Strait of Hormuz "Blockade": "The longer the Middle East conflict lasts, the more severe the impact on India"

Ask AI · How can Modi’s diplomacy break the deadlock in India’s energy lifeline?

On March 25, 2026, in Muscat, Oman, a bulk carrier is docked at the anchorage in Muscat. Since the conflict erupted between the U.S., Israel, and Iran on February 28, shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has come to a near standstill. Visual China / Photo

On March 28, 2026, two liquefied petroleum gas ships flying the Indian flag navigated the northern route through the narrow channel between Larak Island and Qeshm Island, leaving the Persian Gulf along the Iranian coastline.

As the conflict in the Middle East enters its second month, the vital shipping route of the Strait of Hormuz has nearly come to a halt, with traffic dropping by more than 90%.

As the world’s second-largest buyer of liquefied petroleum gas, India’s energy security is closely tied to the Strait of Hormuz. Public data shows that the country relies on imports for about 60% of its liquefied petroleum gas, with around 90% transported through the Strait of Hormuz. Under the obstruction of the shipping lanes, India, which is highly dependent on imported energy, has fallen into a “gas shortage.”

According to Xinhua News Agency, about 30% of restaurants and hotels in India have been forced to close due to the “gas shortage.” In the capital city of New Delhi and other areas, people are queuing for days to purchase liquefied petroleum gas.

In the face of the energy crisis, Indian Prime Minister Modi has had to “play both sides,” negotiating with Iranian President Raisi to ensure the safe passage of stranded tankers through the Strait of Hormuz. On the other hand, he has made emergency calls to Trump, emphasizing the importance of keeping the Strait of Hormuz open.

India was one of the first countries to establish diplomatic relations with Iran, but after the U.S. and Israel jointly launched airstrikes against Iran, the Modi government chose “selective silence,” refraining from condemning the military actions of the U.S. and Israel, while instead co-sponsoring a UN resolution with other countries criticizing Iran’s “malicious attacks” on Gulf Cooperation Council states. A trust deficit has emerged between the two countries.

On one hand, there is an urgent need for energy security, and on the other, a complex relationship with the U.S., Israel, and Iran. Can India, which is pursuing a balanced diplomacy among the U.S., Israel, and Iran, repair the trust gap with Tehran? Can it ensure the smooth operation of energy channels and resolve the domestic energy crisis through flexible diplomacy? During the Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference 2026, Southern Weekend reporter interviewed Aravind Yelery, Associate Professor at the East Asian Studies Center at Jawaharlal Nehru University and Honorary Research Fellow at the Institute of Chinese Studies in India, on these core issues.

Aravind Yelery, Associate Professor at the East Asian Studies Center at Jawaharlal Nehru University and Honorary Research Fellow at the Institute of Chinese Studies in India. Photo / Southern Weekend reporter Wang Hang

“The longer the conflict lasts, the more severe the impact on India”

Southern Weekend: After the U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict, shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has been severely disrupted. What is the strategic significance of this route for India’s energy security?

Aravind Yelery: India is highly dependent on energy imports, with natural gas and crude oil mainly coming from West Asian countries. The Strait of Hormuz is a crucial passage for most ships entering the Indian Ocean and is vital for India’s geopolitical security.

In terms of this conflict, India is actually the country most severely impacted by the war, as India’s manufacturing and large industrial system are heavily reliant on oil and gas resources. In contrast, the U.S., which instigated the conflict, has ample resources and is basically unaffected.

This war will not benefit any developing country; it will only affect the development processes and living standards of middle- and low-income countries. India has taken measures to ensure energy supply for livelihoods and commercial sectors but still faces pressure to maintain supply.

Currently, India is actively persuading the Iranian government to allow oil and gas vessels to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. However, if the conflict continues, the situation will further deteriorate, which is not in the interest of China, India, or any country in the world.

Southern Weekend: Indian Prime Minister Modi has communicated with Iranian President Raisi, focusing on how to ensure the safe passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz. However, since the U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict began, India has not criticized the U.S. and Israel’s airstrikes against Iran. Does India have the capability to repair the trust deficit with Tehran?

Aravind Yelery: Since the outbreak of the war, India has been calling for restraint from both sides. On the surface, it seems that India has not criticized Israel. However, when Israel attacked Gaza, India clearly expressed condemnation; similarly, it condemned Hamas’s violent actions.

