- This risk assessment calculates to what extent the deepening China-Russia axis poses a real challenge to India’s pursuit of strategic autonomy.
- Strategic autonomy now also functions as a hedging strategy in global politics, helping India shape the Quad, BRICS, SCO, and G20 without being tied to any singular bloc.
- Out of all the scenarios, the scenario of ‘Russia’s increased strategic flexibility’ is most likely in the long term and would influence India to remain assertive of its strategic autonomy while also adapting to the Russian newfound flexibility.
- India is positioning itself as a pole in its own right, shaping outcomes in forums like G20, SCO, Quad, and BRICS.
Introduction
The recent 17th BRICS Summit, envisioned to highlight Global South solidarity, saw the notable absence of Presidents Putin and Xi. While not necessarily coordinated, their absence reignited speculation about a growing China-Russia alignment. In a world of shifting alliances and multipolarity, contests between these poles are as much a reality of international relations as is the solidarity between them in multilateral platforms. India and China, key actors in this evolving order, now navigate a geopolitical space increasingly shaped by a recalibrating Russia. Once a superpower, Russia’s entanglement in the Ukraine war and economic sanctions have pushed it closer to Beijing. For India, this moment demands a clear-eyed assessment, not nostalgia for historical alliances. Can Russia still be relied upon as a strategic partner, or has its alignment with China begun to limit India’s own diplomatic space?
This risk assessment calculates to what extent the deepening China-Russia axis poses a real challenge to India’s pursuit of strategic autonomy.
The China-Russia Axis
The China-Russia partnership has evolved gradually from phases of ideological cooperation and conflict during the Cold War to a strategic convergence rooted in mutual interests and shared opposition to Western dominance. Diplomatic relations were first established in 1949 with the signing of the Treaty of Friendship, Alliance and Mutual Assistance, laying the groundwork for long-term military and economic collaboration. In the post-Cold War era, the relationship transitioned to one of “good neighbourliness and friendly cooperation,” marked notably by their first joint military exercise, Peace Mission, in 2005. Since then, over 110 joint exercises have taken place, indicating growing defence coordination.
A turning point came after the 2014 Crimean crisis, when Western sanctions forced Russia to turn eastward under its “pivot to the East” policy. China’s role in Russia’s economy significantly expanded, symbolised by a $400 billion gas deal and Russia’s alignment with China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Together, they advanced a shared vision for Eurasia through deeper economic and ideological engagement. China also became Russia’s key partner in Arctic energy expeditions, supplying drilling equipment denied by sanctioning countries.
The Ukraine War further accelerated this alignment. Western isolation pushed Russia into even deeper economic dependence on China. Yet, the relationship remains asymmetric: China gains a reliable partner to promote its anti-Western narrative, while Russia becomes increasingly reliant on Chinese trade and investment. Their cooperation in platforms like BRICS and the SCO reflects a joint ambition to reshape the current multilateral order. This growing closeness poses a strategic dilemma for India, which must balance its long-standing ties with Russia against its tensions with China and its commitment to strategic autonomy.
What is the concept of India’s strategic autonomy?
As the China-Russia axis deepens, India is increasingly challenged to recalibrate its strategic autonomy. Originally rooted in Nehru’s idea of non-alignment, strategic autonomy was never about neutrality; it was about retaining independence of action. In the post-Cold War era, it evolved into a doctrine of interest-based diplomacy, as Shivshankar Menon described.
Today, India exercises autonomy through multi-alignment, i.e. engaging with rival powers on specific issues without entering rigid alliances. External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar calls this “issue-based coalitions” and “networked relationships.” This is best seen in India’s continuation of Russian oil imports despite Western pressure during the Ukraine war. It reflects a pragmatic, transactional approach that prioritises national interest. Strategic autonomy now also functions as a hedging strategy in global politics, helping India shape the Quad, BRICS, SCO, and G20 without being tied to any singular bloc. However, as Russia’s tilt toward China intensifies, India may find itself with shrinking space to manoeuvre in platforms where Russia once provided balance.
India’s strategic autonomy will increasingly depend on how the China-Russia partnership evolves.
Scenario Mapping: How Could the China-Russia Axis Evolve?
India’s strategic autonomy will increasingly depend on how the China-Russia partnership evolves. A scenario analysis based on the potential impact and likelihood of different trajectories helps assess the strategic implications and prepare responses.
Scenario 1: Deepening Strategic Partnership: (High Impact, High Likelihood)
With the prolongation of the Ukraine war and sustained Western sanctions, Russia becomes increasingly dependent on China, especially for trade, technology, and global diplomatic support. This gradually strengthens their bilateral partnership, and China uses its upper hand to shape Russia’s positions in forums like BRICS and SCO. India is left with less room to manoeuvre, as Russia can no longer act as a counterweight to China. This scenario is highly likely given the current trajectory of the war and Western containment policies, and the impact is equally high, reducing India’s diplomatic flexibility and increasing its strategic vulnerability, especially in multilateral platforms.
Scenario 2: Strategic Drift or Fracture (Low Impact, Low Likelihood)
Underlying tensions, such as Russian discomfort with China’s dominance or competition in Central Asia, could eventually strain their relationship. This might push Russia to engage more broadly. However, this is not likely in the near term, given their strong anti-Western alignment. Even if such a drift occurs, the impact on India would be limited. India may regain some space to engage Russia independently, but the overall balance of power in Asia remains unchanged. Hence, both likelihood and impact are relatively low.
