India voted against Iran in the IAEA Board of Governors in 2005, supporting a resolution that found Iran in non‑compliance with its safeguards obligations, while still saying the issue should preferably remain within the IAEA and not be rushed to the UN Security Council.

What exactly did India do in 2005?

  • On 24 September 2005, India voted in favour of IAEA resolution GOV/2005/77, which held that Iran was in non‑compliance with its safeguards agreement.
  • This put India on the same side as the US, UK, France, Germany and others, and against the position taken by most Non‑Aligned Movement (NAM) states, many of whom abstained.
  • The vote was widely seen as a political departure, because India chose to side with Western powers against Iran, a country with which it had long‑standing civilisational and energy ties.

India’s stated position and justification

  • The Indian government publicly framed its position as a balance between Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy and its obligation to honour safeguards it had voluntarily accepted under the NPT and the IAEA system.
  • Indian officials stressed two points:
    • Iran, as an NPT signatory, had the legal right to peaceful nuclear use, but only within the safeguards framework.
* India preferred that the matter stay within the IAEA and not be immediately referred to the UN Security Council; it pushed European states to soften the text so there was no automatic referral.

Political context behind the vote

  • At the time, India was negotiating its landmark civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with the United States, and Washington strongly pressed New Delhi to vote against Tehran.
  • Delhi wanted to project itself as a “responsible” nuclear power to support its nuclear deal and global non‑proliferation credentials, which made supporting the resolution politically attractive despite costs with Iran.
  • Analysts point out that India’s energy interests in Iranian gas and its traditional closeness to Tehran made this choice controversial at home and in Iran, where the decision was publicly criticised.

How India described its own stance

  • Official explanations from New Delhi emphasized a “principled stand” that:
    • The Iran file should stay with the IAEA as long as possible and allow time for diplomacy.
* Iran must fulfil its safeguards obligations to restore confidence in the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme.
  • Later statements by the Indian Prime Minister to Parliament linked the 2005 and early 2006 IAEA votes to India’s broader goal of upholding non‑proliferation norms while protecting national interests.

TL;DR: In 2005, India’s position at the IAEA was to back a resolution declaring Iran in non‑compliance with its safeguards, aligning with the US and Europe, while officially insisting the issue remain within the IAEA framework and acknowledging Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy if it met its obligations.

Information gathered from public forums or data available on the internet and portrayed here.