• Home
  • About RSIS
    • Introduction
    • Building the Foundations
    • Welcome Message
    • Board of Governors
    • Staff Profiles
      • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
      • Dean’s Office
      • Management
      • Distinguished Fellows
      • Faculty and Research
      • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
      • Visiting Fellows
      • Adjunct Fellows
      • Administrative Staff
    • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
    • RSIS Endowment Fund
    • Endowed Professorships
    • Career Opportunities
    • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
    • Research Centres
      • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
      • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
      • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
      • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
      • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
    • Research Programmes
      • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
      • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
    • [email protected] Newsletter
    • Other Research
      • Future Issues And Technology (FIT)
      • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
    • Graduate Programmes Office
    • Overview
    • MSc (Asian Studies)
    • MSc (International Political Economy)
    • MSc (International Relations)
    • MSc (Strategic Studies)
    • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
    • PhD Programme
    • Exchange Partners and Programmes
    • How to Apply
    • Financial Assistance
    • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
    • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
    • Alumni
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
    • SRP Executive Programme
    • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
    • RSIS Publications
      • Annual Reviews
      • Books
      • Bulletins and Newsletters
      • Commentaries
      • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
      • Commemorative / Event Reports
      • IDSS Paper
      • Interreligious Relations
      • Monographs
      • NTS Insight
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • RSIS Publications for the Year
    • Glossary of Abbreviations
    • External Publications
      • Authored Books
      • Journal Articles
      • Edited Books
      • Chapters in Edited Books
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • Op-Eds
      • External Publications for the Year
    • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
    • Cohesive Societies
    • Great Powers
    • Sustainable Security
    • COVID-19 Resources
    • Other Resource Pages
    • Media Highlights
    • News Releases
    • Speeches
    • Vidcast Channel
    • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsis.sg
Linkedin
instagram instagram rsis.sg
RSS
  • Home
  • About RSIS
      • Introduction
      • Building the Foundations
      • Welcome Message
      • Board of Governors
      • Staff Profiles
        • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
        • Dean’s Office
        • Management
        • Distinguished Fellows
        • Faculty and Research
        • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
        • Visiting Fellows
        • Adjunct Fellows
        • Administrative Staff
      • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
      • RSIS Endowment Fund
      • Endowed Professorships
      • Career Opportunities
      • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
      • Research Centres
        • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
        • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
        • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
        • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
        • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      • Research Programmes
        • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
        • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      • [email protected] Newsletter
      • Other Research
        • Future Issues And Technology (FIT)
        • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      • Graduate Programmes Office
      • Overview
      • MSc (Asian Studies)
      • MSc (International Political Economy)
      • MSc (International Relations)
      • MSc (Strategic Studies)
      • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
      • PhD Programme
      • Exchange Partners and Programmes
      • How to Apply
      • Financial Assistance
      • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
      • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
      • Alumni
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
      • SRP Executive Programme
      • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
      • RSIS Publications
        • Annual Reviews
        • Books
        • Bulletins and Newsletters
        • Commentaries
        • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
        • Commemorative / Event Reports
        • IDSS Paper
        • Interreligious Relations
        • Monographs
        • NTS Insight
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • RSIS Publications for the Year
      • Glossary of Abbreviations
      • External Publications
        • Authored Books
        • Journal Articles
        • Edited Books
        • Chapters in Edited Books
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • Op-Eds
        • External Publications for the Year
      • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
      • Cohesive Societies
      • Great Powers
      • Sustainable Security
      • COVID-19 Resources
      • Other Resource Pages
      • Media Highlights
      • News Releases
      • Speeches
      • Vidcast Channel
      • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
  • instagram instagram rsis.sg
Connect

Getting to RSIS

Map

Address

Nanyang Technological University
Block S4, Level B3,
50 Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798

View location on Google maps Click here for directions to RSIS

Get in Touch

    Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
    RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
    instagram instagram rsis.sg
      RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    RSIS Intranet

    S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
    Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University

    Skip to content

     
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO14061 | India’s Diplomatic Dilemma over Crimea
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • Commentaries
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • IDSS Paper
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers
    • RSIS Publications for the Year

    CO14061 | India’s Diplomatic Dilemma over Crimea
    Harshita Kohli

    02 April 2014

    download pdf
    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Synopsis

    New Delhi’s acknowledgement of Russia’s “legitimate interests” in Crimea and the decision  not to back US and EU sanctions against Moscow could have a ripple effect on the evolving Indo-US partnership and India’s own stance over the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan.

