In August 2025, the U.S. government suddenly launched a handshake against India, not a tariff war or a diplomatic dispute, but a direct move to India¡¯s port project in Iran.

The U.S. Treasury Department has announced that Indian businesses involved in operating Iran's Chabahar port must withdraw within 45 days or face full sanctions.The news immediately attracted international attention.

On the other end not far away, the China-led Gwadar Port is still operating as usual. These two ports face each other across the sea, have almost the same geographical location and similar functions. They are both important nodes connecting the Middle East and Central Asia.

But one is released, one is sanctioned.This can¡¯t help asking, where are the criteria behind?

The port location is similar, but the fate is different

The straight-line distance between Chabahar Port and Gwadar Port is less than 200 kilometers. They are both located on the west bank of the Arabian Sea and not far from the Strait of Hormuz. They are the main transportation routes between the East and the West.

These two ports are important because they can bypass traditional trade bottlenecks, such as the Strait of Malacca and land bottlenecks in Pakistan.

China has been participating in the construction of the port of Guadalupe since 2002 and has continued to expand, forming a first-scale port group, while India began to participate in the Chabahar port project in 2016 with the aim of opening a land passage to Central Asia to avoid border conflict with Pakistan.

However, the pace of development of the two is completely different. The construction of the port of Guadalcanal has progressed relatively rapidly and the supporting facilities have been gradually improved, while the port of Chabahar in India has been interfered by multiple factors and progress is far less than expected.

The U.S. sanctions directly condemned Chabahar¡¯s future to ¡°impeachment.¡±

The U.S. is unconfident about India.

On the surface, the reason of the United States is that Indian companies are suspected of helping Iran circumvent sanctions, especially in the energy sector with non-compliant transactions. But this is only part of the reason. The deeper consideration is that the United States is anxious about India's increasingly complicated diplomatic posture.

India's approach to the United States, on the one hand, is an important part of the "Indo-Pacific strategy" and has also participated in the "Quarter Security Dialogue".

But on the other hand, India did not fully stand on the side of the United States, especially in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, where India did not follow the West to sanction Russia, but instead obtained a lot of cheap energy from it.

In fact, the United States has long been dissatisfied with India's "fence-sitting" approach. This sanctions on Chabahar Port are likely to be a signal that if you don't choose sides, you will have to pay a price.This approach, although not explicitly stated, is not new in international politics, and similar operations in the United States have not been done before.

While there are also investments in Iran and even direct involvement in port projects, the U.S. attitude toward China is more complex.

The game between China and the United States can no longer be changed by a single port, and the United States is clear that China will take action, so instead of choosing to do it here in India, the cost of fighting is small and the risk is low.

India¡¯s embarrassment was not created in a day.

India has made a lot of international moves in recent years. It wants to be a representative of the "Global South" and also wants to win more cards in the game of great powers. But the reality is that India's economic structure, technological capabilities and diplomatic resources are not enough to support it to truly "have both sides".

Manufacturing has always been India's shortage, energy is heavily dependent on imports, especially the proportion of taking oil from Russia increases year by year.

What is even more troublesome is that India's influence in South Asia is slowly being eroded. In the past, India had a certain say in neighboring countries such as Sri Lanka and Nepal, but in recent years, these countries have begun to seek more diverse cooperation partners and no longer lean towards New Delhi.

The recent increases in U.S. investments in these regions have in some way weakened India¡¯s geographical advantage.

The shutdown of the Chabahar Port project is not only an economic loss, but also a major blow to India's influence in Central Asia. Originally, this channel could help India bypass Pakistan and establish closer ties with Afghanistan and Central Asian countries.

Now that it is blocked by the United States, India's "westward strategy" has basically stalled.

Who decides the rules, who can break the case?

International politics has never been a fair game. The United States attacked India this time but remained silent on China, not because China was doing more "legally", but because China had the ability to make the United States hesitate.

The back reflects an old question: who can set the rules, who can choose when to abide by and when to break.

China's confidence comes from its position in the global industrial chain, and its influence in rare earths, manufacturing and technology makes the United States have to consider the consequences. Although India has great potential, it is still in the development stage and lacks sufficient countermeasures in the short term.

This event may lead India to rethink its position in the international landscape.Whether it will continue to remain "multi-party flexible" or choose a side stand between the great powers, which will be a difficult issue to avoid.

The United States 'approach also sends a signal: Even allies depend on whether you are trustworthy or not. Especially in strategically sensitive areas, once your behavior is not in the interests of a major country, sanctions may be dropped at any time.

Reality is cold, choice is difficult

The incident at Chabahar Port, in the end, was a geopolitical ¡°technical breach¡± ¨C India was not the first country to be hit by the United States, nor will it be the last.

In this game, who can be released and who will be targeted often depends not on what you do, but on whether you have the cards to fight back.

China can do what India can¡¯t, not because the policy is better, but because the code is better.This is not a gap that can be explained by the phrase ¡°It¡¯s hard to succeed¡± but the result of decades of strategic accumulation.

For India, now is the time to reconsider ¡°strategic autonomy.¡±When you want to wander between the sides, you end up at a crossroads.The world is becoming more and more realistic, and deciding what you can do has long been not an ideal, but a ability.

In the future, who can move forward in this ¡°port squad¡± and who will be marginalized, the key is not whether there are friends, but whether there is a bottom.

Source of information:

The Ministry of Transport of China and the Maritime Safety Administration of Pakistan jointly released data (as of the end of 2023): Gwadar Port invested and constructed by China has formed a deepwater berth group with an annual throughput capacity of more than 500,000 tons, making it the core hub port of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.

The official website of the U.S. Department of the Treasury released (August 2025): Sanctions were imposed on India Ports Global Limited, requiring it to terminate commercial cooperation with Iran's Chabahar port within 45 days on the grounds of allegedly assisting Iran in circumventing crude oil export restrictions.