Every democracy permits foreign funding under regulated conditions. The question is whether democratic states possess adequate mechanisms to ensure transparency, accountability and protection against external influence operations, which could be against core national interests.
Over the past two months, a series of alleged push-in incidents along the Bangladesh-India border has reportedly left scores of people stranded in zero-line and no-man's-land areas under difficult conditions.
The central message at the Shangri-La Dialogue is that America is staying, but on new terms. It will remain the core military balancer in the Indo-Pacific, but it expects allies and partners to become serious contributors. The era of strategic free-riding is ending. The new Indo-Pacific order will increasingly be defined by those willing and able to share the burden of preserving it.
The CEPS conference shows Pakistan is shifting the Indus issue from technical water management to geopolitical norm contest. That’s the key transition. Once a river dispute enters Brussels policy networks, international arbitration, climate diplomacy, and security discourse it becomes much harder to keep it bilateral. And that is likely Pakistan’s main strategic objective.
Bihar's 2025 electoral revision controversy is not only a national alarm bell but reveals how easily democratic process can be exclusionary under the guise of order; how silence can mask erasure. To preserve democracy, India must reimagine governance not as a gatekeeper of rights but as a facilitator of justice; it must transition from exclusionary governance to one rooted in dignity, justice, and participation, as voting is not just a right but recognition.
A hug, even an awkward or forced one, between Modi and any world leader, particularly Trump will have no bearing on his policy however much he continues to refer to both India and the prime minister as his friend. At best, it is a lip-deep expression that so many Indians, both here in America and in India, have treated as an article of faith. It is anything but that.
This client-state relationship is critical for the illusionary perseverance of Pakistani relevance. Pakistan becomes indispensable not because it is reliable, but because it's situationally useful. The US, China, and Gulf states don’t expect consistency, they expect deliverables. As long as Pakistan delivers (or threatens to disrupt), it retains leverage.
Trump’s renewed tariff war may upend the global trade landscape once again, but India is well-positioned to weather the storm. Its strong domestic economic fundamentals, relatively low dependence on merchandise exports for GDP growth, and diversified export base put it at a strategic advantage—particularly over export-heavy rivals like Vietnam and China.
The repressive nature of the Taliban government along with the absence of a credible international enforcement mechanism for human rights have left Afghan women in despair. Publicly rejecting the ICC ruling and lack of enforcement mechanism of such organizations might set an example to other ideologically resistant countries that global norms can be discarded without consequences.
India has extended a $1 billion credit line for Sri Lanka by one year. Given these realities, Sri Lanka’s path to stability must be built in close collaboration with India. This is more than an economic necessity; it is a strategic recalibration. Working with India also brings Sri Lanka closer to meeting U.S. expectations while balancing regional interests.
The recent India-Pakistan conflict, China’s support for the latter, and China’s growing footprints in South Asia – clearly aimed at undercutting India and keeping New Delhi tied down in its immediate neighbourhood -- cannot be overlooked. Recently, China has proposed an alternative to the defunct SAARC organisation Beijing is also trying to build up a China-Bangladesh-Pakistan trilateral.
If Nepal’s political parties cannot provide a functioning and trustworthy alternative, the longing for the past—however problematic—will continue to grow. For democracy to survive and thrive in Nepal, it must deliver not just procedures and elections, but stability, accountability, and a renewed social contract with the people.
A nation's power today is judged not just by its military or economy but also by the credibility, speed, and resonance of its narrative. As adversaries evolve their hybrid warfare strategies to target public opinion, social trust, and international perception, India must develop a narrative response architecture that is anticipatory rather than reactive
Flashforward from 1971 to 2025 to a Pakistan facing almost the same kind of problems that it was facing in 1971: same intrusions of military in public affairs, same hopelessness, same corruption, same or more inflation and, most importantly, the same threat of rebellion.
The warm reception given to Pakistan's Army Chief in Washington is more than symbolic. It indicates Washington's strategic calculation—that India, despite its rhetoric, is becoming a more problematic partner. Washington, while not forsaking India, is hedging its bets. Its embrace of Pakistan is a backup plan.
India’s states play an outsized role in public spending accounting for nearly +/- 60% of total government expenditure. However, their fiscal health varies greatly across pan India. As someone closely observing both macroeconomic trends and grassroots governance models, I notice a growing divide between states that follow prudent fiscal practices and those still trapped in populist spending cycles.
When democracies embrace the traits of war economies and view peace as a sign of weakness, we need to question not about those who benefit from war, but rather about those who continue to engage in it. Not only does it include safety, but it also includes power, contracts, careers, and control.
The age of overt, high-visibility strikes is diminishing in returns. Covert operations, cyber infiltration, and disrupting terror logistics silently deliver greater impact at a lower political cost. India needs to establish a dedicated Psychological and Information Warfare Command, rather than relying solely on MEA press briefings or tweets from leaders.
BRICS has the potential—and perhaps the will. Ahead of COP30, it should convene a high-level “Redefining Climate Summit” with other like-minded nations invited to the BRICS table. Let the world know: BRICS can indeed build the force to break the climate blockade. The clock is not ticking anymore. It’s screaming.
