In Portugal, and in the West in general, many people wonder why India has abstained from UN votes condemning Russia for invading Ukraine. Is it still a sense of gratitude towards Russia/USSR for its traditional support for India or is it a position also dictated by current interests?
I think it’s a mix. Of course, we have a very long and well-known relationship with Russia, but I also think that there is currently interest in, for example, importing oil – not even Europe has been able to completely stop Russian oil imports. For us, this supply is vital and the Russians accept payment in rupees, which is beneficial for the Indian economy. It is also clear that we have had a treaty of friendship with Russia for many years and that we are naturally interested in supplying arms, especially since much of our defense equipment is made in Russia. That is, we must continue to buy spare parts and everything else from Russia. But apart from these interests, as our foreign minister said recently, we do not think that a solution through sanctions and the use of force is worth it. We need diplomacy and we really need a solution that will bring lasting peace.
Is India’s current position that there should be direct negotiations between Ukraine and Russia?
Exactly, but not only between Ukraine and Russia, but also with other parties that may represent different interests, such as NATO, the United States. We must recognize that Russia was also, in a way, provoked by NATO enlargement. They said several times that reaching Ukraine would be a problem because it is the country right next to Russia. And another point is the hot water port issue. Indeed, there are strategic reasons why Russia did not find this expansion of NATO acceptable beyond a certain point. I think we understand that point of view, we also think about it in national strategic terms.
But, in your opinion, should any negotiation for a lasting peace involve the United States or the West?
Yes, as long as they also allow Russia and Ukraine to negotiate with each other, without too much interference from other powers. As you know, in international affairs, when the great powers are involved, sometimes it is not easy to solve. It’s better to let countries solve their problems, but of course I understand that invading another country doesn’t exactly help. But I think we need to see what’s behind all this, because there was a kind of gentlemen’s agreement that NATO wouldn’t grow beyond a certain point once Germany was reunited, something that wasn’t followed. It seems to me that the point is that countries demand democracy and democracy should be given to them. And India is a democratic country, but we don’t feel it our duty to bring democracy to the rest of the world.
Do you disagree with the idea of a coalition of democracies against the others, the authoritarian ones?
No, I don’t agree. I think all forms of government are valid and we need to understand that countries have the right to choose their own models of government. For example, we all agreed to make deals with countries that have dictatorships, that’s how politics works, it happens several times. We cannot dictate how other countries are run and India’s policy has always been that we should be in favor of a legitimate government of a country and we should recognize it until it changes. I think we should learn to respect all kinds of governments, not just democracies. Even though I personally agree with democratic principles that people have the right to choose their own leaders.
India is part of the QUAD, a kind of informal alliance that also includes the United States, Japan and Australia. In the QUAD it is possible to see the features of an alliance of democracies, but do you think that the main reason for its establishment, and India’s participation, is opposition to the rise of China?
No, I don’t think so, not least because we should not forget that India is participating in the Shanghai cooperation agreement with China, we have also supported the International Infrastructure Bank. We are together in the RIC forum – Russia, India and China – as we are in the QUAD and we have a very healthy relationship with the United States. I think we Indians are in a unique position where we can talk to all parties be it China, Russia, Europe or the United States. Of course we have our problems with China, but we have never broken off diplomatic relations.
Do you think a dialogue between India and China is possible despite the territorial disputes in the Himalayas?
Yes, that’s right, because we’ve had several very successful dialogues in the past. It may be harder now, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen in the future, so I believe in diplomacy and peace.
Is India a leader of the so-called Global South?
There is much debate about what the Global South is, but it is true that the Global South is now a group of countries with different interests and with different levels of development, and India will probably be considered a very advanced country in the Global South. But even so, India is still a developing country, it still doesn’t have a robust social safety net, we still have hundreds of millions of people living in poverty and it’s real poverty.
But the quality of life has improved in recent years, hasn’t it?
Yes, there is a growing middle class, but I think India is still very unequal. There are very rich people, there are very poor people, there is a growing middle class, but in terms of development it is a very big mix. I don’t think it is possible to say there is no Global South but I also don’t think it is possible to deny that there are differences in development between the different countries in the Global South and I think India likes that would like to keep doing. help with what we have already started. Even within the Global South, there are countries that have even greater development needs than we do. We are always committed to this, in fact we have a program called ITEC, for technical and economic cooperation, we have another called Development Partnership Assistance and we are always looking for new projects in other countries that need help.
This year, India officially becomes the most populous country in the world, surpassing China. Is this just symbolic or is there a great opportunity for a country with so many human resources, more than 1400 million, mostly young people?
Yes, we may have a chance, but it’s a big challenge. Because unless we create enough jobs, unless the economy grows enough, unless we invest in education and jobs, the demographic dividend could easily turn into a demographic nightmare. We have a large number of low-skilled or unskilled youth at all, so I think we need to balance this, we need to be more sustainable in this regard to avoid social disruption. We must be well prepared, we must invest heavily in a good health system, in good public schools and in a social security system for the poorest.
In terms of foreign policy, when the somewhat socialist Congress Party was in power, the traditional alliance with the Soviet Union/Russia made some sense, but with the current BJP government it is increasingly pro-business, more liberal in economics. And as many Indian emigrants in America becoming successful, is there currently a shift towards India moving closer to the US or are these foreign policy choices independent of the ruling party?
I think the main foreign policy options don’t depend on the governing party, but you’re right to say that relations with the United States and the West have grown stronger in recent years. Remember there was an earlier time, in the 50’s and 60’s, when there was also very close relations between India and the United States, but later on the views became more and more different. India was a very poor country, we had huge needs on different levels, but today we are seen as a very attractive market not only for consumer goods but also for recruiting people for service areas. In fact, we have many highly skilled people in medicine, engineering and other fields, and right now there is a huge demand for our specialized people around the world. That’s a big advantage that we have now, but also, and this is India’s paradox, we have the flip side of the disadvantages. I think when we say we want to be part of the South or help the South, we’re being sincere, but we also want alliances with the great powers and sitting at the big table and we’re equally sincere about that. Some people might see this as some kind of multi-pronged strategy, but I would say it just protects our national interests. Because we need different strategies in different contexts.
India is truly a unique country!
Yes, it’s very special. Almost everything that can be said about India, the opposite is also true.
India is a nuclear power and there are some fears that this crisis in Ukraine could lead to a global conflict involving the use of nuclear weapons. Is people aware of this risk in India?
There are always concerns about nuclear weapons no matter what country you are in. But I think having nuclear weapons is a deterrent of sorts because everyone knows the price to be paid by the country using them and the countries around them. Personally, I think it works both ways. Having worked at the International Atomic Energy Agency myself, I know that different countries come together to talk about nuclear energy and how to manage it through agreements and I think this is why multilateralism is so important.
Source: DN
