US seeks to keep regional powers, RIC - Russia, India and China "weakened" :::: The Iran war must be also analyzed through this prism !!

There must be merits and strengths. But the formation RIC -- Russia, India and China have problem areas too. 

The three countries reacted differently to the Hamas attack on Israel in October 2023, the subsequent war in Gaza, and the 12-day war between Israel and Iran in June 2024. 

These differences have been evident at the BRICS and SCO forums, hindering the consensus required for joint statements.  

The Russia-India-China (RIC) dialogue was initiated in the late 1990s by Russia to combat what it perceived as a U.S.-dominated unipolar world. 

However, the RIC has seen waning cohesion due to internal tensions (specifically border issues between India and China) and Russia's intense focus on the war in Ukraine, leading some to consider it a "closed chapter" or at least a less effective forum. 

There is another element Israel’s developing ties with RIC countries (specifically India and Russia) are viewed as a way to hedge against potential U.S. military or economic withdrawal from the Middle East. 

But the 'RIC factor' has a spin. It allows Israel to project a more independent foreign policy, enabling it to act against Iran or regional threats even when U.S. administrations are cautious.  

The US seeks to preserve its global hegemony by keeping emerging and regional powers, - these RIC members weakened through economic means. Hence, it is opposed to connectivity projects such as the Chinese-led Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the Russian-backed INSTC, and the Indian-financed Chabahar Port project.  

It may be argued that Washington pressurised India into exiting the Chabahar Port project shortly before the outbreak of the war. The ongoing war will be a big time global game-changer of the new century. 

It goes without stating that Iran is a great geopolitical prize for any great power, and hence the Americans are seeking to seize the prize.

At the same time, for geo-political reasons; Washington has paved the way for Israel’s regional hegemony.  

The complexities have many shades. Three RIC member nations are involved in negotiations with the Trump administration, but there is little alignment in their positions.

India and China are navigating trade talks to sustain economic ties but have to 'prevent relations' from deteriorating further.  Moscow at times is against Washington and at times want to seek to appease Trump to secure favourable outcomes vis-a-vis Ukraine.  

In more ways than one; Moscow, New Delhi, and Beijing could cooperate in various geographies -- Central Asia, Arctic and the Russian Far East. The areas of cooperation could be from energy and agriculture to investment and transport/infra connectivity. 

But this would require a greater degree of trust between India and China and it's not on the table always. Moreover, there is 'sanction' against Russia and this complicates operation and cooperation often.  

But in geo-politics. ifs and buts make a lot of difference. 

A US failure in Iran, after similar experiences in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, could erode US prestige and credibility.

In turn; this would strengthen the conception of the Russian- and Chinese-backed multipolar world order instead of its own unipolar world order. 

Look how things have evolved. Those who tried new experiments -- benefited mostly.  

In the 1990s; China was still wary of a suspected US role in the Tiananmen incident, and hence it opted for a better relationship with both Russia and India. 

India was open to the idea of 'fighting' the unipolor world of the 1990s. New Delhi under Vajpayee especially was keen to protect its strategic autonomy, exercised in instances such as resisting pressure to accept the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, CTBT. 

On the other hand; in response to US unipolarity -- the concept of the RIC as a platform for a doctrine of multipolarity was born. Then Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov favoured Russia to challenge perceived American efforts to shape its post-Soviet future. 

But India went a step further and rightly so on merits. It made common cause with the US, Australia and Japan in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue. 

After this ongoing battle; a few more phases of transitions are on cards. Israel will gain importance and so will be I2U2. 

ends 

Red Square- Moscow - AFP snap (social media) 

 

Iran under Khamenei didn't just fund and arm Assad's regime, it was a key part of Syrian machine that murdered 500,000 Sunni Muslims

Iran, under Khamenei, is largely responsible for the actual genocide of half a million Sunni Muslims in Syria, as well as the displacement of several million others.  

Destroying the Sunnis in Syria was part of Iran’s master plan — hatched by General Qasem Soleimani, who was assassinated in January 2020 — for creating a Shiite arc that stretches from Iran through Lebanon. 

Iran actually sent many of its top officers to command troops in Syria while the mass murder of Syrian civilians was going full force. 

Ten Iranian brigadier generals died in combat in Syria during eight years of fighting. 

