Comment by Riaz Haq on Tuesday

India’s Great-Power Delusions
How New Delhi’s Grand Strategy Thwarts Its Grand Ambitions
Ashley J. Tellis

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/india/indias-great-power-delusions

Since the turn of the century, the United States has sought to help India rise as a great power.

--------

In military terms, it is the most significant conventional power in South Asia, but here, too, its advantages over its local rival are not enormous: in fighting in May, Pakistan used Chinese-supplied defense systems to shoot down Indian aircraft. With China on one side and an adversarial Pakistan on the other, India must always fear the prospect of an unpalatable two-front war. Meanwhile, at home, the country is shedding one of its main sources of strength—its liberal democracy—by embracing Hindu nationalism. This evolution could undermine India’s rise by intensifying communal tensions and exacerbating problems with its neighbors, forcing it to redirect security resources inward to the detriment of outward power projection. The country’s illiberal pivot further undermines the rules-based international order that has served it so well.

-------

An illiberal India is also likely to be less powerful. The BJP’s policies have polarized India along ideological and religious lines, and the unresolved issues about how India’s changing demography is to be represented in parliament threaten to exacerbate regional and linguistic divisions. This makes India look increasingly like the highly divided United States. Polarization has been bad enough for Americans, hobbling their institutions and fueling democratic decay. But it will be even worse for India, where the state and society are much weaker. Polarization, for example, could intensify the armed rebellions against New Delhi that have long been underway, creating opportunities for outside powers to sow chaos within India’s borders. Those conflicts could also spill over into India’s neighborhood, as the ideological animus against Muslims exacerbates tensions with both Bangladesh and Pakistan. Polarization would also increase India’s internal security burdens, consuming resources that New Delhi needs to project influence abroad. And even if polarization does not create more internal troubles, it will undermine New Delhi’s efforts to mobilize its population in accumulating national power.

----------

The United States has tolerated these Indian behaviors in the past in part because both countries were largely liberal democracies. As both proceed down the path of illiberalism, however, they will no longer be tied by shared values. Transactional habits may come to dominate the relationship, and Washington could demand more of New Delhi as the price of partnership. Trump’s approach to India in his second term has already signaled such an evolution. Indeed, India’s inability to match China in the future, as well as its commitment to multipolarity, which is fundamentally at odds with American interests, will be deeply inconvenient for the United States. India, it seems, will partner with the United States on some things involving China, but it is unlikely to partner with Washington in every significant arena—even when it comes to Beijing.

If New Delhi cannot effectively balance Beijing in Asia, Washington will invariably wonder how many resources and how much faith it should invest in India. A liberal United States might continue to support a liberal India because helping it would be inherently worthwhile (provided that the costs were not prohibitive and New Delhi’s success still served some American interests). But if either India or the United States remains illiberal, there will be no ideological reason for the latter to help the former.

Comment by Riaz Haq yesterday

Sushant Singh
@SushantSin
This seems to be coming after the Modi telephone call. After all that Modi has supposed to have told him which he listened to rather meekly, as per the Indian version. Something doesn't add up.

https://x.com/SushantSin/status/1935352130707099822

----------

The Hindu
@the_hindu
JUST IN | "I stopped a war between India and Pakistan. I love Pakistan, Modi is a fantastic man. Gen Munir was very helpful, Modi from the Indian side, lots of people were involved. I stopped the war, but did anyone report that?" President #DonaldTrump said, reports
@suhasinih


He has also said that the U.S. was going to make trade deal with India, according to Reuters.

https://x.com/the_hindu/status/1935351333571412218

---------------

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/india-will-not-accept-th...

Summary
Modi denies any US mediation in India-Pakistan ceasefire
"I stopped the war," says Trump
Trump says he is honored to host Pakistani army chief
India says Trump expressed support for India's anti-terrorism efforts
WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD/NEW DELHI, June 18 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump hosted Pakistan's army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir at the White House on Wednesday, in an unprecedented meeting that risked worsening a disagreement with India over the president's claim that he stopped the recent war between the nuclear-armed South Asian foes.
The lunch meeting was the first time a U.S. president had hosted the powerful head of Pakistan's army, widely regarded as having sway over the country's national security policies, at the White House unaccompanied by senior Pakistani civilian officials.

Trump said he was honored to meet Munir and that they had discussed Iran, which he said Pakistan knew better than most. Trump told reporters he had thanked Munir for ending the war with India, for which he also praised Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who he spoke to on Tuesday night.
"Two very smart people decided not to keep going with that war; that could have been a nuclear war," Trump told reporters.