    Commentary

    RUSSIA’S ANNEXATION of the Crimea on 18 March 2014 has caught India on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, New Delhi’s decision not to back the sanctions levied by the United States and the European Union against Russia is in line with its policy of only supporting sanctions approved by the United Nations. This stance, however, could have adverse effects on India’s relations with the US and EU.

    On the other hand, taking an active stance against Russia could damage relations with a longstanding ally that has been a source of diplomatic support for India in the international arena, the major arms supplier for the Indian military and a source of technology transfers for decades.

    Team Putin?

    When the crisis in the Ukraine unfolded, the Ukrainian ambassador to India met with senior government officials and asked India to take a decisive stand against Russia. The silence from India was deafening; India’s only action was to issue an advisory to Indians in the Ukraine to register with the Indian Embassy in Kiev.

    However, on 6 March, India broke its silence only to take an ambiguous stance. At a briefing for the media, India’s National Security Advisor (NSA) Shivshankar Menon publicly acknowledged that Russia had “legitimate interests” in Crimea. Menon’s statement was interpreted as being pro-Russia. Yet on the same day, the Ministry of External Affairs issued a statement calling for a diplomatic resolution of the Russo-Ukraine crisis.

    The situation became more complicated following the 16 March referendum in Crimea in which the population voted overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Russian Federation. Russian President Vladimir Putin singled out India and China for praise in his address to the Parliament two days later. Specifically, he thanked India for its “reserve and objectivity” towards Moscow. Shortly thereafter, Putin conversed with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during which he explained Russia’s point of view on the Ukraine crisis.

    As the US and EU ramped up their condemnation of Russia following the referendum, India issued yet another anodyne statement which failed to condemn Russia; instead, it pointed to the “close relationship and mutually beneficial partnership between India and Russia”. Subsequently, television and other media quoted government sources stating India will “not support any unilateral measures by a country or group of countries”, adding that New Delhi is also likely to abstain from voting at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) session on Crimea if the resolution tabled by Ukraine is condemnatory of Russia. At the UNGA special meeting that took place on 27 March, India did abstain from voting even as the Ukrainian resolution received overwhelming support from other countries.

    Choosing between partners

    Given the shared history between the India and Russia, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s lack of condemnation of Putin’s actions can be interpreted as tacit support. However, should the actions of the West intensify in an effort to isolate Moscow, India may need to choose between two of its most strategically important partners – Russia and the US.

    Bilateral Indo-Russian ties are extensive. Traditionally, Moscow has backed New Delhi at critical junctures. It supported India in its war against Pakistan in 1971 when support from the US was not as forthcoming. Similarly, after India’s nuclear tests in 1998, when other Western countries were vehemently criticising India, Moscow continued to engage with New Delhi. India has also witnessed a referendum similar to the one organised in Crimea when the state of Sikkim merged with India in 1975 after 98% of residents in Sikkim voted favourably for a merger with India. Moscow had explicitly supported the merger.

    Currently, India is the world’s largest arms importer and relies on Russia for 75 percent of its arms imports. Economically too, Russo-Indian trade is rapidly rising and there is significant Indian investment in Russian businesses. India and Russia have also signed a bilateral nuclear agreement that is worth billions of dollars.

    With the US taking a firm stand against Russia, India’s implicit support for Russia is likely to have an adverse effect on the Indo-US partnership which is already besieged with problems. Many US policymakers have banked on India to play a critical role in the rebalance efforts of the US in Asia. Continuing bureaucratic hurdles in both states restricting trade and investment, lack of progress on the civilian nuclear energy deal and, most recently, India’s strong retaliation to the arrest of the Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade have led many to question whether the strategic bet on India will pay off.

