“India’s Great-Power Delusions” (July/August 2025), offers a searing critique of the country’s strategic posture. US journalist argues that India overestimates its influence on the world stage while lacking the economic heft, military capacity, and alliances to back its great-power ambitions. He warns that India’s attachment to strategic autonomy and multipolarity risks making the country irrelevant in an era of intensifying bipolarity, when the competition between China and the United States will shape geopolitics.
India’s foreign policy is best understood through the lens of liminality, the condition of existing between worlds rather than in a fixed role or within a bloc. India is not a classic great power, but neither is it merely a regional actor. It is a titan in chrysalis, whose $4.1 trillion economy, rapidly expanding defence capacity, and influence among many countries of the so-called global South signal not delusion, but a conscious avoidance of rigid alignments. India’s pursuit of multipolarity should be seen as a strategic liability. Instead, it is a form of adaptive realism, an intentional pivoting strategy necessitated by geography, history, and structural constraints in the international system.
The Logic of Being In Between
India’s geography alone justifies this cautious balancing act. Flanked by two nuclear adversaries—China to the north and Pakistan to the west— India cannot afford to align too closely with the United States without becoming more vulnerable to entanglement in great-power conflicts or retaliation from regional adversaries. Its borders are not buffered by oceans, as is the case for the United States; instead, they are live fault lines. This reality mandates engagement with rivals, particularly China. India’s relationship with China is a watchful one, marked by both détente and deterrence, a formula that seeks to manage competition without inviting conflict.
India’s military capabilities, while expanding, do not yet provide it with an edge in deterring China. Nor does India currently project force beyond its near seas. What one can underestimate, however, is India’s strategy of “distributed leverage”: a mix of defence modernization, diversified procurement, and regional engagement. India is not standing still; it is moving forward, not by mirroring great powers, but by leveraging mini- lateralism—smaller-scale collaborations between a few countries—and issue-based coalitions. These include the security partnership known as the Quad, featuring Australia, India, Japan, and the United States; the I2U2 partnership with Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States; and a trilateral initiative with France and the UAE. Such groupings are not substitutes for alliances but alternatives that provide security dividends without sacrificing India’s autonomy. This is not delusion. It offers a strategic architecture in tune with liminality.
India’s foreign policy carries the legacy of its postcolonial and Cold War experiences, particularly its ability to maintain autonomy amid
competing superpower pressures. Its desire for multi-polarity today is not naive, but a reflection of the global system’s changing structure. The U.S.-Chinese binary may define global military competition, but it does not exclusively determine the ideological commitments and economic priorities of governments around the world. India’s preference for flexible engagement resonates with this broader reality and positions it as a pivotal power—one that connects blocs rather than conforms to them.
Indeed, India’s strength lies in its role as a bridge, not a battering ram; it pursues consensus-building and reform from within the system rather than forceful transformation. Its leadership in the global South, exemplified by its push to bring the African Union into the G-20 in 2023 and its climate finance pledges, suggests a form of moral and institutional leadership that transcends conventional military metrics.
India is not trying to dominate the world order—it is trying to reshape
it from within by leading a coalition of middle and rising powers that are uncomfortable with both Chinese authoritarianism and Western paternalism. That strategy may be imperfect, but it is not incoherent.
Patience, Not Alignment
In economic terms, India’s per capita GDP, infrastructure bottlenecks,
and trade protectionism constrain its rise. But the trajectory matters. India’s recent gains in semiconductor production, its fast-growing digital infrastructure (such as India Stack, a platform providing the entire Indian population with essential digital services that handle identity information, personal data, and payments), and a projected $10 trillion GDP by 2040 point to a transformation in progress.
