in Buka, Ukraine | Photo Credit: AP
a recent report in a major US daily focuses on India likely to play key role In an attempt to bring Russia and Ukraine to the negotiating table. This report was given by Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar’s visit to Moscow (November 7-8). This led to comments, both sober and enthusiastic, in the Indian media about how Indian diplomacy since Russian invasion of UkraineIn February 2022, India was cleverly positioned to promote peace between the warring parties.
For supporters of the ruling government, a mediate Indian role in the Ukraine war would naturally serve as a great confirmation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s personal status as a world leader and the successful handling of India’s external interests by his government. Will do
When the G20 presidency is in the picture
Mr. Modi is drawing public attention to his efforts to advance India’s global standing and prestige, this is evident from the enormous emphasis being given to India to assume the presidency of the G20 on December 1, 2022. On the logo, theme and website of the President of India, he said: “You can imagine what a great opportunity the country has had in the ‘elixir of independence’. It is a matter of pride for every Indian; it brings to one’s pride He added, “…This summit is not just a diplomatic meeting. India sees it as a new responsibility for itself. India sees it as the world’s faith in itself.” The question is whether he will consider the G20 presidency as a “new” responsibility to contribute to the resolution of the Ukraine conflict.
He may be actively encouraged by the West to do so. The idea, although enticing, is fraught with pitfalls. This would mark a departure from the cautious, and largely successful, approach that India has adopted so far on the Ukraine war. India has made its disapproval of Russia’s action clear, even as it has refrained from voting against it on concrete resolutions in UN fora, including the Security Council. India has gone to the extent of Mr. Modi openly telling Russian President Vladimir Putin in Samarkand (September 2022) that the present era is not of war.
India has advocated a return to diplomacy and dialogue. India has intervened with Russia in specific matters such as preventing it from jeopardizing the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant (in Ukraine) or allowing the export of Ukrainian food grains. But all these steps are a far cry from mediation or efforts to bring the parties to the negotiating table.
Lessons from Rajiv Gandhi era
If Mr. Modi or his advisers are tempted to accept Western exhortations to go in the direction of mediation, they would consider the lessons learned by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in intervening with the Soviet leadership at the instigation of the United States. , to end the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. As highlighted in the book, The Great Game in Afghanistan: Rajiv Gandhi, General Zia and the Ending War, Indo-US Diplomacy on Afghanistan A “story of India’s diplomatic defeat and American duplicity” (p.17). India itself wanted Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan from the time it took place. It conveyed its assessment privately to the Soviet Union. However, it is one thing to self motivation And quite different to take an initiative from another country.
Under Rajiv Gandhi, Indian policy makers realized that Indian interests would be best served by the establishment of a broad-based neutral government in Kabul, and the US gave New Delhi the illusion that it wanted the same.
Editorial | Neutrality and Avoidance: On India’s Stand in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Another implied aspect of the bargain was that the US would put the brakes on Pakistan’s secret nuclear weapons program. However it became clear that the US was not interested in any of this; Nor did he want India to play an active diplomatic role in ending the Afghanistan crisis. It only wanted to bring Indian influence to bear on the Soviet Union to withdraw its forces from Afghanistan. When the US position became clear to Rajiv Gandhi, Indo-US relations, which were seeing some heat, were affected.
The present era with its own compulsions for India is a far cry from the 1980s. But the basic principles that govern the games of nations do not change. As it was in the 1980s, now, the US and the West in general want India to use such an advantage as it might to abandon the war with Mr Putin and negotiate with Ukraine. They are undoubtedly aware that Indian shares with Ukraine are practically non-existent. So, regardless of what they can tell India about its growing role in the world and how its global reputation will grow, what they really want to do is change India’s interference with Mr. Putin.
Risks of going beyond this precept
It is certainly appropriate for India to point to the larger and growing global difficulties caused by Russian action. Mr Jaishankar was right when he said after a meeting with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in Moscow on 8 November, and in his presence that “the global economy is too inter-dependent for a significant conflict anywhere, not to have major consequences.” Elsewhere. We are seeing growing concerns over energy and food security from two years of conflict on top of the dire tensions created by COVID. The Global South, in particular, is feeling the pain acutely.” It would also be appropriate for India to continue to insist that a way out can be found only through dialogue and diplomacy. However, going beyond such precepts would be counterproductive. This is not only because mediation efforts, if undertaken, may fail, but also because they will expose the true extent of India’s global influence and the limits of personal chemistry between leaders in influencing events.
Leaders and diplomats like angels should always tread lightly.
Vivek Katju is a former Indian diplomat