Munir was expected to press Trump not to enter Israel's war with Iran and seek a ceasefire, Pakistani officials and experts said. A section of Pakistan's embassy in Washington represents Iran's interests in the United States, as Tehran does not have diplomatic relations with the U.S.
Pakistan has condemned Israel's airstrikes against Iran, saying they violate international law and threaten regional stability.

The meeting represented a major boost in U.S.-Pakistan ties, which had largely languished under Trump and his predecessor Joe Biden, as both courted India as part of efforts to push back against China.
Asked earlier what he wanted to achieve from meeting Munir, Trump told reporters: "Well, I stopped a war ... I love Pakistan. I think Modi is a fantastic man. I spoke to him last night. We're going to make a trade deal with Modi of India.

Comment by Riaz Haq yesterday

A White House love-in for Pakistan’s big man outrages India
It comes after Donald Trump ditched a meeting with Narendra Modi

https://www.economist.com/asia/2025/06/19/a-white-house-love-in-for...

India had hoped for a breakthrough at the g7 summit in Canada. Indian politicians and diplomats had spent much of the past month lobbying foreign governments to isolate Pakistan after its latest conflict with India, which ended on May 10th. America was a particular focus: Donald Trump had upset India by praising both sides, unilaterally claiming to have brokered a ceasefire and then offering to mediate in a dispute over Kashmir, despite Indian objections. Indian officials were also seeking a trade deal with America and hoped that a meeting in Calgary between Mr Trump and Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister, would help on both fronts.

It did not go according to plan. Not only did Mr Trump leave the summit early, without meeting Mr Modi. Two days later, on June 18th, America’s president hosted Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, for lunch at the White House. Mr Trump and Mr Modi spoke by phone the day before, allowing India’s leader to assert that the recent conflict ended at Pakistan’s request and to reaffirm his objections to mediation on Kashmir. But Mr Modi declined Mr Trump’s invitation to “stop by” Washington on the way home.

Field Marshal Munir’s preferential treatment is a setback for India. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, India’s foreign minister, recently drew a direct link between what he called the field marshal’s “extreme religious outlook” and a terrorist attack in the Indian-ruled part of Kashmir on April 22nd. And Mr Modi has spent much of the past decade forging closer ties with America.

The White House said it invited Field Marshal Munir after he called for Mr Trump to be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for ending the conflict with India. But they discussed Iran too. Pakistan has often offered Iran diplomatic support and has condemned Israel’s current attacks on it, so American officials could be anxious to gauge potential Pakistani responses should America become more directly involved. Pakistan’s foreign minister, Ishaq Dar, denied on June 16th that his country would carry out a nuclear strike on Israel if it attacked Iran with atomic weapons.

Recent Senate hearings suggested further reasons for Field Marshal Munir’s visit. On June 10th the commander of America’s Central Command, General Michael Kurilla, described Pakistan as a “phenomenal” counter-terrorism partner. He told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Pakistani forces had targeted leaders of isis-Khorasan, an offshoot of the group that set up a “caliphate” in Iraq and Syria in 2014. On the same day S. Paul Kapur, the nominee to be the State Department’s top South Asia official, told another Senate hearing that his approach to Pakistan would be to “pursue security co-operation” while seeking trade and investment opportunities.

Why have India’s efforts fallen short? They appear to have relied too much on the relationship forged between Mr Modi and Mr Trump during his first term. Mr Trump is now more transactional, unpredictable and dismissive of his own staff’s advice. Despite talk of warming relations, America has not spared India from its trade and immigration offensives. While American officials see India as a counterweight to China, they also want to prevent Pakistan moving deeper into China’s orbit. And Pakistan has sought to cultivate ties with Trump family members, partly by presenting itself as a cryptocurrency hub.

But India has been frustrated elsewhere too, notably in the European Union, which called for restraint from both sides during the conflict and continues to advocate direct talks between them, despite Mr Jaishankar urging it to view Pakistan as “Terroristan”.

Comment by Riaz Haq yesterday

A White House love-in for Pakistan’s big man outrages India
It comes after Donald Trump ditched a meeting with Narendra Modi

https://www.economist.com/asia/2025/06/19/a-white-house-love-in-for...

One problem is that India has yet to provide sufficient evidence of Pakistan’s involvement in the April 22nd attack. Some governments have also been unnerved by India’s vow to respond to any more such attacks with further military strikes on Pakistan. And Western officials are wary of jeopardising counter-terrorism co-operation with Pakistan.