Motorists drive their vehicles past a billboard depicting Iran's then-supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as displayed in the center of Tehran's Valiasr Square on July 13, 2025. (Photo by ATTA KENARE / AFP)  (Times of Israel) 

Ignoring Iran’s role in the Syrian genocide is convenient for those who wish to brand the United States’ and Israel’s attack on the regime as immoral and illegal.  The Ayatollah “sent militia forces into Syria to support President Bashar al-Assad against Western backed rebels and Sunni jihadists.” 

Help for Assad against jihadis sounds reasonable. But the majority of Sunni Muslim deaths in Syria were civilians or political prisoners. 

According to a 2018 report by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, 104,000 political prisoners were executed in cold blood by the regime of Bashar al-Assad. In 2017, Amnesty International published a report which stated that between 2011 and 2015 the Syrian government had murdered an estimated 13,000 people, mostly civilians.  

The conflict in Syria was not simply a civil war between opposing armed forces. 

What began as an uprising against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime had devolved into a violent struggle between local, national, regional, and international forces. The Syrian government, extremist groups, and outside actors have perpetrated mass atrocities against civilians as a systematic strategy of war.  

Khamenei had absolute power and the final say in Iran’s future, whether in regard to its controversial nuclear programme or detente with the west. 

He was not only commander-in-chief of the Iranian armed forces, which includes the regular artesh (army) and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), but also headed the “axis of resistance” – an anti-western and anti-Israel alliance.

This was made up of Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip, Shia militias in Iraq, the Houthi rebels eventually occupying western Yemen, and the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria.

Thus his rule had a direct impact on much of the region, and under his leadership the Islamic Republic of Iran became one of the world’s biggest state sponsors of terrorism. 

Flags of India, Israel, US and UAE : I2U2

Additional Info :  

With Hassan Rouhani as president (2013-21), Iran temporarily came out of isolation. 

After years of negotiations with world powers, in 2015 it signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to curb its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief. The deal would not have been possible without Khamenei’s signalling of “heroic flexibility”.

* Khamenei amassed control of bonyads (charitable foundations) worth tens of billions of US dollars.

** Under his rule Iran was marred by systemic corruption, mismanagement and rising repression. At home there was deeply felt anger and resentment towards him and the clerical establishment.

ends 

"Tehran has repeatedly bathed in American blood" :::: Trump failed to explain the cause of the War .... Does Operation Epic Fury have better prospects ??

During a speech at the opening session of the UN General Assembly in 2007; Iran calls the dispute over its nuclear program “closed” and sad Tehran will disregard Security Council resolutions calling on the country to halt uranium enrichment. 

At a press conference afterward, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the Israeli government an “illegal Zionist regime.” A U.S. National Intelligence Estimate also found that 'Iran ended its nuclear arms program' in 2003 but continued to enrich uranium.

From the outset - it's said - since 1979; the Islamic Republic of Iran has made murdering Americans amongst its highest priorities. 

As critics assail Donald Trump for the supposed 'lawlessness' of the newly revived military conflict; it is important to address the moral and legal case of action first. This becomes important no doubt but a question should also be asked. Can the Iran Govt under Khamenei be held responsible for the deaths of more Americans than any other conflict(s) in the past 50 years.  

Few references -- 

* More than 200 Marines killed by Hezbollah in the 1983 Beirut bombing 

** Six hundred Anerican service members killed by Iran-backed citizens in Iraq. A White House refrain thus can be that : -- Under the principle of self - defence, action taken against a regime (Tehran) that has killed so many of citizens is legitimate. Thus Gerad Baker writes in 'Wall Street Journal' -- "It would have been preferable if Mr Trump had spent more time in the past few weeks explaining the case (read - of the war) to the American people". 

He also argues  -- If the regime change does not come now, what kind of regime survives !! -- Leaderless, impoverished, isolated, besieged ....

There's another element to the background cause for the war. Khamenei almost taunted Donald Trump. While Tehran allegedly smuggled a billion dollars to Hezbollah between Jan and Oct 2025; it offered only $7 (dollars) a month to own citizens. Khamenei oversaw a rule that killed 32,000 street protesters in just two days. The astonishing scale guaranteed the confrontation. 

"The people of Iran had been driven to the streets by economic immiseration, and the regime had no answer but gunfire," says another article in Wall Street Journal. 

In 2025-26; pretending that June's 12-day war had changed nothing only made a 'sequel' more likely. The truth is that Khamenei's own errors had already brought about the collapse of Iran's deterrence. 

