India's West Asia Drift: From Moral Voice to Strategic Silence

The Hindu

5 days ago

Published : Jul 23, 2025 07:24 IST - 9 MINS READ
It is a high-stakes game for India in West Asia given that it has over 90 lakh citizens living and working in the region. These workers, most of them blue-collar, remit an estimated $30 billion to the country annually. Three West Asian countries, namely Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), accounted for nearly 40 per cent of India's total oil imports in June 2025, underlining yet again the critical importance of the region for us. Indians of all religions work in West Asian countries in a variety of roles, skilled and unskilled. Skilled workers such as nurses and technicians earn substantial wages, sending high remittances to families in India.
So, how does India engage politically with the region? Does it understand the region sufficiently to advance its interests? Are India's interests served solely by trade ties and monetary interests or does New Delhi have a role to play a role in the politics of the region?
West Asia remains one of the most disturbed regions in the world, to put it mildly. Rivalries have long defined the region: Israel-Iran, US-Iran, Israel-Palestine, and Iran-Saudi Arabia are just some of those that have impeded the progress of the region.
Loss of India's voice
At the heart of all issues here is Israel, a state that has put itself above the law and killed more than 58,000 Palestinians since the Hamas attack of October 7, 2023. Over half of those killed by Israel are Palestinian women and children.
On this most critical conflict in West Asia, India has lost its voice. Its failure to speak clearly and directly against Israel's daily massacre of Palestinians shows how closely the Central government's foreign policy is allied with Israel.
As India cultivates various kingdoms in West Asia, it is clear that India's approach to the Palestine issue and to the US' attack on Iran on June 22, in conjunction with Israel, is no longer being seen through the prism of the basic protection of human lives or a violation of sovereign sanctity.
For the record, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's tweet on the social media platform X after the Hamas attack of October 7, 2023, was clear and direct. His government stood in solidarity with Israel at 'this difficult hour' after being 'deeply shocked' by the news of the terrorist attacks. However, official statements have lacked this clarity or directness when it comes to Palestine or Iran.
Toeing Israel's line
Since Modi came to power in 2014, there has been a sustained effort to dilute India's support for the Palestinian cause and to address instead the repeated Israeli complaints about India's voting record at the UN.
Indian statements, mostly general in nature, have avoided naming Israel as the state responsible for the relentless bombing of the Palestinians and the denial of food, medicine, and shelter to hundreds of thousands of people. Diplomatic both-siding is no substitute for upholding humanitarian values.
Also Read | One year of Gaza War: Mental scars and a lifetime of invisible trauma
On June 12, India abstained from voting on a UN General Assembly resolution calling for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza and aid access to the starving people there.
The resolution strongly condemned 'the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare and the unlawful denial of humanitarian access and depriving civilians... of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supply and access'.
But India did not join the 149 countries that voted for the UN resolution. Instead, it chose to stay in the camp of the 19 countries that abstained, while 12 nations, including the US, voted against the resolution.
All South Asian nations, and Myanmar, voted in favour of the resolution, as did France and the UK. But India stood out. The General Assembly resolution, initiated by Spain, came after the US vetoed a similar resolution in the Security Council.
While India's clear tilt towards Israel is because the Modi government and its right-wing supporters see Israel as a 'model' to emulate, the increased trade and military ties with Israel also play a role. The Modi government also does not want to displease the US or US President Donald Trump in any way. Remember India's silence on the tariffs imposed by the US and the repeated claims by Trump that he was the one who engineered the ceasefire between India and Pakistan during the conflict in May.
Dialogue and diplomacy
In an explanation of its vote to abstain at the General Assembly, an Indian representative claimed that there was 'no other way to resolve conflicts but through dialogue and diplomacy'. Given that India has not chosen to use dialogue and diplomacy with Pakistan, this claim not only rings hollow but is a contradiction of the aggressive language its party members and supporters use in public and on media channels.
On June 14, India distanced itself from a Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) statement condemning Israeli military strikes on Iranian territory. The SCO said: 'Such aggressive actions against civilian targets, including energy and transport infrastructure, which have resulted in civilian casualties, are a gross violation of international law and the United Nations Charter. They constitute an infringement on Iran's sovereignty, cause damage to regional and international security, and pose serious risks to global peace and stability.'
And this is what India had to say a day before on Israel's military strikes on Iran: 'We are deeply concerned at the recent developments between Iran and Israel. We are closely monitoring the evolving situation, including reports related to attacks on nuclear sites. India urges both sides to avoid any escalatory steps. Existing channels of dialogue and diplomacy should be utilised to work towards a de-escalation of the situation and resolving underlying issues.'
