RT Took Care To Clarify India’s Approach Towards BRICS In Order To Avoid Misunderstandings
Russian state interests are harmed by that country’s supporters wrongly suspecting that India is a “Trojan Horse” since this discredits its policymakers who’ve prioritized the comprehensive expansion of their strategic partnership since the special operation began. Whether intended or not, the innuendo is that they’re either too stupid to realize that India is supposedly a Western proxy, too desperate for partners to do anything about it, or too ready to betray China at the West’s behest to care.
BRICS’ historic expansion last week enabled this group to further accelerate financial multipolarity processes aimed at making the global system much fairer for non-Western countries. It proved that their already highly diverse members could still reach a consensus for advancing shared interests, but some still remain skeptical of India’s role in all of this. On the one hand, it’s defied US pressure to condemn and sanction Russia, but it’s also comprehensively expanding strategic ties with the US at the same time.
Some top influencers in the non-Mainstream Media community, which comprises innumerable outlets with such a wide range of views that it’s inaccurate to speak of them as a single or unified entity, are therefore suspicious of its intentions. For example, this one here who regularly contributes to Russian platforms and is thus regarded by many as an authority of sorts tweeted in late July that India is a “Trojan Horse”. Their post generated over 125,000 views and greatly shaped perceptions of its role.
Everyone has the right to their opinion, but sometimes they get it wrong despite their best efforts. It then falls on those that are considered even greater authorities on whatever subject it may be to gently correct the record in order to avoid misunderstandings. RT is regarded as one such authority due to it being publicly financed by the Russian state, though to be clear, this relationship isn’t equivalent to being state-run unlike the relationship that the BBC and its other peers have with their own state patrons.
The common denominator tying together its diverse contributors is that they have favorable views of the global systemic transition to multipolarity, within which they believe that Russia plays a positive role whereas the US plays a negative one. Every opinion that they share on that platform is their own, but they all align with the preceding paradigm per the standards established by RT’s state patron. Sometimes, however, editors will curate a collection of articles so as to convey a certain point.
Such is arguably the case when it came to four recent articles that they published about BRICS:
They all served the purpose of clarifying India’s relationship with BRICS.
The first article was written by former Indian Ambassador to Uzbekistan and Turkiye M.K. Bhadrakumar, who informed RT’s audience of his country’s approach towards this group before its summit began:
“The bottom line is that India is content if the influence of BRICS in the shaping of the main aspects of the global agenda can make the world more just and stable...India does not want the collapse of globalization, institutions and international law. Put differently, India prefers to create within the existing order such rules, norms and ways of cooperation that would allow for the preservation of its advantages and the elimination of its shortcomings.”
The second was written by former Indian Ambassador to Russia Kanwal Sibal and provides a much-needed strategic risk assessment that candidly discusses the challenges to BRICS’ internal dynamics:
“While expansion no doubt boosts multipolarity, will it make the new grouping less cohesive? Even earlier, BRICS had problems of internal cohesion, especially with continuing India-China differences. The two countries are involved in a military stand-off on the border, which contradicts many of the principles that BRICS espouses....(Nevertheless,) India has welcomed the expansion as it will strengthen the grouping and increase confidence in the idea of a multipolar world order.”
As for the third article, this one was written by Russian journalist Vadim Zagorenko and only briefly mentions India, but still in a way that corrects false perceptions of its motives:
“The members of the alliance – especially China – have achieved rapid growth thanks to global trade and cooperation with other countries, and it is not only pointless but also harmful for them to cut ties with the West. They do not want to choose ‘their own camp’ to the detriment of others: an example is India, which buys weapons from both Russia and Western countries. But they are no longer prepared to see themselves as junior potential partners.”
Finally, the last was written by Indian journalist Ullekh NP and reaffirms the insight shared in the three articles that came before it:
“India seeks an enhanced multipolarity in the world, but it doesn’t want the forum to become overly anti-West to the extent that it becomes a platform for China’s one-upmanship. New Delhi wants greater economic cooperation among non-Western countries. It doesn’t however relish the prospects of BRICS+ championing a China-first policy that hurts its military and trade cooperations with the West. India wants it to be a non-Western entity, but not rabidly anti-West. For India, this distinction is crucial.”
All four articles represent the opinions of their respective authors but were arguably curated by RT in order to clarify India’s approach towards BRICS, gently correct the record after some top influencers like the previously cited one got it totally wrong, and therefore avoid misunderstandings. Once again, RT’s financial relationship to its state patron doesn’t automatically make it state-run, but the state still has the opportunity to intervene on occasion by making editorial suggestions for advancing its interests.
In this context, Russian state interests are harmed by that country’s supporters wrongly suspecting that India is a “Trojan Horse” since this discredits its policymakers who’ve prioritized the comprehensive expansion of their strategic partnership since the special operation began. Whether intended or not, the innuendo is that they’re either too stupid to realize that India is supposedly a Western proxy, too desperate for partners to do anything about it, or too ready to betray China at the West’s behest to care.
None of these correspond with reality since Russian policymakers are among the world’s wisest, their country isn’t desperate for partners after even the New York Times admitted earlier this year that the West’s sanctions and isolation campaigns both failed, and Russia is nowadays in an Entente with China. Accordingly, the state arguably intervened via RT, which resulted in its article series clarifying India’s approach towards BRICS and thus signaling that speculation of it being a “Trojan Horse” is unacceptable.