Neighbourhood diplomacy and its West Asia challenge Premium

As India formulates its next steps in the Israel-U.S.-Iran war, it is necessary to consider not only what it will mean for the whole region but also its own ties with each neighbour

With the sinking of the Iranian warship, IRIS Dena, in the Indian Ocean, by the United States on March 4, the war in West Asia came home to South Asia. With each passing day, the war that began on February 28 has reached South Asian homes in a number of ways — disrupting the availability of daily necessities, travel, trade, food and fuel for cooking and transport, fertilizers, and the safety of citizens in the West Asia region.

Approximately 25 million South Asians live and work in West Asia, including 10 million Indians, five million Pakistanis, between five to six million Bangladeshis, two million Nepalis, and significant numbers from Sri Lanka, Bhutan, and the Maldives. Afghans — between five to eight million — are refugees in Iran. In addition, Indians make up about 15% of the population of seafarers, or crew aboard merchant ships worldwide, along with other South Asians, all of whom are at risk of harm, particularly those positioned around the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran has weaponised access. As New Delhi formulates its next steps in the war, it is necessary to consider not only what it will mean for the whole region but also its own ties with each neighbour.

It is important to recognise that New Delhi’s posture at the start of the war — when U.S.-Israel strikes killed Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and much of his immediate family — has been out of step with most of the region. Bangladesh and Pakistan issued statements condoling Khamenei’s death almost immediately, the Maldives condemned the U.S.-Israel attacks on Iran and Iran’s counter-attacks equally, and the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister offered his condolences. In contrast, it took South Block five days to send Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri to the Iranian Embassy.

It took another week for the Ministry of External Affairs to express “grief” over the killing of more than 150 students and teachers at a school for girls abutting a naval base in Minab. Even in the wider region, a statement by Foreign Ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) criticised U.S. and Israel for “initiating” attacks, and subsequent attacks by Iran.

This is less about optics and more about India’s — and South Asia’s — cultural values: the killing of Khamenei, an 86-year-old religious leader of a state, violated international norms, regardless of how his policies were viewed. That India’s statements in the following days condemned Iran’s retaliatory strikes without ever criticising U.S. or Israeli actions against Iran and Lebanon is an anomaly.

It is possible to explain the initial reactions in light of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel two days before the strikes, and his statement in the Knesset that India would stand with Israel “in the moment and beyond”. But as the horror of the escalating war mounts and the Iranian regime demonstrates its resilience, there is a need to calibrate a more balanced response. India’s traditional position, of building strong bilateral ties with every country in West Asia, without taking sides in regional fault lines has always kept it in a position of trust and goodwill; this was proven during Mr. Modi’s outreach to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian for the passage of Indian ships in the Strait of Hormuz.