Nearly 20 years after India voted in opposition to Iran’s nuclear programme for the primary time, Delhi’s cautious balancing act — between Israel and the US on one facet and Iran on the opposite facet — has come into play.
Whereas India has at all times tried to stroll the diplomatic tightrope stroll, its discomfort over Iran with a nuclear weapon was obvious then. On September 24, 2005, India voted with 21 different nations on the Worldwide Atomic Power Company’s (IAEA) decision (GOV/2005/77) which discovered Iran in non-compliance with its safeguards settlement.
This was seen as a departure from the previous, as India had voted with the US and the western bloc in opposition to Iran, which was in its prolonged neighbourhood and with whom it has a historic and civilisational relationship.
This was the time when India had simply began negotiating its settlement with the US on its civilian nuclear programme, and Washington was in a position to lean on Delhi to vote in opposition to Tehran. Delhi, which was eager to painting its accountable behaviour as a nuclear energy, went together with the concept voting in opposition to Iran’s nuclear programme would burnish its fame.
Nonetheless, the decision didn’t refer the matter instantly to the United Nations Safety Council (UNSC), and India was one of many nations which urged the western bloc of European nations — UK, France and Germany (EU-3) — to maintain the difficulty on the IAEA.
Based on Indian officers, India voted for the decision at the moment, in opposition to nearly all of NAM members who abstained, as a result of it felt obligated to take action after having pressured the EU-3 to omit reference to quick referral to the UNSC.
Months later, on February 4, 2006, India once more sided with the US when the IAEA Board of Governors voted to refer Iran’s non-compliance to the UNSC.
Story continues beneath this advert
“As a signatory to the NPT, Iran has the authorized proper to develop peaceable makes use of of nuclear power in line with its worldwide commitments and obligations… (However) it’s incumbent upon Iran to train these rights within the context of safeguards that it has voluntarily accepted upon its nuclear programme beneath the IAEA,” then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh instructed Parliament on February 17, 2006.
Over time, as India negotiated the nuclear cope with the US, Delhi got here out of the strain to vote in opposition to Tehran as the difficulty went to the UNSC. Sources stated that when the matter went to the UNSC, India didn’t need to take any place on Iran’s nuclear programme between 2007 and 2024.
In between, the US administration beneath President Barack Obama negotiated the JCPOA (joint complete plan of motion) with Iran in 2015 — which was a deal between P-5+1 and Iran. US President Donald Trump walked out of the JCPOA in 2017, and Iran’s nuclear programme as soon as once more got here beneath scrutiny.
India was pressured to cease oil imports from Iran, though its Chabahar port mission growth was happening. Whereas it didn’t need to take any agency place in opposition to Iran’s nuclear programme, that modified final yr when the US introduced in a decision in opposition to Iran.
Story continues beneath this advert
In June 2024, India abstained from a vote on the IAEA concerning Iran. The vote, initiated by the US, aimed to censure Iran for its nuclear programme. Whereas the decision handed, with 19 out of 35 board members voting to censure Iran, India was among the many 16 nations that abstained. This resolution mirrored India’s balancing act between its deep defence and safety relationship with Israel and its historic ties with Iran.
In September 2024, India once more abstained from voting on a decision on the IAEA Board of Governors that censured Iran for its lack of cooperation with the company’s investigations into its nuclear programme. The decision, introduced by France, the UK, and Germany (E3) together with the US, adopted an IAEA report noting Iran’s elevated uranium enrichment.
In June this yr too, India abstained on the IAEA Board of Governors’ decision strongly criticising Iran’s nuclear programme and declaring it in breach of its 1974 Complete Safeguards Settlement. This time, India’s resolution to abstain from the vote mirrored its balanced stance — recognising Iran’s proper to pursue a peaceable nuclear power programme whereas calling upon Tehran to stick to its non-proliferation commitments.
Whereas the change, from voting in opposition to to abstention, marks Delhi’s shifting positions as geopolitical alignments modified, India’s concern in regards to the Iranian nuclear programme was evident.