Scenario 3: Russia’s Increased Strategic Flexibility (Medium Impact, High Likelihood)
If the U.S. and its allies reduce their arms support to Ukraine, possibly to prevent pushing Russia closer to China, it may bring the conflict to a frozen settlement. This would ease Russia’s economic pressure and allow it to act with more diplomatic independence. India could then pursue a rebalanced engagement with Russia. This is a likely outcome as Western focus increasingly shifts to China as the greater long-term challenge. The impact is moderate and not as disruptive as Scenario 1, but still important, as India would still need to navigate ongoing Sino-Russian coordination while making the most of any regained space.
Scenario 4: Emergence of a China-Russia-Iran Bloc (Medium Impact, Low Likelihood)
The shared anti-Western agenda may draw Iran, currently in a proxy war with the US, closer to the China-Russia axis, especially through cooperation under the BRI or BRICS+. This would complicate India’s strategic goals in West Asia, including the Chabahar port and INSTC projects, while indirectly pushing it closer to the U.S. in the Indo-Pacific. However, the likelihood of this becoming a formal strategic bloc is low because of Iran’s unpredictability and Russia’s need for independent diplomacy, making such a tight alignment difficult. If it did happen, the impact would be medium, disrupting India’s West Asia posture but not overhauling its overall strategy since India already maintains careful diplomatic ventures in West Asia.
Scenario 5: Strategic Exhaustion of Russia (Medium Impact, Low Likelihood)
This is an extreme projection of Scenario 1, where continued war and sanctions reduce Russia’s global agency, effectively pulling it into China’s orbit. This is unlikely in the short to medium term since Russia still holds considerable strategic weight. However, if it did occur, the impact on India would be medium. India would lose an important balancing partner and face pressure to recalibrate its alignments further. But it could also become an opportunity for India to assert leadership in regional coalitions like IORA and BIMSTEC.
PESTLE Analysis of impacts on India (based on Scenario 3)
Out of all the scenarios, the scenario of “Russia’s increased strategic flexibility” is most likely in the long term and would influence India to remain assertive of its strategic autonomy while also adapting to the Russian newfound flexibility. While this outcome has a more relative strategic advantage compared to the deepening Russia-China axis in the short-term, it still contains uncertainties. To better understand the multi-dimensional risks involved, a brief PESTLE analysis can help New Delhi prepare for what could come.
| Dimension | Risk / Impact |
| Political | Even with more room to act independently, Russia may not openly support India in forums like the UNSC, BRICS, or SCO if that upsets its ties with China. Thus, while things may not worsen, India shouldn’t assume stronger diplomatic backing from Russia either. |
| Economic | A more balanced Russia-China relationship could help India secure better trade deals, especially in energy. But since China is still Russia’s biggest trade partner, India might face challenges in pushing its interests in large projects like INSTC or in Arctic ventures. |
| Social | Indian public opinion is more aware now of international shifts. If Russia is seen as tilting too much towards China, it could put pressure on the Indian government to take clearer positions and reduce dependency; this could compel India to go for balancing acts rather than strategic autonomy. |
| Technological | This is the most hard-hit dimension. Russia is likely to continue its tech and defence collaboration with China, especially in AI and cybersecurity. India will need to focus more on developing its technologies or finding new partners, especially in defence. |
| Legal | The Russia-China axis may shape global cyber laws that are a threat to India’s cybersecurity. Moreover, pressure on maritime law based on Chinese interests may be expected in the Indo-Pacific against the rules-based order promoted by India. This endangers tipping the regional balance of power towards China. |
| Environmental | The biggest risk to India in this dimension is concerning the Arctic cooperation between Russia and China, which may threaten India’s polar presence. However, in terms of climate change collaboration, India and China tend to have convergence in global climate politics; therefore, a Russia-China axis may not disturb India’s climate action as much. |
Strategic autonomy today is not just about reacting to external power shifts.
Conclusion
This assessment shows that India’s space to exercise strategic autonomy depends largely on how the China-Russia partnership unfolds. A deeper alignment between the two limits India’s room to manoeuvre diplomatically. But if Russia gains some independence in its foreign policy, as in the most likely Scenario 3, India can benefit by recalibrating its ties and preserving its regional and global influence.
However, strategic autonomy today is not just about reacting to external power shifts. The idea has evolved for India. The New Bharat, strengthened by its internal development, growing economy, expanding digital infrastructure, and global leadership, no longer takes shelter in older frameworks of balancing or hedging. India now has the capacity and confidence to assert its interests, rather than avoid alignment out of fear of losing autonomy.
Thus, rather than playing the role of a swing state, India is positioning itself as a pole in its own right, shaping outcomes in forums like G20, SCO, Quad, and BRICS. As External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar put it, India engages on its terms; India is its axis. Strategic autonomy, therefore, is about engaging purposefully based on India’s strengths, interests, and long-term vision. The China-Russia axis may continue to shift global power balances, but India’s future role will be shaped not just by how others align but by how confidently it asserts its place in the world.
Bishwarupa Kar is a post-graduate student at the Department of Politics and International Studies at Pondicherry University. Her areas of interest include Climate Change, Climate Action and Climate Financing, Global South, Terrorism, and Polar Studies. Views expressed are the author’s own.
Faareha Usmani 
Divyanka Tandon 
Aayush Pal