India Backs Russia's "Legitimate Interests" In Ukraine

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Zachary Zeck via The Diplomat,

On Thursday a senior Indian official appeared to endorse Russia’s position in Ukraine in recent days, even as Delhi urged all parties involved to seek a peaceful resolution to the diplomatic crisis.

When asked for India’s official assessment of the events in Ukraine, National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon responded:

“We hope that whatever internal issues there are within Ukraine are settled peacefully, and the broader issues of reconciling various interests involved, and there are legitimate Russian and other interests involved…. We hope those are discussed, negotiated and that there is a satisfactory resolution to them.”

The statement was made on the same day that Crimea’s parliament voted to hold a referendum for secession from Ukraine.

Local Indian media noted that Menon’s statement about Russia’s legitimate interests in Ukraine made it the first major nation to publicly lean toward Russia. As my colleague Shannon has reported throughout the week, many of China’s public statements could be interpreted as backing Russia in Ukraine, despite Beijing’s own concerns about ethnic breakaway states and its principle of non-interference.

However, at other times, including at the UN Security Council, Beijing has appeared to be subtly rebuking Moscow by suggesting that its unilateral path threatened regional and global stability. At the very least, however, Beijing has characteristically not gone as far as the U.S. and the West in publicly scolding Vladimir Putin for the military intervention in Crimea.

Ukraine certainly appeared to interpret India’s endorsement of Russia’s legitimate interests as far more hostile than Beijing’s position on Russia’s actions. According to the Telegraph India, a Ukrainian embassy spokesperson stationed in Delhi responded to Menon’s comments by saying: “We are not sure how Russia can be seen having legitimate interests in the territory of another country. In our view, and in the view of much of the international community, this is a direct act of aggression and we cannot accept any justification for it.”

The larger question, of course, is why India decided to take such a relatively pro-Russian stance on the Ukraine issue? There are a number of possibilities.

First, India and Russia have long-standing ties and Moscow is Delhi’s top arms provider. Moreover, Russia and the former Soviet Union has been nearly alone in the international community in continue to back India during crucial moments such as following its 1974 and 1998 nuclear tests.

It’s also possible that Delhi believes Russia’s intervention offers the best chance of stabilizing Ukraine. India’s Foreign Ministry on Thursday also released a statement noting that there are “more than 5,000 Indian nationals, including about 4,000 students, in different parts of Ukraine.” At the same time, India’s overall interest in Ukraine is fairly negligible—certainly less than China’s, for instance—and thus Delhi might assess that it has more to gain by publicly sticking by Moscow at a time when it desperately needs support.

India also has plenty of interests in certain regions along its peripheral, and at certain times—such as during the Sri Lanka Civil War—has intervened to protect various societal groups with strong ties to India. Unlike China, then, India may assess it has an interest in an international precedent in which major powers can intervene in countries along their borders. At the same time, such an international precedent could be used by Pakistan to justify intervening in Kashmir.

Telegraph India offers another reason. According to the report cited above, Indian officials have told Telegraph India that, in the newspaper’s words, Delhi is “convinced that the West’s tacit support for a series of attempted coups against democratically elected governments — in Egypt, Thailand and now Ukraine — has only weakened democratic roots in these countries.”

This rationale would be consistent with India’s long-standing, deep-seated abhorrence to anything that merely resembles Western imperialism. At the same time, India has not historically made supporting democracy abroad a central tenet of its foreign policy.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
1stepcloser's picture

Sure they do, the best slushy comes out of Ukraine

EscapingProgress's picture

All of this foreplay is really killing me. Can we just have a nuclear war already? As long as all countries agree to put Go-Pros on the tips of their ICBMs and post the live video feeds on the internet for our entertainment I think we'll be OK.

0b1knob's picture

The reason for India's stand is obvious.  Russia invades its former province of Ukraine.    One day India might want to invade its former province of Pakistan.

long-shorty's picture

Ukraine and belorus are big competitors of India for IT outsourcing. Look at the stock of EPAM since crisis began, then look at the Indian it firms. Instability in eastern Europe is a big economic positive for India and its current account.

Event Horizon's picture
Vladimir Putin met with Formula 1 President Bernie Ecclestone.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Thank you very much.

