As the first ever visit of an Indian Prime Minister to Ukraine, it was no doubt a historic occasion, but it came against the sombre background of war. Emotions were running high as Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the President of a war-ravaged country received the Narendra Modi hug, this one against the backdrop of a great tragedy in Ukraine when many of its children were killed in a Russian strike on the very day that the Indian PM had hugged the Russian President Vladimir Putin with marked ebullience last month in Moscow.
The strain showing clearly on his face, an emotional Zelenskyy may have been somewhat comforted by an empathetic Modi hand on his shoulder as they paid homage to children who represent the most tragic and innocent of collateral damage as a war is being waged in Europe in the 21st century. This 30-month war appears to be building into a perpetual challenge to peace as the colonial acquisitive instincts of the leader of a world power were unleashed against a member country of the old Soviet Republic.
The Indian PM, thought to be one of the very few world leaders who can claim to be personally on the best possible terms with the leaders of both the countries which are at war, could play the mediator’s role with sincerity of purpose. But will his overtures of a dialogue for peace find favour enough with Russia and Ukraine to make any difference?
Just back from a tour of areas of Russia’s Kursk province, of which about 1,300 sq km are now in Ukrainian control after a strategic invasion, Mr Zelenskyy may have reason to believe his war tactics of a counter conquest of territory may be a better bargaining chip than any words like “this is not the era of war” and “problem cannot be settled on battlefields” having a conciliatory effect on the invader.
Logic would have it that while a section of its citizens is bound to be unhappy about Russia losing territory to an invader, this for the first time since World War II, most of them could even have their nationalistic instincts triggered by the loss of Kursk, their sentiment playing into Mr Putin’s hands when he is under some stress after loss of territory.
Even so, it was right on the part of India, committed to its strategic orientation of non-alignment, to try and leverage that neutrality to try and bring peace. The attempt had to be made if only because many countries of the Global South have reason to look up to today’s India, with its economic clout, as a leader, having also been affected by the war and its effect on global supply chains.
The Prime Minister’s trip, with long to and from train journeys across the border from Poland to which he had made a state visit of two days, would be meaningful beyond its historicity and the offer to do anything to facilitate peace if he had been able to drive home the point that, irrespective of the vast destruction caused by a Russian invasion, the negotiating table could still represent the best route to peace.
