Opinion Ram Madhav writes: Sonia Gandhi’s criticism of government over Iran is misplaced
The Iran conflict needs to be viewed in the wider regional and geostrategic context. In times of such conflicts, it is not enough to be neutral; it is also necessary to be seen to be impartial
Sonia Gandhi’s criticism that the Indian government had abandoned “our legacy” is clearly misplaced. At the most, her article reflects the Congress party’s traditional minority politics with an eye on upcoming elections. (Illustration: Mithun Chakraborty) Senior Congress leader Sonia Gandhi penned an article earlier this week (‘Government’s silence on killing of Iran leader is not neutral, it is abdication’, IE, March 3) criticising the Indian government for not condoling the death of the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Writing that “impartiality is abandoned”, she went on to question “the direction and credibility of our foreign policy”.
The Iran conflict needs to be viewed in the wider regional and geostrategic context. In times of such conflicts, it is not enough to be neutral; it is also necessary to be seen to be impartial. That’s why on two recent occasions — the US operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, and its attack on Iran leading to a large number of casualties including that of the supreme leader — the Indian government toed the same line. It expressed “deep concern” and called for “dialogue and diplomacy”. It urged “all sides” to “exercise restraint, avoid escalation and prioritise the safety of civilians”.
India and Iran share cordial relations at the government and people level. However, due protocols, geopolitical realities and geostrategic interests cannot be sacrificed at the altar of emotions and euphoria. Iran follows a governance model unfamiliar to the rest of the world. It is an opaque model of theocracy following the ninth-century Twelver Shia tradition, according to which the 12th Imam of the Shia community, Imam Mahdi, entered into “occultation” in 869 CE and continued to guide the community. There firmed up a belief among the Shias that Imam Mahdi was kept alive by God and would stage a comeback at God’s will. Until the Imam’s return, the community was to be led by the system of Velayat-e-Faqih — the guardianship of an Islamic jurist. After the Islamic revolution in 1979, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini introduced the concept into the constitution and declared himself as the Vali-e-Faqih — the guardian jurist. Khamenei succeeded him in that post that ensured that all powers were concentrated in the hands of the supreme leader.
Sonia Gandhi’s repeated reference to Khamenei as the “head of state” is untenable given this opaqueness surrounding his status. The supreme leaders never travelled outside. But when the Iranian presidents visited other countries, they received ceremonials on par with a head of the state. Presidents — including Mohammad Khatami in 2003, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2008 and Hassan Rouhani in 2018 — have received ceremonial welcomes during their visits to India, a standard protocol for heads of state. That is the reason India sent Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri to sign the condolence book conveying the official sentiment of respect towards the departed supreme leader.
Sonia Gandhi highlighted that Iran blocked one anti-India resolution on Kashmir by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation at the UN Human Rights Council in 1994. However, the Iranian government’s stand shouldn’t be confused with that of Khamenei. On several occasions in the past 10 years, Khamenei criticised the Indian government on issues like Kashmir and the status of the Muslim community.
After the abrogation of Article 370 in J&K in 2019, Khamenei took to Twitter saying that “We’re concerned about Muslims’ situation in #Kashmir… we expect the Indian government to adopt a just policy… and prevent oppression & bullying of Muslims in the region.”
When protests broke out in Delhi on the issue of the CAA in 2020, Khamenei again used a tweet to blame India for the “massacre” of Muslims. “The hearts of Muslims all over the world are grieving over the massacre of Muslims in India… [The Indian government] should stop the massacre of Muslims,” he said. The Indian government should “confront extremist Hindus & their parties & stop the massacre of Muslims”, he added. In yet another tweet in 2024, Khamenei equated India with Gaza and Myanmar and said that “We cannot consider ourselves to be Muslim if we are oblivious to the suffering that a Muslim is enduring in #Myanmar, #Gaza, #India”.
India called those utterances interference in its internal matters and “misinformed and unacceptable”. Deploring the remarks, the External Affairs Ministry bluntly said, “Countries commenting on minorities are advised to look at their own record before making any observation about others.” Khamenei also accused Saudi Arabia of engaging in “genocide” in 2015, eliciting a strong reaction from the Saudi government. Similarly, his repeated calls for “death to America” and “death to Israel”, too, elicited contempt. Sadly, such utterances didn’t endear him to many. In the end, his death went without condolence from G7 countries, several Islamic countries and many others.
Notwithstanding all this, the Government of India always maintained cordial relations with the Government of Iran. When then-president Ebrahim Raisi died in a helicopter crash in 2024, India announced one-day state mourning. Prime Minister Narendra Modi posted a condolence message stating that he was saddened and shocked and that “India stands with Iran in this time of sorrow”.
Sonia Gandhi’s criticism that the Indian government had abandoned “our legacy” is clearly misplaced. At the most, her article reflects the Congress party’s traditional minority politics with an eye on upcoming elections.
The writer, president, India Foundation, is with the BJP
Share
