‘The chances of nuclear use are minimal. Both Russia & Ukraine are well aware of results’: DB Venkatesh Varma

Russia has changed a lot over 30 years; it has changed fundamentally because it has opened up to a globalised world. It has also produced a very open-minded middle class. But certain things have remained unchanged in 200 years. And that has to do with geopolitics, which was dormant during most of the post-Cold War period. Russia found itself restricted, especially with respect to Ukraine. Unfortunately, we are in a phase where its concerns are being addressed through the use of military force but its inadequate accommodation among the big powers is what is playing out now.

On the leadership of Russian President Vladimir Putin

The early years of Putin were actually the golden age of democratic Russia. The 1990s were a period of great trauma for the Russian people with a falling GDP, plummeting industrial growth, deep debt, secession, extremism and terrorism in Chechnya. So the turnaround that the Russian President brought about was to consolidate Russia politically, suppress terrorism and the secessionist elements and modernise the economy. Largely, Russia was able to consolidate its financial position and made efforts to integrate with the outside world. US-Russia relations were in particularly good shape, Putin being the first world leader to call US President George Bush to convey his support after the 9/11 attack. Russia supported the US on the latter’s forces in Afghanistan to fight the Taliban and al-Qaeda, non-proliferation, arms control and Iran. Similarly, there was a strong cooperation with the EU, which became its largest trading partner. There was a dramatic change in the Russian automobile industry. Diplomatically, Russia engaged actively at the United Nations. And it nurtured its relations with India continuously while improving its ties with China 2000 onwards.

There are two narratives on what went wrong. The American argument is that Russia took a turn towards authoritarianism between 2008 and 2009 and began pushing its policies in the neighbourhood. Russia claims that the US was not willing to accept it as an equal partner. The first break in their relations came about over the invasion of Iraq. Russia was concerned about US unilateralism, particularly with respect to existing arms control agreements. But the biggest bone of contention was the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). Russia felt that the US was reneging on its commitments at the end of the Cold War to not destabilise the neighbourhood. The US and NATO felt that it was the right of sovereign countries, which had been newly liberated in Eastern Europe from the Warsaw Pact, to decide their own destiny and join NATO. There were five waves of NATO expansion which Russia objected to. But over a period of time, it opposed NATO expansion. So when Ukraine wanted to turn completely towards the West in 2014, Russia turned aggressive. Between 2014 and 2021, Russia and Ukraine tried to find the modus vivendi. This created a civil war situation in Donbass.

In 2015, there was an effort for mutual accommodation through the Minsk agreements and Russia was prepared to deal with Ukraine as an independent sovereign country but it wanted the Donbass region, which is Donetsk and Luhansk with almost 80-90 per cent Russian-speaking people, to be given provincial autonomy through a constitutional amendment in the Ukrainian Parliament. Over a period of time Russia got the sense that Ukraine was not willing to implement the agreements. Russia then concluded it was no longer possible to defend its interests in Ukraine given the direction its neighbour was setting up with prominent NATO countries.

India’s former ambassador to Russia, D B Venkatesh Varma

On Putin’s decision-making apparatus

Russia is an executive presidency by its own Constitution and President Putin has been in power since 2000. Of course, there was President Medvedev in between but then he served as Prime Minister. Elections have been held regularly in keeping with the democratic structure as embodied in the Constitution. The Western Press tends to equate Russia’s authoritarianism with China’s but that’s a lazy generalisation. China is a single-party country. The Russian Federation is a very complex matrix with regional diversities. Oligarchs or those who use wealth for political purposes actually peaked in the 1990s. Putin has, in fact, very clearly said that those who wish to make money in business are most welcome but should keep out of politics. He himself comes from a security background but to attribute his decisions to that thinking only is exaggerated. I think he conducts the affairs of the state in a fairly open manner. Of course, the decisions he takes are his, but his public popularity has stayed pretty high. Some newspapers have been shut down now but were around for the last 20 years. There is a vibrant Twitter, Facebook, Telegram community in Russia, which has not banned social media like China. Putin has also nurtured a new economic leadership; the main Ministries are headed by extremely qualified professionals, all aged between 40 and 50. Russia today has a far more complex and evolved political system than is normally understood by the outside world.

On the nuclear option

Russia has been saying right from the beginning that it would use nuclear weapons only in circumstances where its own existence was threatened. The Russian position is of first use which is also the position of NATO. This becomes risky in times of crisis such as the one in Ukraine now. India’s policy of no-first use is more responsible and is less liable for misinterpretation. However, the chances of nuclear use are minimal because both sides are well aware of the horrendous consequences that would entail.

On the impact of sanctions

I think both the EU and the US made a miscalculation on the efficacy of their sanctions. The Russian Central Bank and the Russian finance ministry took a number of measures to reintroduce the macro-economic stability in terms of the rouble and ensure the availability of credit internally despite the fact that a number of Russian banks were cut off from the Swift system and Russian Central Bank reserves in major Western banks were confiscated. Russia is a continental economy with a huge amount of commodity resources, agriculture, a huge technological base and a very solid workforce. So over a period of time, Russia will recover despite the hits the economy is taking now. On the contrary, the sanctions have had an energy impact on Europe, which is critically dependent on Russian coal, oil and gas. With import restrictions and Russia turning off Nord Stream, the energy gap is impacting European politics.

On relations with India

We continue to engage with Russia bilaterally. Our private industry and the Government are careful not to transgress particular sanctions that have been imposed in the banking sector but we have continued to take advantage of discounted oil for energy security.

We have been consistent in our position on sovereignty and territorial integrity and the need for diplomacy and dialogue. We have kept channels of communication open with both Russia and Ukraine. We have participated in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meetings. Some Western countries tend to fire from India’s shoulders but the true objective should be to get both sides to recognise the value of resolving these issues through dialogue. At present that is not at all visible in either Europe or the US, which is not looking for settlement till Russia is defeated militarily.

On how this impacts India-China relations

We largely depend on our own resources and policies. China knows that India is no pushover. We have a sensible process of engagement. The Russia-China relationship is a complex one as Russia particularly needs China at the present moment. Russian vulnerabilities are stretched in Ukraine with NATO breathing down its neck. US has stretched its global arc to Europe. China is more advantageously placed in this triangular power play. But I don’t see the Indo-Russian relationship being affected by Russia’s tactical accommodation of China.

Audience Questions

On European powers pushing for peace

With Russian aggression, Europe has practically accepted US leadership with even neutral countries like Finland and Sweden seeking NATO membership. There’s a crisis in the political economy of Europe. Its markets have lost out to China’s huge market and it needs cheap Russian energy resources. Will it want to impose a new round of sanctions against Russia? Except for Poland and Baltic countries, which face a direct threat from Russia, in western Europe there is a difference of opinion. Right-wing, populist parties are ascendant across Europe, which cannot afford energy costs or economic disruption.

On what will make Putin end the war

Russia has clearly upped the ante by mobilising 300,000 troops, indicating it clearly wants a settlement on the battlefield. By winter, the economic aspect will become bigger with the Russian economy becoming weaker and Europe deciding what its pain threshold is with regard to energy resources.