New Delhi: Congress Parliamentary Get together chairperson Sonia Gandhi has berated the Centre over its “uncritical silence” on the joint US-Israel assault on Iran and the killing of its Supreme Chief, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, calling it an “abdication” and an “abandonment of our legacy”.

In a column in The Indian Specific printed Tuesday, she underlined that New Delhi’s “reticence” in calling out the US and Israel raises “critical doubts” in regards to the path and credibility of Indian overseas coverage, which is especially troubling in view of India’s “civilisational and strategic” ties with Iran.

“India should be morally clear. We should always have the braveness to talk plainly in defence of worldwide regulation and human lives. Our overseas coverage is rooted in sovereignty and the peaceable decision of disputes—and it should stay constant. PM Modi should communicate up. Does he help the assassination of a head of state as a solution to outline the world order? Silence now diminishes India’s standing on the planet,” he wrote on X.

Escalating hostilities between the US, Israel and Iran are pushing a fragile area towards wider battle. Crores of individuals, together with practically a crore Indians, face uncertainty.

Whereas safety considerations are actual, assaults that violate sovereignty will solely worsen the…

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) March 3, 2026

However Rahul’s considerably calibrated formulation, from the very outset of the newest spherical of battle, which has intensified alarmingly over the previous few days, the Congress has largely thrown its help behind Iran. It has labelled US-Israel’s actions as “imperialist” and basically “incompatible” with a rules-based worldwide order.

The social gathering has additionally accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of “genuflecting” earlier than US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In accordance with the social gathering, India’s muted response marks a pointy departure from its conventional posture of strategic autonomy and principled non-alignment. But the second carries a definite sense of historic irony. 20 years in the past, the roles have been dramatically reversed.

It was on 24 September, 2005 that India had, for the primary time, aligned with the western bloc in voting towards Iran on the Worldwide Atomic Power Company (IAEA), the worldwide nuclear watchdog. The decision adopted that day acknowledged that Tehran’s nuclear actions raised questions that have been “inside the competence of the Safety Council”.

The BJP, then within the Opposition, had accused the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) authorities of appearing below exterior stress, because the vote had coincided with the early levels of New Delhi’s negotiations with Washington over a landmark civil nuclear settlement.

The then Rajya Sabha Chief of Opposition Jaswant Singh had issued a strongly worded assertion, flagging what he described as a “countrywide impression” that the UPA authorities had “surreptitiously engaged in a serious recast of coverage” instantly affecting India’s nationwide safety.

“There’s a sturdy perception, together with amongst UPA alliance companions, that this has been completed below worldwide stress, significantly of the US; that India, as a everlasting member of the IAEA Board, has merely adopted the initiative of others, like that of the EU-3 (UK, France, Germany), and that the UPA authorities has effected this main coverage shift on the quiet, with out satisfactory democratic consultations,” Singh had mentioned in his assertion.

The Manmohan Singh authorities had defended its transfer, sustaining that it had impressed upon the western bloc to not transfer the matter instantly to the United Nations Safety Council (UNSC), and to permit it to stay inside the IAEA framework, thereby shopping for time for Tehran to reply.

Nevertheless, months later, on 4 February, 2006, India had as soon as once more aligned with the western powers in supporting an IAEA decision that referred the matter to the UNSC. The decision had expressed a “insecurity in Iran’s intentions in in search of to develop a fissile materials manufacturing functionality towards the background of Iran’s report on safeguards”.

Talking in Parliament, PM Singh had defended his authorities’s place, flagging Iran’s use of centrifuges “imported from third international locations”, and including that the supply of such clandestine proliferation of delicate applied sciences “lies in our personal neighbourhood”—an obvious reference to Pakistan.

“This august Home, Sir, I imagine, will agree that India can not afford to show a blind eye to the safety implications of such proliferation actions. The goals of upholding Iran’s rights and obligations and addressing our safety considerations arising from proliferation actions in our prolonged neighbourhood have formed our place,” he had mentioned.

However the BJP had been extra unsparing this time. In a scathing assertion, Jaswant Singh had described it as a “nationally humiliating expertise” for the nation to witness the way through which the UPA authorities and its Left allies had “permitted themselves to be hustled and pressurised into voting in a specific method”.

“This has rightly however sadly generated an impression that India has surrendered its sovereign proper to take choices on problems with nationwide significance. The Authorities of India and its allies, the Communists, are chargeable for this shoddy state of affairs. Statements popping out of the US Congress, different decision-makers within the US, and the US ambassador to Delhi threatening India have heightened suspicion that the US needs to ascertain a hegemonistic relationship with India, not that of two sovereign equals,” Jaswant Singh, who had earlier served as exterior affairs minister within the Vajpayee Cupboard, had mentioned.

On 27 November, 2009, the IAEA had adopted one more decision, spearheaded by the US, on Iran’s nuclear programme. India had voted in favour of that decision as nicely. It known as on Iran to “instantly” droop the development of a brand new uranium enrichment facility within the nation’s Qom province.

The decision had famous with “critical concern” that Iran had constructed the enrichment facility at Qom in breach of its obligation to droop all enrichment-related actions. It had additional noticed that Iran’s failure to inform the IAEA of the brand new facility till September 2009 was “inconsistent with its obligations below the Subsidiary Preparations to its Safeguards Settlement”, thereby deepening worldwide scrutiny of Tehran’s nuclear intentions.

(Edited by Mannat Chugh)

---

Additionally Learn: BJP condemns anti-UAE posts by Indians amid Iran battle, days after jibe by personal MP Nishikant Dubey

---