PM Modi’s expected visit to Ukraine: Rhetoric and reality

The ruinous Ukraine conflict would soon touch the 900-day mark, with no end in sight. It bears repeating that this nation of 38 million people has fallen victim to the ambition, rivalry and machinations of big powers. Ukraine’s only fault was to take Western assurances at face value and turn its back on Russia. It has paid and continues to pay a very heavy price for its strategic naivety.

Ukraine has lost a minimum of 31,000 military personnel and more than 11,000 civilians (exact figures are unknown and likely to be much higher). A far larger number lie wounded, many grievously. An estimated 6.5 million people have fled the country, and 3.7 million people have been internally displaced. Reportedly, 14.6 million people will need humanitarian assistance this year.

Ukraine’s infrastructure is in a shambles, the power grid has been crippled, and close to 20 per cent of its territory is now under Russian control. More than half of Ukraine’s 36-gigawatt power generation capacity has been wrecked, causing huge shortages and blackouts. Despite importing 2GW of power from the EU, setting up mini-power plants, and using generators, the dire situation is likely to become grimmer during the upcoming severe winter season.

More from Opinion

Sergio Gor’s senate hearing signals the future of Indo-American ties How Trump’s ‘War on Drugs’ buildup against Venezuela has a hidden agenda

It would take hundreds of billions of dollars and at least a generation to rebuild. It is doubtful that the requisite resources for doing so would be made available by Ukraine’s affluent friends, even though they have eagerly supplied huge quantities of military hardware and munitions to fight the Russian army.

It is sad and ironic that countries, rich and poor, readily find resources to wage war but not to further peace or devel$2 trillion. Imagine what a transformation such a quantum of funds would have brought about, had they been deployed for combating hunger, disease, and climate change!

Impact Shorts

More Shorts

How army remains Pakistan’s biggest business house

60 years on, why 1965 India–Pakistan war still matters

Since the beginning of the conflict in February 2022, the US alone has provided approximately $53.7 billion in military assistance and hardware to Ukraine, including tanks, artillery, rockets, helicopters, UAVs, air defence batteries, and armoured personnel carriers. An estimated $93 billion in aid (military and civil) has been committed by the European Union.

Yet Ukraine is asking for more and pressing for advanced weaponry to take the fight deeper into Russian territory. NATO has since agreed to equip Ukraine with sixty F-16 fighter jets. The induction process has begun. Not satisfied, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been urging NATO to remove all restrictions on the calibre and usage of Western weapons against Russia.

NATO is divided over the issue, with some sections fearing, and rightly so, that such a move could lead to a marked escalation in conflict. The consequences of poking Russia, which possesses the largest number of nuclear weapons, in the eye could be extremely dangerous. The West also knows that in the event of a flare-up, it would essentially fall on them to pick up the pieces.

Ukraine has every right to defend itself and has done so admirably despite the heavy odds. But it has also shown an adventurous streak in carrying out stealth and provocative operations against Russia without taking NATO into confidence.

According to the New York Times, such operations that have ‘frustrated’ and ‘unnerved‘ American officials include a strike on a Russian air base on the western coast of Crimea, a truck bombing that destroyed part of the Kerch Strait Bridge, which links Russia to Crimea, and drone strikes deep inside Russia.

It may sound fanciful, yet a real possibility existed of ending the conflict within 100 days. According to insider accounts, Russia and Ukraine were simultaneously waging war and talking peace, facilitated by Belarus and Turkey. Several drafts of a treaty were exchanged in March and April 2022 that envisaged a peace deal premised on a neutral Ukraine that would forsake NATO membership but could prospectively become a member of the EU.

In turn, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany, Italy, Poland, Israel, and Turkey were to provide multilateral security guarantees to Ukraine. Zelenskyy and Putin were slated to meet face-to-face to sort out differences and conclude the treaty. However, it was allegedly scuttled primarily by the UK and the US, who were determined to make an example of Putin.

Notwithstanding a sustained Western disinformation campaign about President Vladimir Putin’s declining health and fading support, he is going strong. The Russian economy remains robust. Its war machinery is chugging along. It is the Western attention and commitment that is faltering! After some 30 months of hostilities, the Ukrainian morale is getting affected, and the incidence of draft-dodging is growing.

Meanwhile, an estimated 450,000 Russian and over 200,000 Ukrainian troops are engaged in a bitter fight with missiles flying in all directions, wreaking havoc on life and property. It is in such a fraught atmosphere that Prime Minister Narendra Modi could be visiting Ukraine in late August. It gives rise to several questions.

First and foremost is that of security. Even under normal conditions, news of an overseas visit by the Indian prime minister gets known only a few days in advance. Given the serious security challenges, one wonders how it has become public almost a month before the event. Typically, complete confidentiality is maintained in such situations, and the visit is announced a few hours ahead or even after its conclusion.

Secondly, why is the visit being contemplated at such a juncture? India’s ties with Ukraine are cordial but not necessarily substantive. An Indian prime minister has not visited Ukraine for decades. India has traditionally looked at the country through the prism of her ties with Russia. Ukraine since independence has had a Westward orientation. Ukrainian supplies of military hardware to Pakistan, exceeding a billion dollars, rankled with India. Pakistan, notwithstanding official denials, has since reciprocated by supplying 155mm artillery shells worth $364 million to Ukraine in 2022–23.

Since the outbreak of the conflict, Narendra Modi and Volodymyr Zelenskyy have met twice on the margins of G7 summits and have also had several telephone conversations. India has sent at least 15 consignments of humanitarian assistance to Ukraine. Kyiv was quite helpful in facilitating the safe evacuation of Indian students.

Ukraine has sought Indian intervention to end the conflict. It has similarly reached out to several other nations, including China. At the same time, Kyiv has been quite critical of India’s stand on the conflict. The Ukrainian foreign minister had remarked that “every barrel of the Russian oil India receives contains a substantial share of Ukrainian blood”. Zelenskyy had recently lashed out at PM Modi embracing the Russian President, conveniently forgetting that Modi had similarly embraced him.

There has been considerable commentary and speculation about the purpose and agenda of the PM’s visit. It has been variously dubbed a balancing act, damage control exercise, and even a mediation effort. While it is quite possible that it may have one or all these elements, things just do not add up.

Western reaction to Modi’s Russia visit was more or less on expected lines. His Ukraine visit may not change their outlook or assuage their contrived sense of hurt. India had taken a conscious and considered decision to hold a summit with Russia, and there is no looking back. If independent foreign policy comes at a cost, so be it.

In Ukraine, PM Modi may emphasise the need for dialogue and possibly suggest a way forward in light of his talks with Putin. However, the combatants do not seem ready to genuinely give diplomacy a chance. A ‘Summit on Peace in Ukraine’, for example, was held last June in Geneva incredulously without inviting Russian participation. It was reduced to a non-event. The way things are, the conflict may deepen in the weeks ahead instead of getting defused.

Thus, with not many concrete deliverables in sight, the purpose of the visit, if it does take place, remains unclear. Yet it also needs to be noted that Prime Minister Modi is not given to travelling abroad for sightseeing! It would be interesting to watch the unfolding developments.

The author is a foreign affairs specialist and an ex-envoy to Canada and South Korea. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.