Like the United States, which remained largely agrarian until the mid- nineteenth century and then transitioned during a period of rapid and significant industrialization to become an assertive global power in the late nineteenth century, India is building the institutional and material base for a more decisive role in the international order. Until then, strategic patience—not alignment—is its rational choice.
India may not be able to shape the international order unless it chooses sides presumes a binary that India and many other countries reject. In a world increasingly defined by fragmentation rather than consolidation, the ability to adapt may be a greater asset than any fixed alignment.
India’s tightrope walk is not a refusal to grow up—it is a recognition that in today’s world, the tightrope itself may be the only stable ground. In this light, liminality is not a symptom of underperformance; it is a form of power.
India’s moment of full assertion may still lie ahead, but its ability to bend without breaking, to engage without surrender, is not a sign of strategic failure. It may, in fact, be India’s greatest strength.
The stalemate over the US-India trade deal is, well, not about trade. It’s about power. And for now India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi seems to have been out-smarted by his once- favourite strongman.
With a day to go (August 1) for US reciprocal tariffs to kick in and deal talks still ongoing, President Donald Trump has announced a 25% on all imports from India with an additional as-yet-undisclosed penalty due to oil purchases from Russia.
The Russia twist is a reminder that this is Trump’s game and his rules. Even as India’s resisting US access to sensitive sectors like agriculture, Trump has added new restrictions on Russian oil and defence purchases to the mix. And he is using trade to chip at India’s ties with Russia and get President Vladimir Putin to reach a truce with Ukraine.
Trump likes tariffs and he uses them for all manner of problems, including as a threat to get better deals, Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation, said on Wednesday.
This just might be a negotiating ploy, international trade policy expert Abhijit Das said to early Thursday morning.
Trump indulges in such stratagems to skew the deal in his favour and to hasten conclusion of a deal, most of which have been hopelessly one-sided, he said. Unless Trump moderates his demands or India relents on some of its red lines, it would be difficult to see a deal emerging within the next few days.
Ploy or not, the President’s tariff proclamation in a social media post has prompted economists to lower India’s GDP growth estimates by up to 30 basis points, weakened the rupee and sent stocks lower. But it hasn’t altered Modi’s intransigence.
While India remains committed to concluding a fair trade agreement, the government attaches utmost importance to protecting and promoting the welfare of India’s farmers, entrepreneurs and small enterprises, India said in a statement Wednesday night, hours after Trump’s tariff announcement.
The position has political currency. Bully and the Strong is the general mood among Indians on social media. And among Indian trade experts.
“India’s principled stand has avoided the trap of a one-sided deal and that’s a success,” Ajay Srivastava, former trade official and founder of the Global Trade Research Initiative, said in emailed comments.
He argues that India did not walk away from the deal. It negotiated in good faith, but refused to cross its red lines— particularly on agriculture, where over 700 million livelihoods are at stake. And, he said, India is not significantly worse off than economies like the UK (10%), EU (15%), Indonesia (19%) and Vietnam (20%), who signed deals with the US, made sweeping concessions and still face elevated tariffs. An India- US deal “may still emerge, but only on fair terms,” according to Srivastava. Well, that’s the glass-half-full version. Now let’s look at the glass-half-empty one.
The US President’s take on India’s economy seems to betray exasperation but doesn’t alter what’s best for the bilateral trade relationship, nor does it change the reality of India’s dynamism. The absurdity of the US President referring to India’s economy as “Dead” in a social media post, clubbing India with Russia for this diagnosis, seems to reveal some exasperation in the White House. He has probably forgotten or overlooked that India’s young, skilled and talented workforce is driving innovation and competitiveness of the Indian industry. Why would the world’s top economies join ISRO including NASA to launch their satellites from the Indian Space Launch Pads and not from their own?
The US is India’s largest trading partner, biggest export market for goods and services, largest source of foreign portfolio investment and third-largest source of foreign direct investment. India doesn’t even rank among the US’s top 10 trading partners. That, some might say, gives Trump more bargaining leverage than Modi.
In labour intensive industries like electronics, apparel, footwear
