Tightening ties between Moscow and Beijing are a frightening signal for New Delhi

Both also see parallels between NATO and groups like the Quad. Lavrov, in particular, has attacked what he sees as the US policy of creating closed military-political alliances with a limited number of members, arguing that these have a blatant anti-Chinese and anti-Russian bias. Wang, meanwhile, proclaimed China's opposition to small circles engaging in camp clashes, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region. It goes without saying that comparing the Quad, I2U2 or even the AUKUS agreement to NATO is deeply misleading. NATO is a security alliance. None of the other groups mentioned above are comparable to NATO in this sense. Attempts by Beijing and Moscow to draw such parallels are deliberate attempts to undermine the success and appeal of these groupings. This, of course, is problematic from the Indian perspective, given how important these new minilateral agreements are to India's multiple alignment strategy.

Driving an anti-Western narrative

Second, China and Russia want to use structures such as the Global South and groups such as BRICS and the SCO as tools to shape a future world order that meets their interests. In fact, they sought to use the pulpit offered by these forums to formulate anti-Western discourses. It is no secret that Beijing and Moscow share a deep dissatisfaction with what they see as a Western-designed and dominated international order. The February 2022 joint statement between Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin underlined this. The vision of a new order that the two parties have since articulated is essentially dominated by the great powers respecting the fundamental and sovereign interests of each, while dividing the world into spheres of influence. The convergence between the two sides regarding the war in Ukraine is an example. This was evident during the press conference with Wang and Lavrov, where the latter took it upon himself to interpret China's 12-point peace plan as implying that addressing the root causes of the conflict, namely NATO and the European security architecture, as well as Russian security. concerns must be prioritized, rather than the violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Such a vision does not necessarily correspond to that of India or even to the desire for greater representation of the countries of the South. For example, Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar has clearly expressed that India's approach to the international order is not about tearing down pillars while defining the country as non-Western rather than anti-Western. Essentially, if we think of international relations as a game of poker, while India and the Global South want an equal seat and voice at the table, Russia and China seem to want to rule the table.

A new security structure?

It is in this context that the final takeaway from Lavrov's visit becomes important. Speaking to the press, the Russian Foreign Minister said that the two sides exchanged views on the prospect of forming a new security structure in Eurasia, against the backdrop of complete stagnation and self-destruction Euro-Atlantic mechanisms. Responding to a question later, he added: “We have agreed with our Chinese friends to start a dialogue on this issue and involve other like-minded countries. Although there are few details, the formal acknowledgment of this dialogue is indicative of the workings and depth of the Sino-Russian partnership. Of course, this is a matter of grave concern for India, given its increasingly unstable relations with China, conflicts of interest between the two in the wider Indo-Pacific region and dependence of New Delhi with regard to Russian arms supplies.

That said, there are challenges and differences between China and Russia, evident during this visit, that are also worth noting. For example, the emphasis on the importance of the Putin-Xi relationship as a driver of the relationship reveals challenges in terms of the breadth and depth of support for closer ties. Furthermore, the two camps clearly have very different economic stakes when it comes to breaking with the West. Russia is now a pariah when it comes to the so-called Western model of globalization. The urgency to find alternatives is much greater. China, for its part, seeks to protect itself while maintaining deep ties that serve its development. These are not trivial divisions.

Kewalramani is a scholar in Chinese studies and chairs the Indo-Pacific Studies program at the Takshashila Institution. Kumar is a research analyst in the Takshashilas Indo-Pacific Studies Program.