India wary about Iran's nuclear project: Voted against in 2005, abstained in 2024
Almost 20 years after India voted against Iran's nuclear programme for the first time, Delhi's careful balancing act — between Israel and the US on one side and Iran on the other side — has come into play.
While India has always tried to walk the diplomatic tightrope walk, its discomfort over Iran with a nuclear weapon was apparent then. On September 24, 2005, India voted with 21 other countries on the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) resolution (GOV/2005/77) which found Iran in non-compliance with its safeguards agreement.
This was seen as a departure from the past, as India had voted with the US and the western bloc against Iran, which was in its extended neighbourhood and with whom it has a historical and civilisational relationship.
This was the time when India had just started negotiating its agreement with the US on its civilian nuclear programme, and Washington was able to lean on Delhi to vote against Tehran. Delhi, which was keen to portray its responsible behaviour as a nuclear power, went along with the idea that voting against Iran's nuclear programme would burnish its reputation.
However, the resolution did not refer the matter immediately to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), and India was one of the countries which urged the western bloc of European countries — UK, France and Germany (EU-3) — to keep the issue at the IAEA.
According to Indian officials, India voted for the resolution at that time, against the majority of NAM members who abstained, because it felt obligated to do so after having pressured the EU-3 to omit reference to immediate referral to the UNSC.
Months later, on February 4, 2006, India again sided with the US when the IAEA Board of Governors voted to refer Iran's non-compliance to the UNSC.
'As a signatory to the NPT, Iran has the legal right to develop peaceful uses of nuclear energy consistent with its international commitments and obligations… (But) it is incumbent upon Iran to exercise these rights in the context of safeguards that it has voluntarily accepted upon its nuclear programme under the IAEA,' then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told Parliament on February 17, 2006.
Over the years, as India negotiated the nuclear deal with the US, Delhi came out of the pressure to vote against Tehran as the issue went to the UNSC. Sources said that once the matter went to the UNSC, India did not have to take any position on Iran's nuclear programme between 2007 and 2024.
In between, the US administration under President Barack Obama negotiated the JCPOA (joint comprehensive plan of action) with Iran in 2015 — which was a deal between P-5+1 and Iran. US President Donald Trump walked out of the JCPOA in 2017, and Iran's nuclear programme once again came under scrutiny.
India was forced to stop oil imports from Iran, although its Chabahar port project development was going on. While it did not have to take any firm position against Iran's nuclear programme, that changed last year when the US brought in a resolution against Iran.
In June 2024, India abstained from a vote at the IAEA regarding Iran. The vote, initiated by the US, aimed to censure Iran for its nuclear programme. While the resolution passed, with 19 out of 35 board members voting to censure Iran, India was among the 16 countries that abstained. This decision reflected India's balancing act between its deep defence and security relationship with Israel and its historical ties with Iran.
In September 2024, India again abstained from voting on a resolution at the IAEA Board of Governors that censured Iran for its lack of cooperation with the agency's investigations into its nuclear programme. The resolution, brought by France, the UK, and Germany (E3) along with the US, followed an IAEA report noting Iran's increased uranium enrichment.
In June this year too, India abstained on the IAEA Board of Governors' resolution strongly criticising Iran's nuclear programme and declaring it in breach of its 1974 Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement. This time, India's decision to abstain from the vote reflected its balanced stance — recognising Iran's right to pursue a peaceful nuclear energy programme while calling upon Tehran to adhere to its non-proliferation commitments.
While the change, from voting against to abstention, marks Delhi's shifting positions as geopolitical alignments changed, India's concern about the Iranian nuclear programme was evident.
Shubhajit Roy, Diplomatic Editor at The Indian Express, has been a journalist for more than 25 years now. Roy joined The Indian Express in October 2003 and has been reporting on foreign affairs for more than 17 years now. Based in Delhi, he has also led the National government and political bureau at The Indian Express in Delhi — a team of reporters who cover the national government and politics for the newspaper. He has got the Ramnath Goenka Journalism award for Excellence in Journalism '2016. He got this award for his coverage of the Holey Bakery attack in Dhaka and its aftermath. He also got the IIMCAA Award for the Journalist of the Year, 2022, (Jury's special mention) for his coverage of the fall of Kabul in August 2021 — he was one of the few Indian journalists in Kabul and the only mainstream newspaper to have covered the Taliban's capture of power in mid-August, 2021. ... Read More
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Bustling with activity': CM Omar Abdullah hails 'revival' of tourism in Pahalgam; April attack had dented visitor flow
NEW DELHI: Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah on Sunday expressed satisfaction over the revival of tourism in Kashmir, particularly in Pahalgam, which had seen a sharp decline in visitors following the April 22 terror attack at the Baisaran meadow that claimed 26 lives, including 25 tourists and a local pony ride operator. Sharing his observations in a post on X, Abdullah noted a remarkable change in the atmosphere of the popular tourist destination. "The last time I was in Pahalgam I cycled through a market that was all but deserted." he wrote. "Today I came back to a Pahalgam that was bustling with activity. Tourists from various parts of the country competed for space with local picnickers who were enjoying the cool climate & rainy weather.." He credited the visible recovery to the sustained efforts of his administration. " It's very satisfying to see the efforts my colleagues & I have been putting in slowly bearing fruit.," he added. On April 22, brutal terrorist attack in the Baisaran Valley of Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, claimed the lives of 26 people, including 25 Indian tourists and one Nepali national, marking one of the deadliest assaults in the Valley since the 2019 Pulwama attack. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Scam Exposed: What They Won't Tell You about zero trust! Expertinspector Click Here Undo The attack sparked nationwide outrage and led to a spate of travel cancellations across the Valley, casting fresh doubts on the region's security. The massacre drew strong condemnation from world leaders and reignited concerns over cross-border terrorism. In a swift and strategic response, India launched Operation Sindoor during the night of May 6–7, targeting nine terror hideouts of Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, and Hizbul Mujahideen across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Though India maintained that its actions were focused and non-escalatory, Pakistan retaliated with drone strikes on Indian cities. In turn, India responded by disabling Pakistan's HQ-9 air defence system. As tensions escalated, border evacuations were initiated. On May 10, following further provocation, India carried out strikes on eleven Pakistani air bases, including Nur Khan, Murid, and Rafiqui. After four intense days of missile and drone exchanges, both nations agreed to a ceasefire, bringing temporary relief amid growing international calls for de-escalation. Operation Sindoor was not just a security measure but also a message of reassurance to the rest of India that Kashmir remains committed to ensuring the safety of its visitors. With improved security, confidence began to return, and the region is now witnessing a gradual but hopeful revival in tourism.
New Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
BJP leader clarifies saffron flag remark, says it's his personal opinion
PALAKKAD: A day after sparking controversy by suggesting that the saffron flag should replace the tricolour as India's national flag, BJP leader and former national council member N Sivarajan has clarified that his statement was a personal opinion and that the final decision lies with the Central government. Speaking to TNIE, Sivarajan said, 'The saffron flag has a rich history spanning centuries. It is not merely the flag of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). It symbolises India's culture, heritage and spiritual legacy. From Lord Krishna to Swami Vivekananda and Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, the saffron flag has long represented Indian identity.' He further noted that requests to make saffron the national flag have been submitted to the Prime Minister's Office multiple times in the past. 'It is now up to the Union government to make an appropriate decision. I believe crores of Indians share the same sentiment,' said the BJP councillor from the Palakkad municipality. On Sunday, the veteran RSS functionary made the remarks during a BJP protest in Palakkad against the LDF and UDF for disrespecting Bharat Mata. Sivarajan's comments drew widespread criticism from political parties. Amid the controversy, Sivarajan reiterated his demand that political parties should be barred from using flags that closely resemble the national tricolour. 'The Indian National Congress, NCP, Tamil Maanila Congress, and several other parties use flags that look like the national flag. This blurs the distinct identity of our national symbol. They should be asked to adopt clearly distinguishable designs,' he said. His remarks come against the backdrop of a row in Kerala over the use of the image of Bharat Mata astride a lion holding a saffron flag -- an image widely associated with the RSS -- for official events at the Raj Bhavan. The portrayal has triggered sharp protests and confrontations between BJP and CPM workers on the streets, further deepening the political divide in the state. As the debate intensifies, political observers view Sivarajan's remarks as part of a larger narrative pushing for ideological symbolism in national identity.
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
Why and how Europe's growing fear of Donald Trump is bad news for Microsoft, Google, Apple and others
European governments and institutions are accelerating efforts to reduce their dependence on American tech giants after President Trump used executive powers to force Microsoft to suspend the email account of an International Criminal Court prosecutor investigating Israel for war crimes, according to a New York Times report. The February incident involving ICC prosecutor Karim Khan has become a watershed moment for European policymakers, who now view America's tech dominance as a potential weapon that could be wielded against them even in allied nations like the Netherlands. Microsoft's swift compliance with Trump's sanctions order shocked European officials and crystallized long-standing concerns about digital sovereignty . "The I.C.C. showed this can happen," Dutch cybersecurity expert and European Parliament member Bart Groothuis told the Times. "It's not just fantasy." Groothuis, who previously supported U.S. tech firms, said he has done a "180-degree flip-flop" and now believes Europe must take steps toward greater technological independence. European institutions scramble for alternatives The ICC incident has prompted immediate changes across European institutions. Some ICC officials have switched to Proton, a Swiss encrypted email provider, while the court has implemented extensive measures to ensure operational continuity despite ongoing U.S. sanctions, three sources familiar with the communications revealed to the Times. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Buy Brass Laxmi Ji Idol For Wealth, Peace & Happiness Luxeartisanship Shop Now Undo American tech companies control over 70 percent of Europe's cloud computing market, making the region heavily dependent on services from Amazon, Google, and Microsoft for essential digital infrastructure including file storage, data retrieval, and software operations. Tech giants offer reassurances but damage spreads Microsoft President Brad Smith acknowledged that the ICC episode was a "symptom" of eroding U.S.-Europe trust, telling the Times that "the I.C.C. issue added fuel to a fire that was already burning." The company has since enacted policy changes to protect customers in similar geopolitical situations, and when Trump sanctioned four additional ICC judges this month, their email accounts remained active. CEO Satya Nadella recently visited the Netherlands to announce new "sovereign solutions" for European institutions, including enhanced legal and data security protections. Amazon and Google have launched similar initiatives targeting European customers concerned about geopolitical volatility. European governments pivot toward digital independence Despite corporate reassurances, European nations are pursuing concrete alternatives. Denmark's digital ministry is testing Microsoft Office replacements, while Germany's Schleswig-Holstein state is reducing Microsoft usage. The Netherlands government has made digital autonomy a central priority, exploring partnerships with European providers. The European Union has announced billion-euro investments in AI data centers and cloud infrastructure designed to reduce American tech dependence. European Parliament lawmakers are discussing policies favoring EU-based tech services for government procurement. European cloud providers like Netherlands-based Intermax Group and Switzerland's Exoscale report significant increases in new business. "A few years ago, everyone was saying, 'They're our trusted partners,'" Intermax CEO Ludo Baauw told the Times, referring to U.S. tech companies. "There's been a radical change." AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
