The United States-Israel war with Iran has led to increasing fuel\nshortages in India, pressure on the rupee exchange rate, and millions of\nIndian workers in Gulf countries monitoring the situation with growing\nanxiety.<\/p>\n
However, one month after the conflict began, it is Pakistan, not\nIndia, that has positioned itself as a mediator.<\/p>\n
Pakistan\u2019s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar stated earlier this week that\nIslamabad will soon host talks between the United States (US) and Iran,\nalthough neither Washington nor Tehran has confirmed Pakistan\u2019s\ndiplomatic role.<\/p>\n
In contrast, India has adopted a more measured message. New Delhi has\nexercised restraint, calling for de-escalation, while working through\nquiet diplomatic channels and prioritising energy security and the\nsafety of its diaspora.<\/p>\n
Opposition increases pressure on Modi<\/p>\n
However, the government\u2019s stance has also drawn criticism from the\nopposition.<\/p>\n
Rahul Gandhi, leader of the Congress Party serving as the opposition\nin India, described India\u2019s foreign policy under Prime Minister Narendra\nModi as a \u201cuniversal joke.\u201d<\/p>\n
Congress Party parliamentarian Jairam Ramesh also criticised Modi\u2019s\npolicy.<\/p>\n
He wrote on platform X that after India\u2019s \u201cundoubted military\nsuccess\u201d in its action against Pakistan during Operation Sindoor in May\n2025, \u201cPakistan\u2019s diplomatic engagement and narrative management are far\nsuperior to the Modi government.\u201d<\/p>\n
Experts point out that internationally, Islamabad\u2019s role gives it\ndirect visibility and relevance, particularly in Washington, by\npositioning itself as a useful bridge amid high tensions.<\/p>\n
India maintains a middle position<\/p>\n
Shanthie Mariet D\u2019Souza, president of Mantraya, an independent\nresearch forum, said the Modi government portrays the conflict as a\ndistant war that does not require Indian intervention.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis perspective contradicts previous efforts to position India as a\npotential mediator in the Ukraine war, as well as the significant impact\nthe Iran war has had on India\u2019s energy security,\u201d D\u2019Souza told DW.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile this stance may not yet affect Modi\u2019s domestic popularity, a\nprolonged conflict with economic consequences for India is likely to\nimpact approval ratings for the government,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n
D\u2019Souza also said India\u2019s lack of neutrality limits its ability to\nact as a mediator and weakens its claims to strategic autonomy.<\/p>\n
Harsh Pant, head of the strategic studies programme at the Observer\nResearch Foundation (ORF) in New Delhi, said much will depend on how\nlong the war lasts.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf the crisis continues, if pressure on India increases, and if the\ngovernment cannot manage it domestically, there will be an impact on the\nModi administration,\u201d he told DW.<\/p>\n
\u201cIndia\u2019s initial response shows solidarity with Arab countries, where\nrelations with them continue to grow and are very important. India must\nprotect its interests there,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n
Can Pakistan stop the Iran war?<\/p>\n
India\u2019s Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar stated that India will not act\nas a \u201cmediator\u201d like Pakistan in the ongoing US-Israel war with\nIran.<\/p>\n
Jaishankar\u2019s comments responded to suggestions that India emulate\nPakistan\u2019s role, while affirming that New Delhi sees itself pursuing an\nindependent foreign policy and not acting as an intermediary in\nconflicts driven by other parties.<\/p>\n
Modi stated that although the conflict in the Middle East and\ndisruptions in the Strait of Hormuz pose \u201cworrisome\u201d challenges to\nenergy security, the government is ensuring stable domestic supplies by\nutilising strategic reserves, diversifying imports from 41 countries,\nand engaging in diplomatic efforts to ease tensions.<\/p>\n
Ajay Bisaria, former Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan, said India\ndoes not face immediate domestic political impacts, but policy experts\nare concerned that the country appears too cautious and not actively\ninfluencing developments, especially compared to Pakistan\u2019s more\nassertive approach.<\/p>\n
\u201cAmong strategists and policymakers, there is a quiet acknowledgement\nthat India is not shaping outcomes in a region where it has major\ninterests,\u201d Bisaria told DW.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe contrast with Pakistan\u2019s role as a mediator may raise questions\nabout whether New Delhi is too cautious at a time of geopolitical\nshifts.\u201d<\/p>\n
Pakistan\u2019s window of opportunity as a mediator<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, Bisaria emphasised that Pakistan\u2019s role should not be\noverstated.<\/p>\n
\u201cPakistan\u2019s benefits are tactical facilitation. India\u2019s strength lies\nin balance, multi-alignment, and long-term strategic autonomy. The\nchallenge for New Delhi is to turn that position into visible influence\nwhen diplomatic opportunities arise,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt acts as a conduit, not a power broker. This is consistent with\npast patterns. Islamabad has historically often facilitated US\nback-channel diplomacy, from opening relations with China in 1971 to the\nIran hostage crisis in 1981,\u201d Bisaria added.<\/p>\n
According to the former diplomat, the advantage Pakistan gains is\nvisibility and relevance in Washington at a time when India is on the\nsidelines.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat may translate into short-term diplomatic influence or goodwill.\nHowever, structurally, the balance with India remains unchanged. India\u2019s\nglobal weight, economically, strategically, and diplomatically, far\nsurpasses Pakistan\u2019s,\u201d he said.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/overtaking-india-pakistan-seizes-the-diplomatic-stage-in-iran-conflict-1775049385", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }