On calls to mediate, India remains silent, and rightly so

While India's position in the Israel-Palestine conflict may seem unparalleled, achieving its interests in the region is far more rational through economic collaborations rather than using geopolitical tactics.

Recently, Palestinian Ambassador to India Adnan Abu Alhaijaa said in an interview that “There are very old and historical relations between India and Palestine, and I hope they [India] will play the role of a mediator between Israel and Palestine.” This was not the first time such a proposition was made. In 2018 and 2021, Alhaijaa spoke about how India could leverage its position between the two parties, promote its objective outlook on the matter, and, thereby, carry out such a role successfully.

We believe it is in India’s best interest to restrict itself from taking up such a role. This is owing to the alternatives being implemented by exploring newly-formulated strategic interests in its engagement with West Asia through various economic diplomacy initiatives.

India plays a unique and paradoxical role in the Israel-Palestine conflict as it supports both the Israeli right to self-defence and the Palestinian right to self-determination. This seemingly contradictory stance is shaped by ‘proactive neutrality’. Coined by Swaran Singh during the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, it signifies India's forward-looking stance, which attacks Western centrism and bias in traditional international relations.

'Proactive neutrality' is a de-colonised, contemporary update to non-alignment, shifting the focus from passive disengagement to active non-engagement. India makes intentional choices to let major powers balance each other out, steering clear of having to formally declare alliances. This strategy results in the projection of influence by approaching engagement differently.

For instance, India deliberately avoids involvement in conflicts even when heavily confronted with the force of Western liberal moralism, as is visible in the case of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. India puts forward an independent stance by deconstructing the established norms on global justice. Thus, ‘proactive neutrality', as a strategic tool, signals an active Indian participation in global affairs while morally de-linking from West-based discursive hegemony.

This unique approach maintained by India is what makes it the most attractive mediator between Israel and Palestine. Both Ramallah and Tel-Aviv have, on multiple occasions, requested India to mediate. In fact, in 2005, India did take these requests rather seriously by appointing Chinmaya Gharekhan as the first and only Indian Special Envoy for West Asia. This move signified steps towards active involvement, but it was short-lived. There have been no efforts to renew Gharekhan’s mandate, which ran out in 2009, resulting in a bureaucratic silence that has persisted ever since.

The core argument advocating India’s mediation has always been the propensity of strengthening New Delhi’s position in West Asia, against Beijing promoting its brand of brokerage. India aims to achieve this through economic diplomacy measures as opposed to its involvement as a mediator, as the gains from economic manoeuvring promote long-term interests in the region.

From India’s perspective, participating in the West Asian peace process during the 2000s held strategic merit, primarily due to its alignment with the interests of other influential Arab states in the region.

In a recent interview, Gharekhan highlighted a shifting dynamic wherein Arab countries, notably Saudi Arabia, are moving towards normalising relations with Israel. This indicates a waning interest in the Palestinian cause, and serves as a significant factor influencing India's restrained involvement in the peace process.

In addition to this, the upsurge of violence following the attacks of October 7 has witnessed a shift in the overall party arithmetic in Israel-Palestine. The elevation in the status of Hamas to principal belligerent puts Indian mediation visions in a tight spot as this is not a traditional actor that it is used to engaging with. Thus, the presence of more risks than rewards nullify potential gains and forces a re-think on the modality of engagement.

To that end, India has adopted economic diplomacy as a pivotal strategy to enhance its presence in West Asia. This approach is evident in bilateral engagements with Saudi Arabia, particularly after establishing the India-Saudi Arabia Strategic Partnership Council in 2019. On a multilateral level, India continues to forge connections through initiatives like I2U2, the West Coast Refinery Project, and the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). These collaborations not only solidify India's significance in West Asia but also foster critical economic partnerships with key players such as Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.

India's pathway to consolidating its position in West Asia lies in its geo-economic ambitions with major regional actors on a bilateral and multilateral scale. While India's distinctive position in the age-old conflict may seem unparalleled, achieving its interests in the region is far more rational through economic collaborations rather than the usage of geopolitical tactics, such as mediation.

Arkoprabho Hazra is a manager, Aakhya India. X: @ArkoprabhoH.

Abhiraj Goswami is a junior lecturer of political science, University of Amsterdam. X: @wontkillthekaju.

(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH).