As the United States questions the credibility of Pakistan acting as a “mediator” in the Iran war due to intelligence that Islamabad allowed the Iranian aircraft to be parked at Pakistani military bases, Russia has floated the idea that its staunch ally India must step up as the key negotiator in defusing the escalating Iran-US hostilities, given New Delhi’s vast experience in global diplomacy.
Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, at the BRICS+ Summit here in New Delhi, proposed that India step in as a long-term mediator to resolve the military crisis involving Iran, the US, and its Arab neighbours.
Speaking at a high-profile media briefing following the BRICS Foreign Ministers’ meeting in the national capital, Lavrov touted India’s decade-long foreign policy strategy of multi-alignment and neutrality, unlike the traditional superpowers that force nations to choose sides.
Russia centred on the deep, functional, and trusted relationships New Delhi has forged with the conflicting parties, arguing that it makes India—and not Pakistan—diplomatically equipped to act as a long-term mediator in the West Asia crisis.
Simultaneously, India’s relationship with the Arab world—particularly the UAE and Saudi Arabia—as seen in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s May visit to Abu Dhabi, cements India’s role as the Gulf’s trusted partner.
Despite India’s closeness with both Iran and Russia, Washington also views New Delhi as its most vital strategic partner in Asia to counter a rising China. During the war in the Middle East and Europe, the US leadership has shown respect for India’s strategic autonomy. Russia’s Foreign Minister, on Friday, reiterated that New Delhi is one of the very few hotlines available that carries genuine weight in ending the Iran war.
Lavrov emphasised that while Pakistan is currently managing immediate, short-term stabilisation talks between Washington and Tehran, India possesses the requisite global stature and diplomatic experience to broker a lasting settlement.
The proposal comes at a critical juncture for global energy markets, as the West Asia conflict continues to threaten vital maritime trade corridors. Moscow is actively pushing for New Delhi—the current sitting chair of the expanded 11-member BRICS bloc—to leverage its unique position of neutrality and its deep strategic relationships across the geopolitical divide to prevent a wider regional conflagration.
Distinguishing India’s Role From ‘Immediate Dialogue’ to ‘Long-Term Peace’
The Russian diplomat drew a clear distinction between the urgent, tactical crisis resolution via the currently underway dialogue brokered by Pakistan and the institutionalised “long-term” diplomacy, a skill India touts, required to secure West Asia’s long-term future.
Lavrov acknowledged neighbouring Islamabad’s ongoing efforts to prevent direct military escalation between the US and Iran but insisted that a more sustainable diplomatic bridge is needed to mend the broader regional fractures. This is where India comes in.
“Pakistan is helping establish dialogues between the US and Iran to resolve urgent problems,” Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov stated, according to transcripts. “If they seek a long-term mediator between Iran and its Arab friends, this role could be played by India, considering its vast diplomatic experience and international standing.”
Lavrov in Delhi: Pakistan is mediating US-Iran talks right now. But for a long-term solution — Russia is pointing to India. “Considering its vast diplomatic experience,” Lavrov said India is the natural permanent mediator for the West Asia crisis. pic.twitter.com/j5321pBUUc
— Flash Update (@flashupdatenews) May 15, 2026
India’s Energy Security & BRICS Chairmanship Advantage
A key driver behind Russia’s endorsement is India’s direct economic stake in the stability of the Persian Gulf. As a major global oil importer heavily impacted by recent maritime blockades, New Delhi’s national interests are directly aligned with stabilising the regional peace.
India’s multi-million dollar development of Iran’s Chabahar Port provides New Delhi with immense diplomatic leverage. It proves to Tehran that India is committed to its economic connectivity, and its primary objective remains absolute stability and securing trade shipping lanes, not regime change or ideological warfare.
Lavrov urged the Indian government to use its 2026 BRICS Presidency as an active platform to convene direct, de-escalation talks between regional adversaries.
“India, the BRICS president, is directly interested in receiving oil from this region,” Lavrov noted during the briefing. “Why won’t they offer their services, including as a country that is currently presiding over BRICS, so they could invite Iran, the United Arab Emirates, to start with, to have a conversation with each other to agree on how they can avoid any hostilities between the two countries?”
India’s Effective Countering of External Pressures in West Asia
Moscow utilised the New Delhi conclave to hit out at Western [or the United States’] foreign policy, alleging that certain “external actors” are intentionally exacerbating regional anxieties. Lavrov claimed that the hostility directed toward Tehran was a calculated attempt by the United States and Israel to permanently antagonise relations between Iran and its Arab neighbours.
India, through frameworks like the Quad [US, India, Japan, Australia] and the I2U2 Group [India, Israel, UAE, US], has institutionalised its security ties with both the US and Israel. As the current sitting chair of the expanded BRICS bloc, India possesses the perfect multilateral platform to host these delicate conversations.
On the upside, the newly expanded BRICS now includes both Iran and the UAE as full members, giving India the unique bureaucratic and diplomatic authority to invite these regional adversaries to the negotiating table under the neutral umbrella of economic cooperation, lowering the political stakes during the high-stakes meeting.
While the Ministry of External Affairs has yet to issue an official response to Lavrov’s public overture, the proposal coincides with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s high-stakes visit to Abu Dhabi to secure alternative energy corridors.
