Europe’s Naked Nudge to India on Russia Adds to List of Diplomatic Setbacks

In March 1960, as many as ten envoys from various Arab states to the US handed over a demarche to the Secretary of State, Christian A Herter, on the eve of Israeli Prime Minister’s David Ben-Gurion visit.

Emphasising that they didn’t want the visit to be called off, they expressed a concern that the visitor might use the opportunity to achieve clandestine goals.

“Mr. Ben Gurion is doubtless entitled to come to the United States,” noted the Department of State’s memorandum of conversation, but his “various statements suggest that its true purpose is to worsen relations between the United States and the Arab countries.” With a stated aim to “protect United States-Arab relations’, the envoys urged Washington to ensure that the visit was not “allowed to harm” those ties.

Did this amount to interference in US policies, an offence to the visiting guest, or a diplomatic overstep? The State Department clarified that it wasn’t.

It is worth recalling that episode as we consider the decision taken by the envoys of three major European powers to India – France, Germany and Britain – to publish a stinging oped against Russia in a New Delhi newspaper days before the President Vladimir Putin’s scheduled visit.

India hasn’t formally issued a statement, but MEA officials have termed it ‘unusual and unacceptable’. On social media, former diplomats are leading the charge against the envoys for causing “a diplomatic insult to India”. They are “free to make their views known to the MEA in an official demarche but are not supposed to engage in public grandstanding with an overt propagandist intent,” posted former foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal.

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations grants immunities to diplomats but they are also expected not to interfere in the internal affairs of the host country. Ambassadors occasionally write op-eds or give interviews, but are discreet enough not to upset their host country. During the Cold War, envoys were engaged in clandestine dealings, secretly fermenting unrest against the host country. But perhaps never did they choose newspapers as arenas to speak against a third country, let alone the host.

So why did the envoys of the three largest economies of Europe, including two nuclear powers, publish a joint oped that makes India uncomfortable at a crucial juncture?

First, it confirms India’s vulnerability. European envoys know they can speak freely against Russia and its war on Ukraine from Indian soil, but do not want to offend Washington. The oped is pitched against Moscow, but is absolutely silent on US President Donald Trump who is deciding Ukraine’s future along with Putin, bypassing not only Europe, but also Kyiv.

If there’s anyone against whom the envoys could have directed their ire, it was Trump. India may be a soft target – it is keen to clinch a free trade agreement with Europe – but it is also a largely inconsequential one as far as Russia’s war against Ukraine is concerned.

The envoys are clearly aware of India’s anxieties both before Europe and the US. Following the shifting US stance, and Trump’s tilt towards Pakistan since Operation Sindoor, India has often found itself facing uncomfortable truths. The joint oped is yet another such moment. Its authors knew that given India’s heavy dependence on Moscow for defence equipment and a pressing need to expand bilateral ties with the Kremlin, a media statement against Putin would touch an already exposed nerve.

A rare instance of an envoy publishing an article in the host country was recorded in 2019, when the Chinese Ambassador Lu Shaye, wrote an article in the Canadian media questioning the host country’s policies, accusing it of ‘double standards’, ‘Western egotism and white supremacy’.

In the present case, the three envoys have not spoken against their host, but the attack on Putin does amount to a veiled criticism of India’s stance toward Russia. Europe always wanted India to condemn Putin’s aggression in Ukraine, and has now found an opportune moment to upset New Delhi.

All the Modi government can do is to watch, quietly and restively. One can now compare the current episode with the one recounted in the beginning. The Arab envoys approached the US administration with a request. The host country was a global super power. The demarche couldn’t have discomfited Washington on the eve of Ben Gurion’s visit. The Department of State was not embarrassed, let alone annoyed.

Contrarily, the joint statement by the envoys has left the Indian establishment smarting. The question they need to ask is: What has brought India to this stage? How could the representatives of three major powers, with whom India boasts good relations, come together to deliver a joint statement? Why did they forsake discretion and choose to go public? Was it a misstep, an act of audacity, or a calibrated move realising that India could do little except sulk in silence?

This has been a year of strategic losses for India. Another notch has been added to the final tally.

This piece was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire – and has been updated and republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.