in New Delhi in a week before the deadline passed, but got no response and voters were knocked off the list.

Why is revision of voters’ list controversial?

The Special Intensive Revision (SIR), as the process of revising the list is called, has become controversial mainly because it places an unusually heavy burden on existing voters to prove their eligibility.

Such a drive requires people to produce old records, like birth, land, and education certificates – and puts poorer, migrant, and marginalised Indians at a disadvantage, essentially drawing lines on who gets to vote in India. A minor mismatch, such as a spelling, in decades-old records could result in being struck from the voters list in India.

Opposition parties and civil society groups have argued that mass deletions could significantly alter the electorate before elections.

In some places, the exercise has been reported to disenfranchise minorities, including Muslims. In the eastern state of West Bengal, Al Jazeera earlier reported that the exercise removed 9 million residents from the electoral rolls just days before the state elections that were held in April and May.

Nearly 34 percent of the deleted voters were Muslims in the state, where they only make up 27 percent of the population. Then, Prime Minister Modi’s Hindu majoritarian BJP came to power for the first time in the politically critical state.

The BJP and supporters of the SIR process have argued that it is fundamentally aimed at removing illegal migrants, the deceased or fraudulent voters from the rolls – and have tried to portray many Muslims eliminated from the lists in border states as “illegal Bangladeshi migrants,” despite hard evidence that Indian nationals have been victims of the process.

But as the exercise has been expanded to other parts of the country, those claims have increasingly returned to embarrass even proponents of the exercise: In New Delhi, notices were served to India’s Foreign Minister S Jaishankar and his wife, alongside other high-profile politicians, judges and senior bureaucrats. Several former Indian ambassadors to countries across the world have received notices to prove that they are Indian – even though they have served as India’s sovereign representatives abroad for years.

All of this has turned what was political opposition to the SIR process into much more broad-based, nationwide scepticism about the lack of transparency in the Election Commission’s software, the process of matching voters against decades-old electoral rolls, and the criteria being used to flag voters as having “logical discrepancies”.

“The [revision of voters’ list] fundamentally inverts India’s model of electoral democracy,” said Milan Vaishnav, a senior fellow and director of the South Asia programme at the Washington, DC-based nonpartisan think tank The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“Since the adoption of the Constitution, India has assumed the burden of ensuring that the last man or woman is registered to vote,” he said. Vaishnav added that unlike other democracies, notably the United States, which has repeatedly thrown up barriers to the franchise, “India historically adopted an unusually activist approach to voter registration.”

“Specifically, the way in which [the revision] has been carried out threatens to turn that principle on its head,” he told Al Jazeera. “It is now the voter who must prove his or her entitlement to remain on the electoral rolls.”

Quraishi, the former election commissioner of India, told Al Jazeera that he has been against the policies taken up under the revision.

“I hope [these revelations] are a wake-up call and serious action will be undertaken, including at the Supreme Court, the central government, and the Parliament,” Quraishi told Al Jazeera.

“Because the reputation of the Election Commission has gone into the dumps. And it is very difficult to restore it now,” he said. “We need efforts to rebuild faith in the system.”

What is the opposition demanding?

Leader of the opposition Rahul Gandhi has accused the Election Commission of “treason” against the nation, and promised that its leaders will be tried for it, if his Congress Party returns to power.

India’s popular Gen-Z pressure group, the Cockroach Janta Party, whose protest movement led to the ouster of India’s education minister in July, has threatened to hit the streets again if Kumar, the commission’s sitting chief, does not resign by Saturday.

The Cockroach group has also called for an overhaul in the selection process of the next election commissioner.

For its part, the election commission has said in a statement that the investigation report drew on “differing views and deliberations” between the three commissioners rather than official statements of protest. Sambit Patra, a spokesman for Modi’s party, told reporters that any deliberation or divisions in the commission were rather “a sign of a healthy democracy”.

But none of that appears to be cutting ice in a nation where far too many people have now faced the threat of losing their vote through an opaque process.

“Our elections are fundamentally broken,” said Gandhi at a news conference in New Delhi on Thursday. “The sacred belief in elections,” he added, was evaporating.