    India’s decision to not condemn Moscow’s annexation of Crimea is raising questions about the credibility of India’s strategic alliance with the US and if India will ever let go its longstanding and increasingly anachronistic grand strategy of non-alignment that is ultimately proving detrimental to Indo-US ties.

    Ripple effect

    India’s stance on Russia’s annexation of Crimea is already causing problems for the government domestically. On the heels of the Crimean Referendum, The Hurriyat Conference – a coalition of Kashmiri political, social and religious organisations that want Kashmir to become independent or join Pakistan – released a statement urging the UN to help resolve the Kashmir dispute. The spokesperson for The Hurriyat Conference questioned “why the people of Kashmir are denied the right to determine their political future” when Crimea was given the right to self-determination to decide its future.

    India’s support for the Crimean referendum, will inevitably lead New Delhi down a path of controversy vis-à-vis Kashmir. Despite decades of unrest calling for independence or a merger with Pakistan, New Delhi has maintained that Kashmir will always remain a part of India. The Indian government would like the world and its own citizens to see its stance as neutral and one that is focused on achieving a peaceful resolution through diplomatic efforts.

    It has tried to balance out its stand in the international arena by saying that principally New Delhi does not favour referendums and will not support a referendum as the only basis for breaking up a country.

    However, the lack of any criticism by New Delhi on Russia’s annexation of Crimea coupled with NSA Menon’s statement acknowledging Russia’s legitimacy and, most recently, reports of India’s decision not to back Western sanctions suggest otherwise. It appears India has taken a stand which is leaning towards its old friend Russia.

    About the Author

    Harshita Kohli is an Associate Research Fellow with the US Studies Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. She was previously a journalist based in Mumbai, India.

    Categories: Commentaries / International Politics and Security / Americas / Europe / South Asia

    Last updated on 08/09/2014

    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Synopsis

    New Delhi’s acknowledgement of Russia’s “legitimate interests” in Crimea and the decision  not to back US and EU sanctions against Moscow could have a ripple effect on the evolving Indo-US partnership and India’s own stance over the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan.

    Commentary

    RUSSIA’S ANNEXATION of the Crimea on 18 March 2014 has caught India on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, New Delhi’s decision not to back the sanctions levied by the United States and the European Union against Russia is in line with its policy of only supporting sanctions approved by the United Nations. This stance, however, could have adverse effects on India’s relations with the US and EU.

    On the other hand, taking an active stance against Russia could damage relations with a longstanding ally that has been a source of diplomatic support for India in the international arena, the major arms supplier for the Indian military and a source of technology transfers for decades.

    Team Putin?

    When the crisis in the Ukraine unfolded, the Ukrainian ambassador to India met with senior government officials and asked India to take a decisive stand against Russia. The silence from India was deafening; India’s only action was to issue an advisory to Indians in the Ukraine to register with the Indian Embassy in Kiev.

    However, on 6 March, India broke its silence only to take an ambiguous stance. At a briefing for the media, India’s National Security Advisor (NSA) Shivshankar Menon publicly acknowledged that Russia had “legitimate interests” in Crimea. Menon’s statement was interpreted as being pro-Russia. Yet on the same day, the Ministry of External Affairs issued a statement calling for a diplomatic resolution of the Russo-Ukraine crisis.

    The situation became more complicated following the 16 March referendum in Crimea in which the population voted overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Russian Federation. Russian President Vladimir Putin singled out India and China for praise in his address to the Parliament two days later. Specifically, he thanked India for its “reserve and objectivity” towards Moscow. Shortly thereafter, Putin conversed with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during which he explained Russia’s point of view on the Ukraine crisis.

