The past week saw a series of developments that were uncharacteristic of Russian diplomacy. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov announced on Friday that President Putin won’t attend next month’s G20 Summit in India. Several days then passed before the Russian leader called Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday to officially inform him of his decision. Sometime that same day, Peskov also announced that his boss has plans to travel abroad this fall, but he didn’t say where or when.
Standard protocol is for international leaders to inform their counterparts if they’re unable to attend an event of this caliber, especially if they’re close friends like President Putin and Prime Minister Modi are. The official readout of their call or their spokesmen’s press conferences sometime shortly afterwards would then officially announce this to the public. Instead, protocol was inexplicably put aside in favor of Peskov getting ahead of his boss by several days, which led to some confusion on the Indian side.
Making everything even more perplexing is that Peskov’s initial announcement claimed that his boss was too busy to travel to the G20, yet his second announcement suggests that the Russian leader suddenly knows with full confidence that his schedule will free up by sometime this fall. No reason was given for why President Putin couldn’t plan a brief visit to India in the next two weeks after knowing about this event for nine months already but can plan several other international trips in the next few months.
In last week’s analysis about how “Russia Appears To Have Given Up On Participating In The G20 At The Leadership Level”, it was assessed that President Putin’s final decision remained in limbo until the end of the BRICS Summit and was then influenced by the advice given to him by elite policymaking circles. That group’s historic expansion enables it to accelerate financial multipolarity processes, and they might have thought that advising him to sit out the G20 Summit would signal Russia’s full commitment to BRICS.
He didn’t attend last year’s one in Bali and won’t be able to attend the next gathering until 2026 at the earliest since the interim two will be held in ICC-compliant Brazil and South Africa, hence why this decision de facto amounted to President Putin giving up on participating in the G20. It wasn’t meant as a snub to India nor to Prime Minister Modi, but the clumsy way that it was choreographed might have still left some Indians feeling slighted, especially after Peskov said that President Putin will travel this fall.
Explanations aren’t excuses and constructive critiques aren’t intended to discredit those who they’re directed towards. No honest observer would therefore twist the associated insight that’ll now follow about the unusual sequence of developments over the past week. Only “5D chess” cultists whose dogma prohibits them from acknowledging that the Kremlin isn’t perfect and enemies of the Russian-Indian Strategic Partnership would spin explanations and constructive critiques in such a way.
Having clarified that, there’s no excuse for why standard protocol wasn’t followed when choreographing President Putin’s G20 decision, but drawing attention to this isn’t intended to discredit the Kremlin. Rather, the purpose is to dispel misperceptions and reinforce mutual trust since the Russian-Indian Strategic Partnership is one of the most powerful forces shaping the global systemic transition. Confusion and resultant mistrust risk impeding multipolar processes and must thus be counteracted.
As was previously explained in the earlier hyperlinked analysis about Russia and the G20, that country’s elite policymaking circles were seemingly so caught up in the euphoria brought about by BRICS’ historic expansion and all that it entails for the evolving world order that India’s interests slipped their minds. President Putin presumably gave confirmation to them during consultations later that day that he won’t attend next month’s summit, but he might not have expected Peskov to announce this the next day.
Somehow or another this decision reached his spokesman, whether because he was present during those consultations or heard about the outcome from one of its participants, and that’s why he told the press about it less than 24 hours later during his next planned interaction with them. President Putin probably didn’t expect him to do that, however, since he hadn’t yet had the chance to inform Prime Minister Modi about this himself per standard protocol because the Indian leader was traveling.
Calls between heads of state take time to organize due to each’s busy schedule, the need to decide upon the agenda, and the time required for them to prepare for the aforesaid unless there’s an emergency, which is why this didn’t happen until Monday when it might have originally been planned. The Kremlin’s official readout emphasized their close ties and coordination across the board, but it didn’t mention any speculative plans for President Putin to travel to India this fall, though that also can’t be ruled out either.
Whatever confusion might have ensued at India’s leadership and policymaking levels in the days after Peskov’s initial announcement was obviously cleared up during their call, but the public still doesn’t have an explanation for why standard protocol wasn’t followed, and will likely be left wanting. Therein lies the purpose of the present piece since it’s unrealistic to expect diplomats or officials to own up to this mishap in public since few anywhere across the world ever do whenever such things happen.
Had it been unambiguously communicated to Peskov that he mustn’t say anything about President Putin’s plans until after his planned call with Prime Minister Modi, then everything would have proceeded as normal with him announcing his boss’ decision after the fact instead of beforehand. With this in mind, it does indeed appear as though communication channels within the Kremlin didn’t function properly, though this is probably due to how excited policymakers were about BRICS’ expansion.
That’s not an excuse for inadvertently prompting confusion over the weekend that also risked fueling their enemies’ information warfare campaign aimed at sowing distrust between them, but an explanation that cogently accounts for the surprising way that everything unfolded. Constructively critiquing the Kremlin about this also isn’t intended to discredit it, but to clarify what happened for the benefit of civil society, the expert community, and the media.
Absent the explanation and constructive critiques shared in the present piece, those three might struggle to understand Peskov’s faux pas and could therefore become susceptible to pernicious suggestions spewed by ill-intentioned individuals who want to divide-and-rule them along these levels. Hopefully President Putin’s spokesman learned his lesson and doesn’t do this again since it reflects negatively on the Kremlin and extends false credence to speculation that Russia wanted to spite India.
