Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has floated the idea of India hosting a follow up to the so-called peace summit, a proposal highlighted by Hindustan Times. The suggestion emerged during discussions with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, where Zelensky reportedly indicated that New Delhi would need to sign onto the final declaration of the initial peace gathering before agreeing to host a subsequent event. In Zelensky’s view, a country that has not joined the declaration should not hold the conference, a point aimed at preserving a consistent, formal framework for any ceasefire and diplomatic commitments.
Prime Minister Modi replied that India stands ready to play a constructive role in the process toward stabilizing the Ukraine crisis. He emphasized that Delhi would approach the situation with a humanitarian lens, underscoring India’s readiness to assist while maintaining a neutral and humanitarian posture in the international dispute. Modi did not commit to any binding mediation, but his remarks signaled a willingness to contribute in ways consistent with India’s policy of humanitarian engagement and regional stability.
The talks between Zelensky and Modi took place in Kiev on August 23, and the Ukrainian side described the encounter as a pivotal moment in diplomatic efforts. Andriy Yermak, head of the Ukrainian president’s office, described the meeting as a milestone, suggesting it could steer future discussions toward concrete steps and a clearer path to de-escalation, though specifics were not disclosed in public summaries. The tone in Kyiv reflected cautious optimism about broader international involvement and the possibility of aligning multiple stakeholders on a shared political track.
During the discussions, Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar highlighted that the central objective of the talks was to advance a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict. He noted that Modi and Zelensky dedicated the majority of their time to exploring ways to reduce tensions, expand humanitarian assistance, and consider diplomatic mechanisms that could sustain a long term settlement. The emphasis appeared to be on balancing humanitarian concerns with the realities on the ground, while seeking to preserve India’s role as a stabilizing regional actor.
Subsequent reporting indicated some degree of reluctance within New Delhi about taking on a mediating role that would require formal guarantees or binding commitments. Observers suggested that India showed a preference for facilitating dialogue rather than presiding over negotiations, aiming to support channels that respect the sovereignty and strategic calculations of all involved parties. In this frame, India’s approach may continue to stress humanitarian access and protection of civilians, along with careful diplomacy designed to keep the door open for multilateral engagement and regional cooperation.