Russia-Ukraine clash poses quandary for Middle East, India

In the early hours of Thursday (24 February), Russia launched a military attack on Ukraine, launching an air assault on a number of the country's eastern provinces. 

In response, the Ukrainian government was forced to declare a 30-day state of emergency and mobilised forces against Russian aggressors.

Russian President Vladimir Putin justified the attack by describing it as a “special military operation”, claiming the assault is a response to the Ukrainian government’s efforts to build ties with NATO.

However, the attack has been widely condemned by the international community, with US President Joe Biden describing it as an “unprovoked and unjustified” invasion.

Following an emergency meeting in New York, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres called on Russia to withdraw its forces.

“President Putin, in the name of humanity, bring your troops back to Russia,” he said.

The rhetoric has been backed with fresh sanctions, aimed at curbing further aggression from Moscow by undermining its economic and financial position.

VIEW ALL

President Biden’s latest round of sanctions include:

• Removing any remaining financial ties between Russia’s largest bank, Sberbank and its 25 subsidiaries with the US by limiting “Sberbank’s access to transactions made in the dollar”.
• Placing “full blocking sanctions” on Russia’s second largest bank VTB and its 20 subsidiaries, as well as Bank Otkritie, Sovcombank OJSC and Novikombank and their 34 subsidiaries.
• Thirteen of the country’s largest companies would also see new debt and equity limitations placed on them. According to the White House, “these entities, including companies critical to the Russian economy with estimated assets of nearly $1.4 trillion, will not be able to raise money through the US market – a key source of capital and revenue generation, which limits the Kremlin’s ability to raise money for its activity”.
• The new US sanctions also target Kremlin insiders and Russian oligarchs. A White House communique explained that “this action follows up on yesterday’s action targeting Russian elites and their family members and cuts them off from the US financial system, freezes any assets they hold in the United States and blocks their travel to the United States”.
• Belarus has also been targeted by the United States throughout this round of sanctions for supporting the invasion, with 24 Belarusian insiders – from military heads to financial institutions – sanctioned by the government. 
• The White House confirmed that US technology would also be embargoed from Russia for all dual military-commercial use products.

But according to Amin Saikal, adjunct professor of social sciences at the University of Western Australia, the crisis poses serious questions for nations with tentative ties to Russia, namely India, Iran, Israel, and Turkey.

These nations, he writes, will need to “strike a balance” between condemning Russian aggression against Ukraine and maintaining relations with Moscow.

“So far, they have walked a tightrope, but now with Russia’s invasion in full swing they need to show their hands more clearly,” Saikal writes in ASPI's The Strategist. 

For NATO member Turkey, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has fostered a relationship with President Putin despite strategic clashes, particularly in Syria.

“He has tilted towards Moscow to counter what he perceives as America’s and Western Europe’s unfavourable treatment of him, especially in the wake of the failed 2016 coup against him and his harsh crackdown on the opposition,” Saikal continues.

“He has purchased Russian S-400 surface-to-air missiles to the annoyance of the United States, which in turn has dropped Turkey from its F-35 fighter jet program.”

At the same time, Erdogan has built ties with Ukraine, declaring support for the nation’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

“In the lead-up to the Russian invasion, he called for a diplomatic resolution of the crisis and avoided any direct criticism of Russia,” Saikal adds.

“Now, however, he needs to decide whether to side with Turkey’s NATO partners or take an independent course that could further aggrieve those partners.”

Likewise, Saikal claims Israel has good diplomatic relations with Ukraine and Jewish President Volodymyr Zelenskyy but has sought not to “antagonise” Putin.

“Although Moscow has occasionally been critical of Israel for violating Syrian sovereignty and air space when regularly bombing Iranian and Hezbollah sites, it has been reluctant to take on Israel as long as its missions have not caused any problems for Russia on the ground,” he writes.

“Israel would like to see this status quo maintained.”

Unlike Turkey and Israel, Iran has backed Putin’s claims in Ukraine, given its dependence on Moscow for arms and strategic coordination in the Middle East.

Saikal argues that Tehran also needs Moscow’s support in the ongoing negotiations in Vienna on reviving the multilateral 2015 Iran nuclear agreement – scrapped by former US President Donald Trump in 2018.

However, Saikal notes that Russia and Iran have had “bitter moments” throughout history.

“[Tehran] sees benefits in not being critical of Moscow over Ukraine. Yet, in the process it risks provoking American displeasure at the nuclear talks, unless it changes its position from indirect to direct dialogue with the US,” he continues.

India is also in a “very awkward foreign policy situation”, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government developing deeper ties with Washington, particularly via the Quad forum alongside Australia and Japan.

But New Delhi and Moscow have also continued defence cooperation, procuring weapon systems from Russia.

“Primarily for this reason, Modi has so far adopted a position similar to that of Erdogan on the Ukraine conflict – essentially avoiding taking sides, though in a phone call with Putin he did appeal for an ‘immediate cessation of violence’,” Saikal observes.

According to Saikal, Modi would face pressure from Quad members, who have condemned Russia’s actions and imposed sanctions.  

“Now, in the wake of the Russian invasion, New Delhi is further pressed to adopt a clearer posture. If it tries to please Moscow, India is likely to be viewed as a very weak link in the Quad, and if it adopts the Quad’s position, it will likely risk relations with Russia,” Saikal writes.

“The Ukraine crisis is indeed globally multidimensional.”

He concludes: “While it has proven to be quite straightforward for most Western countries to oppose Russia, the same cannot be said for those states that find themselves caught between the West and Russia.”

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia’s future role and position in the Indo-Pacific region and what you would like to see from Australia's political leaders in terms of partisan and bipartisan agenda setting in the comments section below, or get in touch with This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..