BJP names Nitin Nabin, Rahul Sinha for Rajya Sabha polls :::: Gaurav Gogoi to make beginning in Assembly polls : To contest from Jorhat, he may be named Assam chief ministerial face too

The Congress party has released its first list of 42 candidates for the Assam Assembly polls. 

Party’s State unit president and sitting MP, Gaurav Gogoi will contest the Assembly polls from the Jorhat seat. 

This marks Gogoi’s debut in a state Assembly contest, and his candidature has intensified speculation that he could be projected as the party’s chief ministerial candidate.

Deputy leader of Congress in Lok Sabha; he is known as a close and trusted aide of Rahul Gandhi. His father Late Tarun Gogoi was a Congress veteran and a chief minister for 15 years. He was ousted in 2016 assembly polls. Gaurav is MP from Jorhat parliamentary constituency as well.

 

The Congress party’s leader in the Assam assembly, Debabrata Saikia, will fight the polls from the Nazira seat. 

Former Rajya Sabha MP Ripun Bora has been fielded from Barchalla. 

Mira Borthakur Goswami is the party candidate from Dispur, and Indraneel Pegu is from the Majuli constituency. 

Among other significant names, Mahananda Sarkar has been nominated from Barpeta, Zakaria Ahmed from Karimganj North, and Pranti Phukan from Naharkatia.

The first list also sets the stage for a potentially keen contest in Bihpuria, where Congress has named Narayan Bhuyan as its candidate. 

The seat could see a high-profile fight if the BJP fields former APCC chief Bhupen Bora, who recently switched to the saffron party. 

Bhuyan’s candidature positions him as Congress’s challenger in what may become one of the closely watched contests in Upper Assam. 

The Congress first list of candidates came amid reported strain in seat-sharing negotiations between Congress and its potential ally Raijor Dal. 

The alliance talks are understood to be hinging on a few seats with both sides holding their ground while reiterating their commitment to an understanding.

BJP fields national president Nitin Nabin for Upper House of Parliament from his native state Bihar.

Rahul Sinha is party candidate for Rajya Sabha from West Bengal,

From Odisha, BJP's candidates for Rajya Sabha polls will be state BJP president Manmohan Samal and Sujeet Kumar.

Rahul Sinha is a former Bengal unit president. 

The list was released by Arun Singh, national general secretary and in-charge of the party headquarters.

The central election committee of the Lotus party finalised the candidates. 

The Rajya Sabha biennial elections 2026 are expected to witness keen contests in several states, particularly where numbers are tight. 

In Bihar, the arithmetic and the possibility of an expanded NDA lineup have already added an element of suspense.

From Assam, the party has nominated Terash Gowalla and Jogen Mohan.

Haryana will see Sanjay Bhatia contesting on the BJP ticket.

In Chhattisgarh, Laxmi Verma has been declared the party’s candidate.

Laxmi Verma's announcement is being seen as a clear endorsement of Chief Minister Vishnu Dev Sai's preference.

Nitin Nabin is currently an MLA from the Bankipur Assembly constituency. With his move to the Rajya Sabha, he will have to resign from the Assembly seat, making a by-election in Bankipur inevitable.

He belongs to the Kayastha community and is considered an important organisational face in the state unit.

The second nominee, Shivesh Kumar, comes from a Scheduled Caste background. A former MLA, he was fielded by the party from the Sasaram Lok Sabha seat in 2024 but lost the election. He is a former IAS officer and the son of former BJP MP Munilal Ram.

The announcement has also triggered fresh speculation around Upendra Kushwaha. With the BJP deciding to field two of its own candidates from Bihar, questions remain whether Kushwaha will emerge as a fifth NDA nominee. If that happens, securing the required number of MLAs could prove challenging, potentially setting up a contest with an RJD candidate.

ends 

Middle East conflict is not only a military confrontation; — it's a geopolitical gamble :::: And the winner is Benjamin Netanyahu (courtesy - The Raisina Hills)

By - Nirendra Dev 

 Israel’s growing embrace of militarism has not occurred in isolation. It has evolved alongside rapid economic expansion and the extraordinary rise of the country’s high-tech military ecosystem. Over the past three decades, Israel has transformed itself into a global hub of defence innovation, cyber warfare capability, and advanced intelligence operations. 

..... the conflict signals a turning point .... !!

Many Israeli voters credit Benjamin Netanyahu for presiding over both economic growth and military modernisation, strengthening his political standing during periods of crisis.

