Iran-Israel conflict: India keeping tab on Chabahar Port, International North-South Transport Corridor; why it's important
Last year, India signed a decade-long agreement with Iran, entrusting the Chabahar Port's management to India Ports Global Ltd.
Amidst escalating tensions between Iran and Israel, India is keeping a close watch on the strategically important
Chabahar Port
and International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) projects.
Last year, India signed a decade-long agreement with Iran, entrusting the Chabahar Port's management to India Ports Global Ltd. The operations at Chabahar Port are jointly managed by IPGL, a collaboration between Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust and Kandla Port Trust, working alongside Iran's Aria Banader. India has committed substantial financial support, including $85 million for berth improvements and a $150 million credit line through Exim Bank.
According to an ET report, India is monitoring potential effects on the Chabahar Port and International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) as tensions rise between Israel and Iran.
Also Read |
India bleeds Pakistan dry: Water at 'dead' levels in Pakistan's dams; bigger Indus river plans in the works - top points to know
These two Iranian connectivity initiatives serve as India's crucial access points to Afghanistan, Central Asia and Russia, with substantial Indian investment in the port development. Whilst Israel has not directly struck any Iranian ports, there are accounts of strikes along Iran's coastline.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Memperdagangkan CFD Emas dengan salah satu spread terendah?
IC Markets
Mendaftar
Undo
The Taliban administration in Afghanistan has expressed interest in Chabahar and is considering joining INSTC to decrease its reliance on ports in Pakistan. Additionally, several Central Asian nations have demonstrated enthusiasm for this initiative.
Importance of Chabahar port for India
Iran's Chabahar port holds strategic importance for India to expand trade routes to Central Asia. Located on the Gulf of Oman, this port project was first suggested by India in 2003.
It will provide a vital access point for Indian commodities to reach Afghanistan and Central Asian nations through the International North-South Transport Corridor, consisting of road and rail networks, without crossing Pakistani territory.
India's involvement in developing Chabahar port stands as a response to Pakistan's Gwadar port and China's Belt and Road Initiative.
Also Read |
Iran-Israel conflict: How will blocking of Strait of Hormuz hit India? Indian refiners look at alternative routes for fuel supply
India has secured operational control of Chabahar port, following its monetary contribution towards the port's development.
This is India's first venture into foreign port management. The port functions as an essential connectivity corridor linking India with Afghanistan, Central Asia and the broader Eurasian territories.
Functioning as a transit trade centre between India, Iran and Afghanistan, Chabahar port offers an alternative pathway to the conventional Silk Road that passes through China. The port's advantageous position near the Strait of Hormuz and the Indian Ocean enhances its strategic value and future prospects.
Stay informed with the latest
business
news, updates on
bank holidays
and
public holidays
.
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
23 minutes ago
- Business Standard
What is Samson Option, Israel's nuclear threat that's no longer a theory?
Tensions between Israel and Iran have escalated sharply after 'Operation Rising Lion' — Israel's largest strike on Iranian nuclear sites since the 1981 Osirak raid. Iran has responded with missile and drone attacks, straining Israeli defence systems and prompting fears of wider conflict. With Hezbollah mobilising in the north, Houthi threats rising in the Red Sea, and the possibility of a multi-front war looming, Israeli security doctrine is under renewed global scrutiny. At the centre of that attention is the Samson Option, Israel's undeclared but long-assumed nuclear last-resort policy. Once regarded as a Cold War-era relic, the Samson Option has re-emerged as a global worry with serious implications for global security, defence markets, and diplomatic stability. What is the Samson Option? The Samson Option is widely understood as Israel's nuclear last-resort strategy: threat of massive retaliation if the country's survival is at stake. The name is derived from a reference of the biblical figure Samson, who brought down a Philistine temple upon himself and his enemies, an allegory for apocalyptic deterrence. Though Israel has never confirmed possessing nuclear weapons, its policy of 'Amimut' (Israel's policy of neither confirming nor denying the possession of nuclear weapons), or deliberate ambiguity, has kept adversaries guessing. However, foreign assessments suggest Israel has 80 to 400 nuclear warheads, with delivery systems spanning land-based missiles, submarines, and aircraft. The doctrine entered public discourse in the 1990s via US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who, in his book The Samson Option: Israel's Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy, explored Israel's nuclear journey and its relation with the United States. Since then, Israel hardened its 'strategic ambiguity' concept over the possession of a nuclear arsenal. How did Israel build its nuclear arsenal? Israel's nuclear journey began in the 1950s, with the then Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion envisioning a survival insurance policy for the newly-formed Jewish nation. With covert help from France and Norway, Israel established the Dimona nuclear facility, presented publicly as a research centre. By the time of the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel is believed to have constructed its first nuclear weapon. Who is Samson, and why is Israel's nuclear policy named after him? The doctrine's name draws from the Book of Judges, where Samson, betrayed, blinded, and imprisoned, sacrifices himself to destroy his enemies. This story, ingrained in Israeli strategic thinking, underlines the nation's message: if its destruction is imminent, it will not go quietly. Yet unlike the doomed biblical hero, modern Israel is a technologically advanced military power. The Samson Option, therefore, is not desperation, but a calculated deterrent, designed to force potential adversaries to think twice. What nuclear weapons does Israel have? Although never confirmed, Israel is among the nine nuclear-armed