As Modi met Zelenskyy in Kyiv, India showed its strategic autonomy to the world

Last month, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi met President Vladimir Putin in Moscow, Russia bombed a children’s hospital in Ukrainian capital Kyiv.

Earlier today, Modi accompanied Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to a memorial of children killed in the war with Russia in Kyiv and paid his respects. The sombre visuals of Modi walking with Zelenskyy and holding him by the shoulder as they watched a feature on deceased children conveyed much more than accompanying statements.

Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said that Modi was “deeply touched by the poignant exposition set up in memory of children” killed in the ongoing war. He further said, “He expressed his sorrow at the tragic loss of young lives and as a mark of respect placed a toy in their memory.”

While the visit was brief, it was rich in substance and signalling. It was yet another demonstration to the world that India’s foreign policy was driven by national interests alone and not by any partner or bloc — even if it is a historic partner like Russia. It was a message to the world that India stood by long-standing principles and to Russia that had been cosying up to China for years and is now part of the China-led anti-Western bloc which runs counter to India’s interests.

In the joint statement, India and Ukraine called for upholding territorial integrity and sovereignty of states — even as Russia has formally annexed four regions of Ukraine and is fighting in other regions as well.

Modi’s visit to Ukraine served to set the record straight of how India saw Ukraine, Russia, and the ongoing conflict, says Swasti Rao, a scholar of Europe at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA).

“The perception has always been that while India has had a historic relationship with Russia, there has not been a substantial relationship with Ukraine. The fact, however, is that India’s relationship with Russia is rooted in the relationship with erstwhile Soviet Union and Ukraine was also part of the Soviet Union until the break-up in 1991. Historically, India has always had a relationship with Ukraine even though it stayed under the radar,” says Rao.

Similar to Russia, India had a good military and defence relationship with Ukraine where the country was a major source of aircraft and ship engines. India has also bought small arms from Ukraine in the past — which inherited a part of the former Soviet Union’s military-industrial complex.

India’s strategic autonomy at display

Modi’s visit to Ukraine shows that India’s view of the country and the ongoing conflict is independent from that of Russia.

India’s engagement with Ukraine is also part of the renewed interest in Eastern Europe where India has ramped up interactions with the likes of Poland and Greece.

Rao, an Associate Fellow at the Europe and Eurasia Center at the MP-IDSA, says that India has dehyphenated the relationships with Russia and Ukraine.

“The messaging from Russia suggested that the Indian neutrality in the Ukraine conflict was being taken for granted and that India was bound to see the conflict from Moscow’s point of view. That’s obviously not the case. India has been quite consistent in call for peace and stopping the war. It has been part of all the peace conferences so far and has been in constant touch with Ukraine since the beginning of the war. It has constantly provided humanitarian assistance to Ukraine. India’s neutrality was never passive or inclined towards Russia. It was in line with India’s own values,” says Rao.

India’s long-held principle of strategic autonomy was at display in Kyiv where Modi’s actions were in direct contravention to the agenda of Russia — which sees India as a friendly piece in the three-dimensional chess against the West. Modi in Kyiv paid respects to Ukrainian children killed by Russia, handed over mobile hospital units to help treat people injured by Russia, and called for the respect of Ukraine’s territorial integrity hampered by Russia.

As India affirmed the “respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty of states”, India effectively rejected the basis of the Russia’s war. Putin invaded Ukraine on grounds that it’s an illegitimate country and went on to illegally annex four of its regions. India’s call for the respect to territorial integrity tears through Putin’s premise.

At the same time, India has not jumped into the Ukraine-West wagon. While Modi and Minister of External Affairs S Jaishankar reiterated India’s support to the resolution of the conflict through dialogue and diplomacy and emphasised on India’s participation in peace conferences, they also stressed that India had skipped joint communiques in these conferences as it was a futile exercise as Russia was not part of these meetings. Similarly, Jaishankar said that India’s long-held practice is to only abide by the United Nations (UN) sanctions.

There is another message to Russia with the meeting. It is public knowledge that China is India’s principal adversary and Russia has consistently moved closer to China over the years — to the extent that it’s now part of a China-led bloc against the West along with Iran and North Korea.

Modi has conveyed to Russia subtly that if it would not respect India’s sensibilities regarding China, it may not always respect the Russian sensibilities, says Rao.

“The India-Ukraine engagement has increased since the beginning of the war. That way, Russia has only brought India closer to Ukraine,” says Rao.

What’s next in Ukraine-Russia War?

Modi’s visit came at a time when the Ukraine-Russia War has entered a new phase.

Earlier this month, Ukraine invaded Russia in the border province of Kursk. Since then, it has occupied more than 1,000 square kilometres of Russian territories and the fighting has spread to the second province of Belgorod. The idea was to use the offensive as a bargaining chip in future negotiations with Russia.

Even as Ukraine continues to make gains in Kursk, including controlling the town of Sudza which is critical to gas trade, Russia has continued to push inside Ukraine. In the recent days, it has scored numerous victories in the eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region and is closing on the town of Pokrovsk, which is the regional logistical hub. The situation is precarious for the Ukrainians there and a Russian control of Pokrovsk could potentially compromise the entire east for Ukraine.

While the purpose of the Kursk incursion was to use the gains as a bargaining chip and ease pressure off the Ukrainian defenders, that does not seem to be happening as the Russians have continued to push deeper irrespective of the losses in Kursk, says Rao.

As Ukraine has opened a new front, Rao says that chances of any talks between the two sides in the near-future are also dead.

Rao tells Firstpost, “The war has now entered a very dangerous phase. The idea behind Ukraine’s push inside Russia was to gain as much ground as possible to prepare for a potential Trump presidency in the United States. The idea appears to have been that if Trump as president forces Ukraine to come to the negotiating table, then Ukraine would have a bargaining chip to negotiate from a position of relative strength. Ukraine also wanted Russian resources to be spread more so that the pressure on the war inside Ukraine eased. While it has indeed won lots of land, the pressure has not eased and Russia has continued to push. So far, the Ukrainian plan has not worked to its liking. As things stand, particularly as Russia keeps moving towards Pokrovsk, Ukraine stands to lose more if things so south.”