Middle East Chaos: A War for Benjamin Netanyahu 

— it is a calculated geopolitical gamble reshaping global power equations. As tensions escalate, Benjamin Netanyahu appears poised to emerge politically stronger both at home and abroad. 

War is always a gamble, but in modern geopolitics it is rarely reckless; more often, it is a calculated gamble shaped by political ambition, strategic opportunity, and technological superiority. 

The ongoing Middle East conflict appears to demonstrate precisely that dynamic, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu emerging as one of its central political beneficiaries. 

For Netanyahu, the war presents two clear potential advantages: delivering a decisive strategic blow to Iran and reshaping domestic political fortunes ahead of elections. In his political calculus, the strategic and electoral dimensions are inseparable. Military success reinforces political legitimacy.

Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump appears more than satisfied with the shifting geopolitical landscape. The death of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei represents a major setback not only for Tehran but also for Russia’s global network of allies.

Across different regions, Moscow’s partners have faced mounting instability. Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro, long aligned with Russia, has reportedly been captured, while Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad — another Russian client — was forced to flee Syria following the collapse of his military in 2025. Against this backdrop, Trump has even hinted at the possibility of a “friendly takeover” of another Russian ally, Cuba, signalling an increasingly assertive American posture.

Yet while global attention remains fixed on Trump, arguably the most consequential figure of the moment is Netanyahu himself. 

Having overseen Israel’s economic expansion and military-technology boom for decades, he now stands positioned to translate wartime developments into political consolidation.  

Both Trump and Netanyahu appear to share a broader worldview — one that prioritises military superiority, targeted assassinations, and sustained strategic pressure over traditional diplomacy, negotiations, and long-term treaty frameworks. 

The assassination of Khamenei, widely viewed as a demonstration of combined military and intelligence capability, underscores this shift.

In contrast, earlier peace agreements with Jordan and Egypt — once celebrated milestones of Middle East diplomacy — receive comparatively little emphasis in contemporary Israeli political discourse. 

Yet their enduring importance became evident during the current conflict, when those countries provided critical transit routes for Israelis stranded abroad after civilian airspace closures.

The war has also revealed emerging rules of twenty-first century geopolitics: strained alliances, increasingly autonomous militaries, and a renewed willingness in Washington to contemplate regime change. Trump’s strategic objectives may once again include political transformation in adversarial states — an ambition historically associated with earlier US administrations but now resurfacing with renewed intensity. 

Netanyahu, too, appears increasingly aligned with such thinking.

The targeting of Iran’s supreme leadership marks a psychological and strategic milestone for Israel’s leadership. However, such actions risk triggering prolonged regional instability, potentially dragging the Middle East into an unpredictable and extended confrontation with global consequences. Critics argue that while chaos may weaken adversaries, Israel could emerge as the primary strategic beneficiary.

For Trump, the conflict may also create diplomatic opportunities. His administration could pursue a “new deal” with Iran — one designed to replace the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), from which he withdrew in 2018. A revised agreement without expiration clauses and featuring stricter monitoring mechanisms would allow Trump to claim negotiation of a stronger and more permanent framework.

Washington may additionally seek credit for a historic trade arrangement with the oil-rich Islamic Republic, reframing confrontation as leverage for economic diplomacy.

Another political dimension concerns Netanyahu’s ongoing corruption trial. Reports suggest Trump has privately encouraged consideration of a pre-emptive pardon by Israel’s president. Should the war conclude in a manner perceived as strategic victory by Washington and Tel Aviv, political pressure for such a move could intensify. Netanyahu may consequently enter the expected October 2026 elections significantly strengthened.

Following Khamenei’s killing, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reportedly contacted Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov seeking support. Moscow’s response, however, remained limited to strong statements advocating peaceful resolution under international law — a reaction that reportedly failed to impress Trump.

Regional dynamics further complicate the picture. 

Gulf nations publicly warned against military escalation, with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates stating they would not permit the use of their airspace for strikes. Yet reports indicated a more complex reality: while publicly opposing military action, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman allegedly held multiple private conversations with Trump advocating intervention.  

Taken together, the conflict signals a turning point. Military power, technological dominance, and political calculation increasingly shape global diplomacy. War remains a gamble — but for leaders like Netanyahu and Trump, it is one undertaken with carefully measured expectations of strategic and political reward.

Courtesy - The Raisina Hills 

ends 

Oh Governor !! Bhalla 'plays a safe Babu', a conformist :::: "Naga Peace talk stands at a historical hinge -- Rebuilding and Mourning at the Same Moment"

The Nagaland Assembly has yet again taken up the issue of Peace Talks. 

