Strategic triangle ‘Russia — India — China’: Structure and problems of interaction

A contemporary world order is based on an increasingly complex system of interstate relations, which implies the need to thoroughly consider the international context, even when analyzing bilateral interactions. From this point of view, the concept of a ‘strategic triangle’, developed during the Cold War and applied primarily to analyze the dynamics of relationships between the USSR, the USA and the PRC, appears to have significant epistemological potential. In current conditions, it is of particular interest to use this concept to study the logic of relations in the ‘Russia–India–China’ (RIC) triangle. This research pursues two interrelated goals. On the one hand, it is aimed at identifying specific features of this new ‘strategic triangle’, its inner structure and logic of interactions between its participants. On the other hand, it assesses the applicability of the theoretical models developed during the Cold War to the relations within the framework of the RIC strategic triangle. The author examines the history, general dynamics and contemporary features of interaction within each pair of bilateral relations in this ‘triangle’. The research has confirmed the hypothesis that the relations between Russia, India, and China, indeed, form a specific subsystem of international relations, which can be described as a ‘strategic triangle’. At the same time, unlike the Sino-American-Soviet ‘strategic triangle’, it is the logic of cooperation, rather than rivalry, which generally prevails within the framework of the RIC.

However, the RIC ‘triangle’ can also be described as an inherently inconsistent system. While China and Russia maintain close strategic cooperation in almost all areas, in the case of India and Russia, economic cooperation does not match the achieved level of political contacts, and Sino-Indian relations, despite the generally positive dynamics during the recent years, remain at a low level. All this points to the need  to develop a new theoretical and methodological framework for analyzing trilateral relations between Russia, India and China as a special subsystem of the contemporary world politics, one that will be free from Cold War stereotypes.

1. Akarashov I.S. 2017. Yavlyaetsya li Indiya velikoi derzhavoi? [Is India a great power?]. International Relations , no.  4, pp.  80–86. DOI: 10.7256/2454-0641.2017.4.24797. (In Russ .)

2. Valueva I.A., Konovalova Yu.A. 2018. Voenno-tekhnicheskoe sotrudnichestvo dvukh regional’nykh derzhav: novye vyzovy dlya Rossii i Indii [Military and technical cooperation of two regional leaders: New challenges for Russia and India]. RUDN Journal of Economics, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 28–37. DOI: 10.22363/2313-2329-2018-26-1-28-37. (In Russ.)

3. Verchenko A.L. 2020. Prodvizhenie Kitaem idei ‘soobshchestva edinoi sud’by chelovechestva’ [China’s promotion of the idea of ‘community of common destiny for mankind’]. East Asia: Facts and Analytics , no. 1. pp. 6–18. DOI: 10.24411/2686-7702-2020-10001. (In Russ.)

4. Vorob’eva T.A., Yungblyud V.T. 2019. Vzaimootnosheniya v treugol’nike SShA — SSSR — KNR v kontse perioda razryadki mezhdunarodnoi napryazhennosti (1977–1980 gg.) [Relations within ‘triangle’ USA — USSR — China at the end of détente (1977–1980)]. MGIMO Review of International Relations, no. 1, pp. 59–82. DOI: 10.24833/2071-8160-2019-1-64-59-82. (In Russ.)

5. Galenovich Yu.M. 2006. Rossiya — Kitai — Amerika. Ot sopernichestva k garmonii interesov? [Russia — China — America. From rivalry to harmony of interests?]. Moscow, Russkaya panorama Publ. (In Russ.)

6. Degterev D.A., Ramich M.S. 2021. Strategicheskie treugol’niki kak instrument balansirovaniya v mirovoi politike [Strategic triangles and balancing in world politics]. Outlines of Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, Law, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 23–43. DOI: 10.23932/2542-0240-2021-14-3-2. (In Russ.)

7. Kupriyanov A.V. 2019. Sotrudnichestvo Rossii i Indii v Indo-Tikhookeanskom regione v usloviyakh sanktsii [Russian and Indian cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region in the context of sanctions]. International Organisations Research Journal , vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 117–135. DOI: 10.17323/1996-7845-2019-03-06. (In Russ.)

