India skips South Africa-led naval exercise as it's not ‘institutionalised’ BRICS activity

India's decision to abstain from a South Africa-led naval exercise, citing its non-institutionalised status within BRICS, offers a fascinating glimpse into the intricate web of India's foreign policy and its commitment to strategic autonomy in a multipolar world. Understanding this event requires delving into the background of BRICS, India's diplomatic principles, and the evolving geopolitical landscape.

**Background Context and What Happened:**

BRICS, an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, began as an informal grouping of major emerging economies. Conceived by economist Jim O'Neill in 2001, it formally took shape in 2006 (BRIC) and included South Africa in 2010 (BRICS). Its primary focus has historically been economic cooperation, trade, development finance (through the New Development Bank), and advocating for reforms in global financial institutions. Over the years, BRICS has expanded its agenda to include political and cultural exchanges, but military cooperation has largely remained outside its institutionalised framework. The recent expansion of BRICS to include Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Iran, and Ethiopia from January 1, 2024, further diversifies its composition and potential objectives.

The naval exercise in question was initiated by South Africa and involved navies from a diverse group of nations including China, Russia, Iran, Egypt, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, among others. These exercises were held in South African waters. India's rationale for skipping this exercise was explicitly stated: it was not an 'institutionalised' BRICS activity. This implies that while individual BRICS members might engage in bilateral or plurilateral military drills, India differentiates these from activities formally endorsed and structured under the BRICS umbrella. This distinction is crucial for understanding India's approach to multilateral engagements.

**Key Stakeholders and Significance for India:**

**India** is a key stakeholder, demonstrating its commitment to an independent foreign policy. By abstaining, India underscored its 'strategic autonomy' – the ability to make decisions based on its national interests rather than being aligned with any particular bloc. This is a modern evolution of its historical non-alignment policy. India balances its relationships with diverse global powers, including the Western bloc (e.g., through QUAD with the US, Japan, and Australia) and non-Western groupings like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). Participating in an exercise with nations often perceived to be forming an 'anti-Western' axis (China, Russia, Iran) could have complicated India's carefully cultivated multi-alignment strategy.

**BRICS** itself is a key stakeholder. India's stance influences the future trajectory of the grouping. If BRICS were to formally expand into a security or military alliance, it would fundamentally alter its character. India's decision signals a preference for BRICS to remain primarily an economic and political consultation forum, rather than a military pact. This is significant for the newly expanded BRICS, as new members like Iran and Saudi Arabia bring complex regional security dynamics.

**South Africa**, as the host, aimed to bolster its defence cooperation and assert its geopolitical relevance. The participation of nations like China, Russia, and Iran highlights a growing trend among some countries to forge alternative security partnerships, possibly as a counterweight to perceived Western dominance.

**Why This Matters for India:**

This decision reinforces several core tenets of India's foreign policy. Firstly, it reiterates India's pursuit of **strategic autonomy**, ensuring it is not drawn into security alignments that do not directly serve its interests or align with its broader global strategy. India prefers to engage in defence exercises that are either bilateral, part of specific regional security initiatives (like the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium), or clearly defined multilateral frameworks (like Malabar, with the QUAD nations). Secondly, it reflects India's careful **balancing act** between its partnerships. India maintains robust defence ties with Russia (a BRICS member), but also significantly enhances cooperation with the US and its allies. Avoiding a joint exercise with nations whose geopolitical interests sometimes diverge from India's (e.g., China in the Indo-Pacific) helps maintain this delicate balance. Thirdly, it signals India's vision for BRICS – a grouping focused on economic and development cooperation, rather than military alliances, thereby preserving its distinctive character. This stance is crucial as BRICS expands, preventing it from becoming a platform for rival geopolitical blocs.

**Constitutional and Policy Context:**

India's foreign policy is guided by the **Directive Principles of State Policy**, specifically **Article 51**, which mandates the State to 'endeavour to promote international peace and security; maintain just and honourable relations between nations; foster respect for international law and treaty obligations... and encourage settlement of international disputes by arbitration.' While not directly dictating specific military exercises, this article forms the philosophical bedrock of India's approach to global relations, emphasizing peace, cooperation, and adherence to international norms. India's foreign policy principles, such as Panchsheel (five principles of peaceful coexistence) and its evolving doctrine of strategic autonomy, also underpin such decisions. India's defence policy also prioritises self-reliance ('Atmanirbhar Bharat' in defence) and capacity building, while engaging in multilateral exercises for specific, defined purposes like HADR (Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief) or counter-piracy operations, rather than broad geopolitical signalling.

**Future Implications:**

India's decision will likely influence future discussions within BRICS regarding the scope of its cooperation. It sets a precedent that security cooperation, if pursued, would need formal institutionalisation and consensus among all members, which remains a high bar given the diverse interests within the expanded grouping. This event also highlights the ongoing geopolitical churn, where various nations are exploring new partnerships and recalibrating existing ones. India will continue to navigate this complex environment, participating in exercises and alliances that align with its national security and economic interests, while carefully avoiding those that might compromise its strategic autonomy or draw it into unwanted geopolitical rivalries. The expansion of BRICS and the increasing assertiveness of some of its members will necessitate India to continually refine its diplomatic toolkit to safeguard its interests and promote a stable global order.