The very first chapter of the United Nations Charter declares state sovereignty to be inviolable. Yet, for nine months now, the Security Council has failed to do anything to stop the violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity by Russia, one of its permanent members. The protracted Ukraine-Russia conflict has shaken the very foundations of multilateral diplomacy and has shown us the limitations of the existing international system.
With many in Europe and the United States beginning to wonder how the war will end, it now seems that perhaps only an individual country or a small group of countries—not the UN—can mediate an end to Europe’s worst war in decades.
The war, in its ninth month, is worsening. According to a Pentagon assessment, over 200,000 soldiers have been killed or injured—roughly equal on both sides. (Ukraine disputes the numbers but has released no casualties for its troops). Some 40,000 Ukrainian civilians have also died or been injured, and over 30 million have been forced to flee their homes.
The fast-approaching European winter will be hellish for ordinary Ukrainians with Russia deliberately attacking Ukraine’s electricity grid and heating plants. Russia hopes the unforgiving weather will sap Ukrainians’ will to fight. Moscow is also trying to choke off energy supplies to Europe to turn domestic public opinion against supporting Ukraine.
The US military and NATO are providing Ukraine with winter supplies and military equipment, including modern air defence systems. Russia, too, is bringing in reinforcements with the recently enlisted fighters joining the battle. But harsh weather will affect both sides and will reduce the intensity of the fighting. By the time the European winter begins to ease by the end of February, the war would have completed a year, making it the largest conventional military attack on European soil since World War II.
Since the beginning of the war, most of the military, financial and humanitarian support to Ukraine has been provided by the US. Amidst the economic consequences, such as the high energy prices taking a toll on ordinary Americans, recent polling shows waning domestic support for the war. With the Republicans on track for a majority in the House of Representatives following the midterm polls, there is fear in Washington that support for Ukraine will decline drastically.
Amidst signs of war fatigue setting in, there is palpable urgency to bring the war to a negotiated settlement. Recent reports reveal that US officials have privately encouraged Ukraine to signal an openness to talk with Russia. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he was open to “genuine” negotiations with Russia but demanded the full restoration of his country’s borders. He has also called for compensation for the attacks and punishments for those responsible for alleged war crimes, conditions Russia may not be willing to concede.
Meanwhile, both Washington and Moscow have been discreetly engaging with each other. US national security adviser Jake Sullivan reportedly recently held confidential talks about the war with top Kremlin officials.
Analysts believe that a window for negotiations may open if the fighting reaches a stalemate amidst the winter woes—with the energy crisis making life unbearable in Ukraine and across Europe and a recession looming. That offers an opportunity for a country or a small group of countries to step into a peace broking role.
India is one of two hosts emerging as likely peace brokers. The other is a group of countries that includes India, Israel and the United Arab Emirates. All these countries, members of the ‘minilateralist’ I2U2 bloc, enjoy good relations with Russia and Ukraine and are also friendly with the US.
India, having adopted a neutral stance from the beginning of the war, seems well-suited to mediate between Russia and Ukraine. Although India has abstained from most UN resolutions damning Russia, New Delhi has also strived to maintain good relations with Ukraine. It has even mildly rebuked Russia for the invasion.
Russian President Vladimir Putin recently praised India’s independent foreign policy. Putin enjoyed a good rapport with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and highlighted India’s growing role in global affairs.
“Diplomats and foreign-policy experts are watching closely to see if India can use its unique leverage as one of the world’s largest countries that is a friend to both East and West to press Russia to end its war in Ukraine,” a recent report in The New York Times said. “Officials within the Indian government have already been discussing what role India might play in peacemaking efforts when the time is right,” it added.
At a recent meeting in Moscow with his Russian counterpart, India’s External Affairs minister S Jaishankar said that India strongly advocates “a return to dialogue and diplomacy” between the two estranged neighbours. “This is not an era of war,” Jaishankar said, echoing Modi’s words to Putin in September during a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit.
“Peacemaking could carve a more prominent place for India in the global order and possibly bring it closer to a long-sought prize of a fairer power distribution—a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council,” added the NYT report.
As the world’s largest democracy, however flawed it may be, and a top troop-contributor to UN peacekeeping, India is uniquely placed to play the role of an intermediary between Ukraine and Russia.
Now, India also wields the presidency of G-20, the world’s most influential bloc. Whether New Delhi is willing to pick up the mediator’s gauntlet is anybody’s guess.
E D Mathew
Former UN spokesperson
(Tweets @edmathew)
