The problem with India’s multi-alignment stand

Source– The post is based on the article “The problem with India’s multi-alignment stand” published in “The Hindu” on 12th May 2023.

Syllabus: GS2- International relations

Relevance– Ukraine issues and India stand

News– China’s recent mediation efforts to resolve the Ukraine crisis have once again spotlighted India’s approach to conflict resolution.

What has been the approach of China towards Ukraine use?

China has held the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s eastward expansion responsible for instigating the war. As per China, America is the biggest obstacle to a ceasefire.

It is exploiting the differences among western countries regarding the extent of support to Ukraine. It is cementing the Beijing-Moscow relationship and ensuring the survival of the Vladimir Putin regime.

Thus, China has effectively positioned itself in opposition to the American approach. This is not how India views its role in resolving the conflict.

How is India’s position different from China?

In contrast to the Chinese President first outreach to the Ukraine, Mr. Modi has spoken to Mr. Zelenskyy many times.

In October and December last year, Mr. Modi had expressed India’s solidarity with Ukraine while extending support for peace efforts. Mr. Modi had publicly told Mr. Putin that “today’s era is not of war”.

Washington understands the importance of India’s continuous engagement with Ukraine. It is an important way of bringing New Delhi’s response to the Ukraine war into alignment with its own. The geopolitics of the Indo-Pacific and the Ukraine conflict are inter-connected.

The regular Modi-Zelenskyy interactions shows India’s rising stature and recognition of its unique position in the emerging global order. This is despite western criticism of India’s continued energy imports from Russia.

Ukraine’s Deputy Foreign Minister Emine remarked that “India wants to be the Vishwaguru, the global teacher and arbiter. Supporting Ukraine is the only right choice for true Vishwaguru.”

New Delhi has expressed its disapproval of the Ukraine war. But it has avoided taking a clear position in many UN resolutions on the issue.

What are nationalist ideas about Indian foreign policy?

Nationalist ideas have always influenced the Indian state. The choice of the ‘Vishwaguru’ is at the core of the present government’s nationalist foreign policy discourse.

Vishwa Guru image builds on historical trends in India’s political thought. It seeks to emphasise the distinctiveness of the country’s cultural ethos and civilisational values. It highlights the unique nature of ‘soft power’ in foreign policy debates.

India lacks hard power. If India had been adequately powerful, it would have stopped the Ukraine war. The Ukraine attack is being opposed. But nobody is ready to stop Russia because Russia has power.

This narrative assumes that a powerful Indian civilisational state will stand for global peace and stability.

What are the options for India?

The ambiguous position on Ukraine is not a better option for a nation aspiring to become a permanent member of the UNSC. It should have a commitment to speak as a global voice against territorial aggression and rights violations anywhere.

The normative pillars of the democratic, self-confident and morally superior Vishwa Guru identity cannot be identical to hegemon maximising its power at all costs.

Russian justifications are sometimes supported by China. India has no such revisionist motives. India’s views on sovereignty converges with a universally acceptable Westphalian notion. It is against the communist China’s political philosophy of ‘might is right’.

Ukraine is seen as a victim which is resisting aggression from an authoritarian neighbour. The Ukraine war alone is not sufficient to undermine India’s historical ties with Russia. It is based as much on New Delhi’s military dependence on Moscow and India’s strategic autonomy doctrine.

A pursuit of ‘multi-alignment’ may have given New Delhi some diplomatic space in the ongoing war in Ukraine.  However, it may not be sufficient for India to play the role of a mediator between Russia and Ukraine.

India currently lacks the material resources to match the extent of China’s economic and military potential.

Through his peace diplomacy, Mr. Xi’s primary aim is to discourage Mr. Zelenskiy to launch the much-discussed counteroffensive. It will increase Russia’s dependency on China.

Mr. Putin has done immense damage to Russia’s global standing and offended most of the democratic world.

Thus, the Modi government must ensure that India’s refusal to condemn Russian belligerence and continued increase in the import of Russian fuel is not interpreted as a pro-Moscow approach.