Hindutva and Zionism: A Converging Ideological Front Against Iran

In the West Asian and South Asian geopolitics of shifting tectonics, there have been few partnerships that have changed as rapidly and profoundly as that of India and Israel. From being discreet co-operators, the two countries have become overt strategic allies in recent years, trading defense technology, cyber power, intelligence platforms, and increasingly, ideological convergence. This partnership is widely recognized to be effective and creative, but a less attractive dimension is emerging, one that involves this partnership in covert destabilization of third-party countries, i.e., the Islamic Republic of Iran.

At the heart of this question is one that has been more pressing in the wake of a series of bold Israeli forays deep into Iranian free territory. Is India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) acting as an impetus player, enabling Israeli action by offering access, networks, or intelligence sharing? And if so, is this not a strategic, but an ideological, alliance, on the basis of a convergence of Zionism and Hindutva?

Israel’s conflict with Iran has escalated to a full-scale pitch over the past few years, with a steady stream of cyberattacks, sabotage, and targeted assassinations. From the Stuxnet cyber attack to the brazen assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the clandestine war Tel Aviv has waged against Tehran has been characterized by operational complexity and deep intelligence penetration, all without the fig leaf of any Israeli diplomatic presence within Iran. It is generally assumed that Mossad would not have been able to execute such large-scale operations without clandestine enablers on the ground. Iran is no permissive environment, and most Western nationals would be conspicuous. And yet these operations have continued with breathtaking precision and impunity, implying the presence of clandestine facilitators on the ground.

India’s regional situation makes it a serious player. Regardless of the recent Cold War-like chill in India-Iran relations, particularly after New Delhi’s growing alignment with the United States and Israel, India has continued to have infrastructure projects, economic ties, and people-to-people contacts in Iran. Port city of Chabahar, Indian-funded development corridors, and regional trade connections provide the country with a presence not available to Israel. With this economic and logistic presence, India’s external intelligence agency has had the chances to establish networks under commercial, diplomatic, or technical cover. Although there is no official admission of intelligence activity on Iranian soil, the coincidence of Indian access and Israeli intelligence interests cannot be ruled out as circumstantial.

What keeps these two powers together aside from logistics is ideology, though. Zionism and Hindutva, while born in different civilizational contexts, share important similarities. Both are by nature nationalist projects rooted in religious identity. Both are driven by historical grievances and a desire to reclaim lost civilizational greatness. Both have become ruling ideologies, no longer cultural or marginal movements. And most importantly, both share a deep distrust of political Islam and its forms in the international politics of the contemporary world.

Iran is therefore a natural target. For Israel, Iran constitutes an existential, strategic, ideological, and regional threat. For Indian Hindutva elites, Iran is a pan-Islamic assertiveness that is defending causes like Kashmir and criticizing India for the way it treats its Muslim minority. India is formally engaged with Iran diplomatically but increasingly has an ideological interest in a wider civilizational alignment with Israel and the West, and particularly on issues framed as counterterrorism or Islamic extremism.

This ideological convergence has moved beyond symbolic gestures, like when Prime Minister Modi hugged Benjamin Netanyahu openly, to more substantive operational synergies. Memorandums of understanding for intelligence sharing have been signed and collaborative cyber and surveillance exercises conducted. Counterterrorism is normally the focus, but this cooperation also generates capabilities that can be redirected to counter third-country threats like Iran, especially if Israel is barred from access through overland routes.

The emphasis on Iranian nuclear facilities and strategic locations in recent strikes, most typically carried out with precision and in coordination to target important milestones in Iran’s advancement, has even shaken Western analysts. All of the attacks seem to be based not just in technical reconnaissance but in extremely close human intelligence: familiarity with blueprints of buildings, deployments of troops, and vulnerable security protocols. Such information cannot easily be gleaned from outside sources without the use of highly embedded or cooperative networks. Use of proxies is then key to understanding how Israel has been able to persist so well in Iran. India, with its entrenched presence and increasing intelligence presence in the region, is one of the few with the ability and perhaps the inclination to help.

Assuming this hypothesis to be true, the implications are seriously ominous. It would indicate that New Delhi has advanced its strategic alignment with Israel to covert intervention in the affairs of an independent third state. That role would constitute a violation of the sovereignty and non-intervention principles India has thus far professed. It would also constitute a deviation from India’s classical non-aligned policy in West Asia, replacing ideological alignment and selective hostility.

For the Muslim world, the stakes are all the more dramatic. Imaginings of a Hindu-Jewish axis against a Muslim republic feed further into civilizational conflict narratives, dividing regional and global politics. At a time when de-escalation and diplomacy are the requirements, such clandestine collaboration risks triggering broader tensions and undermining peaceful resolution efforts. In all, though Indo-Israeli cooperation has produced tangible dividends for both nations in defense, technology, and geostrategic overlap, its application to Iran, particularly to facilitate Israeli sabotage operations, would be an unsafe overreach. Strategic overlap cannot be used as an ideological tool of aggression, especially when that makes possible the destabilization of a highly volatile region. For regional stability and its own reputation, India must rethink the boundaries of its strategic coalitions and the ideational narratives it risks perpetuating.