nations alongside the United States, Russia, China, the UK, France, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. Estimates suggest Israel possesses about 90 warheads, with enough plutonium to build up to 200 more, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative. Its arsenal is believed to include: > Aircraft: Modified F-15, F-16, and F-35 jets capable of carrying nuclear payloads. > Submarines: Six Dolphin-class submarines, reportedly capable of launching nuclear cruise missiles. > Ballistic missiles: The land-based Jericho missile family, with a range of up to 4,000 km. Around 24 of these missiles are believed to be nuclear-capable. What was the Vela incident? Israel is the only nuclear power which has not openly conducted a nuclear test. The closest indication came in September 1979, when US satellites detected a double flash over the South Atlantic, an event known as the 'Vela Incident'. At the time, US President Jimmy Carter reportedly believed Israel had conducted a nuclear test in collaboration with apartheid-era South Africa. 'We have a growing belief among our scientists that the Israelis did indeed conduct a nuclear test,' Carter later wrote in his diaries, which were made public in 2010. Despite speculation, Israel has never confirmed its involvement in the incident. How was Israel's nuclear arsenal revealed to the world? In October 1986, former nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu exposed Israel's nuclear programme in an explosive interview with the Sunday Times. Having worked at the Dimona plant for nearly a decade, Vanunu revealed that Israel was capable of producing 1.2 kg of plutonium per week, enough for 12 warheads annually. He also disclosed how Israeli officials had deceived US inspectors during visits in the 1960s with false walls and concealed elevators, hiding entire underground levels of the facility. Vanunu was later abducted by Mossad in Rome, tried in Israel, and sentenced to 18 years in prison, spending over half that time in solitary confinement. Even after his release in 2004, he remains under strict surveillance, barred from foreign travel and media engagement. With West Asia at the edge of a potential multi-front war, Israel's Samson Option has moved from the realm of whispered deterrence to an option in real-world decision-making. Its existence, unconfirmed but globally acknowledged, adds a nuclear dimension to an already combustible region.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
27 minutes ago
- First Post
Five years since Galwan: The two-front threat looms larger for India
In recent years, China–Pakistan military cooperation has deepened significantly. In response, India has enhanced its preparedness and strategic coordination, even as managing simultaneous threats on two fronts demands careful resource prioritisation and long-term capability building read more It has been five years since India and China's skirmish in the Galwan Valley, giving rise to bitter relations between the two. It was after nearly 45 years, after the Tulung La conflict in the Arunachal Valley in 1975, in which four Indian soldiers were killed in the Chinese ambush, that India and China suffered military casualties at the borders. There was another incident in Sikkim in which the Indian soldiers chased away the Chinese soldiers; however, no casualties were reported on either side. This led to a worsening of the relations between the two Asian giants, leading India to reorient its approach towards its relations with China. India managed to control the situation from a position of strength and refused to be cowed under pressure from China. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD During the night of June 15-16, 2020, Indian and Chinese soldiers engaged themselves in hand-to-hand combat with the People's Liberation Army (PLA). Both sides incurred casualties; India conceded that twenty soldiers died in the combat, and the Chinese acknowledged only four casualties, but sources confirmed 45 deaths on the Chinese side. Over the next eighteen months both the countries increased the number of forces on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and even exchanged shots against each other. This episode was a landmark in India-China relations, and India revised its strategy towards LAC. Indian forces had minimal armed forces present at the LAC earlier; now it was decided that India would maintain at least 50 to 60 thousand troops permanently besides 40 thousand troops on a rotational basis depending upon the climatic conditions and operational requirements. The Indian foreign minister termed it a 'premeditated and planned action' by the PLA to change the status quo on the borders. How have things changed for India after the conflict? How has the Galwan Conflict changed the dynamics between Pakistan and China, and is India prepared for a two-front war? These are the questions that are being asked by the Indian citizens. Have things changed on the India-China borders? Things have eased up, but tensions are still there. The troop numbers have increased, and it has made a qualitative difference in the situation at the borders before the Galwan. The talks have been going on at three levels between India and China. They are: STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 1. Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC) These are mainly at the diplomatic level and practical level to manage the borders and for de-escalation of conflicts. As of March 2025, 30 rounds of WMCC have taken place, the last one being in August 2024. 2. Corps Commander Level Talks These are aimed at de-escalation and toning down of conflicts at specific levels along the LAC. There have been 21 commander-level talks between China and India. 3. Special Representative Level Dialogue These are high-level talks between political representatives of both countries and are focused on a long-term boundary settlement. 21 rounds of discussions have been held between the two countries. In terms of securing the borders, India undertook significant military and strategic reforms to bolster its security posture along the China border. India is now in a position to rapidly reinforce its troop presence at the borders and has established robust defensive positions besides maintaining a regular deployment of acclimatised troops for high-altitude deployment, giving it an advantage over China. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India has also initiated what it terms the 'Cold Start' doctrine for quick mobilisation and created multiple mountain strike corps focused on the Indo-Tibetan borders to promptly respond to these threats in the border regions. In terms of deployment of military equipment, Indigenous artillery, armoured vehicles, and heavy tanks (like T-90 and T-72) were deployed. The Indian Air Force upgraded and expanded air bases near the border, improving logistics and strike capabilities. Diplomatic messages going across the borders have also been very strong. India increased diplomatic engagement, sought international support, and deepened strategic partnerships, notably with the US and the Quad, signalling a readiness to counterbalance China's assertiveness. Has the Galwan Crisis brought India and Pakistan together? The Galwan crisis has proved to a large extent the Kautilyan theory that an enemy's enemy can be a good friend. The collaboration between Chinese and Pakistani militaries has increased. This is not only because of the crisis in the Galwan Valley but also because there have been ongoing investments in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), in which China has invested approximately $50 billion, linking China to the Gwadar port in the Balochistan province of Pakistan. This route flows via Indian territory in the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD There is a strategic alignment between China and Pakistan and a sort of 'collusive threat' from both towards India; this was seen partly in the recent escalations between India and Pakistan over the Pahalgam terrorist attacks. Pakistan used large numbers of Air Force and military hardware against Indian armed forces which are of Chinese origin. China and Pakistan are also colluding economically, politically and diplomatically with each other at a deeper level and with a greater understanding. Is India prepared for a two-front war? India has made significant progress in its military preparedness, but challenges remain on the two-front war on the question of a hypothetical conflict between India and its northern and western neighbours. India has dwelt upon this at a military level and is acutely aware of this. In January 2020 Chief of Army Staff MM Narvane was confronted with this question, and later Chief of Defence Staff Bipin Rawat also acknowledged this hypothetical situation. Even the Chinese have similar fears. As it has India on one side and other adversaries in the Indo-Pacific and the China seas on the other. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In terms of India, we need to address this in the right earnest. In view of increasingly powerful and assertive China, Indian armed forces strategy and preparedness need a complete overhaul. Military observers feel that Indian armed forces' preparedness is constrained and its resources overstretched, and the conversion of some strike corps for China-facing roles has reduced offensive power against Pakistan. India's strategy involves deterring Pakistan with credible military threats, as observed in Operation Sindoor, while seeking to diplomatically avoid escalation with China, recognising that fighting on both fronts simultaneously would strain resources and in the meantime keep preparing itself for such operational readiness. Conclusion Since the 2020 Galwan crisis, India has made incremental security improvements through diplomatic agreements and infrastructure development, yet significant challenges remain. The Pakistan-China strategic partnership has deepened considerably, with China providing substantial military assistance to Pakistan. While recent border agreements with China show promise for tension reduction, India needs to be prepared for a potential two-front war. The sustained deployment of over 100,000 troops along contested borders reflects ongoing security concerns. Despite diplomatic progress, India must continue strengthening its military capabilities and border infrastructure to effectively counter coordinated threats from both Pakistan and China in an increasingly complex regional security environment. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Amitabh Singh teaches at the School of International Studies, JNU, New Delhi. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
Pakistan's Khyber Pakhtunkhwa CM warns of dissolving assembly; halts budget to resist ‘conspiracy' against Imran Khan; targets Centre
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa chief minister Ali Amin Gandapur on Friday issued a stern warning that he may dissolve the provincial assembly if the federal government attempts to destabilise the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI)-led coalition in the province. In a video message, Gandapur asserted that he holds the constitutional power to dissolve the assembly at any time. The warning comes amid increasing political friction between the federal and provincial governments. Gandapur suspended implementation of the recently passed provincial budget and instructed lawmakers not to submit any cut motions during Friday's session. He added that a new strategy would be announced on Monday. 'If we don't pass the budget, the federal government could take control of the province under the pretext of a financial emergency,' Gandapur said, accusing Islamabad of conspiring to topple his government. He also lashed out at the federal authorities for what he described as 'unjust treatment' of the province following the May 9, 2023, incidents. He alleged that the public mandate in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was stolen in the aftermath. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like AdTab, un delicioso comprimido antiparasitario Adtab Encuéntralo Undo 'Our leader was unjustly jailed, and the way we were treated after May 9, followed by the theft of our mandate, is unacceptable. However, the people of this province stood firm to protect their vote,' he stated. Former Prime Minister Imran Khan , founder of PTI, remains in jail since August 2023. He faces multiple cases, including charges of inciting attacks on military and government buildings following his arrest by paramilitary Rangers from the Islamabad High Court premises. Gandapur also criticised the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa governor for allegedly violating constitutional responsibilities. 'It is the constitutional duty of the governor to call the budget session, but he failed to do so,' he said. He further added, 'Moreover, our party's founding chairman has a legal and moral right to be consulted on the budget, but he has been denied access.' Gandapur's remarks highlight rising tensions between the provincial and federal leadership, amid concerns of deepening political instability in Pakistan.
