Ukraine agrees to meet Russia for talks on Belarusian border
Exclusion from SWIFT: what it entails
GS-3
Shattering myths: an exhibition on peafowl
DRDO, Safran to develop engine for aircraft
Cong. relaunches Mekedatu padayatra
AICC General Secretary Randeep Singh Surjewala inaugurated the padayatra by beating drums along with State Congress President D.K. Shivakumar, Opposition leader Siddaramaiah, Legislative Council Opposition leader B.K. Hariprasad and other prominent leaders.
Shivakumar stated that it is a “historical walk”, taken up as per the highest traditions of struggle of the Congress party, and he won’t bother about the criticism by the ruling BJP government. The walkathon is being inaugurated in the most auspicious time, he said.
“This is not our struggle, this is a struggle for the lives of the people of state. It is a struggle launched to provide drinking water to Bangaloreans. We should brave the sun for these five days,” he urged.
“BJP, which is in power at the Centre as well as in the state, could commence the work after getting clearance from the environment department in two days. If they would do so, we will come in the same numbers to extend our support” Shivakumar asserted.
Mekedatu padayatra, taken out with ‘Walk for Water’ slogan, will cover 79.8 km from Ramnagar to Bengaluru. The protest march would culminate in the Basavanagudi National College Grounds on March 3.
‘The anatomy of India’s Ukraine dilemma
New Delhi’s response to the Russian aggression against Ukraine appears to have been shaped by harsh geopolitical circumstances, that it is in the middle of, than its normative beliefs or preferences. Late last week, India abstained from a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution which called for condemning the Russian military action against Ukraine, but it went on to note its uneasiness of the Russian action in writing (a first).
Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who spoke to Russian President Vladimir Putin as the war broke out, called for an “immediate cessation of violence” and has so far refused to pay heed to Ukrainian Ambassador to India Igor Polikha’s impassioned pleas urging Mr. Modi to mediate with Mr. Putin to halt Russian military advances. With the UNSC deadlocked, friends with both the United States/West and Russia, and passionately urged by Ukraine, New Delhi is uniquely placed to undertake some much-needed mediation between the rival sides. But it has chosen to stay on the margins and do no more than the unavoidable minimum. New Delhi just wants this to be over with.
So, what is the reality?
New Delhi has taken a subtle pro-Moscow position on the question of Russian attacks against Ukraine. This pro-Russia tilt is not just the position of the Indian government, but is something, somewhat surprisingly, shared by much of the Indian strategic community as well.
More notably, one is increasingly hearing subtle, though indirect, justifications of the Russian military actions from the doyens of the Indian strategic community. India’s Russia tilt should be seen not just as a product of its time-tested friendship with Moscow but also as a geopolitical necessity.
The Russia tilt
There are four potential options India can/could choose from:
Condemn Russian aggression,
Support Russian aggression,
Stay silent on Russian aggression, or express displeasure_nbsp;
Call for diplomacy
The first option will pit India against Russia, the second will pit it against the U.S. and its allies, the third option will be read as pro-Russia, and the fourth option — which it has taken — is the least harmful. And yet, a position that does not condemn Russian aggression and one that abstains from voting on a UNSC resolution calling for “condemning Russian aggression and withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine” is indeed a pro-Russia position.
There are understandable reasons for India’s (subtle) pro-Russia position. Let me put it this way: an aggressive Russia is a problem for the U.S. and the West, not for India. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) expansion is Russia’s problem, not India’s. India’s problem is China, and it needs both the U.S./the West and Russia to deal with the “China problem”.
There is today a sobering recognition in New Delhi about the weakening of the U.S.-led global order and the rise of China as a counter-pole, geographically located right next to India. U.S. withdrawal from the region and its decline as the principal system shaper has complicated India’s place in regional geopolitics.
Neighbouring China as the rising superpower and Russia as its strategic ally challenging the U.S.-led global order at a time when China has time and again acted on its aggressive intentions vis-à-vis India, and when India is closest to the U.S. than ever before in its history, throws up a unique and unprecedented challenge for India. Therefore, having Russia on its side is crucial for India, more than ever. Moscow may or may not be able to moderate Chinese antagonism towards New Delhi, but an India-Russia strategic partnership may be able to temper New Delhi’s growing isolation in a rather friendless region.
Second, there is an emerging dualism in contemporary Indian strategic Weltanschauung: the predicament of a continental space that is reeling under immense pressure from China, Pakistan and Taliban-led Afghanistan adding to its strategic claustrophobia; and, the emergence of a maritime sphere which presents an opportunity to break out of the same.
Herein lies the dilemma for India. New Delhi needs Moscow’s assistance to manage its continental difficulties be it through defence supplies, helping it ‘return’ to central Asia, working together at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) or exploring opportunities for collaboration in Afghanistan. Russia, to put it rather bluntly, is perhaps India’s only partner of consequence in the entire Asian continental stretch.
