South Asia Centre Europe

Previous brief:

Putin's Jumbo Team to Modi's India, and EU-India Trade Negotiations

03/12/2025

Putin in India:

Indian media’s celebratory coverage of President Vladimir Putin’s visit—his first trip to India since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine—has revealed the extent to which Prime Minister Narendra Modi continues to prioritize Moscow as a key external partner. The enthusiasm was unmistakable: regime-aligned television networks and star reporters broadcast from both Moscow and New Delhi, often amplifying narratives sympathetic to Russia’s worldview, particularly its grievances toward the West.

In one interview conducted by Indian journalists in Moscow, Putin remarked that he had no interest in rejoining the G8. The interviewers signaled broad agreement, reinforcing the impression that sections of the Indian media now instinctively echo Russia’s skepticism of Western-led institutions.

Since his first term in office, Modi has repeatedly invoked the phrase “a friend in need is a friend indeed” to describe Russia. That sentiment has only grown stronger. India’s brief military confrontation with Pakistan underscored New Delhi’s continued reliance on Russian weaponry and defense systems. With this visit, bilateral ties seem poised to deepen further; notably, Russia’s state-run network RT is preparing to establish “RT India,” a move that could amplify anti-Western narratives within India’s information ecosystem.

Meanwhile, voices within India’s foreign policy community who champion closer US-India relations appear unusually muted. The government and its media allies frequently invoke the “age-old ties” between India and Russia, even though India has historically cultivated equally significant relationships with Western nations, including the United States. Indeed, many of India’s early socialist leaders—from Nehru’s attraction to Fabian Socialism in the UK to freedom-era activists educated in the US—drew ideological inspiration from the West long before embracing Marxist-Leninist thought.

On the practical front, defense cooperation continues to dominate the relationship. Reports of new agreements involving the S-400 or S-500 air-defense systems, the Sukhoi-57 fighter jet program, nuclear-technology collaboration, and even specialized work opportunities in Russia for Indian labor reflect a broadening partnership. India’s interest in such arrangements is understandable given the country’s evolving security landscape: rising hostility with China, the deepening Pakistan-China strategic axis, and periodic friction with the United States—whether over trade tariffs or other issues—have pushed New Delhi to reinforce its ties with Moscow.

Domestically, India faces economic headwinds. The rupee continues to depreciate, capital outflows have increased, several industries are slowing, youth unemployment remains high, and India runs a large trade deficit with both Russia and China. These vulnerabilities undoubtedly weigh on the Modi government, which appears increasingly inclined to leverage foreign partnerships for economic relief and strategic flexibility.

Modi has also invested heavily in cultural outreach—his “yoga diplomacy” in Russia is one such example—highlighting a softer dimension of India’s foreign policy under his leadership. Yet it remains unclear how effectively Modi has communicated Indian concerns regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict or what influence, if any, New Delhi has on Moscow’s strategic calculus.

Interestingly, Putin’s trip comes shortly after the United States imposed sanctions on Lukoil and Rosneft, and at a moment when India reportedly reduced some of its crude oil imports from Russia. Whether the two leaders will devise new mechanisms—possibly involving non-dollar transactions—to sustain or expand their oil trade remains to be seen. The coming days may reveal how far India is prepared to go in balancing its energy needs with geopolitical pressures.

-------------------------------------

India - Ladakh - Gen Z protests

01/10/2025

Protests similar to Nepal's Gen Z uprising had taken place in the capital Leh of Ladakh in northern India, and the Modi government has responded by arresting the well-known personality Sonam Wangchuk on alleged claims of inciting violence in India's sensitive region along the Himalaya near Tibet, China. Modi government has faced several challenges lately as Pakistan has succeeded to cozy back with Washington, and signed a mutual defense alliance with Saudi Arabia. 

Sonam's hunger strike triggered youth of the mountains to take to the streets and turned violent as the security forces cracked down on he protests. The fact that the Modi government had taken away Ladakh's autonomy by placing the region directly under the center administration by bisecting it from the erstwhile state Jammu and Kashmir ( also now under the center Delhi) sowed the seeds of discontent and insecurity. As per the local people, the central government did not follow up on their promise to bring investment and jobs, or safeguards the people's interests with quotas and protections in public positions and extend other special protections such as land not being able to be purchased by Indians of other regions. Now they demand statehood for Ladakh and the 'sixth schedule'. The schedule refers to Indian constitution's protection of some tribal areas in the north east. 

India's northern belts along the Himalayas mostly belong to people or tribal communities and naturally they required special treatment and the Indian government's policies have been to address that cautiously given the geographical sensitivity of the regions. However, there are several social and political complications in Kashmir or India's north east, and there has not been any equilibrium of policies or people's demands which result often in violent protests and crackdowns. Modi government was being criticized recently  for failing to tackle the problems of India's north east, and now his solution to simply arrest the scientist activist Sonam (reportedly a patriot for his contributions)  shows yet another incident of lack of freedom of expression in the north.  

----- **** -----