.jpg?20261027')
Dear Chairman and Responsible Editor,
I read your editorial on India–GCC relations with considerable interest, respect and, I must admit, disappointment.
As a proud Indian who deeply values the historic friendship between India and the Gulf nations, particularly the Kingdom of Bahrain, I appreciate your acknowledgement of the economic, social and human connections that bind our countries together. However, I respectfully disagree with the suggestion that India or Indians have somehow failed to demonstrate solidarity with the GCC during times of regional insecurity.
Your editorial raises an important question, but I believe it approaches that question through a rather selective interpretation of solidarity, diplomatic responsibility and the realities of international relations.
Allow me to respond with facts, figures and a broader perspective.
1. Ten million Indians in the Gulf: A shared success story, not a debt of loyalty
Your editorial correctly highlights that approximately 9.9 million Indians reside across the six GCC nations.These figure demonstrate the extraordinary human connection between India and the Gulf.
However, I would respectfully challenge the implication that the presence of such a large Indian population automatically creates an obligation to demonstrate political loyalty through public campaigns or social media declarations.
Indians have not merely benefited from the Gulf's prosperity. They have contributed significantly to creating it.
For decades, Indian engineers, doctors, nurses, teachers, entrepreneurs, accountants, construction workers, technicians and domestic workers have helped build and sustain the region's infrastructure, healthcare systems, educational institutions and private enterprises.
The modern Gulf's development story cannot be written without acknowledging the contributions of its expatriate workforce, including millions of Indians.
Equally, India must acknowledge the opportunities, security and livelihoods that Gulf countries have provided to generations of Indian families.
This relationship is founded on mutual contribution, mutual respect and mutual benefit—not on a one-sided obligation of gratitude.
2. Remittances: Important figures, but an incomplete interpretation
Your editorial refers to approximately $52.44 billion in remittances from GCC countries during India's 2024–25 financial year, representing nearly 38% of India's total inward remittances.
The importance of this contribution is undeniable.
However, the wider statistical context is essential.
According to Reserve Bank of India figures reported for FY2024–25, India's inward remittances reached approximately $135.46 billion.
The GCC contribution of $52.44 billion is indeed substantial, but it also means that approximately 62% originated outside the Gulf.
More importantly, remittances are not financial assistance or charitable contributions from host governments.
They are the legitimately earned incomes of Indian workers and professionals who contribute their labour, expertise and productivity to the economies in which they live.
An Indian engineer working in Bahrain receives a salary because of the professional value he or she delivers. The same applies to a doctor in Saudi Arabia, an entrepreneur in the UAE or a technician in Kuwait.
The Gulf provides opportunities; Indians provide skills, services, investment and labour. Both benefit.
To frame remittances as a reason why Indians should demonstrate a particular level of political enthusiasm risks overlooking the fundamental economic nature of this mutually beneficial relationship.
3. Trade statistics demonstrate interdependence, not dependence
The economic relationship between India and the GCC is far more substantial than remittances alone.
According to India's Ministry of Commerce, bilateral merchandise trade with GCC countries reached approximately $178.56 billion in FY2024–25, comprising:
- Indian exports to the GCC: $56.87 billion
- Indian imports from the GCC: $121.68 billion
- GCC share of India's global merchandise trade: 15.42%
The trade relationship includes energy, food products, pharmaceuticals, engineering goods, technology, machinery, jewellery, chemicals and numerous other sectors.
The UAE alone accounted for approximately $100.06 billion in bilateral merchandise trade with India during FY2024–25.
Saudi Arabia accounted for approximately $41.88 billion, while Bahrain's bilateral merchandise trade with India stood at approximately $1.64 billion.
These numbers establish an important fact: India and the GCC are strategic economic partners whose prosperity and stability are interconnected.
India is a major market for Gulf energy, a supplier of essential goods and services, and an increasingly important investment and technology partner.
