Was talking to a senior foreign policy wonk, with close ties to RSS, on Friday. I found it very interesting that I am writing the gist here--with his permission, but without naming him. He said the war is the single largest threat to India's economic rise since the early 1990s. He is "personally" not happy with the way India responded to the conflict. "Iran is a civilisational friend. We should have condemned the assassination of Khamenei and expressed our condolences sooner. We should have condoled the killings of the sailors, maybe without naming the US. They were our guests. That would have been the right position." He also expressed dismay over the killing of the Supreme Leader. "How can it be acceptable? Killing a head of the state, killing a religious leader, by foreign powers?" I asked him about Pakistan's growing role in West Asia -- both as a strategic defence partner of Saudi Arabia and as an interlocutor between Iran and the US. "That's exactly why I say India should stay neutral. This is a highly unstable region where we have a lot of strategic and economic interests at stake. I am all for deepening partnership with Israel. But we can't be seen allying with only one side." He appeared more critical of the US than Israel with regard to the current war. "America is not bothered about any of its partners. Why should we tolerate American hegemony in our neighbourhood when the world is becoming more multipolar? This war has also busted several myths about America and its military power. Iran singlehandedly attacked all American bases in the region. Did anyone come to defend the Arabs?" What should India do? "Protect strategic autonomy. Diversify energy sources. And strengthen ties with our civilisational partners, instead of blindly following the line from Washington."