Saednews: An economist stated that countries' positions on the Zionist regime's aggression could shape future cooperation and partner choices for Iran. He noted India pursues the IMEC corridor project jointly with Israel, delays completing Chabahar with uncertain outcomes, and has taken a cautious stance in condemning Israel’s attack on Iran.
According to Saednews,Seyed Taha Hossein Madani Said:
The positions of countries during sensitive and critical moments can serve as a good reference for future cooperation and partner selection. The unforgivable aggression of the Zionist regime on Iranian soil and the martyrdom of the people, scientists, and military leaders of the country prompted reactions from many countries.
Madani added: For example, the United States sided with the hostile country, Oman strongly condemned the Zionist regime’s attack on Iranian territory, Saudi Arabia issued a strongly worded statement calling the attacks a clear violation of Iran’s sovereignty and international laws, demanding immediate global action to stop the aggressions. The government of Yemen strongly condemned the Zionist terrorist attacks, Indonesia strongly condemned Israel’s attack on Iran and called on all parties to show restraint.
He continued: Putin announced his support for Iran, Lebanon expressed concern over these attacks, London called for restraint and a return to diplomatic solutions, describing the Zionist regime’s attacks as worrying. Kuwait strongly condemned the Zionist regime’s attacks against the Islamic Republic of Iran. The French president supported the Zionist regime. The Gulf Cooperation Council condemned the Zionist regime’s military attacks against Iran, calling them a dangerously escalating regional tension, a blatant violation of international law and the UN Charter, and a clear threat to regional and international security and stability. The Kurdistan Region of Iraq also condemned this attack.
Madani emphasized: Italy declared this action unacceptable and demanded it stop. Iraq rejected the use of its land or airspace for any aggressive actions against any neighboring country. The North Korean government announced its full support for Iran. The EU foreign policy chief called on all parties to exercise restraint and avoid further escalation. Egypt also condemned this aggression as unjustifiable.
The head of the Smart Governance Think Tank said: The UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs also issued a statement emphasizing the importance of maximum restraint and caution to prevent dangers and the spread of conflict. The German chancellor supported this attack, while Afghanistan and Armenia condemned the Zionist regime’s attack on Iran. China declared its opposition to any violation of the sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif stated, “I strongly condemn today’s unprovoked attack by Israel on Iran.” Qatar also condemned the Zionist regime’s action.
The Contradiction Between Turkey’s Words and Actions
He continued: Among these countries, Turkey, despite condemning the attacks, allowed its airspace to be used by the Zionist regime’s anti-ballistic missile systems.
The head of the Smart Governance Think Tank stated that these positions can serve as a record for future cooperation and partner selection for Iran. He said: Iran should determine its strategies and identify strategic partners based on these stances in critical moments. It should know which countries it can rely on and prioritize defining shared interests with those who stand by Iran in sensitive times.
India’s Conservative Position and the Need to Reconsider Chabahar Port Development
Madani then referred to India’s position: India is among the countries that preferred a cautious stance in this blatant aggression and limited itself to expressing concern about regional developments. Such a position at this critical moment may indicate that India might not be a good partner for Iran. Even if it has interests in Iran, it might ignore them under pressure from the U.S. and Israel and may act in ways that harm Iran at critical junctures.
He considered the issue of Chabahar port as one that could be affected by such an approach from India. He said India might, with the U.S.’s green light, delay the port’s development, prolonging Iran’s challenges in passive defense and trade, causing Iran to lose its transit share. Despite having signed an agreement 10 years ago to complete Chabahar, India has not taken any significant or promising steps to develop this key port.
This economic expert explained: India is a major export destination for Russia, widely importing oil derivatives, especially diesel, wood, and minerals, and exporting industrial equipment. Since India does not share a border with Russia, it seeks faster and cheaper routes to meet its needs. On the other hand, India has Pakistan as a neighbor, which makes it lose the direct Afghanistan-Pakistan route, and because it does not seriously use Iran’s route, its alternative path is via the Black Sea, the Suez Canal, and the Indian Ocean by sea, also traveling a long distance through the eastern Caspian Sea in Russia.
Why Have We Entrusted Chabahar Port to a Country That Has a Joint Transit Project with the Zionist Regime?
Madani continued: India is also pursuing the IMEC corridor as a joint project with the Zionist regime in exports to Europe. This means that for 10 years, we have entrusted the development of the key Chabahar port to a country that is partnering with Israel on a competing project like IMEC, which rivals the North-South corridor. This is a major political blunder.
He noted: We have previously experienced choosing future cooperation based on countries’ behavior in sensitive times. For example, during the 2018 sanctions and the household appliances issue, where we were consumers and faced major challenges, South Korean companies’ behavior led to their removal from the Iranian market in subsequent years. Before the 2018 sanctions, these companies benefited greatly from Iran’s market and gained many privileges. However, once sanctions began, they abruptly left the Iranian market and neglected Iran’s efforts to resume services and after-sales support. This behavior led to Korean brands being denied re-entry into Iran’s market in later years, even when sanctions eased.
Priority Should Be Given to Those Who Stand by Us in Crisis
He added: This was a wise and good behavior showing that Iran is not a country some nations can exploit unilaterally for economic opportunities. It indicated that if anyone is to benefit from Iran’s market, priority should be given to countries that have stood by us in crisis.
The head of the Smart Governance Think Tank stressed: Even if we do not assume any ill intent from India in the development of Chabahar—which is unlikely—India’s recent negative approaches at least suggest it cannot be relied upon. India’s delay in completing Chabahar port indicates an uncertain outcome.
Madani stated: The government and ruling authorities should identify countries that are companions and strategic partners and define common interests with them in such situations.
The People Should Also Be Demanding
This economic expert said: People should also observe these positions and, in many cases, demand such an approach. For example, if LG or Samsung products enter Iran’s market, people should remember their 2018 behavior. Such perspectives exist worldwide too. For instance, after Israel’s attacks on Gaza, many people in Europe boycotted Israeli products and apps and urged others not to use them on social media. Ironically, these products are now widely produced and available in Iran!
![Tel Aviv in Ruins: Iranian Missiles Reduce Israel's Coastal Hub to Rubble [Photos]](https://en.saednews.com/storage/files/post/08ae102a-7e61-4583-9956-6b3420b5596f-IteaUIZccucIbnw5/1x1-5554011.jpg)