Bharat, Russia, and Ukraine

We are in NAM and QUAD simultaneously, and we are with Russia and Ukraine simultaneously, and none of the direct stakeholders are uncomfortable with us. — Alok Singh 

The Bharat has earned a considerable reputation worldwide in the last decade. The acceptance of our human-oriented philosophy is reflected undisputedly in the practice of Yoga worldwide. The worldwide desire to have a Unified Payment Interface (UPI) reflects acceptance of our technological capability. The remarkable reception received by Bharat from two nations at war, i.e., Russia and Ukraine, which happened within a month, is the acceptance of our principles of foreign diplomacy.

It demonstrates that we are serious and the only trusted player on the chessboard of international affairs. We need not create excuses to explain meeting one and the other. There was no need for a cooling period between the two meetings. 

The world is looking at us to resolve the Russia-Ukraine conflict, whatever the domestic constraints and international compulsions are for the three of us. We will wait and watch for the world to see how we discharge this responsibility.

The prior and post narrative relied on post-independence historical trends built within the country, such as Russia being our long-trusted ally. The opponents, on occasion, critiqued the preference of Russia over Ukraine. The recent meeting with Ukraine provided other opportunities for the opponents to claim that we have lost the confidence of Russians. In the same breadth, they can claim that the Ukrainians will not trust us because of earlier behavior. The opponents have their time-dependent portfolio of opinions, which keeps changing. The proponents can argue that we won the Russian heart when Americans froze the foreign exchange of Russians in dollars and banned access to the “Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication” (SWIFT) facility. The second opportunity we understood with Russians was during New Delhi’s leadership’s G 20 concluding meetings. 

We are dependent on energy security for the international fraternity. Oil is the mutual reason that bonded the interests of Russia and Bharat. Both of us had a win-win situation. This situation didn’t create any new conflict for anyone—the ongoing conflict wherever in the world had an indifferent impact. We did not lobby for lifting sanctions against Russia. We traded in our currency, and Russia accepted it. This simple accomplishment is also a gesture of concern for all.

We are an economy that stands relatively on solid macroeconomic parameters, and this was the result of well-planned, disciplined, and desirable efforts put in over subsequent years of excellent and bad learnings, with the black-and-white decision that led us to desire that we have to be a self-reliant, and developed country by 2047. 

The international currency is an essential constituent of this effort. Hence, we bought Russian oils with our currency or mutually agreed upon basket of currency by isolating American dollars, as Russia has lost all its dollar deposits. Russians have been our traditional weapons suppliers; we have already moved ahead significantly in our defense manufacturing, including arsenals, naval submarines, and other weapons and ancillaries. Today, this is why we have a huge export opportunity for defense products. Our dependency on Russians for arms and ammunition is not the reason to define our relationship with Russia per se. We preferred those who accepted our currency for trade and did the deal.

Bharat and Ukraine committed in their meeting to working towards universal food security in general and in Asia and Africa in particular. They also assured cooperation in the economic, scientific, and technical domains, defense, and cultural and people-to-people ties.

Bharat, Russia, and Ukraine (BRU) are at the center of global politics today. Under the umbrella of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the West appears to be concerned with Russians. However, they are equally concerned about Chinese economic and geographical hegemony. China exploited the Russia-Ukraine war to test its strength against NATO, which comprises thirty European and two North American countries. China has created a web of opponents to checkmate NATO plus Bharat by engaging openly with Russia and North Korea. 

Our neighborhood is deeply in trouble, created by specific global forces, and despite that, we are in control of our neighborhood rather than the Chinese. Our one neighbor who is supporting the Russian war is troubling our other neighbors and is using it as a proxy against us. The situation in the former Himalayan Kingdom and now the democratic republic of Nepal needs our consistent attention because of their inclination towards the Chinese, and we have to neutralize the Nepali compulsions, whatever they are. However, the long legacy and natural choice are in our favor. 

The missed opportunity to integrate Bhutan with ourselves keeps popping up as a subject of debate. We owe the responsibility for defending Bhutan, but the Chinese are creating trouble for us by disturbing its boundaries. 

Bangladesh, an integral part of Bharat before 15 August 1947, has always considered our people. However, our international enemies are creating trouble within Bangladesh by targeting the Hindus to deviate from our strengths. China is a crucial party in Bangladesh’s affairs.

In this, the role of NATO’s leader, i.e., North Americans, is also under the radar. We recently rescued Sri Lanka from the Chinese trap of debt as well as other affairs. The Maldives, Myanmar, and Thailand trust us more than the Chinese or the two North American countries. The Japanese and Australians are always comfortable with us and feel troubled by the Chinese. The South China Sea looks upon our navy for defense and maintaining global maritime order.  

These global chessboards of economics, defense, trade, and the well-acknowledged cultural conflict are not zero-sum games. Those who believe in a zero-sum game, i.e., “I win, You lose, or You win, I lose,” need to change; otherwise, they will have to bear irreparable damage to their culture and people.

We are the face of art with trust. We have paid the price for trust, right from the days of membership to the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). Opponents of our foreign policy complain that we cannot simultaneously be with Russia and China. However, we have demonstrated G20 success, in which we didn’t allow criticism of Russia, concluded the meeting with a grand welcome, and expanded the G20 family by including the African Union (AU). AU itself has fifty-five member states.

Today, we have formulated our defense group, Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD), which includes Bharat, Australia, Japan, and America. We are in NAM and QUAD simultaneously, and we are with Russia and Ukraine simultaneously, and none of the direct stakeholders are uncomfortable with us. We owe the responsibility for the new world order on all fronts, including climate, humanity, civilization, health, energy, food, defense, and others. The absence of a tool of veto right in the United Nations Security Council seems to dwarf our role on the world stage.             

(Alok Singh has a doctorate in management from the Indian Institute of Management Indore and promoter of Transition Research Consultancy for Policy and Management).

Share This