Is this the Nagaland everyone want?

Participating in the debate on Governor Ajay Bhalla's address, NPF legislator Küzholüzo (Azo) Nienü has sought to caution himself and his friends about the "hidden agenda" of the younger generation - Gen Z !! 

Let us assume that the Honourable MLA is right. 

In the meantime a statement has come from a newly floated 'The Concern Naga Forum of Nagaland (CNFN)'. Reportedly it comprises mostly retired and semi-retired individuals. 

The statement says:

"Today, the double talk and the despoiler game being played by the Govt. of Nagaland in its facilitation, the lackadaisical attitude of NSCN(IM) towards its own Framework Agreement and the lack of political will on the part of the Govt of India have collectively put the fate of the negotiations in jeopardy".  

So Mr Azo may actually have to revisit his idea about 'hidden agenda'. 

The Forum also says among other things -- that the Naga peace talks have been  "hijacked by a few vested interest who have created a make-believe world for themselves inflicting an unbearable burden on the people".  Such references make Azo's eloquent words made on the floor of the Assembly more 'relevant'. 

The extortion is not only a menace, says Phek legislator and also a former Home Minister. He adds that there is poor implementation of the words uttered by the Governor in his address to the state assembly vis-a-vis taxations and extortion. 

The bitter truth is the syndicate raj is having a gala time and New Delhi mandarins seem very little concerned about the state of affairs. This also makes us convinced that the naming of the new Forum and putting the word 'Concern' as a pre-fix is a good idea. 

 

A few retired Babus with creative minds have rightly named the forum as such. Babudom is a process; it has certain level of innovation. But it is also a disease. 

Look at the address delivered by a former Union Home Secretary. He is parroting the phrase of a discredited regime in Kohima. Well, given Constitutional positioning - an incumbent Governor has limitations. Still; given the context of Naga polity - one did/could expect 'bigger roles'  for a Governor at Kohima's Lok Sewa Bhavan.

The name of the complex is no longer 'Raj' --- but the colonial tendency to be 'right' and authoritative remains even as one is on an utterly wrong path.

How ?

On Jan 17, 2020 and also Feb 13, 2021 - a man called R N Ravi had spoken about the closure of the Naga peace negotiations. So demand of a so-called political interlocutor at this juncture is both a childish stance punctuated with the mischief of confused mind and the motto to delaying things. 

The assembly on both the occasions had passed the Motion of Thanks to Governor's address. That means the legislators had endorsed what the Governor had said !!

Love for Power continues ... 'absolute power'. Now time to prepare grounds for the children !! And the victims do not seem to realise that the menacing grip it has created for Mr Azo and his beloved leaders and the state Govt.

To make things understand better - here are a few quotes from Azo on the floor of the assembly : 

"I believe there is a Solution to every problem. 

"On Naga political issue, we should be very careful about our utterances."

"I am requesting the members... do not take the criticism negatively. Criticism does not mean, we are wrong, we are defeated. It means we are doing something. We are progressing" .  

 

Azo Nienu : Compelled to make a few candid observations 

The Representation of 14 Tribes of Nagaland had submitted to the Prime Minister dated 17th December 2019, Quote “We have, time and again, made clear that we will not accept mere population integration without territorial integration; hence the concept of Pan-Naga Hoho (PNH) with sweeping powers and that too through an act of Parliament cannot be accepted by us".  

Thus yet again; MLA Azo will have to push back and re-examine what he has been tried to speak or probably was asked to highlight on the floor of the assembly.  

In a significant development and borne out of total frustration due to 'delay' in achieving the Naga political solution, Naga youths responded to the call to come together and band under the platform “Fed-Up Nagas”.

They want 'Naga solution' from the two preliminary pacts - Framework Agreement on August 3, 2015 with NSCN (I-M) and Agreed Position on November 17, 2017 with WC/NNPGs.  

The FNTA has been agreed upon essentially to address the lack of developments and related issues of eastern Nagaland. Left to legislator Azo -- his home district Phek too has faced 'negligence'.  

"I blame myself," Azo admits candidly. All these have been happening when the tenure of A K Mishra as advisor, northeast to the Home Ministrt, has come to an end. 

Complexities remain. 

A crossroads is a physical intersection where two or more roads meet, requiring caution and adherence to traffic signals. Figuratively, as we know such things represent a critical point of decision making.  