The concern now for India is that it may struggle to win support to penalise Pakistan through international bodies. If so, India may focus more on unilateral actions. That could include an effort to renegotiate a 65-year-old river-sharing treaty. But it may also entail covert operations against militants inside Pakistan. And the next time a terrorist attack on India is linked to Pakistan, there will not be many Indian voices calling for peaceful, diplomatic counter-measures.

Comment by Riaz Haq 16 hours ago

Trump embraces Pakistan: ‘Tactical romance’ or a new ‘inner circle’? | Donald Trump News | Al Jazeera

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/19/trumps-pakistan-embrace-ta...

Trump hosts Pakistan army chief Asim Munir for an unprecedented White House lunch, as the US and Pakistan reset ties.

In his first address to a joint session of Congress on March 4 this year, after becoming United States president for a second time, Donald Trump made a striking revelation.

He referred to the deadly Abbey Gate bombing at Kabul airport in August 2021 – which occurred as thousands of Afghans tried to flee following the Taliban takeover – and said the alleged perpetrator had been apprehended.

The country he credited with the arrest: Pakistan. “I want to thank especially the government of Pakistan for helping arrest this monster,” Trump declared.

A little more than three months later, Trump hosted Pakistan’s army chief Asim Munir for lunch at the White House on Wednesday — the first time a US president has hosted a military chief from Pakistan who isn’t also the country’s head of state. Munir is on a five-day trip to the US.

For a country that Trump had, just seven years earlier, accused of giving the US “nothing but lies and deceit” and safe havens to terrorists – and one that his immediate predecessor Joe Biden called “one of the most dangerous nations” – this marks a dramatic shift.

It’s a reset that experts say has been in the making for weeks, under Trump’s second administration, and that was solidified by the brief but intense military confrontation between India and Pakistan in May, during which the US tried to mediate a ceasefire.

Some analysts warn that the evolving relationship should be viewed as a product of Trump’s personal position, rather than institutional policy.

“We are dealing with an administration which changes its tune by the hour. There is no process here,” Marvin Weinbaum, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute (MEI), told Al Jazeera.

“One minute the US has no interest, and the next minute priorities change rapidly. You’re dealing with an administration that is mercurial and personalised, and you don’t associate that with traditional US foreign policy,” he added.

However, others point out that even the optics of Trump hosting Munir are significant.

“Trump’s lunch invite to Pakistan’s army chief isn’t just protocol-breaking, it’s protocol-redefining,” said Raza Ahmad Rumi, a distinguished lecturer at the City University of New York (CUNY). “It signals, quite visibly, that Pakistan is not just on Washington’s radar, it’s in the inner circle, at least for now.”

Reset amid regional crises
The meeting between Trump and Munir came amid heightened tensions in the Middle East, where Israel has been conducting strikes inside Iranian cities since June 13. Iran has retaliated with missile attacks of its own on Israel.

The Israeli offensive – targeting Iranian generals, missile bases, nuclear facilities and scientists – has killed more than 200 people. Iran’s missile and drone attacks on Israel over the past six days have killed about 20 people.

The Benjamin Netanyahu-led Israeli government has been urging the US to join the offensive against Iran, which shares a 900-kilometre-long (559-mile) border with Pakistan.

Speaking to the media in the Oval Office after the lunch with Munir on Wednesday, Trump noted that the Pakistanis “know Iran very well, better than most,” but added that they are “not happy”.

According to Trump, however, the main reason for meeting Munir was to thank him for his role in defusing the May conflict between Pakistan and India, a confrontation that brought the region, home to more than 1.6 billion people, to the brink of nuclear war.

“The reason I had him here was that I wanted to thank him for not going into the war [with India]. And I want to thank PM [Narendra] Modi as well, who just left a few days ago. We’re working on a trade deal with India and Pakistan,” said Trump, who is known to enjoy a warm relationship with Indian leader Modi.

Comment by Riaz Haq 16 hours ago

Trump embraces Pakistan: ‘Tactical romance’ or a new ‘inner circle’? | Donald Trump News | Al Jazeera

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/19/trumps-pakistan-embrace-ta...

“These two very smart people decided not to keep going with a war that could have been a nuclear war. Pakistan and India are two big nuclear powers. I was honoured to meet him today,” he added, referring to Munir.

The crisis had begun after an April attack in Indian-administered Kashmir that killed 26 Indian civilians. India blamed Pakistan, which denied the charge and called for a “credible, independent, transparent” investigation.

On May 7, India launched strikes inside Pakistani and Pakistan-administered Kashmir territories. Pakistan responded via its air force, claiming to have downed at least six Indian jets. India confirmed losses but did not specify numbers.

