When Iran fired missiles at Qatar’s Ras Laffan Industrial City in retaliation for an Israeli strike on its South Pars gas facility, the shockwaves were felt immediately across global energy markets. But thousands of kilometres away, in New Delhi, Mumbai, and countless Indian households dependent on LPG cylinders and CNG vehicles, a quieter but equally serious crisis is now unfolding.

For India — a nation that imports over 88% of its crude oil and nearly 50% of its natural gas — the attack on Ras Laffan is not a distant geopolitical event. It is a direct hit on the country’s energy jugular.

Why Qatar Matters So Much to India

Let the numbers speak.

Qatar is India’s single largest supplier of LNG and its largest supplier of LPG. In 2024-25 alone, India imported energy from Qatar worth a staggering $11.08 billion — forming the backbone of a bilateral trade relationship worth $14.14 billion in total.

Three Indian companies sit at the heart of this energy dependence:

• Petronet LNG Ltd (PLL) — imports approximately 7.5 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) of LNG from Qatar
• GSPC — imports 1 MTPA of LNG from Qatar
• GAIL India — imports under 1 MMTPA of LNG from Qatar

Beyond LNG, Qatar also supplied approximately 5 million metric tonnes of LPG to Indian firms — including the country’s major oil marketing companies (OMCs). Add to that exports of ethylene, propylene, ammonia, urea, and polyethylene, and the full picture of India’s Qatar dependence becomes starkly clear.

Two Problems — and the Second One Is Far Worse

Before the Ras Laffan strike, India’s energy crisis from the Gulf war was painful but theoretically temporary. The Strait of Hormuz blockade had disrupted transportation — a logistical problem that would ease once the waters reopened.

Now, the calculus has changed entirely.

The damage to the Ras Laffan Gas-to-Liquids facility is a structural problem — not a logistical one. Even when the war ends, India’s gas imports from Qatar will depend on how long it takes to repair and restore the facility. That could take months, not weeks.

As one official put it plainly: “Even after the war ends or eases, problems for India will depend on the extent of damage done by the Iranian strike at Ras Laffan.”

The Domestic Crunch: CNG, PNG and Empty Industrial Pipelines

The impact is already being felt on Indian streets.

India produces about 90 Million Metric Standard Cubic Metres per day (MMSCMD) of natural gas domestically, but consumes approximately 189 MMSCMD. The import shortfall of roughly 30 MMSCMD — previously sourced from Gulf suppliers — has been directly affected by a force majeure declaration from a major Qatari processing facility.

The government has been diverting available natural gas to serve domestic consumers through PNG (Piped Natural Gas) and CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) for vehicles — leaving commercial and industrial consumers facing severe shortages.

Meanwhile, state-run oil marketing companies have already raised LPG rates, and despite the Indian crude oil basket crossing a punishing $146 per barrel, petrol and diesel pump prices are being held artificially — a situation that cannot last indefinitely.

Brent crude, which was already at $103.42 a barrel, surged a further 5.6% to $113.39 in a single afternoon following the Ras Laffan attack — a move that has further widened the gap between international benchmarks and India’s already elevated import costs.

India Scrambles for Alternatives

The government is not sitting still. Indian refiners and energy officials have been actively diversifying procurement away from the Gulf — securing LPG and LNG cargoes from:

United States, Norway, Canada, Algeria — and other non-Gulf sources.

Previously, approximately 60% of India’s LPG came from Gulf nations including Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, with 40% produced domestically. That ratio is now being urgently rebalanced.

But diversification takes time, involves higher costs, and longer shipping routes — all of which will ultimately be passed on, in some form, to the Indian consumer.

Beyond Energy: The Full Scale of the Qatar Trade Relationship

The damage goes beyond fuel. Qatar is also a significant source of organic chemicals ($369.86 million), plastics ($222.47 million), and fertilisers ($208.4 million) for India.

On the export side, India sends cereals, iron and steel products, machinery, gems and jewellery, vehicles, and electrical equipment to Qatar — a trade lane worth $1.68 billion annually that is now under serious threat.

Key Indian exports to Qatar in FY25 included cereals ($165.03 million), iron and steel articles ($154.04 million), nuclear reactors and boilers ($151.73 million), gems and jewellery ($113.76 million), and vehicles and parts ($95.49 million).

A prolonged war in the Gulf does not just raise petrol prices in Mumbai — it disrupts an entire web of trade, investment, and supply chains that millions of Indians depend on, often without realising it.

The Bottom Line

India finds itself caught in the crossfire of a war it had no hand in starting. The attack on Ras Laffan has transformed what was already a difficult energy situation into a potentially prolonged crisis — one that will test the government’s ability to secure alternative supplies, manage prices, and shield ordinary citizens from the full cost of a conflict raging thousands of kilometres away.

The war in the Gulf is no longer just someone else’s problem. For India, it arrived the moment those missiles hit Ras Laffan.

In what could mark a significant and dangerous escalation in the ongoing Iran-US conflict, a United States F-35 fighter jet was forced to make an emergency landing at a US air base in the Middle East on Thursday — after coming under what is believed to be Iranian fire mid-mission.

The incident was first reported by CNN, citing two sources familiar with the matter, and has since sent shockwaves through military and foreign policy circles watching the conflict closely.

What We Know So Far

Captain Tim Hawkins, spokesperson for US Central Command (CENTCOM), confirmed that the aircraft — a F-35 stealth fighter jet, America’s most advanced frontline combat aircraft — was “flying a combat mission over Iran” when it was forced to divert and land.

Hawkins confirmed the aircraft landed safely and added that the incident is currently under investigation.

Two sources familiar with the matter told CNN that the jet came under what is suspected to be Iranian fire — though the exact nature of the fire, whether anti-aircraft artillery, a surface-to-air missile, or another weapon system, has not yet been officially confirmed.

