National Interest over Ideology: India’s abstention from Gaza resolution indicates shift in policy

However, observers point out that India’s abstention at the UN is not new and it reflects that in Indian foreign policy, national interest now trumps ideology.

India’s decision to abstain from a UN resolution seeking a 'humanitarian truce’ in the Gaza conflict reflects how national interest triumphs over ideology in foreign policy.

The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) passed a resolution on Friday that sought `humanitarian truce’ and protection of civilians in the Gaza strip. It was supported by 120 countries, including 20 Arab nations and much of the global south. The United States and Israel were among the 14 countries that rejected it. India was among the 45 that abstained.

The Indian opposition slammed the government’s stand. Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi said she was “shocked” and “amazed” at the lack of moral courage on India’s part. The left parties felt India had become a “subordinate ally” of the US.

In the explanatory note on its vote, India strongly criticised the October 7 attack of Hamas and said terrorism was a malignancy that knew no “borders, nationality, or race.” It also called for the immediate release of the hostages taken by Hamas.

But the note also spoke about the deteriorating humanitarian situation, rising civilian casualties, and India’s commitment to creating a situation that allows a Palestine state to live in peace alongside Israel.

Related stories

Pranay Sharma

Contributor|Moneycontrol

• 
  Why Modi’s first state visit to the US has so much riding on it
• 
  India, Egypt set to ratify strategic partnership during Modi’s visit to Cairo
• 
  India’s neutral stance on China disappoints American commentator

Many former Indian diplomats were also disappointed with India’s stand. Some of them linked it with  Qatar’s decision to award the death penalty to eight former Indian naval officers for alleged espionage.

However, observers point out that India’s abstention at the UN is not new and it reflects that in Indian foreign policy, national interest now trumps ideology. The conflict between the two  demands has been debated by Indian policymakers even in the past. India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, had on several occasions argued in favour of giving national interest top priority when it clashed with one’s ideology.

Past abstentions

Observers say India has also abstained on most resolutions against Russia , even though it did not condone its invasion of Ukraine. India’s strong and close strategic partnership with Moscow was the main factor that guided New Delhi’s decision.

It is also argued that as India has evolved into a stronger country with deepened ties with many nations in the west and elsewhere, it has stressed more on national interest than ideology.

Over the years, India’s relations with Israel have become much stronger. It is a close strategic partner of India’s and they cooperate on a wide range of issues, from defence and security, to agriculture and information technology.

Besides, India has been a strong campaigner against terrorism, since it has been a victim of terrorism for years. Therefore, it had to support Israel when it faced a “terror” attack from Hamas. But so far, India has not designated Hamas a terrorist organisation.

India has also been mindful of Arab sensitivities and tried to balance its stand on Palestine by stressing on a “two-nation” solution, and sending medicines and relief materials to the Palestinian Authority.

The Gulf countries, where over nine million Indians live and work and which is the main source of energy for India, are strategically very important for India.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has strong personal relations with the Gulf and Arab leaders, and has been in touch with them during the conflict.

Naval officers in the dock

The case of eight former Indian naval officers, who were working on a submarine project for a private firm in Qatar and were recently given the death sentence for spying, poses a challenge for Indian diplomacy.

They were arrested and taken into custody nearly eight months back, and Indian officials have been in touch with them and the Qatari leaders to keep themselves apprised of the developments. However, the death sentence seemed to have come as a shock for the Indian establishment. The Qatari court’s ruling came at a time when Modi had strongly criticised Hamas.

Some former diplomats saw a link between the two developments. But others who have served in the Gulf ruled out any connection between the two.

They acknowledged that Indian diplomats will have to handle the Qatar situation with care to bring back the convicted former naval officers to India.

India and Qatar signed an agreement in 2015 on the “Transfer of Convicted Prisoners,” which allows convicted prisoners in each other’s country to be sent back to their home country.

Qatar is an important partner of India and its largest supplier of liquefied natural gas. Of the total 19.5 tonnes of LNG India imported in 2023, 10.74 million tonnes, or 55 percent,  was from Qatar. Besides, over 7,00,00 Indians work and live there.

Modi had visited Qatar in 2019 and held wide-ranging talks with the leadership in Doha, including with the Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani.

The Qatari royals attach a lot of importance to their relations with India, and this allows India to seek not only a judicial review, but also a royal pardon. However, Indian diplomats are worried that the strong anti-Qatar campaign on social media could jeopardise the ongoing negotiations.

If the Emir grants the royal pardon, the convicted men could be brought to the country to serve out their sentence.