In a historical and widely publicised meeting, Prime Minister Narendra Modi met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv, drawing significant attention from academics and journalists worldwide. While India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) emphasised that the meeting was not intended as an effort at mediation, the timing and the nature of this visit raise several questions, especially considering India’s traditionally cautious approach to foreign policy. Although the MEA was careful not to attract press attention due to the nature of the visit, much of the discussion in post-meeting briefings by External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar centred around the potential role of India in mediating the conflict. The visit came at a difficult time for any immediate peace initiative by India as Ukraine opened a new front of war with a surprise incursion in the Kursk region.
A consistent foreign policy approach
Historically rooted in non-alignment and strategic autonomy, India’s foreign policy has always sought to balance its relationships with global powers and a peaceful negotiation of territorial disputes. Since the onset of the Russia-Ukraine war in February 2022, India has avoided taking sides, much to the ire of the western states, which have wanted India to condemn the Russian role in the conflict. This approach is consistent with India’s broader strategy of managing complex geopolitical landscapes without compromising its national interests. India has always advocated respect for the United Nations charter and peaceful settlement of disputes through institutions such as the UN.
In February this year, Mr. Jaishankar, in an interview with the German economic daily, Handelsblatt, hinted at the possibility of India’s interest in playing a mediating role in the conflict if approached. However, he emphasised that New Delhi would not take the initiative on its own.
Given this backdrop, Mr. Modi’s visit to Ukraine had some sort of peace initiative on the agenda. The possibility of enhancing bilateral relations with Ukraine appeared slim. India is not dependent on Ukraine for trade, defence, or technology. Opening a new front of bilateral engagement with Kyiv at this point would be risky and fraught with danger. However, if we carefully connect the dots, a possible rationale for the visit begins to appear.
The visit is being interpreted by many analysts as a balancing act by India, especially after Mr. Modi’s recent visit to Russia, which attracted criticism from western powers. By engaging with both Russia and Ukraine, India could position itself as a neutral player in the conflict, reinforcing its image as a responsible global actor committed to peace and stability while also projecting sovereignty in dealing with issues of international politics. This approach aligns with India’s historical role as a mediator in international conflicts, dating back to its involvement in the Korean War armistice negotiations and the Colombo Plan.
A possible broader strategy, the interests
Moreover, the visit could be part of a broader strategy to play a more active role as a mediator or “communicator” in the language of the MEA. During his visit to India in March, Ukrainian Foreign Affairs Minister Dmytro Kuleba explicitly requested India’s help in restoring “just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. This appeal allows India to step into a more active role in the negotiation, leveraging its unique position as a country that maintains strong ties with both Moscow and Washington. This attempt is also being seen by analysts as putting weight to the already ongoing effort from Global South countries in the negotiation. India, as one of the prominent members of the Global South, is trying to play its role in achieving peace in this conflict.
To understand the full implications of Mr. Modi’s visit, it is important to consider the interests of key international stakeholders in this war, particularly the United States and European countries. The U.S. has consistently emphasised that any negotiations over the Ukrainian conflict should only occur from a position of strength.
The recent advances by Ukrainian forces, particularly in the Kursk region, could be considered as a part of this broader strategy to negotiate from a position of strength. A temporary cessation of hostilities or a limited peace agreement facilitated by a neutral party such as India might serve the interests of all parties involved. For the U.S., such an outcome could provide relief from the escalating conflict/war while allowing U.S. President Joe Biden to focus on other pressing foreign policy challenges such as the one in West Asia.
European countries, meanwhile, are desperate to see a resolution to the conflict, especially as the war continues to hurt their economies and increases energy security concerns. With winter approaching, European countries face the prospect of further economic hardship due to energy shortages and inflationary pressures. A temporary peace, even if not a comprehensive solution, would alleviate some of these challenges and provide breathing room for European policymakers.
Among all the stakeholders, Mr. Biden may be the most desperate for an end to the war. Since announcing his decision not to seek re-election in 2024, Mr. Biden has focused on solidifying his foreign policy legacy, particularly in areas where former U. S. President Donald Trump might diverge significantly. Mr. Biden’s decision to step back from the presidential race could free him from domestic political constraints, allowing him to pursue important diplomatic initiatives. One such initiative could be brokering a solution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Taking this forward, Mr. Modi also spoke to Mr. Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin, probably to apprise them of his visit. For Mr. Biden, bringing Russia to the negotiation table before the end of his tenure would represent a significant foreign policy achievement, particularly in light of Mr. Trump’s stated intention to withdraw support from Ukraine unless it agrees to negotiate with Russia. Mr. Biden’s reliance on India, which enjoys good relations with Russia, could be crucial in achieving this objective.
From Moscow’s perspective, India represents the best option for mediation. The long-standing friendship between Russia and India, forged during the Cold War and maintained through decades of military and economic cooperation, provides a level of trust that would be difficult to replicate with other potential mediators, even not so with China. For Mr. Putin, engaging in negotiations through a neutral party such as India could offer a honourable exit from the conflict/war without appearing to surrender to western pressure.
Impact on India
For Mr. Modi, this diplomatic initiative could be a legacy-defining moment. Despite his considerable achievements on the international stage, he has faced significant challenges on the domestic front, including a disappointing performance in the 2024 general election and growing economic concerns. A successful mediation effort in the Russia-Ukraine conflict could bolster his reputation as a global statesman and enhance his standing both at home and abroad.
Mr. Modi’s involvement in resolving the conflict would align with his broader vision of India as a “Vishwamitra”, a country that contributes to global economic and technological advancements and plays a central role in maintaining international peace and security.
Despite the potential benefits of India’s involvement, the path to achieving even a temporary peace in Ukraine is fraught with challenges. Both the parties to the war have taken maximalist positions, with either side refusing to budge from its stand. The geopolitical interests of the U.S. and Russia are deeply entrenched, and both powers are unlikely to agree on a peace deal proposed by the other. Moreover, the involvement of various international actors in this war, make any negotiation process highly complicated.
However, India’s unique position as a trusted partner of both Russia and the West could allow it to facilitate a temporary ceasefire or a limited peace agreement that serves the immediate interests of all parties involved. Such an outcome, while not a permanent solution, would be a significant step towards de-escalating the conflict and providing much-needed relief to all the parties involved.
Amitabh Singh teaches at the Centre for Russian and Central Asian Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Vivek Pandey is a doctoral candidate at the Centre for Russian and Central Asian Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
