Where does India stand on the Israel-Iran conflict?

NEW DELHI: India is on a path of non-involvement in the growing conflict in the Middle East, experts said on Saturday, as they warned Delhi's silence could have serious implications for the region.
Israeli attacks on Iran started on June 13 when Tel Aviv hit more than a dozen sites — including key nuclear facilities and residences of military leaders and scientists — claiming they were aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
After Iran retaliated with ballistic missile strikes against Israel, the two countries have been on a tit-for-tat cycle of bombing.
Israel's attacks on Iran have reportedly killed at least 639 people and wounded 1,329 others, while Iranian missile strikes have killed 24 people and injured hundreds more in Israel.
India has yet to join other Asian nations — such as China, Japan, Pakistan and Indonesia — in condemning Israel's initial strikes against Iran.
It was also the only country in the 10-member Shanghai Cooperation Organization which did not endorse a statement issued by the bloc, condemning Israel's military strikes on Iran. SCO is a political and security body that includes China, Russia, India, Pakistan and Central Asian nations.
In a statement, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs urged 'both sides to avoid any escalatory steps' and engage in dialogue and diplomacy 'to work towards de-escalation.'
'India enjoys close and friendly relations with both the countries and stands ready to extend all possible support,' the ministry said.
Talmiz Ahmad, an Indian diplomat who served as ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Oman and the UAE, described the statement as 'a very low-key remark and is meant for the record.'
'India is not interested in engaging itself with serious matters pertaining to regional diplomacy. India is not interested in pursuing ways in which we could promote security and stability,' he said.
Historically, India's ties with countries in West Asia — a region that includes the Middle East — have been bilateral and transactional, lacking engagement 'with the region in a collective sense.'
'With regard to the Israeli-Iran issue we have taken a position of non-involvement … (but) silence in this matter where Israel has initiated a conflict that could have potentially horrendous implications for the region, is another and is something which India should be very concerned about,' Ahmad said.
'There is no justification whatsoever for India to be so indifferent to the flames that are now gathering speed and strength right in our neighborhood.'
India is Israel's largest arms buyer and Israel is India's fourth-largest arms supplier. According to a report from Reuters, India has imported military hardware worth $2.9 billion over the last decade.
Delhi also has strategic interests in Iran and has invested around $370 million in a port development project in the Iranian port of Chabahar, aimed at hastening trade and connectivity links to Afghanistan and Central Asia.
Moreover, there are over 10,000 Indian nationals living in Iran, the majority of whom are students. Delhi has prioritized safely evacuating them since Israeli attacks began last week.
Peace in the region should be within India's strategic interest, according to Delhi-based foreign policy scholar and researcher N. Sai Balaji, who highlighted the 9 million Indians living and working in West Asia.
'Not only that these (9 million) Indians contribute to billions of dollars in terms of remittances (but) India's energy needs are met from West Asia,' Balaji told Arab News. 'Any conflict with Iran or any conflict in West Asia does not only destabilize its financial stability in forms of remittances but also energy security.'
He said the Indian government was 'taking sides clearly by not calling out the aggression of Israel.'
'India is not only abdicating its historic responsibility but also changing its foreign policy to accommodate Israel,' Balaji added.
Sudheendra Kulkarni, who served as an advisor to India's former premier Atal Bihari Vajpayee, said the country had shifted its traditional approach in foreign policy.
'India has always stood for peace in the world … Therefore, it is deeply painful that Narendra Modi's government has deviated from this traditionally pro-peace foreign policy of India,' Kulkarni told Arab News.
'It is wrong for the government to keep silent in the face of Israel's naked aggression against Iran … Under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, Israel is the aggressor. It has violated international law. Iran is the victim. Iran has the right to defend itself.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Al Arabiya

35 minutes ago

• Al Arabiya

Japan and South Korea Mark 60 Years of Ties Despite Lingering Tension and Political Uncertainty

