When Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister from the Taliban government, Amir Khan Muttaqi, landed in New Delhi, the visit drew  global attention. Yet behind the quiet diplomacy and polite handshakes, something important was unfolding. For the first time since the Taliban seized Kabul in 2021, India is now openly hosting one of its senior leaders. This wasn’t about friendship but about strategy. The geopolitical landscape around Afghanistan has shifted, and India knows that isolation is no longer an option if it wishes to protect its interests.

For years, India kept the Taliban at a distance. New Delhi had invested heavily in Afghanistan’s democratic government—building roads, hospitals, and schools—while refusing to engage with a regime it viewed as a proxy for Pakistan. But the U.S. withdrawal, the rise of China and Russia, and the Taliban’s continued grip on power have forced a rethink. Muttaki’s visit represents that adjustment: a cautious effort to protect Indian influence through engagement rather than absence.

The issue that best captures this change is the debate over Bagram Air Base, a name synonymous with two decades of war. Located 70 km north of Kabul, Bagram once served as the beating heart of America’s military operations. It was where strategies were developed, drones were launched, and intelligence was coordinated. When U.S. troops abruptly abandoned the base in August 2021, leaving behind billions in equipment, it symbolized not only the end of the war but the collapse of Western dominance in the region. The Taliban quickly reclaimed it, turning Bagram into a symbol of sovereignty.

Recently, U.S. President Donald Trump reignited the controversy by demanding that Washington “take back Bagram”. Calling the withdrawal a humiliation, he suggested that regaining control of the airfield was essential to restoring American credibility. But across Asia, the reaction was clear: no one wants the Americans back in Afghanistan. The world has moved on, and so has the region.

Striking Shift In Position

At a recent meeting in Moscow, representatives from ten countries, including India, China, Pakistan, Iran, and five Central Asian republics issued a joint statement declaring that foreign military bases in Afghanistan were “unacceptable”. The surprising part wasn’t the statement itself but India’s endorsement of it. For a nation long seen as aligned with Western powers, joining a consensus with China, Russia, Pakistan and even the Taliban marked a striking shift.

Yet India’s position is not ideological; it’s pragmatic. New Delhi understands that another foreign military presence could reignite instability. If Western forces returned, extremist groups could use it as a rallying cry, fueling new waves of violence that might spill into South Asia. For a country already grappling with terrorism, that is a risk India cannot afford. Supporting the call to keep foreign bases out of Afghanistan doesn’t mean backing the Taliban’s governance; it means prioritizing regional stability over politics.

This rare agreement among India, China, Russia, Pakistan, and the Taliban shows how much the geopolitical map has changed. Each has its own reasons. Russia and China want to limit American influence near their borders; Pakistan intends to preserve its sway over Kabul; and the Taliban, still seeking legitimacy, wants to project sovereignty. For India, a stable Afghanistan acts as a buffer against terrorism and ensures its investments in the region aren’t lost. If Afghanistan collapses into another proxy war, India stands to lose the most.

Question Of Sovereignty

The Bagram debate is more than a question of control; it’s a question of sovereignty. For Afghans, it’s about ensuring their soil remains free from foreign troops. For regional powers, it's about adapting to a world where alliances are fluid and influence is shared. By supporting Afghanistan’s right to keep foreign powers out, India is signaling that it is ready to operate in a truly multipolar world order, one that values stability over ideology.

Of course, this approach comes with risks. The Taliban’s record on human rights and its ties to extremist networks remain troubling. The Taliban’s record on human rights and its ties to extremist networks remain troubling. Any engagement carries moral and political costs. But New Delhi’s policymakers seem to recognize that waiting for a perfect Afghanistan is unrealistic. The alternative, abandoning the country, would only leave space for Pakistan and China to dominate. In this case, pragmatism is not a compromise; it is a strategy for survival.

In many ways, Bagram Air Base has become a mirror reflecting the end of one era and the start of another. For twenty years, Afghanistan was a battlefield of global ambition. Today, it is a test case for whether regional actors can manage their neighborhood without outside interference. India’s choice to support Afghan sovereignty, even under the Taliban, is not a betrayal of its democratic ideals; it’s an investment in regional stability. It recognizes that in geopolitics, influence often depends less on moral clarity and more on strategic foresight.

As Afghanistan struggles to rebuild, Bagram stands as both a scar and a lesson, a reminder of how intervention failed and how fragile independence can be. For India, backing the idea that no foreign power should return to that base is a way of saying the region must take responsibility for its own peace. It’s a gamble, but one grounded in hard-earned realism. In a new great game of South and Central Asia, power no longer comes from armies or airbases; it comes from vision and restraint. And India, for now, appears determined to choose both.

(The author is Assistant Professor, Department of Geopolitics and International Relations, Manipal Institute of Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts (MISHA), Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal, India. Views expressed are personal. He can be contacted at sushant.parashar@manipal.edu )