Why This Matters: The F-35 Is Not Just Any Jet

The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is the most expensive weapons programme in US military history and is considered virtually undetectable by conventional radar systems due to its advanced stealth technology. The fact that one was apparently targeted — and forced to make an emergency landing — raises serious and immediate questions.

If Iran was indeed responsible, it would suggest Tehran either possesses — or has recently acquired — air defence capabilities sophisticated enough to detect, track, and engage an F-35 in active stealth mode. That is not a capability Iran was widely believed to hold.

The development also directly contradicts earlier assessments that Iran’s military infrastructure had been significantly degraded following Operation Midnight Hammer in June 2025.

The Bigger Picture: Escalation at Every Turn

This incident comes amid an already deeply volatile situation. The Trump administration has been conducting active military operations over Iran while simultaneously claiming — through Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard — that Iran’s nuclear enrichment programme has been “obliterated” and poses no active threat.

Yet US combat jets continue to fly missions over Iranian airspace. And now, one has come back damaged.

President Donald Trump famously said he was “shocked” when Iran struck back after the initial US attacks — despite intelligence reports suggesting retaliation was a likely outcome. The question now being asked in Washington and beyond is: what comes next?

Iranian forces have already targeted US bases across the Gulf region, struck Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Kuwait, and closed the Strait of Hormuz — one of the world’s most critical oil shipping lanes.

A US F-35 being hit — if confirmed — would represent a dramatic new chapter in this conflict.

No Statement from Tehran — Yet

At the time of writing, Iran has not officially claimed responsibility for the incident. However, Iranian officials have repeatedly stated that any military aggression against the country will be met with a direct and forceful response — and the Islamic Republic has a documented history of following through.

The Pentagon and CENTCOM are expected to release further details as the investigation progresses.

This is a developing story. Daily Global Diary will update as more information becomes available.

Almost three weeks into the Iran war, something extraordinary happened inside the walls of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee — officials from the Trump administration contradicted their own president, not once, not twice, but repeatedly, and in public.

At the centre of it all? Tulsi Gabbard — the Director of National Intelligence — who came in to testify and ended up raising more questions than she answered.

The Nuclear Programme Is Gone. So What Exactly Are We Fighting For?

Let’s start with what Gabbard actually said. Referring to Operation Midnight Hammer — the U.S. strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities in June 2025 — she told the committee plainly:

“Iran’s nuclear enrichment program was obliterated. There has been no efforts since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability.”

That’s the Director of National Intelligence of the United States saying Iran’s nuclear threat has been neutralised. Fair enough.

But here’s where it gets complicated. Just weeks earlier, Donald Trump stood before the nation in his State of the Union address and told Americans that Iran was actively attempting to rebuild its nuclear programme. His White House adviser and special envoy, Steve Witkoff, went even further — claiming Iran was “a week away from having industrial-grade bomb-making material.”

So which is it? Obliterated or imminent? Gone or almost here?

Nobody in the room seemed to want to answer that.

The Hearing That Revealed Everything — and Nothing

Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) was among the first to notice something odd: Gabbard’s entire opening statement hadn’t even mentioned Operation Midnight Hammer — the very military operation used to justify the Iran war. It was Ossoff who had to bring it up himself.

When pressed further, Gabbard added that the intelligence community’s assessment “stayed the same as before” — meaning Iran had made no attempt to restart its nuclear programme. This directly contradicted Trump’s claim that Iran was rebuilding.

Then came perhaps the most jaw-dropping moment of the hearing.

Ossoff asked Gabbard directly about what constitutes an “imminent threat” — the phrase the White House has used repeatedly to justify military action against Iran. Her response?

“It is not the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what is and is not an imminent threat.”

Ossoff didn’t hold back. He told her that was precisely the job of the intelligence community — to assess threats to the United States and inform policymakers accordingly.

The exchange left many watching in disbelief. The top intelligence official in America had essentially said: don’t ask us, ask the president.

And Then There’s the Small Matter of Iran Striking Back

If the contradictions around the nuclear programme weren’t enough, Trump added another layer of confusion when he admitted he didn’t expect Iran to retaliate after U.S. strikes.

“They weren’t supposed to go after all these other countries in the Middle East… They hit Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait. Nobody expected that. We were shocked. You know, they fought back,” Trump said.

Except — according to multiple U.S. officials and sources familiar with intelligence assessments — Iran’s retaliation had been considered a likely outcome well before the strikes. The possible closure of the Strait of Hormuz was also flagged as a potential Iranian response.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt rushed to clarify on X (formerly Twitter), writing that Trump was “fully briefed” on the Strait of Hormuz scenario and that the Pentagon had been planning for such a possibility “for DECADES.”

So… he was fully briefed, but still shocked? The timeline isn’t adding up.

The Resignation Letter Nobody Wanted to Talk About

Adding yet another dimension to this story is the resignation of Joe Kent, who wrote in his resignation letter that Iran posed no real threat to the United States and that the war was manufactured “solely based on Israeli pressure.”

It’s a damning assessment — from someone who was on the inside.

Israel has long advocated for a firmer stance against Iran, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has pushed for years for action against Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. Whether that pressure played a decisive role in the Trump administration’s decision-making remains, at this point, an open and deeply uncomfortable question.

The Bottom Line

Here’s what we know: Iran’s nuclear facilities were struck. The intelligence community says there’s been no effort to rebuild. The President says there was an imminent threat. His own DNI won’t define what “imminent threat” means. A senior official resigned saying the war was manufactured. And Trump says he was shocked by a retaliation that his own intelligence community had reportedly anticipated.

The American public — and frankly, the world — deserves a straight answer. Right now, it seems like no one in Washington is willing to give one.