A New Ukrainian Ambassador To India Won’t Change Delhi’s Stance Towards The Conflict
If the US couldn’t succeed in changing India’s stance towards the conflict, which is impossible in any case since anything other than its consistent policy over the past one-third of a year would have resulted in unilaterally conceding on an issue of premier national interest, then there’s absolutely no chance whatsoever at all for Kiev to succeed either.
The Ukrainian presidential website published several decrees on Saturday concerning the dismissal of their ambassadors to India and a few other countries. Although no reason was given, it can be taken for granted that their top diplomat to Delhi was removed in response to having failed to sway that civilization-state’s stance towards the Ukrainian Conflict. Should that be the case, then it’s a redundant move since a new Ukrainian Ambassador to India won’t make any difference in this respect either.
India decisively intervened to comprehensively support Russia as its irreplaceable valve from Western pressure in order to preemptively avert its special and privileged strategic partner’s potentially disproportionate dependence on China in response. From India’s perspective, that could have ultimately turned Russia into China’s “junior partner”, which in turn would have compelled India to become the US’ in order to restore balance in the region.
That would have been the worst-case scenario for India, hence why it defied unprecedented US-led Western pressure against it, including most recently the ridiculous demand from the American Consulate in Mumbai to ban all Russian vessels at the country’s ports. At all costs, India will always do whatever’s needed to protect its hard-earned strategic autonomy, hence why it’s doing everything in its power to help Russia.
If the US couldn’t succeed in changing India’s stance towards the conflict, which is impossible in any case since anything other than its consistent policy over the past one-third of a year would have resulted in unilaterally conceding on an issue of premier national interest, then there’s absolutely no chance whatsoever at all for Kiev to succeed either. It doesn’t matter who’s tasked with implementing its policy in that country since this issue is non-negotiable from India’s perspective.
Having said that, Kiev should actually be grateful that India’s practicing a policy of principled neutrality towards the conflict and not openly supporting Moscow. Delhi could have ditched that American ally but chose not to since its international reputation as a non-aligned Great Power is more important for its long-term interests than taking sides. In truth, this means that there really isn’t anything for Kiev to be upset about since India’s neutral stance doesn’t work against anyone’s objective interests.
Therein lies the problem, however, since Kiev and its Western overlords subjectively define their interests in this context as getting the rest of the world to submit to their demands to condemn and sanction Russia. This same interest is nothing but a political fantasy, one which has served to work against their objective interests by reducing trust between them and those countries like India that they’ve unsuccessfully pressured to this end.
It would have been better for them to simply respect India and others’ strategic autonomy instead of bullying them into unilaterally conceding on their objective national interests. Principled neutrality, not zero-sum partisanship, is what everyone the world over should support. That outcome, however, is seen by Kiev and its overlords as helping Russia, which is why it’s unlikely that they’ll lessen the pressure that they’re putting on others even after a new Ukrainian Ambassador to India is appointed.