India opposes any escalation of war in the Middle East, as it will have long-term negative effects on countries, including India. India is not a passive supporter of Israel but rather an active force opposing conflict and the escalation of war.

The communication between Modi and the Iranian president is ongoing. India has clearly stated that it will not participate in any war against Iran. We have successfully persuaded Iran to allow oil and gas vessels to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, achieving positive results, which is a significant outcome of India’s diplomacy adhering to an objective and neutral stance.

Southern Weekend: If the Strait of Hormuz remains closed for an extended period, what feasible ways does India have to ensure energy security?

Aravind Yelery: The longer the conflict lasts, the more severe the collateral impact on India. Iran is not a weak country; it has a strong national system and firm beliefs. India is actively persuading both sides to return to the negotiating table, avoiding escalation of the conflict, and seeking compromise solutions. Currently, both sides have experienced casualties; Iran possesses long-range strike capabilities, while the other side continuously issues extreme rhetoric about “destroying the country.” Destroying a country is no easy task and should not be something to take pride in. All parties should exercise restraint.

For India, alternatives for energy are very limited. We can import a small amount of oil from countries like Malaysia and Myanmar, and we have developed oil and gas resources in our exclusive economic zone, but it is far from meeting demand. The sooner the conflict ends, the better it will be for India and all countries around the globe.

On March 24, 2026, in Mumbai, India, workers are unloading liquefied petroleum gas cylinders from supply trucks and transporting them to tricycles. Due to the escalating situation in the Middle East, shipping routes around the Strait of Hormuz have been obstructed, and this strait is a channel for India to import a large amount of liquefied petroleum gas. Visual China / Photo

“Iran is equally important as Israel on India’s diplomatic scale”

Southern Weekend: India was one of the earliest countries to establish diplomatic relations with Iran. However, since Modi’s official visit to Israel in 2017, India’s relationship with Israel has been warming. What are the key reasons behind this strategic shift? Does it mean that India’s relationship with Iran is deteriorating?

Aravind Yelery: We can understand it this way: Modi’s visit to Russia was not aimed at the U.S.; when President Putin visited India, it was also not aimed at the U.S.; India’s engagement with the U.S. is not intentionally aimed at China. In recent years, high-level meetings between China and India have often been interpreted as signaling the U.S., but I do not see it that way. Essentially, it is India’s strategic autonomous choice.

Similarly, India’s friendship with Israel does not mean sacrificing its relationship with Iran. Historically, the Jewish community has settled and integrated into India. India has been importing agricultural water-saving technology and key agricultural science from Israel for decades, not just in recent years. Modi’s visit to Israel is merely a continuation and deepening of this relationship.

Moreover, even though Iran’s supreme leader has made critical statements regarding issues related to Muslims in India, the official relationship between India and Iran remains good, with close bilateral trade exchanges. Public opinion has never affected the official relations between the two countries.

On India’s diplomatic scale, both Israel and Iran are equally important. We have never allowed one side to overshadow the other, and we maintain a strategic balance with both countries.

Therefore, India’s increase in oil imports from Iran and communication with the Iranian president does not indicate a betrayal of Israel. India simply views different diplomatic relationships separately—energy cooperation depends on Iran, while agricultural technology relies on Israel, with no interference between the two.

Southern Weekend: India is currently facing a rare strategic dilemma, needing to maintain defense cooperation with Israel while also appeasing Iran for energy security and responding to U.S. pressure. Do you think the Modi government has truly found a balance, or has India actually been forced to take sides?

Aravind Yelery: India has never taken sides. During the “Desert Storm” operation in 1991, India faced immense pressure to provide air force bases as refueling facilities. In certain instances, this may have indeed occurred.

However, in this conflict, India has not attempted to offer air force bases or logistical support to either warring party. India will not accept any requests from the U.S. to refuel or allow U.S. military aircraft to station in India. We will not yield to U.S. pressure.

The “balance” I refer to is not about compromising under U.S. pressure but rather maintaining relations with both Iran and Israel simultaneously. India can completely reject any U.S. demands that undermine India’s sovereignty and national interests.

Allowing the U.S. to use Indian bases is tantamount to abandoning national sovereignty and undermines the core diplomatic principle of India’s strategic autonomy. For the Indian government, giving up strategic autonomy is not a wise choice.

Southern Weekend: Now that the U.S., Israel, and Iran are in conflict, what is India’s position?