Moscow’s public backing solidifies India’s transition into a pragmatic, globally accepted arbiter capable of balancing ties between Washington, Tehran, and the Gulf nations amidst the worst energy crisis in decades.
Why Russia Favours India Over Pakistan for the Long Game?
While Pakistan has been heavily dependent on external financial aid for its battered economy and is structurally constrained by shifting geopolitical alignments, a more stable India has proven to be capable of resisting external pressure to protect its national interests.
India is globally seen as a rising global superpower, the world’s 5th largest economy, and a consensus-builder. While Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov acknowledged that Pakistan is useful for immediate, tactical messaging to stop missiles from flying in West Asia, he has explicitly backed India for the long-term peace process due to a stark contrast in the diplomatic capabilities of the two neighbouring countries.
US ‘Does Not Trust’ Pakistan as a Credible Mediator
There has been significant outrage in Washington over Pakistan assuming the “mediator” role to defuse West Asia tensions. US Senator Graham demands that Pakistan be dumped amid Iranian warplanes sheltering allegations.
Intelligence reports have surfaced alleging that Pakistan “quietly” allowed Iranian military aircraft to shelter on its airfields to evade the American airstrikes.
If this reporting is accurate, it would require a complete reevaluation of the role Pakistan is playing as mediator between Iran, the United States and other parties.
Given some of the prior statements by Pakistani defense officials towards Israel, I would not be shocked if… https://t.co/OqJ1cdVLFX
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) May 11, 2026
The revelation has triggered fierce backlash on Capitol Hill, with influential Republicans from the Trump administration, including Senator Graham, launching a blistering attack on Islamabad’s neutrality and demanding that the United States immediately strip the country of its role as the so-called “key mediator.”
The political firestorm ignited in the backdrop of an exclusive report dropped by CBS, which cited US officials revealing that Tehran dispatched multiple military assets to Pakistan Air Force Base Nur Khan just days after US President Donald Trump announced a temporary ceasefire in early April.
The allegations have thrown a wrench into the sensitive peace talks hosted in Islamabad, raising profound questions about whether the US’s regional intermediary, Pakistan, is actively playing a double game with all parties involved.
Confrontation About Pakistan at the Senate Appropriations Hearing
This week, the explosive intelligence report took centre stage during the tense Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing, where Senator Graham aggressively grilled top Pentagon leadership for cosying with Islamabad.
Confronting the US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, and the US military’s Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, Graham questioned whether harbouring foreign military assets was consistent with an impartial diplomatic mediator. While both defence officials refused to comment publicly on the classified data to avoid disrupting active negotiations, Graham made his outrage explicit.
I don’t trust Pakistan as far as I can throw them.
If they actually do have Iranian aircraft parked in Pakistan bases to protect Iranian military assets, that tells me we should be looking maybe for somebody else to mediate. No wonder this damn thing [peace negotiation] is going nowhere, Senator Graham declared during the hearing.
Senator Lindsey Graham says he does not trust Pakistan as a mediator between the US and Iran:
“we should be looking maybe for somebody else to mediate. No wonder this damn thing is going nowhere.” pic.twitter.com/72OBQOFECR
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) May 12, 2026
Inside the Intel: Pakistan’s Nur Khan Airbase Deployment
The US Central Command has been monitoring the movements of Iranian hardware crossing the border en route to Islamabad. Among the shielded assets identified by the US intelligence officials was an Iranian Air Force RC-130, a highly specialised reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering variant of the Lockheed C-130 Hercules tactical transport aircraft.
Satellite imagery analysed by defence experts appears to support claims that these warplanes were strategically relocated at Pakistan’s Nur Khan Airbase to insulate Iran’s remaining aviation infrastructure from devastating American bombardment.
The backlash from US lawmakers extends beyond the aircraft themselves.
(US officials say Pakistan allowed Iranian military aircraft to park at Nur Khan air base, just outside Islamabad, potentially shielding them from American airstrikes. Credit: X)
Capitol Hill insiders point to a deeper structural bias, highlighting past statements by Pakistani defence officials regarding Israel and Islamabad’s heavy defence reliance on Beijing—Iran’s most powerful international backer—as evidence that Pakistan cannot function as a “fair arbiter” for the interests of the US, Israel and the Gulf.
Islamabad Admits Presence of Iranian Planes, Denies ‘Collusion’
Faced with a rapidly deteriorating diplomatic position, the Pakistani Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a swift, high-stakes rebuttal. In an official statement provided to global agencies, Islamabad “categorically rejected” the narrative that it was acting as a military shield for Tehran, but inadvertently confirmed that Iranian aircraft are, in fact, currently parked on its soil.
The Pakistani foreign office argued that the planes arrived purely to facilitate the initial rounds of the “Islamabad Talks” and bear no connection to a war contingency.
“A number of aircraft from Iran and the United States arrived in Pakistan to facilitate the movement of diplomatic personnel, security teams, and administrative staff,” the ministry stated, defending its stance as an “impartial, constructive, and responsible facilitator.”
Despite the explanation, the revelations have significantly eroded Washington’s confidence, giving immense momentum to calls for a more reliable, globally accepted mediator to take over the peace process.
