Russia-India-China (RIC)

IN NEWS:

Amid the tensions along the Line of Actual Control, India attended a virtual meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Russia, India and China (RIC).

WHAT IS RIC:

• The RIC as a strategic grouping was conceived by the then Russian foreign minister Yevgeny Primakov in 1998.
• The group was founded on the basis of “ending its subservient foreign policy guided by the US,” and “renewing old ties with India and fostering the newly discovered friendship with China.”
• It was not an anti-U.S. construct. All three countries considered their relationship with the United States an essential prop to their global ambitions. However, they share some non-west perspectives, especially in matters concerning the global order.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RIC TO INDIA:

• Geostrategic: Together, the RIC countries occupy over 19 percent of the global landmass and contribute to over 33 percent of global GDP. All three are nuclear powers and two, Russia and China, are permanent members of the UN Security Council. Hence, they have the potential to form a formidable power bloc.
• Geopolitical: Any holistic, stable security architecture on the Eurasian landmass cannot develop without having Beijing, Delhi and Moscow on board. Having a common forum can help India push for its interests in the region and the RIC offers the ideal forum for this.
• Converging political interests: The RIC shares some non-West perspectives on the global order, such as an emphasis on sovereignty and territorial integrity, multilateralism, creating a new economic structure for the world, counter terrorism and reforming institutions of global governance like the WTO.
• Converging regional interests: There are areas where their interest converges, like, for instance, on Afghanistan and Iran. None of them wants Afghanistan to be a haven for terrorist activities. They are also against sanctions over Iran. So, they could work together as part of the RIC to ensure stable peace in these regions and by extension, in Central Asia.
• Forum for cooperation: RIC provides the countries with an opportunity to express their foreign policy visions and discuss common threats and issues. For instance, Russia can be the bridge between India and China, since it enjoys strong relations with both. Moreover, as the RIC forms the core of both the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and the BRICS, it can play a vital role in strengthening these institutions.

• Arctic governance: With the Northern Sea Route opening up due to climate change, the RIC has a common interest in ensuring that it is not left to the West and Russia alone and that India and China have a say in the region.

• Energy security: Russia has abundant sources of conventional energy sources such as fossil fuels, while China is the largest market for photovoltaics and solar thermal energy. Also, with Russia being a major exporter of energy and India and China being major consumers, the three countries could discuss the creation of an Asian energy grid, which could go a long way in ensuring energy security for the region.

CONCERNS OVER RIC:

Unlike the BRICS, the idea of RIC never really took off, despite occasional meetings on the side-lines of the UN General Assembly and other multilateral meetings.

• China’s antagonistic approaches: Besides the border disputes and support for Pakistan, China has launched the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, worked to undermine India’s influence in global institutions and expanded its military and economic presence in the Indian Ocean. All of this has resulted in a strained relationship between India and China.
• India’s Non alignment strategy: India has traditionally avoided taking sides in international politics, especially between the great powers, preferring its traditional nonalignment. Hence, India has been reluctant to fully commit to any strategic grouping, be it the RIC or the JIA.
• India-US relations: India’s relations with the U.S. has surged in recent times, encompassing trade and investment, a landmark civil nuclear deal and a burgeoning defence relationship. India is also a key partner in the USA’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy.
• Indo-Pacific strategy: India’s growing strategic partnership with the US, Japan and Australia conflicts with the RIC’s objectives of seeking to undermine Washington’s role in the Indo-Pacific. For India, the Indo-Pacific is a geographic space of economic and security importance, in which a cooperative order should prevent the dominance of any external power. However, China and Russia see the initiatives as part of a U.S.-led policy of containing China.
• Russia-China relationship: The western campaign to isolate Russia over Crimean issue has driven it into a much closer relationship with China, making them increasingly under stress to follow China’s dictates. Thus, the RIC claim of overlapping or similar approaches to key international issues, sounds hollow today.
• Contradicting Afghan strategies: India’s strategies over Afghan appear to be increasingly incongruent with that of Russia and China. Both view India’s strategies as Moscow did not invite India in the recent deliberations for a peaceful Afghan.
• Ever changing strategies: RIC dynamics are sensitive to the configuration of the US-Russia-China triangle. This configuration changed in 2008 due to the global economic crisis and again in 2014 due to Crimea’s accession to Russia. The pandemic and upcoming US Presidential election could trigger the next change. The nature and impact of this change is unknown for now.

WAY FORWARD:

• Make or break: As the Eurasian supercontinent regains its primacy in world affairs and as the interests of India, Russia and China deepen and clashes in the region, it would be useful to have a platform like RIC to discuss areas of cooperation and understand the differences. However, if India does not find some tangible utility from RIC, it should not hesitate to leave the group. Here, India should make a strong decision.
• Diversify RIC’s efforts: In order to stay relevant, the member countries should expand the scope of RIC into new areas such as climate change, energy cooperation, Arctic region and cyber security. 
• Strengthen ties with Russia: Russia is India’s all-weather friend and critical to India’s non-aligned foreign policy. Hence, India should take measures to strengthen this with Russia. Encouraging economic links with the Russian Far East and activation of Chennai-Vladivostok maritime corridor could help persuade Russia into retracing its relationship with India.
• Develop alternate ties: India should also seek to strengthen its ties with the other Central Asian countries. In this light, the International North South Transit Corridor project and TAPI project are important initiatives for achieving an effective Indian presence in central Asia.
• Capitalise on post-pandemic world: COVID-19 could trigger another change, which should be capitalised by India in matters of global governance. As RIC forms the core of both the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and the BRICS, India could utilise it as a power bloc to push forward its global reform strategies.

PRACTICE QUESTION:

Q. Examine the potentials of the Russia- India-China (RIC) grouping. Why has it failed to achieve its intended objectives?