Similarly, the GCC is indispensable to India's energy security, trade connectivity and overseas Indian community.
Neither side needs to justify this partnership by measuring the number of political slogans appearing on social media.
4. India's official position on Gulf security has not been ambiguous
Perhaps the most significant issue in your editorial is the suggestion that solidarity with Gulf nations has not been expressed with sufficient clarity.
Here, an important distinction is necessary between official government policy and selected expressions of public opinion.
India has repeatedly called for respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of countries in West Asia.
Following the outbreak of the regional conflict on 28 February 2026, the Indian government publicly expressed concern, called for restraint and urged all parties to prioritise civilian safety.
On 1 March, India's Cabinet Committee on Security met under the chairmanship of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to assess the regional situation, including attacks on Gulf countries and their implications for security and economic stability.
In a subsequent statement to Parliament, the Indian government reiterated its commitment to dialogue, diplomacy and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states.
India has also condemned attacks on civilian and energy infrastructure and opposed threats to commercial shipping and freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.
These are not expressions of indifference.
They are clear diplomatic positions grounded in India's longstanding foreign-policy principles.So it would be inaccurate to suggest that India remained silent about threats to Gulf security.
Diplomatic solidarity is not measured solely by the volume of public outrage. It is also measured by official positions, responsible engagement and efforts to prevent further escalation.
5. Why compare India's relationship with Israel to its relationship with the GCC?
Your editorial draws a comparison between visible expressions of support for Israel among certain Indian political and social groups and the comparatively limited visibility of organised public solidarity with Gulf nations.
I believe this comparison requires greater balance.
India maintains diplomatic and strategic relations with Israel. These include cooperation in defence, agriculture, technology, innovation and security.
India also maintains deep and longstanding relations with Arab countries, including the GCC, and has consistently supported a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.
These relationships are not mutually exclusive. India is a sovereign nation entitled to pursue independent relationships with different countries based on its national interests, historical commitments and diplomatic principles.
Support for Israel by certain Indian groups does not automatically indicate hostility towards Arab countries.
Equally, the absence of a comparable social media campaign supporting the GCC does not establish a lack of concern for Gulf security.
India is a democracy of enormous political, cultural and ideological diversity. Its citizens express differing views on international issues, and no single group can legitimately claim to represent the sentiments of more than 1.4 billion Indians.
It would therefore be unreasonable to judge India's relationship with the Gulf through the political preferences of selected organisations or the activities of particular online communities.
6. Indian media coverage and the question of public solidarity
Your editorial asks why Indian media and public discourse do not appear to give Gulf security the same prominence as certain other international issues.
This is a legitimate subject for media research, but the conclusion requires evidence.
To establish that Indian media have systematically neglected attacks on Gulf countries, one would need a comparative study examining television coverage, newspaper reporting, digital publications, editorial positions and social media engagement over a defined period.Such an assessment would also need to distinguish between reporting, opinion, political campaigning and expressions of public sympathy.
Without that evidence, the argument remains a perception rather than an established conclusion.
It is equally important to recognise that quiet concern does not necessarily translate into public demonstrations.
Millions of Indian families have relatives living and working in the Gulf. Their concern for regional security is personal and immediate.
When conflict threatens Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar or Oman, Indian families worry about their loved ones, their safety, their employment and their futures.
Their concern may not always appear as a trending hashtag, but it is no less genuine.
The absence of a viral campaign should never be confused with the absence of human solidarity.
7. Bahrain and India: A friendship built over generations
As an Indian who values the Kingdom of Bahrain, I find it particularly important that this discussion does not reduce our bilateral relationship to statistics and political expectations.
India and Bahrain share centuries of commercial, cultural and people-to-people connections.
Indian professionals, business owners, workers and families are woven into Bahrain's economic and social fabric.
Bahrain, in turn, has offered generations of Indians opportunities to work, establish businesses, raise families and participate in a multicultural society.