Aiming at Modi, Gandhi argued that the popularity of a leader could be understood, but not “how anti-incumbency disappears”.

“It doesn’t exist in North Korea. There is no democracy where anti-incumbency doesn’t work. We are looking for answers to where it went here,” Gandhi said, in effect questioning Modi’s re-election first in 2019 and then again in 2024, with a much-reduced mandate – even though there is no firm evidence of widespread voter manipulation helping Modi win those elections. “And we have found answers.”

What does it mean for Indian polity?

Asim Ali, a political analyst in New Delhi, said that the Indian republic is standing at a “dangerous moment, where we could see a breakdown of the republic.”

“We have reached a situation where every opposition party feels that the democratic guardrails have been destroyed,” Ali told Al Jazeera, adding that the allegations are about the worry that “independent institutions like the Election Commission and Supreme Court have become co-opted.”

The political cleavage has created an extreme polarisation of politics in India. “Politics has assumed a kind of existential stakes, where we have unrestrained politics of friend vs enemy,” he added.

Rasheed Kidwai, a political analyst and senior journalist who has covered the Indian government for several decades, told Al Jazeera that “impartiality is paramount” for the Election Commission.

“The fact is that Caesar’s wife should be above suspicion,” he said. “In India, we have seen difficult times, including a state emergency, but never was the role of the Election Commission compromised at this level.”

Kidwai noted that Modi’s party has ridiculed opposition parties’ concerns about free-and-fair elections, calling them sore losers. “The outcomes of a match are inconsequential, but at least the umpire should play fair,” he told Al Jazeera.

The major criticisms of Indian democracy in recent years have principally related to what happens in between elections, said Vaishnav of the Carnegie Endowment think tank.

While critics “pointed to the erosion of basic freedoms, an uneven rule of law, and the concentration of power in the hands of the executive,” Vaishnav said, “most observers have argued that when the electoral spotlight is on, India’s democracy remains remarkably robust and competitive.”

The conduct of the Election Commission is “now calling this distinction into question”, he added.

Youth group threatens return to mass protests, sets deadline for Gyanesh Kumar to quit due to reports of meddling with voter lists.

India’s ‘cockroach’ party youth movement has threatened to launch nationwide protests unless the country’s chief election officer does not resign by Saturday.

Founder of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), Abhijeet Dipke, announced on Friday that protests would begin in Mumbai on October 2 – if Gyanesh Kumar does not step down.

The CJP, a satirical outfit born on Instagram in May after India’s chief justice compared unemployed young Indians to “cockroaches” and “parasites”, has shaken the staunchly conservative government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

On Thursday, the group demanded that Kumar quit within 48 hours, following a newspaper report linking him to altered voter lists. Opposition parties say the lists have been manipulated to benefit Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

“If Gyanesh Kumar does not resign by tomorrow, CJP will begin its nationwide protest from Mumbai on 2 October, and take it to cities across India,” Dipke posted on X.

“This Gandhi Jayanti let’s pledge to save democracy,” he added, referring to the October 2 holiday marking independence leader Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday.

Report provokes political storm

On Wednesday, the Indian Express newspaper reported that two election commissioners had raised questions or voiced concern with Kumar at least 14 times in 10 months, mostly over the process of updating voter lists that began last year.

The main opposition Congress party announced protest marches on state election offices across India on Friday, demanding Kumar’s arrest, his removal and an independent review of decisions and voter-list changes made under him.

Opposition parties have long accused the commission of deleting the names of millions of voters without warning and adding new voters without verification to favour the BJP.

Election panel rejects claims

The Election Commission of India said that “differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberation in any institution” and that all its actions were lawful.

The BJP has defended the commission, accusing the opposition of a smear campaign because it keeps losing elections.

“Neither the Election Commission of India nor any constitutional body in India is under dictatorial rule,” BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said on Wednesday.

CJP-led protests in July forced the resignation of Modi’s education minister over exam-paper leaks, one of the prime minister’s biggest political setbacks since coming to power in 2014.

Kovalam and Mumbai, India – When Sugar Shanti Banarse and Kamali Moorthy entered their first surfing event in 2022, the girls could scarcely have imagined they would end up representing India at the Asian Games within a few years.

