🔗 Share this article

The last time Vladimir Putin traveled to the South Asian nation four years ago, the global landscape was markedly different. That short trip, limited by the global health crisis, focused on talks on economic and military ties between the two leaders.

Months later, the large-scale military offensive of Ukraine would transform the Russian leader into a figure of international condemnation, significantly restricting his overseas engagements.

Furthermore, that era came before a major change in ties between Washington and Delhi, marked by inflammatory rhetoric and the imposition of substantial import duties.

"In this context, the significance of Putin's journey to engage with the Indian PM is profound, serving as a symbol of enduring ties and a defiance of external pressure," analysts note.

A Pivotal Moment for Two Major Powers

The high-level meeting takes place at a crucial time. The Kremlin leader arrives following rejecting recent peace proposals for Ukraine, confident due to claimed gains by Russian forces.

"For Russia, the key significance of this engagement is its very occurrence," stated a prominent analyst based in Moscow. "It suggests a movement toward a form of routine global diplomacy."

From Delhi's standpoint, the stakes are particularly elevated. The country faces a challenging international environment, characterized by a semi-isolationist United States, a weakened Russia, and an assertive China.

The tightrope walk was highlighted just before the visit, when senior Western diplomats published a joint opinion piece criticizing Russia's peace efforts. This prompted a firm rebuke from Indian officials, who labeled it an unacceptable diplomatic practice.

'China Remains the Greatest Threat'

The historical partnership originates from the Soviet period and is deeply entrenched, with Moscow historically being Delhi's primary arms provider. This alliance was largely tolerated by the West until a change in approach.

Over time, Western nations ignored India's substantial purchases of cheap energy from Russia. However, in the wake of failed peace efforts, accusations mounted, leading to economic penalties and a major chill in transatlantic relations with Delhi.

"Consequently, India has reverted to its traditional posture of 'hedging'," noted a foreign policy expert. "It signals to the US that it has other choices and is observing how the situation unfolds."

Apart from international politics, India's fundamental concern with Russia is its strategic location. "Beijing continues to be the greatest threat to India, and for decades, India has relied on Russia as a counterweight against China," the analyst stated.

The deepening Moscow-Beijing axis has caused concern in Delhi, prompting efforts to prevent an excessively close bond between its adversary and its traditional ally.

This apprehension has also accelerated India's drive to diversify its military imports, shrinking its reliance on Russian equipment from a dominant share to a reduced portion in the past few years.

"Delhi will try to strike a balance: buy sufficient Russian weaponry to maintain the alliance, but not become so dependent that a supply disruption would cripple its defenses," the analyst remarked.

The Oil Question

Enhanced trade relations is expected to be a key agenda item. The Russian leader has publicly emphasized plans to take cooperation with India to a "qualitatively new level", in spite of Western sanctions.

The issue of crude oil purchases remains pivotal. Although the Indian government has vowed to keep buying Russian oil, new sanctions have dampened activity from the commercial buyers. Simultaneously, India has agreed to increase imports of US energy.

A Russian official acknowledged "hurdles" in economic cooperation but said it would proceed uninterrupted. The official minimized the effect of sanctions, claiming they would cause only "minor" and "brief" disruptions and that Russia possesses the "means" to circumvent them.

Limited Leverage on Ukraine

When the two leaders sit down, the issue of Ukraine is likely to be mentioned mainly through India's consistent appeal for dialogue and peace.

"While the Indian leader can speak to both sides, the nation lacks the necessary leverage to significantly influence the conflict," the analyst said. "Beyond encouraging talks, its capacity to make a difference is constrained."

Ultimately, notwithstanding the public displays of camaraderie between the two leaders, the relationship is at its core one of "pragmatic strategic interest," guided by cold calculation in a volatile world.