After the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the legacy of Ukraine was fraught with unresolved historical issues. The Russians and the Ukrainians have had a troubled relationship for centuries, with big brother Russia treating Ukraine as a colony. After gaining independence in 1991, Ukraine finally had a chance to assert its identity.
The West tried to lure it away from the Russian influence by throwing a broad hint at possible association with the European Union. For dismantling nuclear silos on its land voluntarily, Ukraine was given cash grants from time to time. Accordingly, it dared take an aggressive stance on regional issues, at variance with Russia’s stated position.
With such pinpricks, Russia started stirring things up in Ukraine through Russian-speaking ethnic groups, leading to armed skirmishes and casualties. Ukraine used to siphon off the gas for domestic use from Russian pipelines to Germany. The payment issue for that had remained unresolved, as the exact volume could not be determined.
Russia had a foreboding that the west would strike at its vulnerable soft underbelly. Enters Crimea in the equation. Ukraine had leased it out for Russia’s crucial naval base in the Black Sea.
After being part of the Russian Empire for a long period, the Crimea region was “gifted” to Ukraine in 1954—to commemorate the 300th anniversary of a treaty between the Cossacks and the Muscovy authorities. It is claimed that this transfer of control was facilitated by Nikita Khrushchev, the Ukrainian-origin leader who was then at the helm of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, as was his successor Leonid Brezhnev.
To spike Ukraine’s intent to cross over to the western camp, Russia took over the Crimean Peninsula in 2014. Thankfully there was not much bloodshed or direct action between the two adversaries. After this unilateral action from Russia in violation of international law, Ukraine went to NATO grouping for support and help. Russia has been ignoring all warnings and threats since then.
Russia's next move was to place military infrastructure in Ukraine's troubled border region—Donetsk and Luhansk. The west now wants Russia to withdraw its forces from the region and return Crimea to Ukraine.
Russia is not in a position to take on its own the mighty US and the European Union. By putting its full weight behind the Ukraine issue, is the US not going for the overkill--which would be detrimental to its interests and commitments, especially in the strategically vulnerable Indo-Pacific region? China is bound to exploit the vacuum so created to its best advantage.
From India’s point of view, the crisis in Ukraine has grave implications. With Russia getting closer to China, India’s legitimate concerns on the border with China may well be ignored by Russia.
This is a crucial time as India has been actively involved in the Quad grouping (along with the US, Japan and Australia) in the Indo-Pacific. The direct participation of the US in Ukrainian affairs, at the cost of its interests in the Indo-Pacific, will be nothing less than catastrophic for India. There is even the threat of India losing the sanctions waiver it enjoys from the US for the acquisition of the S-400 missile system from Russia.
India hopes that the US would keep a close watch on China’s activity in the South China Sea, the issue of Taiwan and security in its neighbourhood.
India has to take a balanced stand in the Russia-Ukraine standoff. More than 60 per cent of India's defence supplies come from Russia. Spare parts for MiG fighters and other defence equipment come also from Ukraine. Our supply lines must not face any disruptions.
India’s relations with Ukraine have come a long way from my days as the ambassador of India to Ukraine 25 years ago. We had a direct relationship with the Soviet-era design bureau in Ukraine for the supply of strategically vital components and had close links in science and technology and R&D sectors.
Bilateral ties, back then, suffered a setback because of two unfortunate developments. Against our strident protests, Ukraine gave Pakistan 320 T-80 UD battle tanks. They also supplied guns for Pakistan’s China-made tanks. Even more disappointing was Ukraine’s stand against our 1998 nuclear tests. It was one of the few countries to have come out openly against India. After explaining our compulsions, followed by some intense lobbying at the top level, Ukraine toned down its rhetoric.
Indo-Ukrainian relations have been on the upswing since then. The Indian pharma sector made a spectacular entry in Ukraine at the turn of the century. Bilateral trade has been growing. The Indian student population in Ukraine is now more than 18,000. Their security has to be kept in mind while dealing with the unfolding scenario.
On Crimea, India had expressed “concern”, but it also talked of “legitimate Russian interests”. On January 31, India abstained from a procedural vote at the UN Security Council to decide whether to hold a discussion on the Ukrainian crisis. India called for “a solution that can provide for immediate de-escalation of tensions, taking into account the legitimate security interests of all countries concerned and aimed towards securing long-term peace and security in the region and beyond”. As tensions between the west and Russia grow, India will have to walk a diplomatic tightrope.
India does not want the US to divert its attention and resources from the Indo-Pacific because of the Ukraine crisis. China exploiting this situation to its advantage will give sleepless nights to the Indian strategic community.
The author was India's ambassador to Ukraine.