and gems and jewellery, Indian exports to the US face stiff competition from China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Mexico – countries with lower costs or lower US tariffs. Modi’s Apple economy dream hangs in the balance.
Then, there are regional security concerns, not helped by
Trump’s wooing of China and lunching with the Pakistan army chief.
Yet, Das doesn’t think that India should back down. Once the US starts playing hardball, countering it with a soft hand has not worked in the past, he said, recalling his experience as a trade negotiator. Only when the government threatens to or takes retaliatory action does the US relent, he added. Though in this Trump term that approach hasn’t worked for any country except maybe China.
It would be a real game-changer for both the US and India to reach a deal with lower levies, particularly in beginning to neutralize the long- term challenges of China as exporter to the world, said Mark Linscott, former US trade negotiator and senior advisor for trade policy at the US-
India Strategic Partnership Forum. The US can build new supply chains through India, giving the South Asian nation opportunity to expand its export base, continue to attract FDI and increase its economic and employment growth trajectory.
“If there’s any chance of a deal with India, it will likely require direct engagement between President Trump and Prime Minister Modi,” he said.
And for one of them to blink.
• So far, 147 UN Member states have recognised the State of Palestine. Within the past week, three Western countries : France, UK and Canada have expressed their intent to do the same in September this year when the UN session will be on. Will this lead to more conflict between the US-Israel and Palestine, if other Arab Nations support Palestine?
• The megaquake off Russia’s coast may have done more than shake the region, it could trigger volcanic eruptions across the Pacific’s “Ring of Fire”.
• The Ring of Fire is a 25,000-mile chain of volcanoes and earthquake zones that stretches around the Pacific Ocean, home to about 75% of the world’s active volcanoes and frequent earthquakes. This is a warning to brace for ‘Ring of Fire’ apocalypse as megaquake sets off devastating chain reaction.
• Four-foot tsunami waves were recorded in Hawaii, and the initial signs of a tsunami were detected in California after a powerful earthquake in Russia’s Far East triggered warnings across the Pacific. While some alerts in Hawaii were downgraded to advisories—allowing evacuees to return home—and warnings in Shanghai were cancelled, authorities remained watchful.
The magnitude-8.8 quake is the strongest worldwide since 2011.
• New Law Bills of Lading 2025 in India:
The Bill was passed in the Lok Sabha, Indian Parliament, in March 2025, then passed in the Upper House, Rajya Sabha as reported on 21st July, 2025. It aims to update and simplify the legal framework for shipping documents by replacing the Indian Bills of Lading Act, 1856 (of Colonial period). Bill will bring transparency in the conduct of business. The new legislation repeals the colonial law.
The Bills of Lading Bill 2025 modernizes India’s maritime law by replacing the outdated Indian Bills of Lading Act 1856.
Key changes include streamlining legal procedures, aligning with global standards, and enhancing efficiency in shipping documentation. This is expected to boost India’s role in global maritime trade and improve the ease of doing business.
Key Changes:
• Replaces the 1856 Act:
The bill replaces the existing colonial-era legislation with a modern framework.
• Simplifies legal language:
Outdated and ambiguous language from the 1856 Act is replaced with clearer and more user-friendly terminology.
• Aligns with international standards:
The bill incorporates global best practices, making it easier for India to participate in international trade.
• Streamlines procedures:
The bill simplifies the process of issuing and managing bills of lading, potentially reducing delays and disputes.
• Empowers the Central Government:
The bill grants the Central Government authority to issue directions for effective implementation, ensuring the law remains relevant.
• Focus on transparency:
The bill aims to promote transparency in maritime trade, which can help reduce fraud and improve overall efficiency.
Benefits:
• Increased trade efficiency:
Streamlined procedures and clearer legal frameworks can lead to faster and more efficient shipping processes.
• Reduced litigation risks:
Simpler language and clearer guidelines can minimize disputes and legal conflicts.
• Enhanced global competitiveness:
Alignment with international standards can improve India’s position in the global maritime trade landscape.
• Supports India’s role as a maritime hub:
The bill aims to strengthen India’s role in global maritime trade and make it easier to conduct business in the country.
• Potential for digital trade in Future:
