Prof Virender Koundal
virender_koundal@rediffmail.com
In recent weeks, some opposition groups and a few activists in different parts of India, including in Kashmir, have demanded that the Government of India strongly condemn the killing of Iranian leader Ali Khamenei by the United States and Israel. Protests and demonstrations have been organized, and some voices are attempting to create a political narrative that India must openly support Iran in this matter. However, such demands raise important questions about India’s national interests, diplomatic history, and strategic partnerships. A responsible and informed debate must consider the historical record of how different countries have treated India’s core concerns, particularly the sensitive issue of Jammu and Kashmir.
India has always followed an independent foreign policy based on national interest, strategic balance, and peaceful coexistence. The country maintains relations with many nations across the world, even those that may have conflicts with each other. However, when evaluating international issues, it is important to examine the historical attitudes of these countries toward India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. In this context, the positions taken by Iran and Israel over the decades provide valuable insights.
Historically, Iran has maintained a complex and sometimes contradictory position regarding Kashmir. Even before the Islamic Revolution of 1979 led by Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran often leaned toward Pakistan’s position on the Kashmir dispute. During the 1950s and 1960s, the Iranian monarchy maintained close strategic relations with Pakistan and supported its position in international forums. Iran backed Pakistan diplomatically during the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 and the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. These wars were critical moments in South Asian history, and Iran’s stance at the time clearly aligned more closely with Pakistan than with India. After the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran’s foreign policy was influenced by ideological and religious considerations. The new leadership under Khomeini frequently referred to Kashmir as a Muslim issue. In earlier speeches, including one in Najaf in 1965, Khomeini called upon Muslims to unite in support of causes such as Palestine and Kashmir, framing these issues within a broader Islamic political context. This approach often created discomfort in India because Kashmir is considered an internal matter and an integral part of the Indian Union.
Over the decades, Iranian leaders continued to raise the Kashmir issue in various international statements. For instance, Iranian authorities have occasionally criticized India’s policies in Kashmir or called for international attention to the situation. In November 2010, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei urged Muslims around the world to support what he described as the “struggle” in Kashmir, placing it alongside conflicts in places such as Afghanistan and Palestine. Such statements were strongly objected to by the Indian government because they appeared to question India’s sovereignty over the region. Even in recent years, Iran has occasionally supported statements with Pakistan that emphasize resolving the Kashmir issue according to the will of the people of the region. For example, during the visit of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi to Pakistan in April 2024, a joint statement between the two countries referred to Kashmir as an issue requiring peaceful resolution based on the wishes of the people. India immediately rejected this statement, reiterating that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and that no external country has the right to comment on it.
These historical examples illustrate that Iran’s position on Kashmir has often been ambiguous and sometimes sympathetic to Pakistan’s narrative. At times Iran attempted to maintain a balanced approach between India and Pakistan, but its public statements frequently created diplomatic tensions with India. This history is important when evaluating the present demands by some groups in India that the government should take a strong stand in favor of Iran.
In contrast, Israel has consistently maintained a supportive stance toward India’s security concerns. Diplomatic relations between India and Israel were formally established in 1992, but cooperation between the two countries has grown significantly over the past three decades. Israel has emerged as one of India’s most reliable strategic partners, particularly in the fields of defence technology, intelligence sharing, agriculture, and innovation.During several critical moments, Israel provided India with crucial defence and logistical assistance. For instance, during the Kargil War of 1999, Israel reportedly supplied surveillance equipment, precision-guided munitions, and other military support that helped India in its operations against infiltrators backed by Pakistan. Israel has also been a major supplier of advanced defence technologies, including missile systems, drones, radar systems, and electronic warfare equipment. Such cooperation has strengthened India’s national security and helped modernize its armed forces.
Importantly, Israel has consistently recognized India’s sovereignty over Jammu and Kashmir and has avoided making statements that challenge India’s territorial integrity. On international platforms, Israel has generally respected India’s position that Kashmir is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan. This approach reflects a strategic partnership built on mutual respect and shared security interests. From a strategic perspective, India’s relationship with Israel is based on mutual interests, shared democratic values, and cooperation in areas such as counter-terrorism, defence technology, and economic development. This relationship contributes directly to India’s national security and economic growth.
In this context, it is important to understand that foreign policy decisions cannot be driven by emotional reactions or domestic political pressure. Every country must prioritize its own national interests. India has traditionally followed a balanced diplomatic approach that avoids taking sides in conflicts between other countries unless its own national interests are directly affected.
The protests and demands for condemning Israel and the United States therefore raise broader questions about the role of domestic politics in shaping foreign policy narratives. While democratic societies allow freedom of expression and peaceful protest, it is equally important that such debates remain informed by facts, historical context, and national priorities.
India is a diverse and pluralistic society where people from different communities express their views on global events. However, creating law and order disturbances or attempting to politicize international conflicts can undermine social harmony and distract from the country’s development goals. Responsible political leadership requires encouraging constructive dialogue rather than amplifying divisive narratives.
At the same time, India’s foreign policy has traditionally emphasized strategic autonomy. This means that India maintains relations with multiple countries even if those countries have conflicts with each other. India has friendly relations with Iran as well, particularly in areas such as energy cooperation and connectivity projects like the development of the Chabahar port. Therefore, India’s policy is not about choosing permanent friends or enemies but about safeguarding national interests while maintaining diplomatic balance.
In conclusion, the debate surrounding demands to condemn Israel and the United States must be viewed within the broader framework of India’s historical experiences and strategic interests. The record shows that Iran has often taken positions on Kashmir that were not aligned with India’s perspective, while Israel has consistently supported India’s security concerns and provided critical assistance during difficult times. Understanding these historical realities is essential for making informed judgments about international issues.
India’s foreign policy must remain guided by national interest, strategic stability, and diplomatic prudence rather than short-term political pressures. A mature and confident nation like India should continue to pursue balanced relations with all countries while firmly protecting its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Only such an approach can ensure long-term peace, security, and prosperity for the country.
The post Understanding India’s Position on Iran and Israel appeared first on Daily Excelsior.