Candidates need to give his opinion regarding What India’s response to the Russian aggression in Ukraine should be and he should substantiate it or provide evidence to support or prove the truth of it.
Introduction
In the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine, the situation is both fluid and volatile. A session of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) was held to try to resolve the Ukraine crisis caused by Russia’s invasion of its neighbour. The United States backed resolution to censure Russia was supported by United Kingdom and France. China, another permanent member absented itself from the voting. India and the UAE also did not vote. India called for an immediate cessation of violence and a return to dialogue.”
What India’s response to the Russian aggression in Ukraine should be:
By abstaining from any overt criticism of Russia, India seemed to revert to its erstwhile stance of neutrality, if not equidistance from Cold War antagonists, America and Russia. It’s in best favour of India to maintain “independent, neutral and balanced” position during the vote due to the following reasons:
India’s long-standing friendly relations with Russia cannot be denied or dumped overnight.
Russia, besides being an established friend, remains India’s major arms supplier and strategic partner.
As member of the Security Council and one of the world’s largest countries and economies, India has an additional, mediative role to play, which it cannot compromise or squander by taking sides in a hasty, premature, or precipitous manner.
By abstaining, India retained the option of reaching out to relevant sides in an effort to bridge the gap and find the middle ground with an aim to foster dialogue and diplomacy.
Firstly, India is dependent on both Russia and Ukraine for a lot of its energy supplies. A developing economy like India would obviously be on the receiving end if the war continues for a long period.
Undoubtedly, the war in Ukraine has put the foreign policy makers of India in a tough situation where they face a dilemma of whether to stick to its non-aligned path of neutrality or whether to voice its concerns against the Russian aggression that is unprecedented in Europe after the Second World War.
All these factors have created enormous pressure on the Indian leadership as they need to act proactively as the crisis unfolds.
The best option for India, considering its stakes in the war, should be to avoid getting entangled in favour of a particular side and continue its balancing act. India’s multi-vector foreign policy doesn’t allow it to choose sides in a particular crisis as it requires the support of both Russia and US on a number of issues- getting permanent membership of the UNSC is an example in this case. An independent foreign policy will also provide the space for India to meditate on the crisis and play a major role in solving it peacefully via multilateral platforms.
India’s stance will also depend on what course the Russian military action takes in future. If Putin chooses to escalate the crisis horizontally or vertically then it would become increasingly difficult for India to stay non-aligned, especially if the US chooses to impose extraterritorial sanctions.
Conclusion
Dialogue is the only answer to settling differences and disputes, however daunting that may appear at this moment. It is a matter of regret that the path of diplomacy was given up. We must return to it. For all these reasons, India has chosen to abstain on this resolution and shall continue to do so.