On the other hand, when it comes to the vast maritime sphere, the Indo-Pacific to be precise, Russia is not of great consequence to India. That is where its American and western partners come into play. India is simply not in a position to address the China challenge in the maritime space without the active support of American and western navies and, of course, the Quad. This unavoidable dualism in the contemporary Indian strategic landscape necessitates that India balances the two sides, but doing so without a subtle Russia tilt may not be feasible at this point of time.
That said, the war on Ukraine could have major implications for India’s strategic calculus.
For one, Russian action in Ukraine dismissing the concerns of the rest of the international community including the U.S. will no doubt embolden China and its territorial ambitions.
Second, the new sanctions regime may have implications for India’s defence cooperation with Moscow.
Third, the longer the standoff lasts, the closer China and Russia could become, which certainly does not help India.
Finally, the more severe the U.S.-Russia rivalry becomes, the less focus there would be on the Indo-Pacific and China, which is where India’s interests lie.
Impact on foreign policy
India’s responses to the Russian aggression on Ukraine underline the fact that India is operating from a position of geopolitical vulnerability. While the Indian stand does reek of realpolitik, it reeks more of strategic weakness. Here is a country located in a hostile neighbourhood trying to make the best of a terrible situation it finds itself in. This then means that, going forward, India’s ability to be a “swing state”, “major power” or a “leading power” stands diminished. So we must expect more middle-of-the-road behaviour from New Delhi rather than resolute positions on global strategic developments.
India’s position also shows the unmistakable indication that when it comes to geopolitics, New Delhi will choose interests over principles. This is nothing new: New Delhi has chosen interests over principles even in the past — for instance, India has violated the principle of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of neighbours.
INSIGHT: For Example, Nepal’s constitution forming matter.
The difference this time may be that India is choosing interests over principles even though the issue at hand is not directly pertaining to India. And yet, a careful reading of India’s statements and positions taken over the past few days also demonstrates a certain amount of discomfort in having to choose interests over principles. There is perhaps a realisation in New Delhi that a dog-eat-dog world, where rules and good behaviour do not matter, does not help India in the long run either.
Going forward, if tensions between Russia and the West persist, balancing extremes will be a key feature of Indian diplomacy. India is perhaps already mastering the art. Consider India’s “explanation of vote” during the recent vote on Russia’s aggression against Ukraine: even though New Delhi abstained from voting on it (thereby siding with Moscow), it made its unhappiness about the Russian action clear in the written note.
Conclusion
Finally, what does this mean for India’s ‘strategic autonomy’? For sure, India’s strategic autonomy has been under a lot of stress for some time now. However, New Delhi’s response to the recent crisis, especially its “explanation of vote” at the UNSC indicates a careful recourse to the principle of strategic autonomy:
India will make caveated statements and will not be pressured by either party. In that sense, India’s indirect support to the Russian position is not a product of Russian pressure but the result of a desire to safeguard its own interests.
_nbsp;Therefore, while we may witness a steady erosion of India’s strategic autonomy in the longer term — primarily as a function of the need to balance against China — we will continue to witness instances where Indian diplomacy will take recourse to the principle of strategic autonomy.
India to face tough choices at UNGA
After abstaining from the UN Security Council resolution 8979 condemning Russian action in Ukraine on Saturday, India faces more difficult choices, with the U.S. and European-led coalition now pushing for a vote at the UN General Assembly aimed at “isolating Russia”.
The UNGA vote, that could take place as early as Monday, will follow a discussion of the UNSC late on Sunday night on an “emergency special session” to examine the text of the resolution 8979 which Russia had vetoed.
The U.S. and European countries leading the diplomatic charge against Russia are hopeful of gaining a large majority in the 193-member UNGA, given that more than 80 countries co-sponsored Resolution 8979, and have been working the phones in order to convince others to vote along with them.
Change in stand
“We are presenting our position to the Ministry of External Affairs on why it must support Ukraine against Russia’s attacks,” said a European diplomat. “It is up to India to decide whether to stand with the aggressor or the victim,” he added, saying that despite the earlier abstention, diplomats feel India could “potentially” change its position.
“If a UNGA vote happens, India will have to choose where it stands in the much larger global arena: with us, or with countries like China, Syria and Venezuela on the issue,”
India has thus far refrained from supporting any resolution criticising Russia, which is a traditional strategic partner, but officials said India’s growing concerns over the “humanitarian crisis” and thousands of Indian students caught in the crossfire in Ukraine could find mention in the new resolution, which could invite a rethink in New Delhi.
