����ֱ��

The last 21 months of military conflicts in large parts of the Middle East have presented complex challenges to the interests of several regional and extraregional states. Not surprisingly, given its historic links with the region and its substantial political and economic ties with regional states, India’s responses to various aspects of the conflicts have been closely scrutinized by commentators. It has been noted that, on four occasions, India abstained on UN General Assembly resolutions calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza that were backed by most members of the Global South.
Sonia Gandhi, the president of the opposition Congress Party, last month wrote an article criticizing the country’s “muted stance” on the conflicts in Gaza and Iran, describing this as a “surrender of moral values.” She attacked the free hand enjoyed by Israel in “an atmosphere of impunity” and insisted on the reaffirmation of India’s support for the two-state solution to fulfill Palestinian aspirations.
Another writer said that India’s diplomatic balancing act now appeared to be “unravelling (and) revealing inconsistencies” under strong geopolitical challenges. Even India’s former National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan felt that Indian foreign policy was facing an “existential crisis” amid serious diplomatic challenges, such as those posed by the new US administration and the wars in the Middle East, where India seemed “out of sync with reality.”
These are harsh words for a country whose ties with the Middle East go back at least five millennia — ties that have remained uninterrupted and been nourished over the centuries with fresh inputs so that they meet the changing needs and interests of both sides.
So, why these criticisms? India’s diplomatic approach to the Middle East has been bilateral and transactional. It has built very substantial relations with all the regional states, but only on a bilateral basis; it has largely avoided taking a collective view of the region and has avoided engagements through regional cooperation platforms. And it has assiduously avoided any active involvement with issues relating to Middle Eastern security and stability.

India’s diplomacy will need to exhibit a fresh focus on engagement with its immediate and extended neighborhoods.

Talmiz Ahmad

This approach, ideal in peacetime, has been found inadequate amid the horrendous killings that have defined Israel’s response to the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, and the wanton spread of its attacks to the West Bank, Lebanon and Syria, and to Iran itself, in which it was joined by the US. No wonder Gandhi said that “we cannot remain silent in the face of such destruction.”
But recent developments have also raised new challenges for India’s core interests. India’s hands-off approach as far as security issues are concerned has provided opportunities for other nations to play a leading role in addressing matters of regional security by facilitating engagements between hostile neighbors and encouraging rival Palestinian factions to interact with each other.
There is more. Last month, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations organized a joint conclave with the Gulf Cooperation Council states and China as part of their effort to expand and diversify economic links with other major partners in the face of challenges posed by the US administration. The tripartite joint declaration contained strong ASEAN criticisms of Israel and backing for the peace efforts of the GCC states. Former Indian diplomat Gurjit Singh noted that the declaration affirmed that the ASEAN has matured and is “no longer content to remain a bystander in global affairs.”
Gandhi wrote in her article that there was still time for India to “course-correct” and act “clearly, responsibly and decisively.”
The first step in the proposed course correction would be for India to affirm the core principle that will guide Indian diplomacy: a commitment to strategic autonomy and the realization of a multipolar world order in which India will be a robust voice of the Global South, recalling its role in the Non-Aligned Movement during the Cold War.
To end the sense of strategic drift that some commentators have noted, India’s diplomacy will also need to exhibit a fresh focus on engagement with its immediate and extended neighborhoods — South, West, Central, Southeast and Northeast Asia, and the Indian Ocean. This will call for the replacement of the outdated bilateral approach to important relationships with the shaping of collective regional approaches, with regular interactions on matters of geopolitics and geoeconomics at specially designed regional platforms.
India’s substantial and abiding links with the Middle East, founded on energy, trade, investments, joint ventures, connectivity projects and technology partnerships — all brought together by the presence of India’s 9 million-strong resident community — will ensure that this region will command its principal attention. But India’s new approach will also include an important place for dialogue on issues of security and stability with a view to shaping a regional comprehensive security arrangement.
This pioneering effort will be propelled by three principles. One, it will be inclusive in that participation in the dialogue process will include all parties with an abiding interest in regional security. Two, the effort will be diplomatic, given the conviction of participants that, for far too long, external military interventions have wreaked havoc upon the region. And, three, the process will be incremental and evolutionary. Given the long-standing differences among regional states, this is the only approach that will work.
India’s fading global influence and credibility has in fact opened exciting opportunities for new visions and new initiatives in which “moral responsibility and diplomatic leverage act as a bridge for de-escalation and peace.”

• Talmiz Ahmad is a former Indian diplomat.