The Delhi dilemma

Ex-Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs

Russia’s ‘special military operation’, which began on February 24, in Ukraine is an invasion. For PM Modi, this invasion constitutes an enormous diplomatic challenge which includes the need to safely evacuate thousands of Indian students caught in the conflict zone and navigate through the competing demands of US-led NATO countries and Russia. In another age, Prime Ministers Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi faced the contradictions arising out of Soviet actions in Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan, but their dilemmas were not as cruel as Modi faces now. India’s relations with the US and its allies were then constrained by ideologies and the compulsions of the Cold War and its dependence on Moscow was crucial. Today, India’s engagement with the US is critical while its defence relationship with Russia is still essential for its interests.

Modi will have to use all his political and diplomatic skills to continuously navigate between US and Russian demands to ensure that India’s interests are protected.

As President Putin prepared to take military action, India called for ‘de-escalation of tensions taking into account the legitimate security interests of all countries and aimed towards security and long-term peace and stability in the region and beyond’; its UNSC statements of January 30, February 17 and February 21 included these words. While the February 23 UNSC meeting was going on, news reached the council chamber of the invasion. India’s statement called for ‘de-escalation’, ‘sustained diplomatic dialogue’ and the need to take into account ‘the legitimate interests of all parties’.

In the present context, the words ‘legitimate security interests of all countries’ tilted towards Russia, for it had drawn a red line on Ukraine’s membership of NATO. Hence, Russia found the formulation favourable to its position. As one of its senior Delhi-based diplomat told the India media, ‘We welcome the independent position India has taken in the UNSC twice already and which was expressed openly by the external affairs minister and other officials’.

The security interests of one great power can be ignored by other great powers only at the cost of international peace and stability. Russia’s pleas that the expansion of NATO into Ukraine was not acceptable to it were brushed aside by the US and its allies who focused on the sovereign rights of all states. Theoretically all sovereign states are equal, but the reality is that the international system gives primacy to the interests of great powers. India was therefore indirectly stressing the need for the US and the European great powers to reconcile their security interests with Russia.

The western powers did not publicly comment on India’s position. They adopted the path of quiet diplomacy which they have really not given up till now. They did not emphasise the inconsistency in India’s insistence, along with them, in demanding a rules-based Indo-Pacific while basing its approach on realism in Europe. The quality of India’s relations with the US and major European countries led them to give India space.

That space is now closing with Putin’s invasion and the outrage in NATO and other parts of the world. Putin’s action has threatened Europe’s security order put in place by NATO. The merits of this order can be debated because it pushed Russia into a corner, but Putin crossed a red line. This is obviously the point that the US and other European countries are pressing on India in an attempt to get its position closer to theirs. A hint on what is occurring behind the scenes was given by President Biden in his media interaction on February 24. He was asked, ‘Is India fully in sync with the United States on Russia?’ He said, ‘We’re going to be —we’re in consultation with India today. We haven’t resolved that completely.’ A State Department official later said, ‘We are continuing to consult with Indian counterparts on a collective response to Russia’s invasion.’

Modi spoke to Putin on February 24. The Ministry of External Affairs statement on the conversation noted Modi’s appeal to Putin ‘for the immediate cessation of violence’. (The choice of the word ‘violence’ for an invasion is noteworthy.) While calling for a ‘return to the path of diplomatic negotiations and dialogue’, Modi ‘reiterated his long-standing conviction’ that Russian and NATO differences can only be ‘resolved’ through dialogue. Is Putin likely to pay heed when he is creating facts on the ground in Ukraine? His stated initial aim was Ukraine’s ‘demilitarisation’ and ‘denazification’. The meaning of the first word was clear but the second is heavy with history and its connotation, though imprecise, indicated a desire for regime change. That is now confirmed by Putin’s appeal to the Ukraine army to do so.

Significantly, NATO Secretary-General told a media briefing on February 25 that Russia had demanded that the organisation should remove troops and equipment from those of its members that joined it after 1997. This implies that Putin wants those countries which were members of the Warsaw Pact or part of the USSR should be ‘defanged’. Russia-NATO ties will continue to be an element of global instability. In this situation, India’s diplomacy will continue to get severely tested. Modi will have to use all his political and diplomatic skills and continuously navigate between competing US and Russian demands to ensure that India’s interests are protected.

That India has begun this process of diplomatic adjustment is shown in India abstaining on the UNSC Resolution criticising the invasion and demanding a return to status quo ante. In its explanation of vote, India dropped the formulation regarding ‘legitimate security interests’ and stressed the need to respect the ‘sovereignty and territorial integrity of states’, which Russia has violated in Ukraine. Clearly, the US has put great pressure behind the scenes, despite the growing partnership. Did it convey that it would sanction India for its purchase of the Russian S-400 missile system and reconsider intelligence cooperation? The question now is how will Russia react to India’s changing position. Its ire may be constrained because China too abstained!