The American-Israeli aggression against Iran, set in on 28 February, has posed a serious challenge to the interests of all the regional players. India, in particular, has wound up forced to choose between several foreign policy directions, each equally important for New Delhi, and reconciling them is becoming extremely difficult.
Iran: An Energy Partner and Transit Corridor
Furthermore, Iran offers New Delhi the opportunity to bypass the territories of hostile Pakistan in establishing transport links with Afghanistan, since India’s foreign policy has been prioritising the development of relations with the latter. It refers to the project to modernise the Iranian port of Chabahar, which could become a node of communication with Afghanistan via a railway line currently under construction that goes straight to the Iran-Afghan border. It is significant to mention that the port of Chabahar has remained untouched during the war, which may well indicate a desire of the US and Israel to avoid provoking India, a crucial partner for them.
A New Vector: The Corridor to Europe via the Middle East
Several years ago, another equally significant vector of regional activity manifested itself in India’s foreign policy course — the project for a transport and infrastructure corridor to Europe, with transitional stops in the Gulf states and Israel. At the end of 2021, the formation of another regional ‘Quad’ was announced, which, alongside India and the United States, comprised the United Arab Emirates and Israel. In September 2023, on the sidelines of the G20 summit in New Delhi, the initiative was expanded with Saudi Arabia and several leading European countries having joined it.
Escalation and its Consequences
However, just a month later, the ‘7 October incident’ put paid to all these plans, triggering a process of escalating regional tensions, and the current military action appears to be merely the latest step. Although, even on the eve of the US and Israel having unleashed military action against Iran, it seemed that a negative scenario might have been averted. The American-Iranian talks and Prime Minister N. Modi’s visit to Israel seemed to serve as the evidence for it. It is unlikely that this visit would have taken place at all if N. Modi had known that his hospitable hosts would, just a day after his departure, strike a country of paramount importance to him.
Negative emotions in India were also provoked by an American submarine sinking an Iranian corvette — a vessel that, just a day earlier, had visited the Indian naval base in Kochi as part of traditional naval diplomacy. Overall, the current American administration is behaving rather clumsily in its relations with a partner of utmost importance to it. Take, for instance, the sheer audacity of ‘permitting’ India to resume purchases of Russian oil – a notion as presumptuous as the cock that believes that the sun rises only because of its morning crowing.
The American-Indian Framework Agreement on Trade and Commerce concluded in February could have helped to rectify this impression, apart from the fact that the port of Chabahar was excluded from the list of the objects to be attacked. However, the agreement contains certain ‘nuances’ which, along with the ambiguous position of the Indian leadership regarding the aggression against Iran, have become a target for criticism aimed at the government and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party from the opposition, led by the Indian National Congress party.
External Challenges Exacerbate India’s Internal Problems
The unpredictability of the foreign policy of the United States, India’s key partner, is taking its toll on the country’s domestic political situation.
Not only is the US India’s largest trading partner, providing a significant market for Indian goods, but it also ranks first in terms of bilateral trade volume. In 2025, Indian exports to the US amounted to 100 billion dollars, out of a total bilateral trade of 150 billion dollars. This trade model developed naturally as a result of prolonged objective processes. However, the current US President, Donald Trump, seeks to alter it through radical methods by imposing increased tariffs on imported goods.
Such policies by the American leader have created serious problems for the Indian leadership, which it has attempted to resolve through nearly a year of negotiations. In the end, Donald Trump made concessions, reducing the initial tariffs from 25-50% to 18%. This was achieved thanks to reciprocal steps by India, primarily in the area of opening its market to American agricultural products.
However, it is exactly this last condition that has sparked a new wave of protests among Indian farmers, with them having already protested previously against their own government’s agricultural policies.
It goes without saying that the opposition seized upon the farmers’ discontent, initiating a discussion in the lower house of the Indian parliament regarding both the format of the negotiations with the US and the contents of the aforementioned agreement, which, on a related note, has not yet entered into force. The acuteness of the parliamentary debate was underscored by the fact that even the Speaker, Om Birla (representing the ruling BJP), was accused by the opposition of conducting the session improperly, which begs the question of his further tenure in the post.
For the BJP and the Indian government, the intertwining of external and internal problems represents a serious challenge in terms of its never-ending electoral cycle. It is safe to say that in mid-January 2026, the party managed to perform successfully in the local elections in the state of Maharashtra, largely due to the elections having taken place before the announcement of the framework agreement with the US and the escalation of the Middle Eastern conflict. However, another round of elections is due in May-June in four more states and one union territory. What will they result in?
The Election Outcomes in Nepal
Nepal has become the third neighbour of India to undergo a change in leadership through an electoral process in recent months. Prior to this, general elections were also held in Myanmar and Bangladesh. It is important to note that Nepal, along with other countries in the so-called ‘string of pearls’, is an arena for geopolitical competition between India and China – the two leading powers in Asia. Events in the region inevitably affect the interests of other significant global players as well.
For this very reason, electoral processes in neighbouring countries are closely monitored by New Delhi. In this regard, the general elections in Nepal, held on 5 March, were no exception. The country organised and held the elections as a direct consequence of the de facto coup d’état that took place in autumn 2025, with the active participation of student youth, representatives of ‘Generation Z.’ Balendra Shah, who led the protests and had no previous party affiliation, joined the National Independent Party in January earlier this year, which went on to secure a convincing victory in the elections. As a result, Balendra Shah assumed the post of Prime Minister of Nepal, a development his Indian counterpart, N. Modi, congratulated him on during a telephone conversation on 9 March.
As for the overall reaction of the Indian leadership to the aforementioned events in the region, it has not yet displayed any noticeable activity. New Delhi has adopted a wait-and-see approach, likely taking into account the factors of high uncertainty and potential risks being present.
Vladimir Terekhov, expert on Asia-Pacific region affairs
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