The bill paves the way for the future adoption of electronic bills of lading, potentially further enhancing efficiency and reducing costs.
British retailers warned food inflation will hit 6% by Christmas. A BRC survey found two-thirds of firms plan to raise prices further after being squeezed by the Labour government at its first budget.
• Real estate investors are holding back in Europe. Commercial property sales are down 10% by value in the second quarter and down 7% in the first half of the year, according to MSCI data.
• UK housing developers are downsizing projects after high-rises are being delayed by regulators.
• Property companies like Greystar Real Estate are focusing on developing low-rise residential projects, which aren’t subject to the same safety checks as what are designated “higher-risk buildings.”
• Trade talk: Trump reached an agreement with South Korea on a 15% tariff rate and $350 billion in US investments. But Korean farmers vowed to fight back. Trump delayed a 50% levy on Brazil exports by seven days while exempting products including orange juice and civil aircraft. Brazilian markets and businesses breathed a collective sigh of relief.
• India and the US have held several rounds of negotiations for a trade deal over the past few months, with Delhi even reducing tariffs on goods like Bourbon whiskey and motorcycles to placate the US. But the US runs a $45bn (£33bn) trade deficit with India, which Trump is keen to reduce. He wonts India to buy GMF foodgrains from the US. Trump calls India and Russia as Dead Economies to suit his domestic appeal but he forgets:
• US economic growth slowed through the first half of the year as consumers reduced spending and companies sought to inoculate themselves from the Trump administration’s frequent and unpredictable shifts in trade policy.
Inflation-adjusted gross domestic product, which measures the value of goods and services produced in the US, increased an annualized 3% in the second quarter, according to the US government. But as solid as the pace was, economic growth averaged 1.25% in the first half, a full percentage point below the pace for 2024.
• China’s $167 billion mega-dam in Tibet is Xi Jinping’s high- stakes bet to revive the economy. The project, which uses 60 times the cement of the Hoover Dam and more steel than 116 Empire State Buildings, also gives Xi another tool of state control.
The Big Dam carries Big Risks – The Yarlung Tsangpo river in Nyingchi.
• 400-mile-long chain of fossilized volcanoes discovered beneath China
• Researchers recently discovered a huge chain of extinct volcanoes buried deep below South China that formed when two tectonic plates collided during the breakup of Rodinia, around 800 million years ago.
• The chain of volcanoes was discovered beneath the Sichuan Basin in southern China.
Researchers have discovered a 400-mile-long chain of extinct, fossilized volcanoes buried deep below South China. The volcanoes formed when two tectonic plates collided during the breakup of the supercontinent Rodinia hundreds of millions of years ago, the scientists reported in a new study. The ancient volcanoes extend the region of past volcanism in this area by several hundred miles and may have affected Earth’s climate. About 800 million years ago, during the early Neoproterozoic era, South China sat at the northwestern margin of Rodinia.
Shifting plate tectonics caused this area to break off into what is now the Yangtze Block plate, pushing it toward the China Ocean plate. As the two plates collided, the denser oceanic crust sank beneath the more buoyant continental crust and slid deep into Earth — a process known as subduction.
As oceanic crust subducts, it heats up and releases water, which generates magma. The magma rises to the surface, creating a long, narrow chain of volcanoes that follow a curved line above the subduction zone. This is known as a volcanic arc.
• The race for critical minerals in Africa: A blessing or another resource curse?
• There is currently an exponential growth in the global demand for critical minerals, particularly lithium, to meet clean energy and decarbonisation objectives. However, sustainable supply of these minerals is at risk due to declining ore grades, available extraction and processing technologies, socio-environmental concerns, and geopolitical challenges. Africa hosts substantial critical minerals resources, and the continent is currently being positioned as a major global player in the critical minerals supply chain. As a result, there is a rush for Africa’s critical mineral resources through investment in exploration activities and license acquisition by foreign mining companies. Drawing on the case of lithium mining in Africa, we analysed the urgency claims of critical minerals in the African context and assessed the inherent socio-ecological impacts. We found that the urgency claims of critical minerals largely serve