    As the US and EU ramped up their condemnation of Russia following the referendum, India issued yet another anodyne statement which failed to condemn Russia; instead, it pointed to the “close relationship and mutually beneficial partnership between India and Russia”. Subsequently, television and other media quoted government sources stating India will “not support any unilateral measures by a country or group of countries”, adding that New Delhi is also likely to abstain from voting at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) session on Crimea if the resolution tabled by Ukraine is condemnatory of Russia. At the UNGA special meeting that took place on 27 March, India did abstain from voting even as the Ukrainian resolution received overwhelming support from other countries.

    Choosing between partners

    Given the shared history between the India and Russia, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s lack of condemnation of Putin’s actions can be interpreted as tacit support. However, should the actions of the West intensify in an effort to isolate Moscow, India may need to choose between two of its most strategically important partners – Russia and the US.

    Bilateral Indo-Russian ties are extensive. Traditionally, Moscow has backed New Delhi at critical junctures. It supported India in its war against Pakistan in 1971 when support from the US was not as forthcoming. Similarly, after India’s nuclear tests in 1998, when other Western countries were vehemently criticising India, Moscow continued to engage with New Delhi. India has also witnessed a referendum similar to the one organised in Crimea when the state of Sikkim merged with India in 1975 after 98% of residents in Sikkim voted favourably for a merger with India. Moscow had explicitly supported the merger.

    Currently, India is the world’s largest arms importer and relies on Russia for 75 percent of its arms imports. Economically too, Russo-Indian trade is rapidly rising and there is significant Indian investment in Russian businesses. India and Russia have also signed a bilateral nuclear agreement that is worth billions of dollars.

    With the US taking a firm stand against Russia, India’s implicit support for Russia is likely to have an adverse effect on the Indo-US partnership which is already besieged with problems. Many US policymakers have banked on India to play a critical role in the rebalance efforts of the US in Asia. Continuing bureaucratic hurdles in both states restricting trade and investment, lack of progress on the civilian nuclear energy deal and, most recently, India’s strong retaliation to the arrest of the Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade have led many to question whether the strategic bet on India will pay off.

    India’s decision to not condemn Moscow’s annexation of Crimea is raising questions about the credibility of India’s strategic alliance with the US and if India will ever let go its longstanding and increasingly anachronistic grand strategy of non-alignment that is ultimately proving detrimental to Indo-US ties.

    Ripple effect

    India’s stance on Russia’s annexation of Crimea is already causing problems for the government domestically. On the heels of the Crimean Referendum, The Hurriyat Conference – a coalition of Kashmiri political, social and religious organisations that want Kashmir to become independent or join Pakistan – released a statement urging the UN to help resolve the Kashmir dispute. The spokesperson for The Hurriyat Conference questioned “why the people of Kashmir are denied the right to determine their political future” when Crimea was given the right to self-determination to decide its future.

    India’s support for the Crimean referendum, will inevitably lead New Delhi down a path of controversy vis-à-vis Kashmir. Despite decades of unrest calling for independence or a merger with Pakistan, New Delhi has maintained that Kashmir will always remain a part of India. The Indian government would like the world and its own citizens to see its stance as neutral and one that is focused on achieving a peaceful resolution through diplomatic efforts.

    It has tried to balance out its stand in the international arena by saying that principally New Delhi does not favour referendums and will not support a referendum as the only basis for breaking up a country.

    However, the lack of any criticism by New Delhi on Russia’s annexation of Crimea coupled with NSA Menon’s statement acknowledging Russia’s legitimacy and, most recently, reports of India’s decision not to back Western sanctions suggest otherwise. It appears India has taken a stand which is leaning towards its old friend Russia.

    About the Author

    Harshita Kohli is an Associate Research Fellow with the US Studies Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. She was previously a journalist based in Mumbai, India.

    Categories: Commentaries / International Politics and Security

    Last updated on 08/09/2014

    Back to top

    Terms of Use | Privacy Statement
    Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
    This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
    OK
    Latest Book
    CO14061 | India’s Diplomatic Dilemma over Crimea

    Synopsis

    New Delhi’s acknowledgement of Russia’s “legitimate interests” in Crimea and the decision  not to back US and EU sanctio ...
    more info