Japan and South Korea are marking the 60th anniversary of the normalization of their diplomatic relations. The two Asian powers, rivals and neighbors, have often had little to celebrate, much of their rancor linked to Japan's brutal colonial rule of Korea in the early 20th century. Things have gotten better in recent years, but both nations – each a strong ally of the US – now face political uncertainty and a growing unease about the future of their ties. South Korea's new liberal president, Lee Jae-myung, is determined to break sharply from the policies of his disgraced predecessor, Yoon Suk-yeol, who now faces a trial on charges of leading an insurrection over his imposition of martial law in December. Relations with Japan, however, are one area where Lee, who describes himself as a pragmatist in foreign policy, may find himself cautiously building on Yoon's approach. Before his removal from office in April, the conservative former president tried to repair relations with Japan. Yoon wanted to also tighten the countries' three-way security cooperation with Washington to counter North Korean nuclear threats. In 2023, Yoon announced a South Korea–funded compensation plan for colonial-era forced laborers. That decision caused a strong backlash from victims and their supporters, who had demanded direct payments from Japanese companies and a fresh apology from Tokyo. Yoon's outreach boosted tourism and business ties, but there's still lingering resentment in South Korea that Japan failed to reciprocate Seoul's diplomatic concession by addressing historical grievances more sincerely. While advocating for pragmatism and problem-solving in foreign policy, Lee has also long criticized Japan for allegedly clinging to its imperialist past and blamed that for hurting cooperation between the countries. Some experts say the stability of the countries' improved ties could soon be tested, possibly around the August 15 anniversary of Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule at the end of World War II, when Lee is expected to publicly address the nation's painful history with Japan. Some in Seoul want Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba to mark the anniversary with a stronger statement of remorse over Japan's wartime past to put bilateral ties on firmer ground. While wartime history will always linger in the background of Seoul–Tokyo relations, Lee and Ishiba may face a more immediate concern: US President Donald Trump's rising tariffs and other 'America First' trade policies. South Korea's Hankyoreh newspaper, in an editorial this week, called for South Korea and Japan to collaborate immediately on a joint response to Trump's policies, arguing that the proposed US tariffs on automobiles pose similar threats to both countries' trade-dependent economies. Ishiba, eager to improve ties with Seoul, has acknowledged Japan's wartime aggression and has shown more empathy to Asian victims than his recent predecessors. His first encounter with Lee seemed positive despite worries in Japan about South Korea's stance under a liberal leader known for attacks on Japan's wartime past. Lee, in that meeting with Ishiba at the G7, likened the two countries to neighbors sharing the same front yard and called for building a future-oriented relationship that moves beyond their small differences and disagreements. Ishiba and Lee agreed to closely communicate and to cooperate on a range of issues, including North Korea's nuclear and missile development. Under a 1965 normalization treaty, Japan provided $500 million in economic assistance to South Korea, saying all wartime compensation issues were settled. However, historical issues, including forced labor and sexual abuse of Korean women during the war, have disrupted ties over the decades, while South Korea has become an Asian power and a rival to Japan, and while Tokyo, especially during the late Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's rule, has promoted revisionist views. Japan has since offered atonement money twice for the so-called 'comfort women:' an earlier semi-private fund and a second one unilaterally dissolved by former South Korean President Moon Jae-in's liberal government. Things have improved in recent years, and Japan is watching to see whether Lee sticks with his conservative predecessors' more conciliatory diplomacy or returns to the confrontation that marked previous liberal governments. Cooperation between the two sides is more essential than ever to overcome their shared problems, such as worsening regional security and Trump's tariffs that have shaken free trade systems, Japan's largest-circulation newspaper, Yomiuri, said in a recent editorial. At a 60th anniversary reception in Tokyo, Ishiba said that he sees a bright future in the relationship. He expressed hope also for cooperation in common challenges such as low birth rates and declining populations.

Arab News

2 hours ago

• Arab News

Trump wins immediate praise from Republicans in Congress after announcing strikes on Iran

WASHINGTON: Congressional Republicans — and at least one Democrat — immediately praised President Donald Trump after he said Saturday evening that the US military bombed three sites in Iran. 'Well done, President Trump,' Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina posted on X. Texas Sen. John Cornyn called it a 'courageous and correct decision.' Alabama Sen. Katie Britt called the bombings 'strong and surgical.' Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin posted: 'America first, always.' Good. This was the right call. The regime deserves it. Well done, President @realDonaldTrump. To my fellow citizens: We have the best Air Force in the world. It makes me so proud. Fly, Fight, Win. — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) June 22, 2025 The Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, said Trump 'has made a deliberate — and correct — decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime.' Wicker posted on X that 'we now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies.' The quick endorsements of stepped up US involvement in Iran came after Trump had publicly mulled the strikes for days and many congressional Republicans had cautiously said they thought he would make the right decision. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Saturday evening that 'as we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm's way.' Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, were briefed ahead of the strikes on Saturday, according to people familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss it. Johnson said in a statement that the military operations 'should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says.' House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford, R-Arkansas, said he had also been in touch with the White House and 'I am grateful to the US servicemembers who carried out these precise and successful strikes.' Breaking from many of his Democratic colleagues, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, an outspoken supporter of Israel, also praised the attacks on Iran. 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,' he posted. 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities.' Both parties have seen splits in recent days over the prospect of striking Iran. Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican and a longtime opponent of US involvement in foreign wars, posted on X after Trump announced the attacks that 'This is not Constitutional.' Many Democrats have maintained that Congress should have a say. The Senate was scheduled to vote as soon as this week on a resolution by Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine requiring congressional approval before the US declared war on Iran or took specific military action. Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House intelligence panel, posted on X after Trump's announcement: 'According to the Constitution we are both sworn to defend, my attention to this matter comes BEFORE bombs fall. Full stop.'