the geostrategic and economic interests of western countries and China. The rush for Afri’s critical minerals is producing significant socio-ecological impacts, including driving loss of rich biodiversity, displacement of communities and breeding new forms of illegalities in the resource sector. Based on our findings, we argue that the current race for Africa’s critical mineral resources does not serve the interest of Africa and it is likely to create adverse long-term socio-ecological impacts rather than benefits for the continent unless appropriate sustainable measures, including strategic planning, are carefully considered, and fully implemented. Our findings have implications for policies seeking to promote sustainable and responsible mining in Africa, and elsewhere with similar challenges.
Shipping News:
• US Treasury unleashes largest Iran shipping sanctions since 2018
• In its most expansive sanctions package against Iran in nearly seven years, the US Treasury has imposed sweeping measures on over 100 individuals, companies, and vessels linked to Iranian maritime and sanctions-evasion network. The action, unveiled Wednesday, is aimed at dismantling what the US calls a “shipping empire” at the heart of Iran’s illicit oil trade.
• At the centre of the newly sanctioned web is Mohammad Hossein Shamkhani, son of Ali Shamkhani, a senior adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. According to the Treasury, Hossein Shamkhani orchestrates a global network of front companies and shadow fleets used to ship oil, petroleum products, and containerised goods from Iran and Russia to clients across Asia, Europe, and beyond.
• 52 vessels—including oil tankers and containerships—have been blacklisted for operating under front companies tied to the Shamkhani family. 15 shipping firms, 12 individuals, and 53 entities in 17 countries, including Panama, Italy, and Hong Kong, were named in the crackdown. The US Department of State also designated an additional 20 entities and 10 vessels for facilitating the Iranian petroleum and petrochemicals trade.
• “The Shamkhani family’s shipping empire highlights how the Iranian regime elites leverage their positions to accrue massive wealth and fund the regime’s dangerous behaviour,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said.
• South Korea to invest $150bn in US shipbuilding
• South Korea has agreed to invest $150bn into a dedicated US shipbuilding revitalisation fund, as part of a $350bn bilateral trade agreement signed Wednesday in Washington.
• The move—touted as the largest Korean industrial investment in US history—aims to inject new life into America’s struggling shipyards while simultaneously granting Korean shipbuilders a critical foothold in the world’s largest defence market.
• Announced just ahead of an August 1 tariff deadline, the agreement includes the creation of a Make American Shipbuilding Great Again initiative, which will channel Korean capital into the construction of new commercial and naval vessels on US soil, as well as the production of shipbuilding equipment and systems and maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) for US fleets.
• The $150bn shipbuilding component will be part of the broader $350bn investment package, which also spans sectors such as semiconductors, EV batteries, biotech, and clean energy. In exchange, the US has agreed to cap reciprocal and auto tariffs at 15%, levelling the playing field for Korean exports.
• The US struck a similar deal with Japan – including its shipyards – earlier this month.
• South Korean president Lee Jae-myung, celebrating the outcome, stated on social media: “With this agreement, the government has eliminated uncertainty in the export environment and, by matching the US tariffs to be lower or at the same level as major competitor countries, has created conditions for us to compete on equal or superior terms with other major countries.”
• Presidents Lee and Trump will meet within the next two weeks to finalise and fine-tune the trade agreement.
• Shares of leading Korean shipbuilders Hanwha Ocean and HD Hyundai Heavy Industries rallied Thursday in Seoul, buoyed by optimism that the agreement will fast-track Korean participation in US maritime programs.
• Top executives from Korea’s major conglomerates, including Hanwha vice chairman Kim Dong-kwan, Samsung’s Lee Jae-yong, and Hyundai Motor’s Chung Euisun, were in Washington during negotiations.
• How marine service providers are helping shipping meet its sustainability goals
As global trade continues to expand, the maritime industry is facing increased pressure to reduce its environmental impact. Rising sea levels, pollution, and climate change have made it clear that sustainable practices at sea are no longer optional—they’re essential. Marine service providers are now rethinking their roles, adopting new methods, and supporting cleaner shipping operations to help build a more sustainable future.
