Why India abstained on UNGA resolution against Russia

India has once again abstained from voting on a resolution drafted against Russia during the United Nation General Assembly (UNGA) emergency session held on Wednesday, in view of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine armed conflict.  
 
Within the 193-member UNGA, 143 member States voted for the resolution, 35 nations including India and China abstained while only five nations including Russia voted against it.  

While supposedly urging for de-escalation, India has consistently abstained from most UN votes against Russia, including the first resolution drafted in March this year.   
 
The resolution, titled ‘Territorial Integrity of Ukraine: Defending the Principles of the UN Charter’ called for immediate withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine and condemned Russia’s “illegal” annexation of the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine, based on certain “so-called” referendums that the former held in the midst of continued military aggression.  
 
The long-drawn Russia-Ukraine conflict – now indisputably defined as war – dates back to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and was markedly exacerbated by the Russian annexation of Crimea.  

This conflict resurfaced and evolved into its present condition after Russian president Vladimir Putin unleashed a “special military operation” against Ukraine citing intention of “demilitarising” Ukraine on February 24, 2022.  

Despite the growing global call for a ceasefire over this period of six months, Putin appears resolute in achieving his ultimate goal of rewriting history and occupying Ukraine entirely.  

At present, the Ukrainian counter-offensive with the help of the United States has begun to recapture certain regions. 
 
In justifying the abstention, India's permanent representative to the UN Ruchira Kamboj stated that it is consistent with the nation’s “well-thought-out national position” and claimed that there were “other pressing issues which have not been adequately addressed in the resolution” – without mentioning what those issues were.   

However, Kamboj stated that India calls for a peaceful end to this conflict underscored by “dialogue and diplomacy”. 
 
"The path to peace requires us to keep all channels of diplomacy open. We therefore sincerely hope for an early resumption of peace talks to bring about an immediate ceasefire and resolution of the conflict. India stands ready to support all efforts of de-escalation,” she said.  
 
India’s stance has stirred equal amount of surprise and indifference in the global community. While this move is categorically defined by the nation’s present geopolitical position and well-functioning bilateral ties with both Russia and the United States, it also brings into question India’s stand against Euro-American imperialism (given its own history) as well as its recent defence agreements with the US such as the QUAD and a common threat in the form of China.  
 
The “well-thought-out national position” is hinged upon various economic and security concerns, particularly India’s purchase of Russian weaponry and fuel, a lucrative arrangement for India that was established in the Soviet era.  

Additionally, India’s solid relationship with Russia serves as a safeguard against its antagonists, since Russia is also sufficiently amicable with both China and Pakistan; triggering Russia could place India in a precarious and vulnerable position.  
 
Russia is also India’s second-largest supplier of oil; India’s “developing” economy that has been in stasis for a while and hard-hit by the pandemic is not only reliant on Russian oil-reserves but could also benefit from the recent Russian expansion of its pipeline toward South Asia.  
 
Taking into account the overall negative politico-economic domestic impact of an affirmative vote as well as the catastrophic international impact of a vote against the resolution, India’s decision can only be classified as the most diplomatic way out.