Though the competition at the Covelong Classic in Kovalam, about an hour’s drive from Chennai in Tamil Nadu, southern India, featured just seven women among about 50 competitors, the possibility of winning was an afterthought. Their intention was to simply get a taste of competition.

At 12, Moorthy was the youngest of the lot, thrilled to surf alongside some of the senior girls. She failed to catch a single wave, but the experience stayed with her. She vowed to train harder and return stronger.

Finishing second was a decisive moment for Banarse, then aged 16. A recreational surfer until then, she loved the competitive aspect of the sport. In that moment, she knew she wanted to be a professional.

The duo has come a long way since then. Alongside their male counterparts Kishore Kumar and Sivaraj Babu, they will take on the best continental talent at September’s Asian Games in Japan, where surfing makes its debut and runs from Friday until Tuesday.

“We’ve been putting in the work over the last couple of years and made good progress. It’s our time to shine now,” Banarse told Al Jazeera.

Even though India has thousands of miles of coastline and breaks of different kinds, it’s taken a while for surfing to catch on.

India’s team coach Samai Reboul comes from the first generation of Indian surfers, who had few resources at their disposal. He would watch holidaymakers surf near his home in Auroville, Tamil Nadu in the late 1990s and had a go when they lent him a board. He was soon hooked.

“I grew up at a time when there were no coaches, no access to training material and no surfboards. [It was] really frustrating,” he told Al Jazeera.

Surf schools started cropping up along the coast over the next few years. This is how Banarse, now 20, got her first opportunity back home in Mandrem in Goa, when she decided to accompany a friend. Moorthy, now 16, was luckier – her uncle is a surf instructor who gave her the first lesson off the coast of Mahabalipuram in Tamil Nadu.

Kumar, 18, and Babu, 22, hail from families who fish for a living in Kovalam and Mahabalipuram, respectively. They started out by jumping into the sea on hot summer days, then body surfing, before finally hopping onto a board.

“A local school in Mahabalipuram would let us use surfboards in exchange for chores. There were a few boards and many boys, so a lot of fights once the patience ran thin,” Babu told Al Jazeera.

Though their lives revolved around the sea, it was difficult to get their families to understand what they were chasing.

A beating awaited Kumar when his family discovered he was sneaking away to surf – they considered it a waste of his time.

Babu was expected to help his father with his fishing, as his elder brother had done.

Moorthy’s mother, who runs a beach shack, knew what the harsh sun could do to her daughter’s complexion and asked her to stay out of the water.

“She was worried I would get [too dark], but at the back of her mind, she knew I was enjoying surfing and that it would reach a point of no return. And here I am today,” Moorthy says, laughing.

More importantly, the sport lacked structure. Though the Surfing Federation of India (SFI) was launched in 2011, there were no regular competitions, and participants had to fend for themselves when it came to travel and accommodation. Babu doubled up as an instructor and banked on community support to make money to compete. He once had to camp in a forest during an event in Mangaluru.

“My family didn’t quite understand the scope of what I was doing. But I had some imagination of what I wanted to achieve and persisted against their wishes,” Babu says.

Turning point

Circumstances improved after Arun Vasu took over as the president of the SFI in 2020. As chairman and managing director of the prominent Indian conglomerate TT Group, he secured money from the company’s Corporate Social Responsibility funds to support a handful of athletes. The older surfers were encouraged to pursue their coaching and judging licences to improve the level of domestic competitions.

Meanwhile, Vasu worked towards getting the SFI recognised by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports. That moment arrived in March 2025, and changed the trajectory of the sport. Besides the injection of funds through the government-run Sports Authority of India, it brought stability for the SFI. Its members could now focus all their energy on growing the sport.

“The first generation of Indian surfers worked really hard without much support. They’ve brought us to this point where we are enjoying the benefits,” Moorthy says.

The goal was to prepare the athletes for the Asian Games. Reboul started monitoring the team and refining their technique during camps. A sports psychologist worked on the mental aspect of competition, while other staff focused on improving physical conditioning.

“Besides quality equipment, what really changed was access to cameras and software for video analysis. Even outside of camp, they could send across videos through which I could offer feedback,” Reboul said.

