Why India's failure to take a hard stance on Russia could backfire

As Washington was raising the alarm about convoys of Russian military forces heading toward the Ukrainian border in early December, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin were posing for cameras at a grand New Delhi palace. 

During the 21st India-Russia Annual Summit, both leaders reaffirmed their "special and privileged strategic partnership," signing a military and technical co-operation pact to boost trade to $30 billion US per year, including a $5.4 billion US missile defence system for India.

Since Russia invaded Ukraine two weeks ago — shelling several major cities, hampering efforts to evacuate and causing the deaths of at least 400 civilians so far —  India has abstained on every United Nations vote condemning Russia's actions. These include votes at the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly, the UN Human Rights Council and at the International Atomic Energy Agency.

India's stance invoked the opprobrium of the overwhelming majority of its NATO allies, including the U.S., with whom it has been forging a deeper strategic alliance in recent years, bolstered by their common concern over increased Chinese incursion into the Indo-Pacific region.  

"India is in a very tough spot," said Srinath Raghavan, professor of political science at Ashoka University in Gurgaon, India.

India's need for Russian arms to defend itself is the main reason India refused to vote against Russia at the UN, Raghavan said.

"As a country with disputed borders yourself it (abstention) is definitely a difficult stance for India to take."

India did recognize that Russia committed an act of aggression and a violation of Ukrainian sovereignty, with Ambassador T.S. Tirumurti saying on Feb. 25 that India was "deeply disturbed," and urging "immediate cessation of violence" in its explanation of why it abstained on the UN resolution.

But India's support of Russia is deep-rooted and comes as little surprise to foreign policy experts, having been referred to as a "reciprocity of silence" by scholar Ramesh Thakur back in 1991.

Dating back to the Cold War, arms sales have been the foundation of India-Russia relations. As its best customer over the decades, India has benefited from so-called "friendship prices," easy credit arrangements and technologies that are, for the most part, competitive and reliable.

Since 1991 alone, India has spent $70 billion US on Russian arms, including frigates, nuclear submarines, fighter aircraft, transport helicopters, cruise missiles, and air defences, and it plans to spend much more, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

"The Indian military would come to a standstill if Russian support is not there. And that would mean that the Chinese threat becomes even more potent," said Sushant Singh, senior fellow at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi.

India has had a difficult relationship with China for decades. Hostilities took a violent turn in 2020 when, for the first time in 45 years, clashes resulted in losses of life on the demarcation known as the Line of Actual Control. Some 20 Indian and an unknown number of Chinese soldiers died in the 2020 clashes, and tensions remain. 

"There's a sense in New Delhi that at the end of the day, when India gets into a very difficult situation with China, it's sort of on its own," said Sanjay Ruparelia, Jarislowsky Democracy Chair at Ryerson University in Toronto.