The conflict escalated as both sides exchanged drones for three days and eventually launched missiles at military targets on May 10. It ended only after intense backchannel diplomacy, particularly involving the US, led to a ceasefire.

Trump reiterated his role on Wednesday. “I stopped the war between Pakistan and India. This man [Munir] was extremely influential in stopping it from the Pakistan side, Modi from the India side, and others,” he said.

While Pakistan has acknowledged the US role, India insists the ceasefire resulted solely from bilateral dialogue. Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri stated on Tuesday that Indian PM Modi had spoken to Trump by phone to underscore New Delhi’s view that there was no US-led mediation between India and Pakistan.

Arif Ansar, chief strategist at Washington-based advisory firm PoliTact, said Pakistan’s military performance during the confrontation prompted Trump’s engagement.

“It demonstrated that despite its political and economic challenges, the country can outmanoeuvre a much bigger adversary,” Ansar told Al Jazeera. “This has led President Trump to engage with Pakistan’s traditional power centres based on core strategic interests.”

“Opportunity to reassert relevance”
That engagement has a long history.

Pakistan’s relationship with the US dates back to its 1947 independence, after which it aligned with Washington during the Cold War. After the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistan supported US objectives there, and the two collaborated closely to support the mujahideen that eventually forced Moscow to pull out its troops.

Subsequently, Pakistan also backed the post-9/11 US “war on terror”.

However, over the years, many within the US strategic community also started questioning Pakistan’s credibility as a reliable security partner, especially after 9/11 architect Osama bin Laden was found in Abbottabad, close to Rawalpindi, home to Pakistan’s military headquarters in 2011.

Since the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021, the strategic partnership has waned further. Pakistan has increasingly turned towards China for economic, military and technological support.

But Weinbaum said that since Trump returned to office, Pakistan has been getting respect that was lacking under the previous Biden administration.

Trump wanted “counterterrorism assistance,” Weinbaum said – and seemingly got it.

On June 10, General Michael E Kurilla, chief of the US Central Command (CENTCOM), detailed how that cooperation led to the capture of the suspected Abbey Gate bomber.

“They [Pakistan] are in an active counterterrorism fight right now, and they have been a phenomenal partner in the counterterrorism world,” Kurilla said, in a testimony before the House Armed Services Committee in Washington, DC.

According to Kurilla, who also oversees the US military’s Middle East operations including Iran, this progress, including the arrest of the Abbey Gate bombing suspect, was made possible due to direct coordination with Pakistan’s army chief. “Field Marshal Asim Munir called me to tell me they had captured one of the Daesh-K [ISKP or ISIS-K] individuals,” he said.

Comment by Riaz Haq 15 hours ago

Suhasini Haidar
@suhasinih
Blame not the messenger in India’s diplomacy: My Op-Ed
@the_hindu
. If India's Post Op Sindoor narrative isn't getting the same global traction 2016 &2019 did... the government should review its message, global shifts and its own image issues since 2019

https://x.com/suhasinih/status/1935879600954830953

------------

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/blame-not-the-messenger-in-in...

History and literature are replete with references to not ‘shooting the messenger’ for bringing bad news. In Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra, the Egyptian queen assaults a messenger and threatens to have him “whipped with wire and stewed in brine, smarting in ling’ring pickle”, for bringing her the news that the Roman General Mark Antony has married another. “I that do bring the news made not the match,” the messenger replies, before making a hasty exit. Over the past two months, India’s ‘diplomatic messengers’ too have faced an ire that is unprecedented — criticised not for the message they bring, but for failing to convey effectively enough, the message New Delhi has sent out after Operation Sindoor (May 7-10, 2025).

Public commentary that is critical of the Ministry of External Affairs and its missions has focused broadly on three counts. First, that India received condolences and statements condemning the Pahalgam terror attack from all quarters, but not the kind of unequivocal support, especially from the neighbourhood, for retaliatory strikes on Pakistan, of the kind seen in 2016 (post-Uri) and 2019 (post-Pulwama). In 2016, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and the Maldives backed India’s decision to stay away from the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation summit in Pakistan after the Uri attack. In 2019, global solidarity with India forced even China to back a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) terror designation for Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Masood Azhar. Earlier, in 2008, there was international consensus in India’s favour after the Mumbai attacks, when Hafiz Saeed and a number of Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists were designated by the UNSC, and Pakistan was put on the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list for the first time. Instead, this time, unfavourable comparisons have been made to Pakistan for the lines of support it received from China, Turkiye, Azerbaijan, Malaysia and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page