India making efforts to end Ukraine war

AFTER declaring that ‘this is not an era of war’ in the context of Ukraine, India is not resting on its laurels, although it is extremely pleased with the positive response from the international community to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s now-famous seven words spoken to Russian President Vladimir Putin 10 months ago.

Indian negotiators are convinced that if peace efforts get off the ground, the final summit document can be about peace in Ukraine, not the war.

Avoiding publicity and treading softly, but in a structured format, India is walking the talk and doing its best to seek an end to the 17-month-old conflict between Russia and Ukraine. True to this format, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) did not announce in advance or after the event its participation in a Ukraine-related secret conference at Copenhagen in June-end. Sanjay Verma, India’s second-ranked career diplomat (after the Foreign Secretary), represented the country at this conference. In another such instance, the MEA did not tell anyone prior to Verma’s travel to Kyiv that he would be with the top Ukrainian leadership on the day Modi would discuss the war with French President Emmanuel Macron.

The stage for such secret diplomacy in the cause of peace was set by Modi’s meeting with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Hiroshima in May — the first meeting between the two men since the war began. That meeting as well as a visit to New Delhi by Ukraine’s First Deputy Foreign Minister Emine Dzhaparova in April were part of India’s public diplomacy with Ukraine.

Outlandish though it may sound on the surface, the need of the hour for India — to use a well-worn cliché — is to be seen as working towards peace in Ukraine. A peace initiative in which India plays a part is the only way New Delhi can prevent the G20 summit in September from ending in discord. Such a prospect is unthinkable for those who have toiled for two years for the success of the summit as the crowning foreign policy achievement of Modi’s second term in office. It is clear by now, after more than 50 high-level meetings all over India since the assumption of the organisation’s presidency, that the conundrum over the Ukraine conflict will prevent the G20 from reaching a consensus on a joint communiqué at the end of the summit. An initiative — even one that does not actually bring peace, yet is ongoing — offers a way out of this dilemma. No G20 member will say that it is against peace. India is hopeful that drafting a joint communiqué with emphasis on peace is far easier than drafting one in which the talk is all about Russia’s violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. Several G20 countries will refuse to sign on to a document which dwells negatively on Russia. On the other hand, without a peace initiative to fall back on, almost all Group of Seven (G7) rich Zelenskyy backers will insist on strong references to Russia’s alleged misdeeds. Most Indian negotiators are convinced at this stage that if peace efforts get off the ground, the final summit document can be about peace in Ukraine, not about the war.

The paradox of the 17-month-long war is that Zelenskyy wants peace, but his international backers will not let him have it. The White House, for example, will fight for Ukraine till the last able-bodied Ukrainian is capable of fighting. But no American boots on the ground. In Warsaw, politicians of all hues are salivating at the prospect that the war will eventually lead to the incorporation of parts of western Ukraine into Poland. Some of these territories were once part of Poland. Ukraine’s tragedy is that when it was part of the Soviet Union, it had little say in its destiny. After Ukraine became independent, its people have even less say about their country’s fate. Ukraine became a western pawn to destroy Russia, especially after Washington’s puppet Boris Yeltsin (former Russian President) ceded the Kremlin’s power to Putin.

It is instructive now to recall a speech by Denmark’s then Prime Minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, at the so-called Ukraine Reform Conference in June 2018. The title of the conference said it all. Ukraine had become the most corrupt country in Europe. Oligarchs had seized everything in the former Soviet republic the way their peers in Moscow and St Petersburg nearly seized everything that was worth capturing in Russia before Putin stopped his country from going the Ukraine way. Unlike in Ukraine, Putin got back the family silver for his people, although he had to make several compromises with Russian oligarchs along the way for reasons of expediency. Ukraine’s Prime Minister at the time of the Ukraine Reform Conference was Volodymyr Groysman, Zelenskyy’s namesake.

“Reforming a society fundamentally is an immense task,” Rasmussen had told Ukraine’s Prime Minister (“my friend Volodymyr”) at that time. “One example is the fight against corruption,” the Danish leader advised. “Reforms are moving forward at a snail’s pace. Better framework conditions are required for businesses and investments, including foreign investments. Private companies depend on a well-functioning and independent system of justice.” Today, western propaganda — in which a dishonest western media has played a part — has made us forget that Ukraine did not have any of these since it became a sovereign republic in 1991. It is still lacking in those.

Modi did right by telling Zelenskyy in Hiroshima that India would continue to provide humanitarian assistance to Ukraine, particularly pharmaceuticals, a critical wartime requirement. Foreign Secretary Vinay Mohan Kwatra was expansively candid at the end of their meeting which, Kwatra said, “was sought by President Zelenskyy.” Asked about a mediatory role by India, Kwatra said: “The Prime Minister conveyed to Zelenskyy that India and the Prime Minister himself will do everything in their power to find a resolution to the situation through diplomacy and dialogue.” He did not rule out mediation. He made a distinction between the dual roles of ‘India and the Prime Minister’. Between the lines, he was alluding in retrospect to the subsequent spadework done by Verma to pave the way for a peace initiative. Most candid of all, Kwatra said “the answer is no” about Zelenskyy attending the G20 summit. That is a red line, come what may.