When do we plan to launch Formula 1?


Independent's picture

Guess the Indians know only too well the imperialism attached to the English language.

Plus Gandhi never would of liked protesters with guns

UselessEater's picture

BRICS have been busy....... 

the articles could lead one to speculate once the IMF gets past US opposition to changing its veto voting rights then WB, IMF etc can help the BRICS Bank waiting in the wings, with gold foing west to east and ongoing calls for new currency... Urkraine is looking more pivotal in chaning geo-political relations and perceptions for agendas that go beyond pipelines, not sure WW3 is the goal (maybe in the years to come) but sure looks like this is more about isolating the US and USD and fostering more global governance and centrally planned bullshit.



Wahooo's picture

Not sure I'd buy an Indian made AK.

SWRichmond's picture

US pisses off Russia, tells world it's Russia's fault.

Russia refuses to back down.

China sides with Russia, citing American imperialist meddling gone awry.

India sides with Russia, citing the same.

Drop your cocks and grab your socks, kids.  This ain't looking good.

This is the end
Beautiful friend
This is the end
My only friend, the end
Of our elaborate plans, the end
Of everything that stands, the end
No safety or surprise, the end
I'll never look into your eyes...again
Can you picture what will be
So limitless and free
Desperately in need...of some...stranger's hand
In a...desperate land
Lost in a Roman...wilderness of pain
And all the children are insane
All the children are insane

kaiserhoff's picture

India wants Russia to help kick China and Pakistan out of Kashmir. 

Borders are being redrawn all over Asia, mostly by the Chinese, but the lame steam median are too busy covering up for Barry to notice.

Truthseeker2's picture

Exposé explains the whole deal, particularly the BRICS posture.


"How is this announcement related to the preplanned Ukraine ‘Color Revolution’ executed by the Anglo-American Axis?"


silvermail's picture

"Invasion" it is what makes today U.S. troops in Iraq.
They are looking for weapons of mass destruction? And how many more years the U.S. Army, will be trying to find these fictional, non-existent weapons in a foreign country?
Or the United States in the pocket there is a request of the legitimate authorities of the Iraqi, about military assistance?

What about U.S. troops in Afganistan? It is not illegal "Invasion"?
When in Washington begin to rant about "sovereignty", it is perceived by the world community only as a new anecdote.
World aggressor number one, publicly says rants about "sovereignty"! LOL

drdolittle's picture

I've always had good luck with the stuff I buy from India. High quality at a very reasonable price.

JK, not sure which end of the gun would be scarier.

kaiserhoff's picture

Serious question.

What kinds of things does India manufacture, and export in bulk?


sangell's picture

Mahindra tractors are fairly well known to people who buy tractors. Jaguar cars are owned by an Indian firm but are still made in the UK. I also recall noticing manhole covers being made in India. I realized that  years ago when I had to pull them up after finding a gas leak blowing into a storm sewer.

Drifter's picture

India is the "I" in BRICS, which I call "ANA", the new Asian Nuclear Alliance. 

It could be "AMA" too, the new Asian Monetary Alliance.

Or how bout "AMNA", the new Asian Monetary / Nuclear Alliance", bringing a new gold-backed monetary system, backed up with a shitload of nuclear weapons.

The wheels on the bus are going to fall off's picture

Nice, this post deserves alot more attention!

edwardo1's picture

As always, one has to ask, who benefits? The idea that gangster Putin's gambit, which involves invading a sovereign nation, is remotely acceptable, is absurd on the face.

Every pretext offered is exaggerated where it is not entirely bogus. Putin, a monster himself, backed a sociopath and Ukrainians ousted him. Whether the U.S. supported the movement against Yanuckovych is irrelevant. If there weren't widespread support for the kleptocrat's ouster, no revolt would have transpired let alone been successful. Putin knows this, and what India and China are doing, essentially nodding in support of invading a sovereign nation, is utterly self serving and incredibly dangerous. If this incursion is not properly dealt with, and it does not appear likely that it will be as widespread condemnation, which is needed at a minimum, is not forthcoming from the global community, you can be sure that there will be more of the same coming across the planet in the months and years to come. India and China may be backing Russian aggression because they have monetary reform designs that are anti-dollar based, but there will be some very unpleasant (perhaps unintended) consequences- imagine China going for Taiwan or some lesser Pacific territorial prize- if the aforesaid great nations attempt to bestow the patina of legitimacy to that which is egregiously unlawful.