Of course, bloggers who write a piece of two 'in advance' against the backdrop of a highly charged and volatile situations may always run the risk of having to eat own words.   

In modern journalism -- we may call it perils of sticking the neck out.  

However, there is a consolation. One is not alone. After long spell of indifference; a bunch of young people are saying they are 'fed up'. Slowly things may move the Gandhian way --- the well known 'non cooperation'. 

Even the NNPGs -- who have presence in good numbers these days - will have to now develop a spirit of self-sacrifice in order to achieve something big.

In politics – there is no moral authority to speak on divisions, suspicion and hate. 

ends 

Congress-led UPA voted three times against Iran :::: New Delhi has good reasons not to remember deceased Iranian Supreme leader Khamenei as a 'friend'

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei used the hashtag 'Indian Muslims in Danger' in 2020. This was on the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) row. He had bluntly interfered in India's internal affairs, calling to confront 'extremist Hindus' and also described the communal riots as a massacre of Muslims that (unfounded claims) threatened India with isolation from the world of Islam. 

In 2017, Iran's Supreme Leader, had called on the Muslim world to mobilise support for what he described as 'oppressed Muslims of Kashmir'.  

So in circa 2026 -- when Iran is cornered and militarily under attack by India's two key strategic partners the US and Israel --- New Delhi has good reasons not to remember the deceased Iranian leader as a 'friend'. 

These were multiple other moments when he left the Modi Govt provoked and anguished.

He targeted New Delhi between 2019 (abrogation of Article 370) to 2024 (comparing India to Gaza).

For records, each time the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) had summoned the Iranian envoy and registered the formal protest. 

In September 2024, Khamenei placed India alongside Gaza in a tweet.

And the MEA responded calling such reference as "misinformed and unacceptable." 

Come to think of it; India has to depend on Smart Diplomacy. The so-called equi-distance is a misnomer and outdated phenomenon in the contemporary setting. 

Iran is now involved in military escalations not only against Israel and the US.

It is in confrontation and military conflict also within the Arab region, including missile and drone strikes targeting Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other Muslim-majority countries.

These nations in effect host about million Indian nationals and hence any misadventure to side with Iran at this juncture may actually backfire. 

The Congress party and leaders such as Sonia Gandhi and Malikarjun Kharge may try to see these on-going conflicts as occasions to playout their good old Muslim-appeasement politics. 

"When the targeted killing of a foreign leader draws no clear defence of sovereignty or international law from our country and impartiality is abandoned, it raises serious doubts about the direction and credibility of our foreign policy," Sonia Gandhi wrote in an article to a national daily. Prior to that Kharge had issued a statement and spoke rather philosophically about Vasudeva Kutumbakam and so on. 

The Congress party is not quite pleased with PM Narendra Modi's visit to Israel too. Sonia Gandhi says: 

"The unease is compounded by the timing. Barely 48 hours before the assassination, the Prime Minister returned from a visit to Israel, where he reiterated unequivocal support for the government of Benjamin Netanyahu, even as the Gaza conflict continues to draw global outrage over the scale of civilian casualties, many of them women and children". 

France’s La Tribune newspaper asks if it is “The end of the Mullahs?”

Modi actually held a telephonic conversation with UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and maintained that India supports de-escalation and regional peace.

He had also thanked Al Nahyan for taking care of the Indian community in the UAE. 

The fact of the matter is the IRGC struck Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar — the largest US air base in the Middle East. It hit the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain. 

It targeted UAE bases near Abu Dhabi, Kuwait’s Central Command sites, and installations across at least six nations. 

Iranian media framed each strike as retaliation against “legitimate military targets,” warning non-US sites to stand clear.  The Congress also has an habit of selective amnesia.

 

Between 2004-14, the Congress-led UPA government voted against Iran three times at the IAEA — in 2005, 2006, and 2009 — during negotiations for the India-US Civil Nuclear Agreement.

Incidentally, Ayatollah Ali Khemenei was seen as a major oppressor of women in Iran and against equality and women's rights.

Following his death, global reactions were mixed. 

Of the 57 member states of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), fewer than 10 publicly expressed condolences. 

Countries such as the United States, Israel, Argentina and Ukraine welcomed the development. Meanwhile, treaty allies and partners including Russia, China and North Korea, along with several Islamic countries such as Pakistan, Iraq, Malaysia and Turkey, either condemned the strikes or offered condolences.

Sovereign nations decide their responses based on national interest; not for garnering votes -- something the Congress party is used to. 

ends