Ritu Jha-
India’s repeated refusal to vote against old friend Russia seems to be testing the patience of new friend the United States. A senior U.S. diplomat has openly said it is time for India to take a stand and “avoid major new transactions for Russian weapons systems”.
Madelyn Mahon, foreign service officer at the State Department, told indica, “The United States continues to engage with our partners in India and around the world to discuss the importance of a strong collective response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.”
She was responding to a question on the stern statement made by Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia Donald Lu after India abstained, yet again, this time in the U.N. General Assembly, on a resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Mahon said, “India has expressed deep concern over the situation in Ukraine and reiterated its call for immediate cessation of violence and an end to hostilities. As India has stated, all member states of the United Nations are not only obliged to follow the U.N. Charter, but to respect international law and the territorial integrity and sovereignty of states.”
Several national and international media outlets highlighted Lu’s statement after India abstained on the General Assembly resolution Wednesday. Lu said all attempts to persuade India to end its balancing act had failed so far.
“Let me say that all of us have been working to urge India to take a clear position, a position opposed to Russia’s actions,” he said. “But what have we seen so far? We have seen a number of abstentions.” The State Department’s frustration was clear for all to see.
Many now fear the U.S. may initiate action against India by imposing sanctions if New Delhi goes ahead with its already contentious purchase of S-400 Triumf missile defense systems from Russia. Action may be initiated under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).
Asked specifically about this possibility, Mahon said, “We have not yet made a determination under CAATSA with respect to this transaction. We continue to urge all countries, including India, to avoid major new transactions for Russian weapons systems.”
Speaking to members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Wednesday, right after India and 34 other countries abstained from the General Assembly vote, Lu said the Biden Administration was still considering sanctions against India.
While Mahon declined to say more, it is clear that neither the Administration nor U.S. lawmakers are impressed with India’s balancing act.
Arzan Tarapore, PhD, South Asia research scholar, FSI Asia-Pacific Research Center, Stanford University, told indica, “India is in a tough spot. It is reluctant to condemn Russia too strongly. But we should also note that its position, while not aligned with (that of) the U.S. or NATO, still seeks to distance it from Russia more than in the past.”
Tarapore pointed out that India’s explanation of its vote at the U.N. Security Council, its aid to Ukraine, and its participation in the Quad summit today are clear signals to Moscow of New Delhi’s displeasure with Russian actions. Still, it cannot go as far as most Western governments would like.
Tarapore said India’s dependency on Russia for military equipment plays a big part in this reluctance. A majority of India’s military hardware is of Russian origin and needs continuing life-cycle support in the form of ammunition and spares. It will not be easy for India to switch quickly or seamlessly to non-Russian suppliers, partly because that would be prohibitively expensive and partly because Russia has sold India some equipment that others are not in a position to provide.
These tend to be the most valuable bits of Indian military equipment – like nuclear submarines. Moreover, some Russian-origin kit is especially valuable or sensitive right now: for example, India is inducting S-400 SAMs from Russia, a phase that involves greater reliance on Russian technical expertise.
Overlaid on all this is the continuing military stand-off on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China, so India will not want to jeopardize the possibility of getting emergency supplies (like critical ammunition stores) during a contingency, should that crisis escalate.
But the military relationship is not the only reason India is reluctant to take a hard line, Tarapore explained. India is also in a delicate position because it still has many citizens stuck in Ukraine and doesn’t want to jeopardize their evacuation by antagonizing either of the belligerents.
Moreover, Russia has been a reliable diplomatic partner over the decades and India has been careful to maintain a productive relationship with Moscow to prevent it from slipping further into China’s orbit. A Russia less dependent on Beijing is in New Delhi’s interest.
Yet, the war in Ukraine and the sanctions on Russia will probably turn all this upside down, the Stanford scholar said. India will have much greater difficulty buying Russian arms. And Russia will definitely grow more dependent on China because of the sanctions imposed by the West.
So, the war is clearly an inflection point for India’s relations with Russia – whether by choice or circumstance – and the India-Russia bilateral relationship will probably be reordered as a result.
As for the U.S. position, Tarapore said that despite some hysterical commentaries in the media, the State Department’s official position has been clear and reasonable, that it does not expect India to behave as the U.S. does. This is astute and shows a maturity in the relationship between the U.S. and India, he said. Washington would, of course, prefer more strident Indian action, but understands New Delhi’s predicament.
It also understands that the U.S.-India relationship remains critical – and unchanged – in the Indo-Pacific region. Contrary to what the naysayers may have us believe, the Quad summit sent a clear signal that the U.S.’s partnership with India has not been undermined.
Former U.S. deputy secretary of state Stephen Biegun and Anja Manuel, executive director of the Aspen Strategy Group, in an article in the Indian news portal The Print recalled how the U.S. has been supporting the country, from the civilian nuclear deal to offset India’s power shortages to encouraging its partnership as a member of the Quad, and said Indian foreign policy experts must understand that this is a fight to defend democracy against authoritarianism.
They pointed out that the U.S. had given India aid worth over $2.8 billion since 2001, including for the 2004 tsunami response and as part of an emergency Covid-19 response last year. And after Chinese forces crossed the LAC in Ladakh in 2020, several U.S. officials supported India publicly while Washington shared real-time geospatial intelligence and leased Predator drones to India.
Indeed, during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the U.S. in September, he described the U.S. and India as “natural partners”.
Incidentally, Assistant Secretary Lu was in California last month [Above photo Lu in the middle right side]and met several Indian community leaders and discussed visa problems and won praise as well for some quick actions.
Ajay Bhutoria, now a member of President Biden’s Advisory Commission on Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, told indica, “I had one-on-one meetings with Assistant Secretary Lu Feb 25 in Mountain View and later in the evening in Hayward. Sharing his thoughts on India’s abstention (in the Security Council), he said, ‘A majority of countries around the world are standing with Ukraine and condemn Russia’s action. India should also consider denouncing Russia’s irresponsible action’.”
Bhutoria, however, felt that India could be in a position to play a diplomatic role in bringing Russia and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies together for talks to work out a ceasefire.