Buckaroo Banzai's picture

"If there weren't widespread support for the kleptocrat's ouster, no revolt would have transpired let alone been successful."

Exactly. All the idiots who think US-backed neo-Nazis were the driving force behind the overthrow of the kleptocrats overlook the obvious fact that hundreds of thousands of people don't materialize in the streets unless they have a compelling, personal reason to do so.

"The idea that gangster Putin's gambit, which involves invading a sovereign nation, is remotely acceptable, is absurd on the face."

There is a flaw in your logic here. First, Crimea is actually a semi-autonomous republic. Second, until 1954, it was actually part of Russia. Third, it is full of ethnic Russians. So there is a meaningful gray area here.

That said, here is the case that Putin is entirely in the wrong: when Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons, Russia and the western nations signed a treaty guaranteeing ukraine's territorial integrity. I am surprised that this fact gets overlooked. The real takeaway here, of course, is that Ukraine was stupid to give up its nukes. But still-- everyone agreed that Ukraine was going to be left alone, and now they are fucking with that.

kaiserhoff's picture

Good summary Buck.  So many of the comments on this subject have been barking at the moon mad.  The love fest for Putin is especially troubling.  Gangsters should not be worshiped.

According to ZH, the hot war has been on like Donkey Kong for a week now.  We should study their methods, and learn to fight wars with Zero casualties.

silvermail's picture

Gangster Obama, brought to power in Kiev, their pocket fascists.

Gangster Obama, brought to power in Kiev these fascists undemocratically. Rebels backed by the U.S., made ??in Kiev armed coup.
They seized power in Kiev by force and deceit , through the willful slaughter and human sacrifice.

But part of the regions of Ukraine, refused to obey the fascist junta and gangster Washington. They remained faithful to the Constitution Ukraine and the democratically elected President.
At the request of the legitimate President of Ukraine and the full support of the population in these areas , Russia sent troops.
QUESTION: Who is the aggressor and gangster here: Putin or Obama?

sangell's picture

Thoughtful comments in a forum of assholes and screwballs, 99% of whom could not write you a check today for $10,000 but for some reason hang out on a site that is basically financial,  are not appreciated. No one denies Russia has legitimate interests in Ukraine. Its Navy has a major base there but why the Indian foreign minister chose to seemingly 'tilt' his statement towards Russia is interesting. Oil and Gas or maybe India, with a large diaspora of its nationals throughout Asia, Africa and the South Pacific wants to adopt the Hitler/Putin doctrine that wherever our people are we reserve the right to intervene. For example Fiji and other small Pacific Island nations where the aborginal people have, on occasion, attacked the Indian population.

silvermail's picture

Most importantly, India did not accept the doctrine of Hitler/Obama.


silvermail's picture

Only a complete idiot would call an "occupation", a request for military assistance, from the legitimate authority in the person of the President, democratically elected.

Dr. Destructo's picture

Dude, have you ever thought about our schedules? A lot of us work 5 days a week, and then would like to enjoy our weekends. Just because you have nothing going on doesn't mean we would want a nuclear war spoiling OUR plans.

Seriously, some people...

Quinvarius's picture

You make a powerful argument for rescheduling this to happen on Monday.

Oliver Klozoff's picture


Let's start the week off with a bang, S+P 2000!

Ness.'s picture
I know I'm speaking for the entire platoon when I say...

...this WAR should be postponed until this platoon is better rested.
kaiserhoff's picture

Well done, Sir.

Until I started reading ZH, I thought understated sarcasm was mostly a Midwest art form, but there are many roads to Nirvana;).

CPL's picture

Hey tough guy.  Put your money where your mouth is and how about you go help over at fukushima in the clean up efforts.  See how tough you are after a year.

bawk bawk bawk bawk bawk!

Vampyroteuthis infernalis's picture

At the same time, India has not historically made supporting democracy abroad a central tenet of its foreign policy.

