INDIA today stands at a delicate crossroads in its engagement with West Asia. Once admired for its principled non-alignment and moral clarity, New Delhi now appears to be navigating the region with a sword of opportunism—sharp, calculated, but ultimately dangerous. The question that arises is both urgent and existential: Quo Vadis, India – As the compass falters? Where are you headed?
For decades, India’s West Asia policy was anchored in balance. It maintained strong ties with Arab nations, supported Palestinian self-determination, and simultaneously cultivated relations with Israel. This delicate equilibrium reflected the spirit of Non-Aligned Movement and the legacy of leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru, who envisioned India as a moral voice in global affairs.
However, recent years signal a marked shift. India’s deepening strategic and defense relationship with Israel—especially under the leadership of Narendra Modi—has raised concerns about an erosion of that balance. High-profile visits, defense agreements, and intelligence cooperation have elevated the partnership to unprecedented levels. While realpolitik justifies such ties, the silence—or at times ambiguity—on Israel’s actions in Gaza Strip and the West Bank has drawn criticism both domestically and internationally.
India’s abstentions or equivocal positions in key votes at the United Nations have not gone unnoticed. For a country that once championed anti-colonial struggles and human rights, this perceived retreat into strategic convenience risks undermining its credibility. The optics are troubling: India appears less as a principled actor and more as a transactional power, hedging its bets in a volatile region.
This shift is not without consequence. Within the framework of BRICS, India has long positioned itself as a bridge between the Global South and emerging powers. However, its growing alignment—perceived or real—with Western and Israeli strategic interests risks alienating key partners such as Iran and even complicating ties with Russia and China.
Iran, in particular, has been a critical partner for India—not just for energy security but for strategic connectivity projects like the Chabahar Port, envisioned as India’s gateway to Afghanistan and Central Asia. Yet, under pressure from the United States and its sanctions regime, India has significantly scaled back its engagement with Tehran. This retreat has been interpreted by some as strategic capitulation rather than prudent diplomacy.
Meanwhile, China has moved swiftly to fill the vacuum, deepening its economic and infrastructural ties with Iran and across West Asia. Through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative, Beijing has entrenched itself as a long-term stakeholder in the region. India’s relative hesitancy risks not only economic marginalization but also geopolitical irrelevance.
The consequences extend beyond BRICS. India’s standing in the broader Global South is also at stake. Countries in Africa, Latin America, and Asia have historically looked to India as a voice of resistance against imperialism and a champion of equitable global governance. A perceived drift toward opportunistic alignment may erode this trust.
Furthermore, India’s large diaspora in West Asia—particularly in the Gulf—adds another layer of complexity. Millions of Indian workers contribute significantly to the economies of countries like Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Qatar. Any perception that India is tilting too heavily toward one side in regional conflicts could have social and economic repercussions for these communities.
It would be simplistic, however, to dismiss India’s approach as mere opportunism. In an increasingly multipolar world, strategic flexibility is essential. Nations must pursue their interests, adapt to shifting alliances, and secure their economic and security imperatives. India’s engagement with Israel, for instance, has yielded tangible benefits in defense technology, agriculture, and counter-terrorism.
Yet, the challenge lies in balancing pragmatism with principle. Opportunism, when unchecked, can morph into inconsistency. A foreign policy that appears reactive rather than rooted in a coherent vision risk diminishing a nation’s stature.
The danger for India is not immediate expulsion from BRICS—such a move is unlikely given the bloc’s diversity and internal contradictions. However, the more insidious risk is marginalization. If India is perceived as unreliable or overly aligned with external powers, its influence within BRICS could wane. Decision-making may increasingly bypass New Delhi, reducing it to a peripheral player in a grouping it once helped define.
Moreover, India’s aspiration to be a “Vishwaguru” or global leader rings hollow if it is not underpinned by moral clarity. Leadership in the international arena is not merely about economic or military strength; it is about trust, consistency, and the ability to articulate a vision that resonates beyond national borders.
India must therefore recalibrate. It must reclaim its voice on issues of justice and human rights, even while pursuing strategic partnerships. It must engage with all actors in West Asia—not as a passive observer or opportunistic participant, but as a principled stakeholder.
The sword of opportunism may yield short-term gains, but it is double-edged. In wielding it, India risks cutting away the very foundations of its global standing.
Quo vadis, India? The answer will determine not just its role in West Asia, but its place in the world.
_____________
Ranjan Solomon is a writer, researcher and activist based in Goa. He has worked in social movements since he was 19 years of age. The views expressed here are the author’s own and Clarion India does not necessarily share or subscribe to them. He can be contacted at ranjan.solomon@gmail.com