8. Li G. 2012. I chzhun chzhenchan de chzhan’ lyue khoban’ guan’si — E in’ chzhan’lyue khetszo de chensyao yui tsyan’tszin [Effectiveness and prospects of a normal strategic partnership — Strategic cooperation between Russia and India]. E lo sy yan’ tszyu , no. 4, pp. 43–66. (In Chinese.)

9. Lukin A.L., Gubin A.V. 2021. Strategicheskii treugol’nik Rossii, Kitaya i Yaponii: istoriya, sovremennost’ i vozmozhnoe budushchee [The strategic triangle of Russia, China and Japan: History, present, and possible future]. Japanese Studies in Russia , no. 4, pp. 94–112. DOI: 10.24412/2500-2872-2021-4-94-112. (In Russ.)

10. Men Kh. 2015. Du’’ya chzhi syui lun’ di tsyui byan’ dun li lyan bo i yui chzhun go lyue [The theory of the East Asian order: Regional changes, power games and China’s strategy]. Shankhai, Shankhaiskoe narodnoe izdatel’stvo Publ. (In Chinese.)

11. Panchenko M.Yu. 2009. Upravlenie ATR na primere ‘strategicheskogo treugol’nika Rossiya — Indiya — Kitai’: mezhparadigmal’nyi podkhod [Management of the Asia-Pacific region on the example of the ‘strategic triangle Russia  — India  — China’: An interparadigm approach]. Public Administration E-Journal , no. 21, pp. 1–10. (In Russ.)

12. Pestsov S.K. 2017. Rossiya i Kitai: vospriyatie drug druga i perspektivy sotrudnichestva [Russia and China: The perception of each other and the prospects for cooperation]. Russia in the Global World, no. 11 (34), pp. 51–63. (In Russ.)

13. Pogodin S.N., Tarakanova T.S. 2021. Vneshnepoliticheskie interesy Rossiiskoi Federatsii v Tsentral’noi Azii [Foreign policy interests of the Russian Federation in Central Asia]. Eurasian Integration: Economics, Law, Politics, no. 2 (36), pp. 77–85. DOI: 10.22394/2073-2929-2021-02-77-85. (In Russ.)

14. Rau I. 2019. Vzlet Indii pod rukovodstvom Nare[n]dry Modi [Rise of India under the leadership of Narendra Modi]. Sovremennaya nauchnaya mysl’ , no. 5, pp. 150–163. (In Russ.)

15. Myasnikov V.S. (ed.). 2000. Rossiya — Kitai — Indiya: problemy strategicheskogo partnerstva (po materialam sovmestnoi konferentsii IDV i IV RAN, 29 noyabrya — 1 dekabrya 1999 g., Moskva). Vyp. 7 [Russia — China — India: Problems of strategic partnership (based on the materials of the joint conference of IFES R AS and IOS R AS, November 29 — December 1, 1999, Moscow). Iss. 7]. Moscow. (In Russ.)

16. Sya L. 2002. Dan dai go tszi guan’ si chzhun de sa’’ tszyao guan’ si: chao yue tszyun’ shi li nyan’ [Trilateral relations in modern international relations: Beyond the concept of equilibrium]. Shi tsze tszin tszi yui chzhen chzhi , no. 1, pp. 17–21. (In Chinese).

17. Turitsyn I.V., Rau I. 2019. ‘Kitaiskaya mechta’ o velikom vozrozhdenii natsii i vneshnyaya politika KNR epokhi Si Tszin’pina (2012–2018 gg.) [‘Chinese dream’ on the great revival of the nation and the foreign policy of the People’s Republic of China of the epoch of Xi Jinping (2012–2018-ies)]. Sovremennaya nauchnaya mysl’ , no. 1, pp. 135–159. (In Russ.)

18. U Ch. 2018. In’du dui i dai i lu chan’’i de lichan’’ yan’khua yui veilai tsyuishi [Evolution and future trends in India’s position on the Belt and Road Initiative]. Nan’ ya yan’ tszyu, no. 2, pp. 24–39. (In Chinese.)

19. Uyanaev S.V. 2022 . Diaogovyi format ‘Rossiya — Indiya — Kitai ’: kitaiskii faktor, tekushchie perspektivy, zadachi Rossii [‘Russia — India — China’ dialogue format: The Chinese factor, current prospects, tasks for Russia]. Asia and Africa Today, no. 9, pp. 5–11. DOI: 10.31857/S032150750021782-2. (In Russ.)

