India Tomorrow
NEW DELHI: At a discussion held on Sunday at Saiyidain Manzil, Ghazala Wahab, author, editor and journalist, spoke extensively on “Iran’s Resilience, Israel’s Debacle and India’s Missteps,” outlining what she described as three key aspects shaping the ongoing conflict and its global implications.
Wahab began by emphasizing what she termed the most surprising development in the conflict: Iran’s resilience. She noted that Iran has “been able to not only withstand the war until now, but also fight it on its own term and force the US and Israel to fight on Iran’s terms,” a development that has surprised not just the West, the United States and Israel, but observers across the world.
Explaining the roots of this resilience, she said Iran had been preparing for such a confrontation since the 1979 revolution and the subsequent imposition of US sanctions. Referring to the hostage crisis in Tehran, she highlighted how the failed American rescue mission marked a turning point, leading the United States to view Iran as an “evil regime” and Iran, in turn, to identify the US as its primary adversary.
According to Wahab, Iran understood early that it could not match the United States in conventional military strength, technology or capital. As a result, it adopted an asymmetrical warfare strategy, focusing on turning “American strength into its weakness.” She pointed out that Iran invested heavily in missiles and unmanned systems, which are cheaper and easier to produce, rather than attempting to compete in air power or fighter aircraft production.
She also underlined Iran’s shift from the American GPS system to a Chinese navigation system, which she said significantly improved targeting accuracy and reduced civilian casualties. This technological adaptation, she argued, has limited US air superiority and enabled Iran to respond swiftly to attacks, including immediate retaliation following strikes on February 28.
Another factor contributing to Iran’s resilience, Wahab said, was the martyrdom of Ayatollah Khamenei. She described his assassination as a moment that generated widespread reverberation across the Muslim world, enhancing his stature and mobilizing popular sentiment. According to her, his decision to “embrace martyrdom” helped Iran transform the narrative from being seen as an aggressor to a nation resisting oppression, likening it to a “David versus Goliath” struggle.
She further noted that strong support from Russia and China has bolstered Iran’s position. Unlike the previous year, both countries have now recognized the broader implications of the conflict for West Asia and are providing support through weapons, technology, humanitarian aid and diplomatic pressure.
Turning to Israel, Wahab argued that it is likely to emerge as the “biggest loser” in the conflict. She cited three primary reasons, beginning with demographic challenges. With a narrow gap between Jewish and Muslim populations in the region, she described Israel’s identity as a Jewish state as “very precariously balanced.” She also pointed to the migration of wealthy and dual-citizenship holders out of Israel, which could weaken its socio-economic and technological base.
The second factor, she said, is Iran’s sustained military response. She explained that Israel’s air defence systems, including its multi-layered interceptor systems, are expensive and difficult to replenish at the pace required. Continuous attacks, coupled with reports of manpower shortages and prolonged exposure of civilians to bunker conditions, have contributed to demoralization within the country.
Wahab added that Israel’s military is facing strain due to high casualties and multi-front engagements, warning that without increased recruitment, the Israeli Defence Force could face “collapse because of exertion, demoralization and lack of equipment.”
The third factor she highlighted, was the diminishing stamina of the United States for prolonged conflict. She noted that US President Donald Trump has increasingly spoken about peace and negotiations, while Israel continues actions that escalate tensions. This divergence, she argued, indicates that American support may be weakening, thereby increasing Israel’s vulnerabilities.
On the issue of civilian casualties, Wahab contrasted what she described as an “Asian approach to war fighting” with Western practices. She argued that countries in Asia, including India and Pakistan, traditionally avoid targeting civilian populations, whereas Western conflicts have historically involved large-scale civilian bombardment.
In the final part of her address, Wahab examined India’s foreign policy stance. She stated that India has made a “very deliberate decision” to align with Israel and the United States, citing ideological convergence between Hindutva and Zionist thought as one reason. She also pointed to India’s strategic objective of strengthening ties with the US, including defence agreements and cooperation.
Additionally, she highlighted the role of defence collaboration with Israel under initiatives like “Atmanirbhar Bharat.” According to her, India relies significantly on Israeli technology and joint ventures, with equipment often being imported, modified and presented as domestically produced. This defence relationship, she said, is a key reason behind India’s position in the conflict.
Concluding her remarks, Wahab suggested that India has “staked” its traditional global standing and non-aligned position due to this alignment, underscoring the broader implications of its foreign policy choices.