Arab News

2 hours ago

• Arab News

What to know about the Iranian nuclear sites Trump says were hit by US strikes

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates: President Donald Trump has said US forces attacked three Iranian nuclear and military sites, further upping the stakes in the Israel-Iran war. Trump said the strikes, which he described as 'very successful,' had hit the Natanz, Fordo and Isfahan sites, with Fordo being the primary target. Iran's state-run IRNA news agency confirmed there were attacks early Sunday at Iran's Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites. IRNA quoted Akbar Salehi, Isfahan's deputy governor in charge of security affairs, saying there had been attacks around Isfahan and Natanz. He did not elaborate. Another official confirmed an attack targeting Iran's underground Fordo nuclear site. Israel launched a surprise barrage of attacks on sites in Iran on June 13, which Israeli officials said was necessary to head off what they claimed was an imminent threat that Iran would build nuclear bombs. Iran, which has long insisted its nuclear program is peaceful, has retaliated with a series of missile and drone strikes in Israel, while Israel has continued to strike sites in Iran. The US and Iran had been in talks that could have resulted in the US lifting some of its crushing economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for Tehran drastically limiting or ending its enrichment of uranium. Until Saturday, Washington had helped shoot down Iranian strikes on Israel but had not launched direct attacks on Iran. Here's a look at the sites Trump said the US struck and their importance to Iran's nuclear program. Natanz enrichment facility Iran's nuclear facility at Natanz, located some 220 kilometers (135 miles) southeast of Tehran, is the country's main enrichment site and had already been targeted by Israeli airstrikes. Uranium had been enriched to up to 60 percent purity at the site — a mildly radioactive level but a short step away from weapons grade — before Israel destroyed the aboveground part of the facility, according to the UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency. Another part of the facility on Iran's Central Plateau is underground to defend against potential airstrikes. It operates multiple cascades, or groups of centrifuges working together to more quickly enrich uranium. The IAEA has said it believes that most if not all of these centrifuges were destroyed by an Israeli strike that cut off power to the site. The IAEA said those strikes caused contamination only at the site itself, not the surrounding area. Iran also is burrowing into the Kūh-e Kolang Gaz Lā, or Pickax Mountain, which is just beyond Natanz's southern fencing. Natanz has been targeted by the Stuxnet virus, believed to be an Israeli and American creation, which destroyed Iranian centrifuges. Two separate attacks, attributed to Israel, also have struck the facility. Fordo enrichment facility Iran's nuclear facility at Fordo is located some 100 kilometers (60 miles) southwest of Tehran. It also hosts centrifuge cascades, but isn't as big as Natanz. Its construction began at least in 2007, according to the IAEA, although Iran only informed the UN nuclear watchdog about the facility in 2009 after the US and allied Western intelligence agencies became aware of its existence. Buried under a mountain and protected by anti-aircraft batteries, Fordo appears designed to withstand airstrikes. Military experts have said it could likely only be targeted by 'bunker buster' bombs — a term for bombs that are designed to penetrate deep below the surface before exploding — such as the latest GBU-57 A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb in the American arsenal. The roughly 30,000 pound (13,600 kilogram) precision-guided bomb is designed to attack deeply buried and hardened bunkers and tunnels. The US has only configured and programed its B-2 Spirit stealth bomber to deliver that bomb, according to the Air Force. The B-2 is only flown by the Air Force, and is produced by Northrop Grumman, meaning that Washington would have to be involved in such an operation. Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center The facility in Isfahan, some 350 kilometers (215 miles) southeast of Tehran, employs thousands of nuclear scientists. It also is home to three Chinese research reactors and laboratories associated with the country's atomic program. Israel has struck buildings at the Isfahan nuclear site, among them a uranium conversion facility. The IAEA said there has been no sign of increased radiation at the site. Other nuclear sites Iran has several other sites in its nuclear program that were not announced as targets in the US strikes. Iran's only commercial nuclear power plant is in Bushehr on the Arabian Gulf, some 750 kilometers (465 miles) south of Tehran. Iran is building two other reactors like it at the site. Bushehr is fueled by uranium produced in Russia, not Iran, and is monitored by the IAEA. The Arak heavy water reactor is 250 kilometers (155 miles) southwest of Tehran. Heavy water helps cool nuclear reactors, but it produces plutonium as a byproduct that can potentially be used in nuclear weapons. Iran had agreed under its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers to redesign the facility to relieve proliferation concerns. The Tehran Research Reactor is at the headquarters of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, the civilian body overseeing the country's atomic program. It initially required highly enriched uranium but was later retrofitted to use low-enriched uranium over proliferation concerns.