“We must isolate Russia together. FM Baerbock spoke about this with her counterpart from India, Dr. Jaishankar. It is important to speak up in one voice around the world: Russia’s President Putin is the aggressor and has violated international law _amp; the European peace order,” said a particularly strong statement from the German Foreign Ministry.
Russia thanks India
Meanwhile the Russian Embassy in India tweeted that it “highly appreciated India’s independent and balanced position at the voting in the UNSC on February 25”, and has thanked India for its consistent partnership.
When asked, MEA officials declined to comment on how India will vote on the upcoming resolutions, only saying that all votes would be decided only on the basis of the text of each document.
U.S. and Albanian representatives, who are the “penholders” on the resolution on Ukraine, said the emergency session needs to be called, “considering that the lack of unanimity of its permanent members at the 8979th meeting has prevented it from exercising its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.”
The wording of the agenda for the Sunday meeting indicates that Western countries could ask the UNGA to convoke or summon a “Uniting for Peace” resolution, and agree to strong measures against Russia unless it announces a ceasefire and withdrawal of troops from the Ukraine. A similar resolution 377A was passed in 1950, when Russia consistently blocked resolutions that sought to authorise military action against North Korea. However, analysts have pointed out that the UNGA resolutions lack the “teeth” of a UNSC resolution, pointing to an emergency session held in December 2017 to condemn the U.S. decision to relocate its embassy to Jerusalem, where as many as 128 countries including India voted against the U.S., while only 9 voted in favour to illustrate how little lasting impact the vote had.
Ukraine agrees to meet Russia for talks on Belarusian border
Ukraine said Sunday it would hold talks with Russia at its border with Belarus -- near the Chernobyl exclusion zone -- after a call between President Volodymyr Zelensky and Belarus leader Alexander Lukashenko. The politicians agreed that the Ukrainian delegation would meet the Russian one without preconditions at the Ukraine-Belarus border, near the Pripyat River, Zelenskys office said.
Zelensky has said he will not hold talks with Russia on the territory of Belarus, where some Russian troops were stationed before invading on Ukraines northern border.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that a Russian delegation was currently in the Belarusian city of Gomel.
Zelensky, refusing to travel to Minsk, said Kyiv had proposed Warsaw, Bratislava, Budapest, Istanbul, Baku as options to Russia.
Exclusion from SWIFT: what it entails
The US and European Union (EU) have decided to partially exercise the nuclear-weapon option as far as economic sanctions are concerned: cutting off a number of Russian banks from the main international payment gateway, SWIFT. The assets of Russia’s central bank are also expected to be frozen, constraining Moscow’s ability to access its overseas reserves.
The intention of the moves is to “further isolate Russia from the international financial system”, a joint statement stated.
These joint sanctions are the harshest measures against Moscow since its forces went into Ukraine and are expected to badly hit a country that is heavily reliant on the SWIFT platform for its key natural resources trade, especially the payments for its oil and gas exports. Cutting off a country from SWIFT in the financial world is equivalent to restricting Internet access of a nation.
Prior to this, only one country had been cut off from SWIFT — Iran. It resulted in it losing a third of its foreign trade. The move against Russia is only partly implemented for now, with only some Russian banks being covered. The option of expanding it further to a pan-country ban is something that the US and its allies are holding back as a further escalatory move.
What is SWIFT?
The SWIFT system stands for the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication and is a secure platform for financial institutions to exchange information about global monetary transactions such as money transfers.
While SWIFT does not actually move money, it operates as a middleman to verify information of transactions by providing secure financial messaging services to more than 11,000 banks in over 200 countries. Based in Belgium, it is overseen by the central banks from eleven industrial countries: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States, besides Belgium.
Excluding Russian banks from the SWIFT platform is expected to hit the country’s economy hard — and in the words of the White House, it will make the country rely on “the telephone or a fax machine” to make payments.
According to former Russian Central Bank deputy chairman Sergei Aleksashenko: “There is going to be a catastrophe on the Russian currency market on Monday”. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, said the decision to paralyse the assets of Russia’s central bank would stop the Kremlin from “using its war chest”, referring to its forex reserves.
The banks affected are “all those already sanctioned by the international community, as well as other institutions, if necessary”, a German spokesman was quoted as saying by the BBC. Targeting only some Russian banks seems to be aimed at both keeping the option of further escalation open, while ensuring that the sanctions have the maximum possible impact on Moscow, but prevent a major impact on European companies dealing with Russian banks for payments for their gas imports. Plus, the curbs on Russia’s central bank will prevent it from dipping into its forex deposits to limit the effect of sanctions.
Moscow has been building up a cushion of foreign currency in the wake of the previous round of sanctions in 2014, with reserves touching a record high of $630 billion in January 2022. The new measures will significantly decrease the reserves available to the country’s central bank, according to experts.
