not and for that matter has not been he saidindia also has tremendous leverage in different areas whether its economic leverage diplomatic leverage political leverage but also moral leverage india has the ability weve seen from prime minister modi to speak with tremendous moral clarity when prime minister modi said last year that this is not an era of war the world listened as they should because when prime minister modi and his country say something to that effect it is meaningful to the united states price saidhe said india has a unique role to play not only as the g20 host but also as a country with whom we have a global strategic partnership a country that has a relationship with russia that we donthe also referred to the g20 foreign ministers meeting in new delhi being unable to come out with a joint communique due to bitterly increasing rift between the usled western powers and russia over the ukraine conflict despite consistent efforts by host india to bridge the differencesthe meeting adopted a chairs summary and outcome document listing various key priorities but external affairs minister s jaishankar had said there were differences over the ukraine conflict because of which the meeting could not agree on the joint communiqueprice said of course this was a chair of summary that was subscribed to by all 20 members of the g20 except for two key paragraphs we all know those two countries in question russia and china we all know the issue in question russias brutal war of aggression against ukraine he saidbut when it comes to the broader set of issues that neither russia nor china could agree to accept i think it was pretty notable that the key paragraph referenced the essential need to uphold international law and the multilateral system that safeguards peace and stability he saidprice asserted it is a paragraph that speaks to defending protecting the principles of the un charter ensuring that countries around the world adhere to international humanitarian law including the protection of civilians and infrastructure in armed conflict and that makes clear where countries stand in strongly condemning the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons in any conflictthe fact that neither russia nor china could sign on to a paragraph that should be as anodyne and common sense and basic as that it tells you a lot about the two countries that purport to believe in the un charter have been permanent members of the un security council consistently raise international law and the principles of the un charter only to ignore them in contexts like this he said