Our relationship is reflected in everyday life: hospitals, schools, commercial establishments, financial institutions, construction projects, cultural associations and countless friendships between Bahrainis and Indians.
It is also strengthened through diplomatic engagement, trade, investment, cultural cooperation and institutional partnerships.
The respect Indians have for Bahrain and its leadership should not be questioned merely because some individuals have not participated in public political campaigns.
Nor should the loyalty, sincerity or gratitude of expatriate communities be measured by their willingness to express particular geopolitical opinions.
Respect for the sovereignty, laws and security of host nations is fundamental. But that respect should be assessed through responsible conduct and constructive contributions, not presumed absent because of social media silence.
8. A strategic partnership should not become a test of public allegiance
Your editorial rightly observes that the GCC should not turn its relationship with India into a daily test of loyalty.
I welcome that acknowledgement.
However, the broader argument appears to risk moving in precisely that direction by suggesting that the depth of economic and human ties should produce a corresponding level of visible political solidarity.
International partnerships are not mathematical equations in which a certain volume of trade, a particular number of expatriates or a specific amount of remittances must generate a predetermined quantity of public political support.
India's independent foreign policy seeks to maintain relationships with multiple nations, sometimes even those with competing strategic interests.
Such an approach may not satisfy every observer, but it is not evidence of disloyalty.
The GCC nations themselves pursue foreign policies shaped by their individual security priorities, economic interests and diplomatic relationships.
India deserves the same recognition of sovereign decision-making.
Friendship should allow room for diplomatic differences without automatically questioning sincerity or commitment.
9. Solidarity must be reciprocal, principled and consistent
I fully agree that attacks on the sovereignty and security of Gulf countries deserve condemnation.
No nation should face attacks on its civilian population, infrastructure or territorial integrity.
India's friendship with the GCC makes regional peace and stability particularly important to us.
However, the principles invoked must be universal.
The sovereignty of Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar and Oman deserves respect, just as the sovereignty of India and every other nation does.
Similarly, civilian lives deserve protection regardless of nationality, religion or political alignment.
If we expect solidarity to be meaningful, it should emerge from shared principles rather than economic calculations or political pressure.
The strongest international friendships are those in which partners can express concerns openly without turning disagreement into accusations of ingratitude.
10. The way forward: Strengthening understanding rather than creating unnecessary divisions
Your editorial concludes by calling for open and frank dialogue between India and the GCC.
On this point, I wholeheartedly agree.
However, meaningful dialogue must begin with a balanced recognition of what both sides have contributed to this remarkable relationship.
The GCC has provided opportunities and prosperity to millions of Indians.
Indians have contributed their skills, labour, entrepreneurship, investments and professional expertise to the growth of Gulf societies.
India has benefited enormously from its partnership with the GCC, and the GCC has similarly benefited from its engagement with India.
The future of this relationship should be built upon greater economic integration, security cooperation, cultural understanding, people-to-people engagement and mutual respect.
It should not be weakened by comparisons based on selective political narratives or the perceived enthusiasm of social media users.
As a proud Indian, I stand unequivocally for the sovereignty, security and prosperity of Bahrain and every GCC nation. I also stand firmly for India's right to pursue an independent and balanced foreign policy. These positions are not contradictory. They are entirely compatible.
The friendship between India and the Gulf is far older, deeper and more resilient than any contemporary political controversy.
It deserves thoughtful journalism, balanced interpretation and a recognition that genuine solidarity is often demonstrated through decades of partnership rather than moments of public applause.
India does not need to prove its friendship with the Gulf through hashtags. Decades of shared history, billions in trade and the contributions of millions of people already provide powerful evidence of that friendship.
Let us strengthen this relationship through facts, fairness and mutual respect, rather than allowing perceptions of insufficient public enthusiasm to cast unnecessary doubts upon one of the world's most important international partnerships.
With respect,
Dr. Rithin Raj
&uuid=(email))