NEW DELHI – In an unexpected but telling move, India refused to endorse a strongly-worded Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) statement condemning Israel’s recent military strikes on Iran, exposing once again the country’s intricate balancing act between its global alliances and regional interests.
While the rest of the China- and Russia-led SCO bloc, including Iran itself, lined up to denounce what they called Israel’s “aggressive actions” that killed dozens of civilians and high-ranking Iranian officials, New Delhi stood apart — abstaining from both the condemnation and the behind-doors discussions that shaped it.
So, what’s behind this diplomatic dodge? Why did India — a country that often prides itself on its principled foreign policy — choose ambiguity over alliance? And what does this mean for its position in the power chessboard of Eurasia and the Middle East?
In early June, Israel launched a wave of deadly strikes on Tehran and other Iranian cities, targeting nuclear facilities, energy infrastructure, and military assets. The Iranian regime claimed over 80 fatalities, including nuclear scientists and senior members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The attack came amid rising hostilities between the two nations, igniting fears of full-scale war in a region already on edge.
Iran retaliated with drone and missile strikes on Tel Aviv and Haifa, reportedly killing at least 13 Israelis. Nuclear negotiations between Iran and the United States have since stalled.
The violence triggered international outcry. The SCO, whose members include China, Russia, Iran, India, and Central Asian republics, released a unified condemnation of Israel — all except one: India.
Instead of echoing SCO’s fury, India offered a carefully worded official statement that emphasized concern over escalation and called for “a return to diplomacy”. Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar personally phoned his Iranian counterpart, offering condolences but steering clear of blaming Israel.
India’s Ministry of External Affairs stated:
“We are closely monitoring the evolving situation, including reports related to attacks on nuclear sites… India enjoys close and friendly relations with both countries and stands ready to extend all possible support.”
Translation? We’re watching. We’re worried. But don’t make us pick a side.
To understand New Delhi’s hedging, you’ve got to zoom out and look at the big picture of India’s global dance. It boils down to three major factors: defence, diplomacy, and dollars.
India is Israel’s largest arms buyer, and the relationship isn’t just transactional — it’s tactical. During the 2024 Gaza conflict, India quietly allowed its defence companies to sell ammunition and rocket parts to Israel, according to Al Jazeera.
India’s military modernization efforts are tightly intertwined with Israeli technology, from drones and air defence systems to border surveillance gear.
Supporting a resolution that labels Israel as a violator of international law? That would be shooting oneself in the foot — and blowing up billions in defence deals.
Meanwhile, India has deep economic and geopolitical stakes in Iran, primarily through the Chabahar Port Project — a $500-million investment that gives India access to Afghanistan and Central Asia without going through Pakistan.
But under U.S. sanctions, that investment is on shaky ground. And with Donald Trump back in office, Washington has reimposed tight sanctions, including on Chabahar. India had previously secured a waiver for the port, but the new administration has yanked it, effectively cornering New Delhi.
So India needs to keep Tehran on side, but not at the cost of angering the U.S. or Israel — especially when it’s inching toward a potential trade agreement with Washington, which could remove looming tariffs on Indian exports.
India is not your typical SCO member. While the group is heavily influenced by China and Russia, India is also a member of the Quad alliance with the United States, Japan, and Australia — an informal but strategic counterweight to China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific.
As Kabir Taneja of the Observer Research Foundation put it:
“India is sort of an outlier inside the SCO. Given its strong ties with the US and Israel, it would’ve been very difficult to subscribe to the SCO’s exact wording.”
In short, India’s foreign policy strategy is not about loyalty — it’s about leverage.
Not overtly. But New Delhi’s silence in the face of SCO unity does more than whisper; it signals that India isn’t interested in ganging up on Jerusalem — not while its defence needs, global ambitions, and diplomatic future depend on playing nice with Tel Aviv.
India’s recent abstention from a UN resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza further clouds its stance. For a nation that once championed Palestinian rights, this shift speaks volumes.
If India leans too far into Israel’s embrace, it risks alienating long-time friends in Tehran, losing access to Central Asia, and destabilizing its position in the Global South. On the flip side, supporting Iran too vocally could put a target on India’s back from U.S. and Israeli lobbyists, potentially derailing trade talks and defence upgrades.
This tightrope is not new for India — but it’s becoming increasingly perilous. With Middle East tensions rising, U.S. pressure mounting, and SCO expectations growing, New Delhi will need more than diplomatic wordplay to stay upright.