There was no naming of Israel as the aggressor. No saying that Israel violated Iran's sovereignty. Nothing. Instead, India claimed to be monitoring the situation and urged 'both sides' to avoid escalatory steps. Israel had struck first, but India resorted to both-siding, as it has been doing of late between Israel and Palestine as well.
On June 24, the External Affairs Ministry said: 'We have been following developments overnight relating to the conflict between Iran and Israel, including the US action against Iran's nuclear facilities and Iranian retaliation against US military bases in Qatar.'
Stumbling vishwaguru
This fuzzy logic approach is a far cry from what Modi once promised. Speaking in Sydney in November 2014, he had claimed that India would regain its lost status of 'vishwaguru' and would once again provide leadership to the world.
If this were true, given India's relationships with key players in West Asia, one wonders why it is not mediating between Israel and the Palestinians, or why India is not helping Iran to talk to the US, or why India is not acting as a bridge between Iran and Israel.
Given India's acclaimed new stature in the Modi era, it would have been fitting that New Delhi used its good offices to help resolve the many conflicts raging today. Instead, India proclaims dialogue for the rest of the world but not in its immediate neighbourhood.
Interestingly, members of the all-party delegations who travelled overseas to convey India's point of view after Operation Sindoor said that they were repeatedly asked why India had nothing to say on the issue of Palestine.
Change in stance vis-a-vis Palestine
From refusing to agree to the creation of Israel at the UN in November 1947 to being among the first nations to recognise the Palestinian state in the 1980s, India has never baulked in its open and full-throated support not just to the Palestinian people but to all those engaged in anti-colonial struggles.
Today, the situation is vastly altered. Notwithstanding Trump repeatedly equating Prime Minister Modi with Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir, India has stood with the US as it facilitates Israel's genocide. In the Russia-Ukraine war, however, India returned to its more traditional pro-Russia stance, even continuing trade in defiance of the US.
India's membership of forums such as the SCO and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Asia) has increasingly become a problem in its diplomatic negotiations with the US. With a bully like Trump in power, someone who recently threatened an extra 10 per cent tariff on countries that side with BRICS (India is a founder-member) and 100 per cent tariff on countries that buy oil from Russia, India might find its balancing act coming to an end.
It needs to be mentioned here that India's shifting votes on West Asian issues were also seen when the Manmohan Singh government voted with the US and against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency in September 2005. The vote created considerable consternation in the country and eventually resulted in the Left parties withdrawing support to the coalition government at the Centre.
There was also considerable pressure on Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to send Indian troops to Iraq in 2003 as India and the US moved closer after the Kargil War of 1999. However, after consideration, the government decided against it because, as a senior official in the Vajpayee government told this writer, Indian troops would be seen as mercenaries.
Equally, the weak-kneed response from West Asian countries to the ongoing genocide of Palestinians has also made it easier for India to take a pro-Israeli position. Even countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia have not gone beyond issuing statements.
Engaging with West Asia
For long, India has stressed the 'personal' nature of ties between Modi and the leaders of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar and the importance of this in promoting India's interests in West Asia. However, in 2022, when two BJP functionaries made comments against Prophet Muhammad, there were strong statements from Qatar and protests from other West Asian countries.
In a tweet, Lolwah al-Khater, the then Assistant Foreign Minister of Qatar, had said: 'The Islamophobic discourse has reached dangerous levels in a country long known for its diversity and coexistence. Unless officially and systemically confronted, the systemic hate speech targeting Islam in India will be considered a deliberate insult against 2 billion Muslims.'
Also Read | Gaza: Scarred, ruined, and silenced by death
Although the BJP took some belated action against the officials, the incident revealed that the world closely watches India and tracks hate speech by top-level members of the ruling party. One also recalls the uproar when the BJP's IT cell trolled Maldives, resulting in some diplomatic unpleasantness.
Given the fact that key functionaries of the BJP have demonstrated a clear and consistent anti-Muslim bias, this story is far from over. Countries often stay quiet to serve or protect their own interests but speak up when pushed.
In a world where colonial prejudices and policies have staged a vicious return, India would do well to re-embrace independent thinking, respect for the lives of people cutting across race and religion, and upholding the sovereignty of nation states across the world, which were once the hallmarks of its diplomacy.
Amit Baruah was The Hindu's Diplomatic Correspondent and Foreign Editor of Hindustan Times. He is now an independent journalist.