While workarounds to SWIFT have been tried, none have proven to be effective. During the last seven years, Russia, too, has worked on alternatives, including the SPFS (System for Transfer of Financial Messages) — an equivalent of the SWIFT financial transfer system developed by the Central Bank of Russia. The Russians are reported to be collaborating with the Chinese on a possible venture which will be a potential challenger to SWIFT.
It needs to be seen if Moscow can leverage this platform to some extent to get around the partial ban, which could soon be escalated to a complete one.
While it may take a while for the ban to make an impact, what is important is that they exhibit a strong resolve from Western nations. Responding to the latest economic sanctions, Ukraine’s Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal termed them a “real help during this dark time”.
Shattering myths: an exhibition on peafowl
It was with a resolve to shatter the popular myth on peacocks not mating that wildlife enthusiast Vinod Goel, a retired bureaucrat, began chasing the national bird in and around Delhi with a camera around a decade ago.
Having captured around three lakh pictures of the peafowl over these years, Mr. Goel has not just broken several myths surrounding the national bird, but also brought to the fore several fascinating facts through his dynamic collection.
Around thirty of his pictures capturing the national bird in varied moods and positions were on display at Museo Camera in DLF Phase-IV here over the weekend. Incidentally, the exhibition coincides with the day he visited Sunder Nursery in Delhi to capture his subject for the first time on February 27, 2013.
Posing proudly next to a frame showing the peafowl mating, Mr. Goel said it is “the most difficult picture” he took. He vividly recalled how he had to wait for six long years before he captured the moment on his camera. “I had many encounters with the peafowl mating, but I finally managed to capture a perfect mating moment from the front on June 10, 2019 at Sunder Nursery. I also recorded a video of the mating. It is just over in 6-12 seconds and takes place only once in the breeding season. So, it is due to lack of photographic record that the myth gained ground,” said Mr. Goel, known across the globe for his rare and wide range of photographic work on peafowl.
But it is another picture depicting the hidden “red feathers” of a peacock clicked just a moment before the bird flies off, which, Mr. Goel said, is his “signature picture”. The red feathers of a peafowl at the back usually go unnoticed and not many people know about it, he said.
Another rare picture captures the peahen taking a dust bath to shake off the mites, lice and other parasites. While a couple of frames capture the peacocks in their famous dance position with the feathers widespread, a few more show them fighting among themselves for territorial and mating rights.
He feels that the peacock, though, declared a national bird over six decades ago, was yet to get its due. Despite being a part and parcel of our culture for ages, it is difficult to find a book dedicated to the national bird. “It is not difficult to find the paintings of the peacock, but the same cannot be said about its pictures. Also, one can easily find books on tigers, elephants and other wildlife, but not peacock. It must change,” said Mr. Goel, hinting at his future plans.
DRDO, Safran to develop engine for aircraft
India and France are close to concluding a deal, likely in the next couple of months, for the joint development of a 125KN engine for the indigenous fifth generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) under development, according to defence officials. The collaboration is between the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and French engine maker Safran.
“External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar discussed this issue with French Defence Minister Florence Parly during his visit to Paris [last week]. We expect to have an agreement in a month or two,” a defence official said.
In December 2021, speaking at an event after Ms. Parly’s visit to India, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh had said a major French company will come to India and “make the engine in strategic partnership with an Indian company”.
Last year, the government had informed Parliament that it is proposed to develop indigenous engines for powering aircraft such as the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) variants and AMCA in association with an international engine house.
Stealth aircraft
The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) is currently working on the LCA-Mk2 along with Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), as well as the AMCA and the Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF), for the Navy.
The initial design of the AMCA started way back in 2009 and is envisaged as a twin-engine stealth aircraft with internal weapons bay and Diverterless Supersonic Intake, which has been developed for the first time and for which the design is complete. It will be a 25 tonne aircraft with internal carriage of 1,500 kg of payload and 5,500 kg external payload with 6,500 kg of internal fuel.
The AMCA will have stealth and non-stealth configurations, and would be developed in two phases — an AMCA MK1 with existing GE414 engine, and an AMCA Mk2 with an advanced, more powerful engine planned to be jointly developed, Dr. Deodhare added.
Once the agreement is concluded with France, development of the aircraft as well as the engine will progress parallelly to meet the timelines, officials acknowledged. The manufacturing and production of the aircraft is planned through a Special Purpose Vehicle, which will also involve private industry.
India has in the past unsuccessfully attempted to indigenously design and develop a jet engine for the LCA under the Kaveri programme sanctioned in 1989. The project, which ran for 30 years with an expenditure of ?2,035.56 crore, before being shelved, saw the development of nine full prototype engines and four core engines.
The Shakti engine, which powers the indigenous Advanced Light Helicopter and its later variants, is a joint development between Safran and HAL.
