(This article is part of the View From India newsletter curated by The Hindu’s foreign affairs experts. To get the newsletter in your inbox every Monday, subscribe here.)
When the U.S. and Israel launched their war on Iran on February 28, U.S. President Donald Trump said overthrowing the Iranian government was his objective, and told Iranians their freedom was in their hands. The Iranian government did not just survive the initial blow, but retaliated with missile and drone attacks at Israel and across the Persian Gulf, targeting American bases in the region. The U.S. and Israel continued their air strikes, and Iran kept retaliating. Three weeks later, neither side seems interested in taking an off ramp.
Mr. Trump has declared victory several times over the past week. He said the U.S. was very close to meeting its military objectives such as destroying Iran’s navy, air force and missile capabilities. Both the Pentagon and the Israel Defence Forces had earlier claimed that they had targeted most of Iran’s missile launchers. But despite such claims, Iran continued to launch missiles and drones. Last week, Israel attacked Iran’s South Pars gas field, and Tehran retaliated by targeting energy facilities in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait and Israel. After the Iranian retaliation, Mr. Trump distanced himself from the South Pars attack, saying Israel would not target the Iranian oil field again, and warned Iran against attacking Qatar’s gas facilities any more. Israel then struck Iran’s Natanz nuclear plant. In response, Iranian missiles targeted Dimona, which hosts Israel’s nuclear facilities.
Mr. Trump faces a dilemma here. Oil and gas prices are rising. A prolonged war, which is unpopular at home, could come with a political cost. He claimed victory several times, but Iran refused to budge and is still firing. So the claims of dismantling Iran’s capabilities sound hollow. A bigger challenge is the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime chokepoint which the Iranians have effectively shut after the war broke out. Mr. Trump earlier sought help from his allies in Europe and Asia, as well as China to open the Strait. While no country was willing to join his war, he said the U.S. did not want anybody’s help. And then, in another social media post, he called America’s NATO allies “cowards” for not sending help.
It now increasingly looks like reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before the war broke out, has become the main objective of the ongoing war effort. The U.S. media reported that the Trump administration is sending additional marines to West Asia in possible preparation for a ground offensive. On March 23, Mr. Trump threatened to bomb Iran’s power plants unless the Strait is opened in 48 hours. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has responded saying any attack on Iran’s power facilities would trigger immediate retaliation against power plants across the Persian Gulf. In the face of Iran’s threats, Mr. Trump said on Monday that he would halt attacks on Iran’s power facilities for five days.
India’s response
This is worrying for the global economy, particularly for India which is dependent on imports to meet most of its energy requirements. Prime Minister Narendra Modi on March 21 spoke with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and urged for “freedom of navigation”, indicating India’s growing concern over disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz. Mr. Pezeshkian, on his part, referred to the current presidency of India in the BRICS and said it should play an “independent role” in bringing the attacks by the U.S. and Israel to a “halt”. India’s position since the war broke out has triggered intense debates in the country. New Delhi condemned Iran’s attacks on Gulf states, but not the strikes by the United States and Israel on Iran, including the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, on February 28. India also co-sponsored a UN Security Council resolution that only condemned strikes by Iran on its neighbours. But the government is now emphasising the need to avoid attacking civilian infrastructure “across the region”. Chinmaya R. Gharekhan, a former ambassador and expert on West Asia, writes in The Hindu that New Delhi’s Iran policy may be influenced by U.S.–Israel dynamics in the war.
The Top Five
1. Tucker Carlson | Voice of America
The American conservative commentator, who says his worldview is shaped by his Christian faith, has emerged as one of the most influential critics of U.S. interventionist foreign policy, Washington’s support for Tel Aviv, and, more specifically, Israel’s war in Palestine and the ongoing U.S.-Israel attack on Iran, writes Varghese K. George.
2. Iran and the politics of martyrdom
By assassinating Khamenei, Larijani and others, the U.S. and Israel have elevated them, in the eyes of their supporters, to a higher realm of martyrdom, writes Stanly Johny
3. Sri Lanka looks to India-backed Trincomalee project amid energy crisis
Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath terms redevelopment of storage wells the ‘permanent solution’ to managing energy crisis, reports Meera Srinivasan.
4. South Pars | Same field, two fates
An Israeli attack on a gas field straddling the Persian Gulf and Iran’s counterstrikes have laid bare how fragile the world’s energy security really is, writes V. Nivedita.
5. Blockade on Cuba: Asphyxiating an island nation
Cuba’s dependence on oil is structural: it accounts for 83% of total power generation, while oil products make up 56% of total energy consumption by industry, transport, agriculture, and households, writes Srinivasan Ramani.