Over the last few years, the SFI has hosted prestigious competitions such as the World Surf League series and the Asian Surfing Championships, which have allowed Indians to rub shoulders with top international surfers. Trips across Asia have given them a feel for different conditions as well as elite competitions.

“It’s very different from a few years ago when we had limited opportunities to train systematically,” Banarse says.

The Olympic dream

Their performances have shown promise. Ramesh Budihal took bronze at the Asian Surfing Championships in August 2025, and a few months later, Kumar won silver at the Asian ProAm Surf Series.

“At the Asian Championships last year, [Kumar] beat Ikko Watanabe of Japan, a country that is up there [with the best]. So we know it’s possible [to compete],” Reboul says.

The focus is also on developing the next generation of surfers. SFI has joined the Asian Surf Ecosystem’s Grom Patrol – youth surf training camps and competitions – and runs three age group contests (under-12s, under-14s and under-16s), with the winners qualifying for the final in Bali.

Besides the talent that usually comes from fishing communities along the coast, it has attracted young surfers from cities such as Chennai, Bengaluru and Mumbai. And more importantly, girls who are ready to test the waters.

“We’ve struggled to find women surfers, so it was really encouraging to see 15-odd girls in every competition,” Vasu says. “Parents see a future, and these kids are hungry to learn. It makes us realise we are doing something right.”

Indian surfers still face a number of challenges. The monsoon season means surfers need to constantly shuttle between the two coasts or travel abroad to train year-round, which requires resources. There is also a need to create a deeper pool of skilled coaches to work with young athletes.

“More of the older surfers are getting into training. This year, we brought down an experienced coach, Ivan Villalba, to conduct a programme for them,” Reboul said.

“Good training and a competitive surf culture is what is required to put India on the map, rather than get a particular athlete to win.”

In the world of Asian surfing, India is still a young nation compared to the likes of Indonesia and Japan. Competing at the Asian Games will be valuable exposure for the current crop, especially ahead of the Los Angeles Olympics in 2028.

“A lot has happened for Indian surfing in the recent past. Some of the guys I’ll be competing against are my idols and I know I can put up a good fight for the podium,” Kumar says.

“The dream is to represent India at the Olympics.”

ABU DHABI: Of all the memories Jujhar Singh carried home from Abu Dhabi last year, one has stayed with him more vividly than the others: the final slap he took on a night when he made history for India.

On Oct. 24, 2025, Singh became the first Indian striker to win at a Power Slap event in the UAE’s capital. Almost a year later, he is preparing to compete there again, this time against Louis Robinson and with the prospect of strong Indian support at Space42 Arena.

“I remember the last slap I took that night the most,” Singh said. “Returning to Abu Dhabi means a lot to me because the people of India want to see me compete again.”

Singh (1-0) competes at Power Slap 25 Presented by Monster Energy on Friday, Oct. 23, where he will face British heavyweight Louis Robinson (2-0, 2 KOs), currently ranked No. 8 in the division.

Singh added: “India versus England is going to be a huge match.”

Robinson has won both of his Power Slap appearances by knockout, setting up another significant test for Singh in Abu Dhabi.

Singh said: “This time, I’m facing an undefeated competitor, but I want to create more history in Power Slap and give him his first taste of defeat.”

For Singh, another victory is only part of what makes his return to Abu Dhabi significant.

“The Power Slap stage is a huge stage for me personally, and representing my country is like a dream come true,” he said.

That connection to India could be particularly evident inside Space42 Arena. Abu Dhabi is home to a large Indian community, and Singh expects plenty of support when he steps on the stage against Robinson.

Singh added: “This time the atmosphere in Abu Dhabi will be special as my Indian community is coming there in large numbers.”

Indian fans traveling from further afield also have an added opportunity to make the journey in October. A tourism initiative running until Oct. 31 covers UAE entry visa costs for eligible Indian passport holders traveling from India when they book an Abu Dhabi holiday of at least three consecutive nights through participating travel partners or online travel agencies.

With Power Slap 25 taking place on Oct. 23, the event falls within the initiative’s travel period, offering Indian fans the opportunity to combine a visit to Abu Dhabi with the chance to support Singh at Space42 Arena.

Power Slap 25 will mark the third consecutive year that the promotion has staged a live marquee event in Abu Dhabi, strengthening the UAE capital’s role in the sport’s international calendar. That continued presence could also play an important role in Power Slap’s future in India.

Singh said: “The events in Abu Dhabi are very important in increasing the popularity of Power Slap in India as it will give more Indian competitors a chance to compete.”

The US-China G-2 concept is both normatively exclusionary and strategically constraining. The inherent limits of a G-2 framework—hierarchy, power structure, and systematic constraints—make it a non-starter in a multipolar reality. Here, I completely agree; the concept of a G2 is unworkable and constitutes a strategic exclusion of many international actors in a multipolar world order characterized by a complex distribution of power and multiple centers of decision-making. The Structural and Political Constraints, represented in:

· Unacceptable Hierarchy: This framework attempts to impose a bipolarity that ignores the rise of major regional and international powers such as the European Union, India, and Russia.

· Lack of Methodological Flexibility: This framework fails to accommodate global issues that transcend borders and require broad collective cooperation, not just bilateral understandings.

· Conflicting Interests: The current strategic and geopolitical competition between Washington and Beijing makes it impossible to manage the international system through joint governance. The structural conflict of interests between Washington and Beijing renders joint management of the international system impossible, amidst a fierce struggle for technological leadership, economic dominance, and the reshaping of national security rules. This manifests itself in:

– First: The Roots of the Strategic Conflict

A) The Challenge to Hegemony: China seeks to reshape international rules and challenge absolute American supremacy.

B) The American Shift: Washington adopts a strategy of confrontation and containment to reduce Chinese influence and supply chains.

– Second: Arenas of International Conflict

A) Technology and Trade: The chip war, tariffs, and control over advanced technology.

B) Regional Sovereignty: The escalating competition in the South China Sea and the Taiwan issue.

Trump’s China policy has shifted from confrontation to accommodation. If we wonder how true that is, to claim that Donald Trump’s policy toward China has completely shifted from confrontation to accommodation is inaccurate. It is merely a superficial shift toward de-escalation and managing disputes through deals, while the underlying geopolitical and structural competition remains intense.

– Manifestations of De-escalation and Deals (Tactical Accommodation)

· Diplomatic Summits: A state visit to Beijing in mid-May 2026 and frequent summits with President Xi Jinping to reduce escalating tensions.

· Trade Settlements: Temporarily reducing some reciprocal tariffs and concluding major deals, such as Boeing aircraft orders and easing chip restrictions for major companies.

· Regional Crisis Management: Seeking cautious coordination or neutralizing China’s role in some global energy and shipping crises.

– Constants of Conflict and Confrontation (Ongoing Competition)

· Technological Restrictions and Economic Structure: The complex core of the conflict over intellectual property and control of advanced technology remains unresolved.

· Legal and Institutional Pressures: Reciprocal restrictions and legislation continue, with China activating its blocking statute to counter extraterritorial US sanctions.

· The Taiwan file and military strategy: Divergent major strategic interests and military deterrence in the Indo-Pacific region.

China wants to be seen on par with Washington. The Chinese gave Trump everything he wanted but nothing of substance. Taiwan was off the table at the Beijing May 2026 meet. Here, political assessments of the Beijing summit held in May 2016 vary. Some believe China successfully established itself as a rival to Washington, while others consider the results to have ranged from symbolic gains to continued ambiguity regarding issues such as Taiwan and trade deals. The summit’s dimensions and outstanding issues can be summarized as follows:

· International parity: Beijing sought to solidify its image as a major power capable of competing with and managing the power struggle with the United States.

· Taiwan’s position: Taiwan was naturally absent from the direct bilateral talks between the two leaders, amidst strong Chinese warnings to Washington about the dangers of arms sales to the island.

· Mutual gains: Opinions differed regarding the extent of concessions. Analysts believe the Trump administration did not secure any decisive, substantive commitments on certain regional issues in exchange for a temporary easing of trade tensions.

