India as G-20 chair: Will New Delhi’s altruism and pacifism help end Ukraine War?

Though Prime Minister Narendra Modi had said that ‘ India has become the centre-point to world’s desires’ in a different context, it indeed has become one, as the chair of two prestigious global groupings, namely, the G-20 and SCO for 2023. In the G-20 especially, India is one country that cannot be marked as centre-right or centre-left, thus providing and provisioning for balancing the two, especially in the context of the continuing Ukraine War. It is this Indian characteristic that will come under severe stress, strain and a series of tests through the year, again thanks to the Ukraine War. New Delhi should be happy that it did not host this year’s G-20, which took place in Bali, Indonesia, where Modi and the rest of the world leaders gathered last week. It is not as much about what transpired there but what did not transpire. After all, with what all the West has to say against Russia on the Ukraine front having been said in various global capitals, and also in the UNSC and the UNGA, the absence of President Vladimir Putin and the avoidance of the traditional ‘ family photo op’ even without him alone stand out. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov represents Russia at the summit. The West’s targeting of his nation, and his responses, both within the summit and to the international media outside, will be subjects of analytical interpretations in the days that follow. So will the list of leaders whom he met. Balancing ties For India, if it were the host this time, the situation would have been more embarrassing than for host Indonesia. India is diffident and is also in defiance of the West, especially, after a point. New Delhi has been seeking to balance its commercial relations with Russia and strategic ties with the US-led West, without giving an inch to either. This would not have been possible as the host, so to say. That leads to the focus on India as the possible ‘peace-maker’ in the Ukraine War. Indian intentions are altruist. Despite the aggressive ‘Surgical Strikes’ and the like, the world sees the nation still in Gandhi’s pacifist approach. It is also the core of Indian values. New Delhi has not linked either war or peace in eastern Europe as beneficial to its continuing to import oil from Russia. This is despite the fact that Russia had to promptly cut down the price when global oil prices were expected to go through the roof. It is also a fact that under the given circumstances, if there has to be a negotiated end to the war, the West has not left anyone with substantial reach, to play the facilitator, if required. The UN ceased to be one very long ago after successive secretaries-general in the post-Cold War era displayed undiluted partisanship. The East is incapable of producing a facilitator, not after then Soviet Prime Minister Alexi Kosygin played the role to end the India-Pakistan conflict of 1965. De-risking global economy As if in the run-up to the G-20 summit, rather before PM Modi left for Bali, it would seem, External Affair Minister (EAM) S Jaishankar made a quick trip to Moscow, where he met with his Russian counterpart Lavrov. Days later, he met with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba on the side-lines of the ASEAN-India summit in the Cambodian capital of Phnom Penh. After the Moscow meet, the minister recalled what PM Modi told President Putin at the Samarkand SCO summit: ‘This is not an era of war’. He added that the global economy is too inter-dependent not to be impacted by a significant conflict and the Global South is feeling ‘this pain very acutely’, especially after two years of Covid pandemic. India ‘strongly advocates a return to dialogue and diplomacy’ and is on the side of ‘peace, respect for international law and support for the UN Charter’, Jaishankar said. He even offered help in issues, including food grains and fertiliser shipments, and support for any initiative that de-risks the global economy. At the same time, India, he asserted, will continue to buy cheap Russian oil, to cater to the needs of domestic consumers. It was Jaishankar’s maiden visit to Moscow after the commencement of the war in February. He said that it is essential that the time-tested bilateral defence relationship continues to perform smoothly. Lavrov added that they had a detailed discussion on the prospects in military and technical cooperation, including joint production of weaponry — all of it implying that India is not going to shake off traditional Russia ties, or limit it in any way, despite continuous urgings and pressures from the West. In a tweet after meeting the Ukrainian counterpart, Jaishankar said that the ‘discussions covered recent developments in the conflict, the grain initiative and nuclear concerns’. Kuleba tweeted that they discussed ‘bilateral cooperation and ways to end Russia’s war on Ukraine. I emphasized that Russia must immediately cease deadly attacks, withdraw all troops from Ukraine, and commit to peace. We also focused on global food security’, he added. Security concerns If Jaishankar’s talks with counterparts from the two warring nations mean anything more than exchanging notes, especially if it was still a preliminary initiative for a patch-up, there is nothing even remotely on record to show it. For, such initiatives commenced months ago, when PM Modi talked to Russia’s Putin and