Copyright infringement not intended

Picture Courtesy:  THE HINDU

Context:

India's diplomatic approach at the United Nations is undergoing a significant transformation, marked by a record-high number of times it chooses to abstain from voting on resolutions. 

INDIA'S VOTING PATTERN AT THE UN

How does voting work in the UN Security Council?

Every Member Gets One Vote => UNSC has 15 members in total (5 Permanent +10 temporary), each casts one vote.  

• The Permanent Five (P5) =>  China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US). These nations gained their permanent seats and veto power after World War II.

Two Types of Decisions, Different Rules 

• Procedural Matters => Decisions about how the Council operates, like adding items to the agenda or arranging meetings. To pass a resolution, at least 9 of the 15 members must vote "yes."
  • The "Permanent Five" (P5) members cannot block it with veto.
• Substantive Matters => Decisions concerning peace and security, such as approving peacekeeping missions, imposing sanctions, or condemning actions by a country. For a resolution to pass, it needs 9 "yes" votes. 
  • All five permanent members must also agree. If even one of the P5 votes "no," the resolution fails.

How has India's voting pattern at the UN changed over the years?

In 2025, India's annual percentage of abstentions reached 44%, which is the highest it has ever been in its history at the U.N. At the same time, its 'yes' votes dropped to 56%, the lowest since 1955. 

Why is India choosing to abstain?

A World Divided => Fragmented global stage, with major powers like the US, China, and Russia often disagreeing. 

• This makes it hard to find common ground on important international issues. 
• India avoids taking sides, preferring to maintain a position of neutrality or "multi-alignment" to protect its diverse national interests.  

Complex Resolutions => UN resolutions are very complicated, packed with many different clauses. 

• Some of these clauses might go against India's specific interests or principles. When faced with such resolutions, abstaining allows India to avoid fully supporting or rejecting proposals that are too complex. 

Standing Firm on Sovereignty => India views abstentions as an indicator of its independent diplomatic judgment. 

• This allows India to express its unique positions clearly and without compromise. 
• This approach helps India maintain its diplomatic flexibility and show its independent stance without being seen as blindly following any particular group of countries.

India as a Growing Global Power => For rising middle powers like India, abstention serves as a valuable tool to navigate difficult issues and maintain strategic flexibility in a world where many powerful nations exist. 

• It allows India to act as a balancing force in international relations, engage with others without sacrificing its core interests or values.

What are the consequences and importance of India's choice to abstain?

Strengthening Strategic Autonomy => India is adapting its traditional non-aligned heritage to fit today's complex global politics. For example, India has abstained on resolutions concerning the Russia-Ukraine conflict, human rights situations in Myanmar, and issues related to Israel-Palestine disputes.

A Tricky Diplomatic Balance => Allows India to avoid taking definitive sides on highly contentious issues, thereby maintaining good relations with a wide range of international partners. 

• However, there's a potential risk: allies expecting stronger support might feel disappointed, especially on resolutions dealing with important values like human rights or security.

Impact on Global Image => Critics argue that when India frequently abstains on issues like human rights or humanitarian crises, it could lead to a decline in India's moral leadership.

United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Aspirations => India's repeated abstentions on high-profile issues could potentially weaken its case for a permanent seat, as it might be seen as less willing to take definitive stands on global responsibilities. However, supporters argue that India's strategic autonomy makes it a more reliable and independent voice for the Council.

Conclusion

India's strategy of strategic abstention is likely to continue as it allows India to pursue its interests while engaging with all major powers, without being aligned by rigid alliances. India sees its unique position as an asset, which allows it to act as a bridge-builder and a voice for the Global South.

Must Read Articles: 

New UN Security Council Members 

UNSC 

Source:  THE HINDU