In recent years, international regulations have raised the bar for environmental accountability in the maritime sector. Initiatives like the IMO 2020 sulphur cap and the push toward net-zero emissions by 2050 have set clear expectations for cleaner operations at sea.
Marine service providers are helping shipowners comply with these rules by:
• Supporting the switch to low-sulphur and alternative fuels
• Offering responsible waste disposal and recycling services
• Assisting with energy-efficient upgrades onboard vessels
These efforts ensure that vessels not only meet regulatory requirements but also reduce their overall impact on the environment.
Sustainability in shipping extends beyond vessels—it also includes the operations that support them. Marine service providers are implementing sustainable practices in their own day-to-day work:
• Using electric or hybrid boats for harbor operations
• Reducing paper usage through digital systems
• Installing energy-efficient systems in warehouses and offices
These changes, though often behind the scenes, contribute significantly to a cleaner, more efficient marine supply chain.
Technology plays a vital role in driving sustainability across the marine industry. Service providers are using digital tools and data to improve operations while cutting emissions and waste. Key developments include:
• Predictive maintenance to reduce unnecessary equipment replacement
• Smart routing systems that lower fuel consumption
• Real-time tracking to monitor environmental compliance
By integrating these technologies, marine service companies are making operations more efficient and environmentally friendly.
Sustainability is a shared responsibility. Marine service providers, port authorities, vessel owners, and regulators are increasingly working together to promote greener practices. Initiatives such as green shipping corridors, alternative fuel testing, and shared emission reduction targets are examples of how collaboration is shaping a more sustainable future.
Providers are also supporting innovative pilot programs, including those focused on hydrogen and ammonia-fueled ships, showing a willingness to adapt and lead during a time of industry-wide change.
Transitioning to more sustainable practices isn’t without challenges. Costs, training, and evolving regulations can all present obstacles. But these challenges also bring new opportunities to lead, innovate, and stand out in a competitive market.
Marine service providers that commit to sustainability are building long- term value—not just for their customers, but for the environment and future generations.
• Boxship newbuild orderbook nears 10m teu as focus switches to smaller vessels
• Newbuilding orderbook for containerships looks set to pass 10m teu soon, should optional vessels be declared
• The feeder boxship and regional boxship segments have dominated ordering activity lately as focus shifts away from larger vessels
• Most orders for feeder vessels have been placed by Greek tonnage providers and are backed by time charters to leading liner operators
• Over 60 containerships alone were ordered in July, with the majority being of between 1,800 teu and 4,000 teu
• Shipping industry cuts U.S. cargo capacity amid tariff uncertainty
• The shipping industry is reducing the capacity on routes from East Asia to the U.S. This is because the transportation demand, which significantly increased after the US and China delayed high tariffs under the Geneva agreement last May, has recently decreased again, resulting in falling freights.
• A Danish shipping analysis firm, the global shipping companies capacity planned for routes from Asia to the U.S. next month was investigated at 360,000 TEU as of the 18th July. The figure represents a decrease of about 5% compared to 380,000 TEU reported on 13th of June’25.
• Freight rates for routes Shanghai to USWC was recorded at $2,067 per FEU as of the 25th July, a decrease of 3.5% from the previous week. This is a drop of 63% compared to the freight rate of $5,606 in June’25.
• The decline in freight rates on routes to the US is expected to lead to poor performance for domestic shipping companies i.e. HMM and SM Line, operating primarily in this sector. HMM generated 40% of its total revenues.
• Oil Prices Hold Gains Amid Tariff Threats and Trade Turmoil
• Oil prices held steady after rising 7% this week, with WTI at $69.99 and Brent at $73.10, driven by geopolitical tension and U.S. sanctions.
• Trump escalated pressure on Russia and its crude buyers, threatening secondary tariffs on countries like India and China.
• EIA data showed a crude inventory build but strong gasoline demand, while market attention remained focused on geopolitical risks and upcoming U.S. economic data.
• Oil prices traded flat on Thursday in Asian markets, holding on to gains from earlier in the week as traders continued to weigh intensifying geopolitical risks and new tariff deals that could reshape global crude flows.
