The West wants a break in Indo-Russian relations. Condemnation of India’s traditional friend would further isolate Russia politically. India’s participation in Russia-India-China, BRICS and SCO forums that exclude the West and seek to promote multipolarity would become problematic. The division between “democracies” and “autocracies” would become politically sharper if India, as the largest democracy, moved away from groupings. India’s strategic autonomy built around its ability to maintain friendly ties with all powers will be restricted. With the deterioration of Indo-Russian military relations, American companies will benefit. This explains the
efforts to push India to condemn Russia.
The Foreign Affairs article should be seen in this context. To say that India has “the last best chance” of becoming a great power by choosing the West over Russia assumes control of India’s destiny. A false link is established between Russia-Ukraine and India-China territorial issues. To argue that refusing to take a stand could alienate a powerful United States is to disregard the position that India has already taken in its national interest, which is not aligned with that of the United States to cause the economic collapse of the Russia and bring about regime change.
To suggest that for now the United States “tolerates” India’s neutral stance but that its “patience is not endless” is to treat India like a stray child to be spanked if it is too annoying.
That he is “so central to US efforts to counterbalance China that India will remain immune to a potential backlash” is not what Indian policymakers think. They rely on America’s rational assessment of the geopolitical viability of its strategy to curb China’s expansionism without India as an Indo-Pacific and Quad partner.
The argument that “India is a kind of exception among the democracies of the world” on Ukraine is hypocritical. The United States itself is not in the habit of choosing India as a democracy over Pakistan and China. Claiming that India “even supported Moscow” by buying its oil distorts the facts. Importing 700,000 barrels a day in April meets only a very small part of its one-day requirement. Europe has imported about $23 billion worth of fossil fuels per month from Russia since the start of the conflict in Ukraine. A sense of proportion is necessary.
The United States, according to the article, will not increase “its transfer of sophisticated defense technologies to New Delhi” if India does not shift to non-Russian military supplies. DTTI has been a wet squib so far. Expert visualizes US sanctioning India under CAATSA. If that happens, it will be a long-term blow to India-US relations.
India “reducing its dependence on Russian military equipment” is seen as morally right. Is dependence on the United States more moral? Talk of providing a $500 million foreign military funding package to induce India to buy US weapons belittles India, which has the third largest defense budget in the world.
To say that the United States has “publicly sworn to stand with India in the country’s efforts to protect its territorial sovereignty” against China’s aggression greatly overstates the willingness of the United States to get directly involved. in an Indo-Chinese conflict.
Using the Quad to get India to cooperate on Ukraine would misrepresent its objective of meeting China’s challenge, not Russia’s. Issues of food shortages due to the Ukrainian crisis are not on the Quad’s agenda.
Think tank America does not think well.