NEW DELHI – India, an emerging global economic power projected as the world’s fourth-largest economy by nominal GDP, has attracted scrutiny regarding its level of visible engagement in international peace-building efforts, particularly when compared with the more overt mediation roles undertaken by some other nations.
The nation currently navigates a complex international environment characterised by dynamic geopolitical shifts and competing global interests. Domestically, India faces ongoing challenges, including infrastructural deficits, income inequality, and subdued private investments. Concurrently, discussions persist regarding the preservation of its secular and pluralistic identity, as originally envisioned by its founding figures. In the diplomatic sphere, India prioritises strategic autonomy amidst a global landscape that often demands polarised positions.
India’s Engagement in Global Conflicts
While India has demonstrated leadership in rallying support for the Global South on shared concerns such as climate change, climate finance, and carbon taxation, its visible contribution to peace-building initiatives in major geopolitical conflicts has been noted as comparatively limited. Observers suggest that while behind-the-scenes or sideline diplomacy may occur, India’s public and explicit involvement in conflict mediation appears less prominent, potentially impacting its diplomatic leverage.
In contrast, several other countries have adopted more overt and visible roles in resolving international disputes:
- China: In 2023, China facilitated a rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran, enhancing its profile as an international mediator. Furthermore, China played a role in the agreement between Afghanistan and Pakistan to reinstate diplomatic ties and has spearheaded the International Organisation of Mediation (IOMED), an intergovernmental legal body dedicated to international dispute resolution.
- Russia-Ukraine Conflict: India has maintained a neutral and balanced stance, engaging with both sides and advocating for peace. However, it has yet to broker a direct dialogue or peace process. By comparison, Türkiye, in collaboration with the United Nations, proactively engaged in mediation, notably through the 2022 Black Sea Grain Initiative (BSGI), which facilitated the export of food and fertiliser commodities. Türkiye has also previously sought to negotiate a ceasefire.
- US-Iran Nuclear Programme: Oman, a considerably smaller nation, has been at the forefront of facilitating diplomacy and dialogue between the United States and Iran on the latter’s nuclear programme. From its initial role in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to more recent diplomatic efforts, Oman has established itself as a credible mediator.
- Myanmar Civil War: Indonesia, under former President Joko Widodo, became the first Asian nation to engage both sides in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, underscoring its commitment to peace. In October 2024, Indonesia garnered support from the United Nations, ASEAN, the European Union, and Myanmar’s National Unity Government (NUG) to seek a resolution to the 2021 army-led coup and civil conflict. China has also engaged in brokering ceasefires in Myanmar.
- Conflicts in Africa: Despite significant economic and infrastructural stakes on the African continent, where India is the third-largest trading partner with a trade basket valued at approximately US$83.34 billion, its role in mediating regional conflicts, insurgencies, and civil wars has remained largely restrained, beyond participation in UN peacekeeping missions, capacity building, and quiet diplomatic presence.
- Israel-Iran Conflict: India’s decision to maintain a calculated distance from the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation’s (SCO) condemnation of Israel’s 2025 attack on Iran was perceived as a balancing act, reflecting its amicable ties with both nations. While the Ministry of External Affairs expressed concerns, this approach of ‘strategic ambiguity’ has been suggested to limit its potential in conflict resolution.
- Gaza Conflict: India’s historical stance of anti-colonial solidarity with the Palestinian people has shifted towards a “de-hyphenated” relationship with both Israel and Palestine, marked by deepening military, economic, and technological ties with Israel. This is reflected in repeated abstentions from UNGA resolutions calling for a ceasefire, even as India provided humanitarian assistance to Gaza, including 135 metric tons of aid, with 81.5 metric tons comprising medicines and medical supplies.
Strategic Autonomy and Future Role
India’s measured approach to global peace discourse is shaped by a complex interplay of historical legacies, security imperatives, and a commitment to strategic autonomy in an increasingly polarised international political landscape. Historically, India’s foreign policy has consistently resisted being dictated by rigid ideological bloc politics, a position that proponents argue holds distinct merits.
However, analysts suggest that deeper introspection within New Delhi may be warranted regarding the extent of its guarded stance. Policy planners face the challenge of distinguishing visible peace-building efforts from partisan alignment or entanglement in conflicts unrelated to its core interests. The argument is made that proactive peace-building can be achieved without compromising strategic autonomy.
For India to project itself more assertively as a global power and move beyond perceptions of being a ‘silent giant’ or ‘fence-sitter’, it is suggested that it must demonstrate a credible and visible commitment to building peace, beyond declarations of being “on the side of peace.”
Discussion