20. Uyanaev S.V. 2004. Rossiya — Kitai — Indiya: na puti trekhstoronnego vzaimodeistviya [Russia — China — India: On the path towards trilateral cooperation]. China in World and Regional Politics. History and Modernity, vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 24–39. (In Russ.)

21. Tszyan Ch. 2019. Chzhun mei mao i mo tsa yui chzhun — mei — dun men san’ tszyao guan’ si khu dun [Sino-American trade tensions and interactions within the framework of the China — USA — ASEAN trilateral relations]. Tsyui yui yui tsyuan’ tsyu fa chzhan’, no. 6, pp. 130–152. (In Chinese.)

22. Chzhao Kh. 2018. Lun’ chzhun e mei sin’ san’ tszyao guan’ si [New trilateral relations between China, Russia and the United States]. E lo sy chzhun ya dun ou yan’ tszyu , no. 6, pp. 1–25. (In Chinese.)

23. Chen‘ L., Chzhan T., Van L. 2020. In‘du tszai RCEP chzhun de bo i tszitsi tszyazhu tsyan‘tszin fen‘si [Analysis of India’s policy towards RCEP and its prospects for joining the partnership]. Nan’‘ya dun nan‘ ya yan‘ tszyu, no. 4, pp. 53–76. (In Chinese.)

24. Yakovlev A.G. 2004. Global’nye faktory: ‘za’ i ‘protiv’ strategicheskogo treugol’nika [Global factors: ‘For’ and ‘against’ the strategic triangle]. In: Uyanaev S.V. (ed.). Vzaimodeistvie Rossii, Indii i Kitaya v XXI v.: problemy, perspektivy, napravleniya [Interaction of Russia, India and China in the 21st century: Problems, prospects, trends]. Moscow, IDV RAN Publ., pp. 121–130. (In Russ.)

25. Yan’ S. 2005. Gotszi chzhenchzhi yui chzhungo [International politics and China]. Beijing, Izdatel’stvo Pekinskogo universiteta Publ. (In Chinese.)

26. Yaskina G.S. 2003. Rossiya — Kitai — Indiya: perspektivy trekhstoronnego sotrudnichestva [Russia — China — India: Prospects for trilateral cooperation]. Far Eastern Affairs , no. 1, pp. 28–38. (In Russ.)

27. Ambrosio T. 2005. The third side? The multipolar strategic triangle and the Sino-Indian rapprochement. Comparative Strategy, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 397–414. DOI: 10.1080/01495930500448863.

28. Hallenberg J., Karlsson H. (eds.). 2006. Changing transatlantic security relations: Do the US, the EU and Russia form a new strategic triangle? London, Routledge.

29. Dittmer L. 2005. The Sino-Japanese-Russian triangle. Journal of Chinese Political Science, vol. 10, pp. 1–21. DOI: 10.1007/BF02877005.

30. Dittmer L. 1981. The strategic triangle: An elementary game-theoretical analysis. World Politic s, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 485–515. DOI: 10.2307/2010133.

31. Kim I.J. 1987. The strategic triangle: China, the United States and the Soviet Union. New York, Paragon House.

32. Mohan M. 2002. The China factor in the India-Pakistan conf lict. Parameters, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 35–50. DOI: 10.55540/0031-1723.2134.

33. Shambaugh D. 2005. The new strategic triangle: US and European reactions to China’s rise. The Washington Quarterly , vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 5–25. DOI: 10.1162/0163660054026470.

34. Singh S. 2013. Political and strategic dimensions of India-Russia relations in present scenario. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 1232–1239.

35. Wight M. 1977. Systems of states . Leicester, Leicester University Press.

36. Ye H. 2021. Perception of identity, perception of relationship and strategic interaction: An analysis of China-Indian border disputes from the perspective of game theories. East Asian Affairs, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–29. DOI: 10.1142/S2737557921500030.

37. Zha D. 2001. The Asian-American triangle and beyond. International Studies Review , vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 117–126. DOI: 10.1111/1521-9488.00247.