Why does India have to stay above Russia-Ukraine war?

The statement of the Indian Permanent Representative to the United Nations may indicate that India has taken the path of least resistance. Those defending India’s foreign policy decisions could have told Americans and the West that at least it had not voted against the resolution – it would have been a sign of massive support for Moscow. Those defending the decision for the Russians might likewise say that New Delhi categorically did not support Moscow’s decision, at least it took into account some of the latter’s concerns.

You might also like

Jio will be eyeing 5G enterprise business, not just the consumer

Sony to shut down Zee channel to address CCI’s concerns over deal

How tokenization will transform your online purchases

Matrimonial sites find ways to beat dating apps

However, it is also easy to call out India for discrepancies in its position, both domestically and abroad. The Permanent Representative reiterated the Indian Prime Minister’s statement in his meeting with the Russian President last month that “this cannot be an era of war. He also emphasized that the sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity of all countries have been respected.” However, India risks a nuclear conflict by sending the Indian Air Force across the Line of Control to attack terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan in response to the 2019 Pulwama terrorist attack. India, on the other hand, has so far in 2020 It has refused to retaliate against the Chinese for violations of Indian sovereignty and territorial integrity, preferring instead a negotiated settlement.

Therefore, it should be clear that it is difficult for large powers to maintain continuity or doctrinal positions. And what New Delhi has done in the case of the Russia-Ukraine conflict is to draw a careful line between what looks like the two extremes.

India is outspoken about the illegality of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, condemns human rights violations during the conflict, and calls for dialogue to end the conflict, but it remains open to the dilemmas of history, nationalism and the security of all sides. Also familiar with complex interrelationships. Represent the events of Ukraine.

For one, whatever Russia’s immediate reasons for invading Ukraine, at its core is a strong sense of betrayal by the US about NATO expansion to the east and promises made after the end of the Cold War that this would not happen. . While these concerns were not entirely unfounded, it was evident from NATO member states that post-invasion military and other material support to Ukraine, as well as its President Volodymyr Zelensky’s response to the latest Russian contracts, fast-track membership. will apply for. NATO. That the US or NATO may not accede to this request quickly, if at all, can certainly be put down to Russian willingness to bet with the threat of nuclear weapons.

For another, it also appears to be the case that the US-led West is unwilling to offer Moscow any off-ramp – “route” – from the conflict. Ukrainians are buoyed by their military successes raising their ambitions to oust the Russians not only from territory occupied in eastern Ukraine since the start of the current conflict, but also from occupied Crimea in 2014. As for New Delhi, however, it seems that the Ukrainians are now being pushed by the West to continue a fight they cannot possibly win, if at all, leaving themselves at great cost.

Given Russia’s interference in the US electoral process and its subsequent classification as a “strategic adversary”, US action may seem entirely reasonable and justified. But from New Delhi’s point of view, if Putin’s downfall is what Americans are seeing through a protracted conflict, there is no guarantee that his replacement will be any better and there is every possibility that the developing world will be vulnerable to conflict. The macroeconomic consequences will pay off. A new crisis elsewhere.

So, even leaving aside one’s own political and economic interests – the ability to access Russian crude at concessional rates, being able to moderate the Russia-China alignment as well as buffering itself from US unreliability The need for (consider the subsequent abrupt exit from Afghanistan) – India has good reasons to continue its current record of absence from the UN Security Council.

Elsewhere in Minto

Manu Joseph explains in opinion why intellectuals are wrong About the rise of authority in Europe. Ankita Thakur location data Can promote enterprise in Tier II and III cities. Andy Mukherjee says India’s internet policy should not evolve Chinese characters, Long story a. explores the possibility of foggy november this year.