This line is a load of crap. India cares about India. Don't kid yourself.

lead salad's picture

Quick, get Owebama on the phone to Punjab, or whaterver the hell his name is....another photo opp moment.

Boomberg's picture

The US will never sanction India for anything. India can shut off the IT support pipeline and every Fortune 500 corporation would shut down within hours. 

One And Only's picture


Finally pay some Americans to answer the phone. I hate it when I get that guy that doesn't speak English and it takes 2 hours to solve a 3 minute problem.

And to that tech guy in India - I know your name isn't fucking Adam Smith you lying piece of shit.

Skateboarder's picture

You think he likes being Adam Smith? We're all being played, fool.

It's not his fault for seeking a job within his means. It's not your fault for getting him as your phone-to guy. It's the multinational coropration's fault for outsourcing labor and allowing this horseshit to happen.

One And Only's picture

If taxes weren't raised to pay for medicare part d maybe that job wouldn't have been outsourced and I wouldn't have had him on the phone.

Bottom line: Bush's fault.

Skateboarder's picture

If taxes were not levied for income, social security, and healthcare, we wouldn't be in this steaming pile of shit to begin with. Not Bush's fault, but rather his predecessors that set up the conditions. Clinton did more 'damage' than Bush in that sector.

gwiss's picture

Hence the requirement for apportionment of direct taxes in the original Constitution.  They wanted to make taxation honest by tying spending to funding.  No company credit card spending sprees.

Anusocracy's picture

If it weren't for the dollar's reserve currency status we couldn't afford Indian call centers.

Theosebes Goodfellow's picture

~"Bottom line: Bush's fault."~

Holy shit, man! Talk about using a dead stick to beat the dead horse! How long have you been reading ZH? Do you really think it started with either 41 or 43? We got sold out way, way before that. Part of coming to Fight Club is using FC to knock the crap out of your blinders. Get over the "libtard or neocon" mentality. If you view events through that prism you've already lost, (though many here will argue that we've already lost anyway). Give up your blue pill ways, amigo. Figure out how you've been fucked and then work to defeat that. Start with your big-bank checking account. Then protect yourself from the coming non-voluntary, forced "bail-in" of your retirement account. Grow a garden. Stack PMs. Exercise, a lot. (You're going to need the stamina.)

One And Only's picture

Sense of humor.

I guess /sarc needs to be added to every comment?

RaceToTheBottom's picture

"using a dead stick to beat the dead horse!"

I use a live stick to beat a dead horse.

Or is it a dead stick to beat a live horse?  I always forget, I just know there is beating involved...

James-Morrison's picture

We be pirates here.

The beatings will continue until the morale improves, argh.

edotabin's picture

Nah.... I'm getting as fat as possible. I figure it'll give me an extra month or two of fat comsumption when there is nothing left to eat.


Grande Tetons's picture

I like dealing with these IT guys from India. I have never had a problem. They are always polite...kinda refreshing. 

Boomberg's picture

Those doing phone support are only a tiny fraction of IT support in India. Virtually every major corporation has their data centers supported by fully or partially by staff in India. Only hardware support is local, and even then some corporations have the hardware overseas also. Acme Inc. outsources all IT support, operating system, network, database, application servers, web servers to a major outsource provider like IBM. IBM then supports Acme from India, but Brazil, Ireland, and other nations are also suppliers of cheap IT labor. 

lolmao500's picture

Well I work for a big multinational in Canada... and they outsourced the IT support to the USA...

Skateboarder's picture

Wno further outsourced it to India?

I too have a family member who works for a big multinational. Being on the supply chain side, he deals with IT folks in the US, in India, and sometimes in China and Brazil. The 'organizers' are in the US, while the gruntwork is done in India (mostly) and China sometimes.

Grande Tetons's picture

Yes, it is no doubt the IT sector has been great for the young Indian go getter.  On the CSU side...I admire their dedication to learning close to perfect English. Some, can even switch to French....or...Spanish. Pretty remarkable.  NAMs minus the N,  kinda what the Statue of Liberty WAS all about. 

Give me your tired, your poor, 
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, 
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. 
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me: 
I lift my lamp beside the golden door


The key word is yearning. It does not mean a pulse or a big fucking bag of money.