• As of Thursday morning in Asia, WTI crude had dipped to $69.99 per barrel and Brent crude was trading at $73.10 per barrel. Though slightly lower on the day, both benchmarks have risen approximately 7% this week, underpinned by rising concern over supply constraints stemming from new U.S. sanctions and trade policies.
• This week, President Trump shortened the deadline for Russia to reach a peace agreement with Ukraine from 50 days to just 10–12 days, warning of secondary tariffs of up to 100% on countries that continue to import Russian oil if no progress is made. India, a major buyer of discounted Russian crude, is at the center of this pressure campaign.
• On Wednesday, Trump confirmed that 25% tariffs on Indian imports will take effect on Friday, although trade talks between the two nations are ongoing. The uncertainty is causing anxiety among Indian refiners and reverberating through global oil markets. The Brent-Dubai spread has shifted deeper into discount territory as refiners look to the Middle East for more secure alternatives.
• “Concerns that secondary tariffs on countries importing Russian crude will tighten supplies continue to drive buying interest,” said Toshitaka Tazawa of Fujitomi Securities.
• Chinese and Korean shipbuilding heavyweights fight for huge CMA CGM order
• French line mulls order for up to 12 LNG dual-fuelled newbuilds
• At least five Asian shipyards are vying to bag newbuildings from French liner giant CMA CGM, as it weighs a fresh order for a series of mega-size container ships.
• News of the enquiry comes one week after the world’s largest container ship owner, MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company, was reported to have added up to 20 mega-vessels in a round of fresh orders.
• Shipbuilding players said Rodolphe Saade’s CMA CGM has approached shipyards in Asia for a series of up to 12 boxships of between 21,000 teu and 24,000 teu.
• Indian state refiners pause Russian oil purchases, sources say
• Indian state refiners have stopped buying Russian oil in the past week as discounts narrowed this month and U.S. President Donald Trump warned against purchasing oil from Moscow, industry sources said.
India, the world’s third-largest oil importer, is the biggest buyer of seaborne Russian crude.
• The country’s state refiners – Indian Oil Corp (IOC.NS), opens new tab, Hindustan Petroleum Corp (HPCL.NS), opens new tab, Bharat
Petroleum Corp (BPCL.NS), opens new tab and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd (MRPL.NS), opens new tab – have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners’ purchase plans told Reuters.
• The four refiners regularly buy Russian oil on a delivered basis and have turned to spot markets for replacement supply – mostly Middle Eastern grades such as Abu Dhabi’s Murban crude and West African oil, sources said.
• Private refiners Reliance Industries (RELI.NS), opens new tab and Nayara Energy are the biggest Russian oil buyers in India, but state refiners control over 60% of India’s overall 5.2 million barrels per day refining capacity.
• On July 14, Trump threatened 100% tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine.
Batic News 31st Ju.ly, 2025
BALTIC INDICES 31/07/2025
DRY INDEX: 2003 (+ 8)
CAPESIZE INDEX: 3239 (+ 53)
PANAMAX INDEX: 1659 (- 30)
SUPRAMAX INDEX: 1268 (- 3)
HANDYSIZE INDEX: 678 (- 1)
BCI TC AVG $/DAY 26858 (+ 436)
BPI82 TC AVG $/DAY 14929 (- 274)
BSI TC AVG $/DAY 16029 (- 39)
BHSI TC AVG $/DAY 12210 (- 13)
TIMECHARTER
‘Ithaki I’ 2025 82062 dwt dely Singapore 2/3 Aug trip via Port Latta redel China intention coal $19,250 – Jera
‘Admiral Reiwa’ 2021 82026 dwt dely passing Taichung 2/5 Aug trip via Indonesia redel Singapore –
Japan intention coal $13,250
‘Cape Race’ 2012 81438 dwt dely Panjin 3/6 Aug trip via NoPac redel Singapore – Japan intention coal $10,500 – Oldendorff
‘Flag Lama’ 2017 80891 dwt dely EC South America 19 Aug trip redel Singapore – Japan $16,850 + $685,000 GBB – Reachy
‘Silver Navigator’ 2011 80312 dwt dely Cai Mep 5 Aug trip via Indonesia redel Korea $14,250 – HMM
‘Miho Pracat’ 2008 79964 dwt dely Fangcheng 30 Jul trip via Indonesia redel Korea $13,000 – KLC
‘Exelixsea’ 2011 76361 dwt dely Kaohsiung 31 Jul trip via Indonesia redel India $12,000 – Tongli
‘Anastasia’ 2006 75331 dwt dely EC South America 16 Aug trip redel Singapore -Japan $15,000 + $500,000 GBB
‘CBL Spring’ 2009 53456 dwt dely Singapore 5 Aug trip via Indonesia redel Philippines $14,000
VOYAGES ORE
‘Shandong Civilization ‘ 2022 190000/10 Tubarao/Pohang+Gwangyang 22/31 Aug $22.90 fio 3 days shinc/34000+33000shinc – Posco
‘TBN ‘ 170000/10 Dampier/Qingdao 14/16 Aug $10.30 fio 90000shinc/30000shinc – Rio Tinto
COAL
‘TBN’ 75000/10 Newport News/Visakhapatnam 1/10 Aug $44.70 fio 40000sshex/25000sshex – SAIL
Baltic Exchange Index – 31 JULY 2025 Baltic Exchange Capesize 182 Index

