The West and Ukraine want India to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine in unequivocal terms. Belying their hopes, India has so far batted for “the sovereignty and integrity of states” and has refrained from directly asking its oldest ally, Russia, to stop its aggression in Ukraine.
But at the same time, India has been gentle and generous towards the battered Ukraine. New Delhi began dispatching its first tranche of humanitarian aid to the war-torn Ukraine in March this year. Essentials like medicine and medical equipment have flown to Ukraine via Poland. Till May, India had handed over 187 tonnes of humanitarian aid to healthcare facilities.
The Minister of State for External Affairs, Meenakshi Lekhi, while answering questions in Parliament in March, said that the Indian government has been in touch with Russia and Ukraine at various levels. The Prime Minister has spoken to the presidents of both countries on multiple occasions. He had urged an immediate cessation of hostilities and a return to the path of diplomacy and dialogue for a resolution of the conflict.
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has often insisted that dialogue is the only solution to iron out the differences and disputes, however daunting it may look at this moment. The global order is anchored on international law, the UN charter, and respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of states, he added.
There has been no shift in the position of India from February 24 till today. There will not be any change because New Delhi is not in a position to give up this diplomacy. India, as a powerful South Asian country, is well aware that its stance would not sit well with the West, particularly the United States. India has focused on the humanitarian crisis in the war zone while suggesting Moscow to opt for talks. India has taken this position despite being under severe international pressure to take a firm stand against Russia. In the eyes of the West, India looks like a supporter of Russia, though in a subtle manner.
Despite the hard posture of India, the US is silent or, to a certain extent, it has accepted the reality. This is mainly for two reasons: the US is aware of India’s precarious position and, for both the US and India, the common challenge is to tame China. It has been wrongly construed that India is neutral in this situation. Such an analysis is nothing but simplifying the track chosen by India.
India, by being restrained or not showing its angst or anger, is also conveying its position in handling both the US and Russia. The task is to strike a balance between Russia, an old and trusted ally, and the United States, a new friend in need. India has not, however, ignored human suffering on the battlefield. The stated aim of Washington and New Delhi is similar – to respect the global order. While the US often transgresses or provokes other smaller countries to violate the order, India, with its limited resources, is only trying to consolidate its boundaries and business.
To the discomfort of the US and India, Russia and China have come closer. If Russia gets influenced by China, then it may cosy up with Pakistan. Having two hostile neighbours is already causing severe stress on India. It would be even more if Russia, China, and Pakistan worked in tandem. China has already constructed ports at vantage points, including in Pakistan and Sri Lanka. New Delhi cannot stop the devious plans of Beijing. But it can always minimise the damage China may cause to others in the region. This is what India is up to for now.
It would be a geopolitical advantage to continue to trust Russia, a steady friend of India since the Nehruvian era. The Soviet Union (Russia’s previous incarnation) had strongly supported India in the Jammu and Kashmir conflict. How can India forget the Soviet Union using its veto power six times in support of India in its capacity as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council?
The first time in 1955, the Soviet Union used the veto power over the Kashmir issue. The communist country made no apologies for saying it would support India if it ran into problems over the Kashmir issue. It stood by its words by using the veto power in favour of India when Pakistan proposed the use of a temporary UN force in the Kashmir valley. In 1961, when Portugal sent a letter to the UNSC explaining its intent not to let Goa out of its control, the Soviet Union used its veto power to stand by India. In 1962 and 1971, Pakistan’s efforts to raise the Kashmir issue at the UNSC turned futile, thanks to the veto power of the Soviets. The Soviets remained neutral during the 1959 border dispute and the India- China War of 1962. China had strongly resisted the policy of the Soviet Union. The US was hostile towards India during the 1971 India-Pakistan War. The superpower never criticised Pakistan, while the Soviets stood by India firmly.
The Soviets extended considerable economic and military assistance in the 1960s. It was much higher than what China had received. In 1962, the Soviets, setting aside the request from China, agreed to transfer technology to co-produce the MiG-21 jet fighter in India. In 1965, the Soviets brokered peace between India and Pakistan to halt the conflict over Kashmir.
So, history clearly shows that India is not in a position to sacrifice Russia.
It is not just the veto power of Russia that is making India remain cautious. New Delhi is excessively dependent on Moscow for defence-related imports. No less than 60 to 70% of spares for the Indian aviation sector come from Russia. Since 2014, the dependence on Russia has reduced as India is also partnering with the US, Germany, France, and Israel, among others. However, the largest weapons supplier, for historical reasons as well as for low cost factors, is Russia. Unlike the West, Russia is not too hesitant to share or transfer technologies. This is very crucial for India, which is inching towards self-reliance in the defence sector. As per a Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) report, Russia was India’s largest arms supplier in both 2012–16 and 2017–21.
In October 2018, India signed an agreement worth $5.43 billion with Russia to purchase five S-400 Triumf surface-to-air missiles, which are billed as the best in the world. This was done despite America’s Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) that has imposed sanctions on Russia, Iran, and North Korea. This alone indicates how New Delhi is maintaining its strong relationship with Moscow.
Does this rigid stance of India fetch rewards in the long run? Will India be able to live forever in its comfort zone in this globalised era where there is an unequal distribution of geopolitical power? For the West, its never-ending desire for supremacy across the world is the challenge. And China and Russia are the two major hurdles. For Russia, tackling India or China doesn’t arise. Because of the US’s aggression, Moscow has to be on its toes forever. India has one unwritten enemy – China backed by Pakistan – in South Asia to handle. To keep China in cautious mode, India has to get the support of both Russia and America. In such a situation, India has to protect its own self-interest and nothing beyond that. Even the US wants the support of India to put China in its place. This is one reason why the US is not making much noise about India’s aloofness towards the Ukraine war. Ukraine itself has given up its bid to get NATO membership because it has realised that neither America nor European countries are ready to help.
Those countries and experts who are analysing and overanalysing India’s moves and intentions must also spare a thought as to whether the West is not serving its interests in the given situation. As many as 27 members of the European Union have not stopped purchasing crude from Russia. Of course, India and China have not banned crude imports from Russia. The EU, on June 3, settled for a partial embargo on Russian oil.
Probably, as Jaishankar has pointed out, there will be no winner in the ongoing conflict. The worrying point is not India’s diplomatic or self-interest in the given situation but the ever increasing tension between the US and China. The tension between these two superpowers will rattle the peace of Asia. Unfortunately, no world peacekeeping organisations or Europe is sparing a thought about it. Asia’s problems are many including boundary disputes between India-China and India-Pakistan. What matters most is working together for better living while safeguarding the interest of individual countries.
– The writer is an Aerospace and Defence Analyst & Director ADD Engineering Components (India) Pvt Ltd (An Indo- German Company). The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Raksha Anirveda