Aravind Yelery: India is not a “strategic partner” of the U.S. There is a large Indian diaspora in the U.S., and both sides have trade and some technological cooperation, but the U.S. only sells India second- and third-tier technologies and never shares core first-tier technologies. The U.S. is selling technology, not sharing it.

Israel is a long-term partner for India, providing crucial technology cooperation for decades; Iran is an important partner for India in the Middle East, highly aligned with India in terms of connectivity and energy supply. The cooperation between India and Israel, as well as India and Iran, operates independently and does not conflict; India does not face a so-called dilemma.

No conflict has winners; this is India’s only position. We condemn terrorism and oppose indiscriminate attacks.

On March 26, 2026, in Prayagraj, India, people are queuing at a gas station waiting to refuel. Visual China / Photo

“China and India will bear greater responsibility”

Southern Weekend: In your 2021 book, you described the economic relationship between China and India as a “Tailspin.” Currently, high-level meetings between China and India are frequent, and shipping routes are being restored. In your view, has the “tailspin” between China and India bottomed out, or are we still in a period of ongoing low-intensity turbulence?

Aravind Yelery: China is one of India’s largest trading partners and an important neighbor. India closely monitors China’s development model across many fields. From manufacturing to industrial upgrading to the creation of high-quality products, India pays particular attention to China’s modernization path, hoping to strengthen cooperation with Chinese enterprises and buyers to create a more balanced bilateral trade relationship.

The core of my viewpoint on the “tailspin” in Sino-Indian economic relations is about how India should make the most of its trade relationship with China, but India has not succeeded in doing so. Part of the reason is that China holds an advantage in bilateral trade, which presents numerous challenges for India in aligning with China’s trade demands.

However, China remains one of India’s important sources for components, allowing India to avoid undertaking many bottom-up innovations. India imports a significant amount of electronic products and various other products, aiding its development. Recently, India has also decided to re-examine its trade relationship with China. India has made adjustments and is open to Chinese investment.

Sino-Indian trade brings both opportunities and challenges for India. In the future, India needs to work closely with exporters and importers from both countries to jointly address challenges.

The U.S. may take a tough stance on trade deficits, and Indian society has opinions on trade imbalances, but India has not continuously raised tariffs or suppressed Chinese enterprises. Compared to other economies, India’s economic stance has always been relatively balanced, which is also a characteristic of the long-standing economic relationship between India and China.

Southern Weekend: Border issues have always been a barometer of Sino-Indian relations. Is it merely a territorial issue, or does it reflect deeper strategic competition?

Aravind Yelery: In recent years, the leaders, foreign ministers, and defense ministers of both countries have met, which is the correct way to resolve border disputes. The border issue requires a pragmatic attitude, and both sides must sit down and negotiate a solution.

I believe there is an emotional connection between China and India regarding the border issue. The mountains, rivers, and tribes along the Himalayas involve both countries, and from population distribution to cultural ecology, they are closely interconnected. Therefore, this is not merely a political issue but also a social, anthropological, and ecological one.

No matter how good the economic, cultural, and educational relations between China and India are, resolving the border issue is crucial for both countries. The political leadership of both sides needs to play a greater role, demonstrating a firm attitude and commitment, and adopting a gradual approach to solve the problem, which is also a necessity of the current situation.

Southern Weekend: How do you view the future of Sino-Indian relations?

Aravind Yelery: China and India have profoundly influenced the course of humanity at the civilizational and cultural levels, making Asia once the center of world history. However, in the 19th and 20th centuries, due to the rise of colonialism and imperialism, both countries lost their strategic positions and experienced one of the most challenging periods in history, becoming part of a subordinate international system dominated by Western powers.

In the past century, China and India have risen again. Since the reform and opening-up, China has embarked on a non-Western path to modernization, becoming a model for many developing countries. Many middle-income countries, including India, also wish to participate in global economic, cultural exchanges, infrastructure, new technology, and green technology governance. With their economic scale, population size, and innovative capabilities, China and India will play key roles in significant transformations in global technology, economy, and politics and cannot be marginalized. In global trade and issues concerning the Global South, both countries hold significant discourse power. I firmly believe that as we explore a new global order that transcends Western, American, and European perspectives, China and India will bear greater responsibility.

Southern Weekend reporter Wang Hang

Edited by Yao Yijiang