Route Description Value Change

C8_182 182000mt Gib/Hamburg transatlantic RV 35,450 – 571
C9_182 182000mt Cont-Med trip China-Japan 54,063 – 343
C10_182 182000mt China-Japan transpacific RV 28,986 + 1877
C14_182 182000mt China-Brazil round voyage 26,910 + 855

C16_182 182000mt Backhaul 7,363 + 825

C5TC 182 Weighted Timecharter Average 29,868 + 782
Baltic Exchange Index – 31 JULY 2025
Baltic Exchange Capesize Index 3239 (+ 53)

Route Description Value($) Change

C2 160000mt Tubarao to Rotterdam 11.507 + 0.093
C3 160-170000mt Tubarao to Qingdao 23.805 + 0.390
C5 160-170000mt W Australia to Qingdao 10.295 + 0.520
C7 150-160000mt Bolivar to Rotterdam 15.557 – 0.136
C8_14 180000mt Gibraltar-Hamburg T/A RV 31,643 – 714
C9_14 180000mt Conti/Med Trip China/Japan 49,500 – 625
C10_14 180000mt China/Japan T/P RV 25,914 + 1891
C14 180000mt China-Brazil RV 23,235 + 740
C16 180000mt N.China to Skaw-Passero 3781 + 281

C17 170000mt Saldanha Bay to Qingdao 17.594 + 0.266

5TC Weighted Timecharter Average 26,858 + 436
Baltic Exchange Panamax 82500mt Index 31 JULY 2025
Baltic Exchange Panamax Index 1,659 (- 30)

Route Description Value ($) Change

P1A_82 Skaw-Gib T/A RV 18,182 – 309
P2A_82 Skaw-Gib trip HK-SKorea incl Taiwan 23,869 – 418
P3A_82 HK-SKorea incl Taiwan, Pacific/RV 12,363 – 335
P4_82 HK-SKorea incl Taiwan to Skaw-Gib 8,197 – 78

P6_82 Dely Spore Atlantic RV 13,620 – 212

P5TC Weighted Timecharter Average 14,929 – 274
The following routes do not contribute to the BPI or Weighted TC Average.

Route Description Value ($) Change

P5_82 S. China Indo RV 12,867 – 319
P7 66000mt Mississippi Rvr to Qingdao 54,593 – 0.393
P8 66000mt Santos to Qingdao 37,379 – 0.157
Baltic Exchange Panamax 82 Asia Index – 31 July 2025

Route Description Size (MT) Value($) Change

P5_82 S.China one Indo RV 12,867 -319

Baltic Exchange Supramax Index – 31 JULY 2025
Baltic Exchange Supramax Index 1268 (- 3)

Route Description Value ($) Change

S1B_63 Cnkle trip via Med or Blsea to China-S.Korea 16,496 – 29
S1C_63 US Gulf trip to China-South Japan 23,368 + 329
BS2_63 North China one Australian or Pacific RV 14,506 – 44
BS3_63 North China trip to West Africa 14,930 0
S4A_63 US Gulf trip to Skaw-Passero 23,196 + 710
S4B_63 Skaw-Passero trip to US Gulf 11,911 – 3
BS5_63 West Africa trip via ECSA to North China 19,225 – 361
BS8_63 South China trip via Indo to EC.India 17,586 + 90
BS9_63 W.Africa trip via ECSA to Skaw-Passero 16,114 – 179
S10_63 S.China trip via Indonesia to South China 14,500 – 19

S15_63 Indian Ocean trip via S.Africa to Far East 13,108 – 767

S11TC Weighted Timecharter Average 16,029 – 39
S10TC Supramax(58) Timecharter Average 13,995 – 39
Baltic Exchange Supramax Asia Index – 31 July 2025

Route Description Value($) Change

S2_63 N.China one Austr or Pac RV 14,506 -44
S8_63 S.China via Indonesia/Ec India 17,586 +90

S10_63 S.China via Indo/S.China 14,500 -19

S3TC Weighted Time Charter Average 15,397 +2
Baltic Exchange Index – 31 JULY 2025
Baltic Exchange Handysize Index 678 (- 1)

Route Description Value ($) Change

HS1_38 Skaw-Passero trip Recalada – Rio de Janeiro 6,596 + 17
HS2_38 Skaw-Passero trip Boston – Galveston 8,793 + 89
HS3_38 Rio de Janeiro-Recalada trip Skaw – Passero 17,025 – 253
HS4_38 USGulf trip via USG or NCSA to Skaw-Passero 14,471 – 118
HS5_38 SE Asia trip to Spore – Japan 13,000 + 25
HS6_38 N.China-S.Kor-Jpn trip to N.China-S.Kor-Jp 12,413 + 44

HS7_38 N.China-S.Kor-Jpn trip to SE Asia 2,669 + 63

Share with...