Press the play button
EVEN as we crossed one year of the Ukraine conflict in February this year, there is no end in sight. Everything has been weaponised, including social media, cyber and digital space, finance, food, energy and sports. The unilateral non-UN sanctions imposed by the West have caused the Global South tremendous distress and supply chain disruptions with respect to food, energy, fertilisers, finance and funds. We have now reached a point when neither side is willing to or is allowed to try the path of dialogue or diplomacy.
If India does not take the lead, others will wrest the initiative and we will lose an opportunity to lead during what is a crucial turning point in history.
The two parties came to the table during the early months of the conflict in 2022, but this was scuttled by outside players. The sabotaging of the Nord Stream 1 & 2 pipelines also scuttled the political will of West European countries to undertake diplomatic efforts. While the Black Sea Grains Initiative was a welcome step, the UN Secretary General has indicated that he will ‘mediate only if all parties want him to mediate.’ The Chinese initiative hasn’t received traction since they present a selective Chinese world view, whereas the 10-point peace plan of Ukrainian President Zelenskyy also hasn’t received the enthusiastic endorsement of G7. He is also pushing for a Global Peace Summit. Brazilian President Lula da Silva, the next G20 Chairperson, has talked about putting together a Contact Group on Ukraine.
The refrain one hears is that neither side is ready for dialogue, which begs the question — how can they be ready if you don’t allow them to be?
Meanwhile, the immense suffering of the Ukrainians has not moved either of the sides. Neither has the suffering of the Global South. People don’t seem to matter in this war.
Prime Minister Modi’s stand that this is not an era for war has been heard loud and clear. The conflict has proved to us again the sagacity of having an independent and proactive foreign policy to create that strategic space for ourselves in consonance with our national interest. But is the stand taken by India so far enough or should India do more?
A flashback to the 1950s. When we were in the Security Council for the first time in 1950-51, we witnessed the Korean war. The scenario was broadly similar — the US on one side and Russia and China on the other. Our ceaseless efforts to bring about a resolution without being condemnatory on either side helped finalise the armistice agreement in 1953. In recognition of our efforts, India was made Chair of the five-member Neutral Nations Repatriation Commission set up soon after, a duty which we discharged to the full satisfaction of all sides.
Can we play a similar role now? While each conflict has its own dynamics, India has the necessary heft and credibility to play that role now. Creating a strategic space in foreign policy by itself is good but not enough. It is time to use it.
Given our current policy of multi-alignment, where we are members of BRICS, Quad and the SCO, and our ability to reach out to both sides of the divide in the Ukraine conflict, we now have an opportunity to play that role.
Such an initiative becomes all the more urgent when we see that there is a competition to give more arms to Ukraine. Russia and Ukraine are said to be poised to make fresh military thrusts. In the meantime, we are also seeing the reiteration of the ‘no-limits partnership’ between Russia and China showing the world that, at the very least, China will not let Russia be defeated militarily. Further while, on the one hand, France is calling for ‘strategic space’ for Europe vis-a-vis China and the US, on the other hand, the US and the UK are determined to pursue the military option in Ukraine.
India is also the President of G20. At the recent meeting of G20 finance ministers and Central Bank Governors in Bengaluru and the G20 foreign ministers’ meeting in Delhi, there was no consensus document. Both Russia and China have stood firm that they cannot allow a consensus if there are references to the conflict. This deadlock is not going to go away any time soon and may, in fact, get more difficult as the situation further deteriorates on the ground.
Moreover, this conflict is sucking financial and other resources out of the system — resources which are vital for the Global South to realise Sustainable Development Goals 2030 targets and drive climate action targets of 2030 under the Paris Agreement.
Even more fundamentally, questions are being asked in the Global South on whom do principles of international law apply. Do they apply only when there is a conflict in the West or do they apply to other conflicts also, where the West has disregarded these very principles? India’s stand has been a catalyst in helping other developing countries refuse to take sides, shrug off pressure from both sides, abstain in UNGA voting and reject the push for a military solution.
Consequently, any initiative on Ukraine from India will not only be timely but also immediate and necessary. It will also be seen as credible, coming as it does from a country with an independent voice on the conflict as well as the current President of G20. It will also show our seriousness to address the conflict. And there is no need to fear failure since India coming in will be a significant step in the right direction.
If India does not take the lead in this matter, others will wrest the initiative and we will lose an opportunity to lead during what is certainly a crucial turning point in history. Are we going to let this initiative slip into the hands of those who may not be capable or not be unbiased or not be equal to the task? It’s time we punched the play button.