Ukrain’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy, initially to facilitate oil purchases from Russia, and grain movement from Ukraine. But of immediate greater concern for New Delhi was the safety of the Indian medicos in the war-zone in Ukraine. It goes to India’s credit of balancing-act that both Russia and Ukraine suspended the war for a time, and created a safe-zone for Indian nationals to reach safety, and then to their homes. However, all subsequent contacts between India and either of these nations, whether at the prime minister’s level or that of the foreign ministers, have focussed more on the global pains of the war, and the need to end the same, asap. When Modi expressed himself against war in his Samarkand meeting with Putin, there is no knowing if India had laid equal stress on Ukraine too having to address Moscow’s security concerns flowing from the other’s intention to join NATO. Ironically, more than any time in the past, Ukraine will be more than inclined to join the US-led NATO now, in the face of the ‘Russian invasion’, as its sense of insecurity too is more than at any time in the past. Kyiv cannot also be seen as taking unilateral decisions in ending the war, without consulting its American and European backers. As may be recalled, until the West upped its military supplies to Ukraine close to a fortnight after commencement, the war was going in Russia’s way. Today, it is evenly poised, with Russia repeatedly withdrawing from Ukrainian territories, one following the other, after western arms supplies began pouring in. Kyiv cannot overlook it. Indispensable partner, but… Incidentally, no Western power has called for peace negotiations to end the war, not in recent weeks. Instead, they have all insisted on Russia ending the ‘invasion’. The US and the UK have mainly focussed on it. West European nations, stuck as they are with anticipated gas shortages ahead of another winter, seem to be circumspect. For the same reason, they have also not talked about any one playing the facilitator for such talks – lest it should also be interpreted as they losing their nerves, whatever the reason. Against this, the US, staying at a safe distance from the war-zone and not dependent on Russia, or even Ukraine, for raw materials and supplies, has been forceful in its condemnation of Russia and Putin. It has also been the way the US is known to act since the end of the Second World War. It needs to reassert its position within the western order. Also, old habits die hard, especially when the bogey of the erstwhile Soviet Union keeps returning in the form of Putin’s Russia. Lately, the US has been more vociferous about India, for instance, still purchasing Russian oil. In the early weeks of the West-imposed sanctions, Washington’s allies were the first ones to troop to New Delhi to dissuade India in the matter. Recently, the US State Department spokesperson Ned Price was talking about India’s transition away from Russia. He claimed that a number of countries have learned ’the hard way of the fact’ that Moscow is not a reliable source of energy or security. In this context. Per force, he recalled how the India-US relations have ‘deepened in every sector, including economy, security and military cooperation’. In New Delhi, addressing an US-India Businesses and Investment Opportunities event American Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, too, said India was an ‘ indispensable partner’. Addressing the event, India’s finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman said that economic ties between the two countries are touching new heights, and at $ 150 b in 2021, the US today is India’s biggest trading partner In a media interview in Delhi, secretary Yellen said / clarified that there was no bar on Russia selling oil, or any nation buying Russian oil, as long as it was under the price-cap fixed by the G-7 grouping. In what could be seen as a cheek-by-jowl comment, she however added India and private Indian oil companies ‘can purchase at any price they want’ as long as they don’t use western oil tankers and seek insurance and the like from western companies. Yellen said that the US would help India through the G-20 presidency. Indications however are that the US and the rest of the West would bring pressure on India at the multiple G-20 fora through the next year, with their focus on Russia and Russia-India relations. The way New Delhi has managed it all through the past months of the Ukraine War, in the UNSC and UNGA, and other fora and conferences, India can be expected to ‘balance’ its multiple relations and equations as comfortably and confidently through the coming year, at the helm of G-20, and also the SCO. In doing so, New Delhi can be expected to keep larger humanitarian aspects and also the nation’s ‘supreme self-interest’ the American way, in constant focus, but without sacrificing larger global concerns and interests. It is thus not impossible that all stake-holders and competitors in G-20 and the SCO feel sobered and chastised through India’s firm but pacifist approach to complex matters, with the traditional all-Indian attitude and approach that avoids conflicts and clears the air for a cohesive and comprehensive dialogue on contentious issues. The writer is a Chennai-based policy analyst & political commentator. Views expressed are personal. Read all the Latest News , Trending News ,  Cricket News , Bollywood News , India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.