Beijing has sought to solidify its image as a major power capable of rivaling and managing the struggle for influence with the United States. It aims to establish itself as a major power on par with Washington through a variety of economic, technological, and military tools, skillfully managed through a policy of gradual retaliation and the management of international competition. This is achieved through:

– First: Economic and Technological Tools

• Rare Earth Minerals: Controlling the production of raw materials vital to advanced technologies and imposing export restrictions on them.

• Trade War: Reciprocal and gradual retaliation against US tariffs to mitigate the effects of economic pressure.

• Supply Chains: Leveraging the Belt and Road Initiative to enhance global trade routes.

– Second: Geopolitical and Diplomatic Presence

• Multipolarity: Supporting a new international order that limits unilateral US hegemony.

• Partnerships and Alliances: Expanding diplomatic and economic influence in vital regions such as Africa and Latin America.

There were some raised questions related to whether US-China friendship is bad for India and whether their infighting is bad for India too. Here, I partially agree with this view, as the interaction between Washington and Beijing presents both gains and risks for India. The conflict grants New Delhi strategic room for maneuver and security alignment with the US, but sharp conflicts or a sudden rapprochement between the two giants could exert economic and political pressure on India’s interests.

– First: Risks of US-China Conflict and Friendship for India

· Bilateral Accords Between Washington and Beijing: If the two powers reach trade agreements or strategic stability without India’s involvement, it could diminish New Delhi’s importance as a crucial ally for containing China.

· Economic and Trade Pressure: Global conflicts, tensions, and reciprocal tariffs affect the stability of markets and supply chains upon which India depends.

· Regional Military Escalation: Direct conflict increases the likelihood of India’s regional involvement due to its direct border disputes with China.

– Second: Opportunities and Gains for India from Competition

· Strengthening Strategic Partnerships: US-China competition is driving Washington and Western countries to deepen military and technological cooperation with India to counterbalance Beijing’s influence.

· The strategy of multiple independence: India benefits from competition by implementing a policy of multiple alignment, protecting its decision-making independence without being completely dependent on any party.

The interaction between Washington and Beijing presents India with both opportunities and risks, most notably strategic room for maneuver, security cooperation with the US, and potential economic pressures. In terms of gains and risks, these can be assessed as follows:

– Strategic Gains

· Role for Maneuvering: New Delhi skillfully balances its relations between the two powers.

· Security Cooperation: Stronger cooperation with the US and the Quad countries to counter China’s influence.

· Economic Gains: Global companies are seeking to relocate their factories from China to India.

– Risks and Threats

· Military Escalation: A direct confrontation could force India to choose sides.

· Sudden Rapprochement: Any major deal between the US and China could marginalize India’s regional role.

· Economic Pressures: Markets and supply chains could be affected by any trade tensions between the two giants.

Beyond the US and China, India and others are building a G Minus Two for Indo-Pacific. Here, the fundamental error in the statement lies in describing India and other countries as building a G-2 alliance with the United States and China. The G-2 concept actually refers to a potential bipolar hegemony or joint management of the world solely by Washington and Beijing, while India and other regional powers are pursuing a strategy known as G-Minus Two to expand their options for independence. This can be understood through:

– Rejection of Bipolar Hegemony:

India adopts a policy of strategic independence and rejects any bipolar system or joint US-China hegemony that diminishes the role of emerging powers.

– The G-Minus Two Strategy:

New Delhi is working with partners such as Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Australia, and Indonesia to build a network of flexible partnerships that balance influence and protect regional interests.

Here, the statement of Beyond US and China, India, and others building a G Minus Two for Indo-Pacific, accurately describes the shift of major regional powers like India towards building a network of independent strategic partnerships, moving away from the bipolar hegemony of the US and China. This is achieved through:

– Concepts of International Alliances

• The G2 concept refers to a shared global management or potential bipolar hegemony confined exclusively to Washington and Beijing.

• The G-Minus Two concept: expresses the middle power strategy of expanding its economic and defense cooperation with countries such as Australia, Japan, Indonesia, and South Korea to safeguard its strategic independence.

– Dimensions of the G-Minus Two strategy

• Diversifying partnerships: avoiding the trap of bipolar polarization between the two superpowers.

• Securing sea lanes and supply chains: building flexible regional blocs to enhance Asian stability.