The strategic consequences extend well beyond Dhaka. Bangladesh occupies a critical position in the Bay of Bengal, bordering major sea lanes and neighboring one of the world’s most volatile regions. A Bangladesh drifting toward extra-constitutional governance while deepening ties with China and Pakistan would alter regional dynamics in ways that merit serious attention in Washington and European capitals.
Today, India’s grand strategy faces a similarly critical moment—this time shaped not by the Kissinger Doctrine but by the Donroe Doctrine. New Delhi must avoid relying on limited or incremental approaches. Instead, its strategy must be upgraded to a level that allows it to take calculated risks, withstand U.S. diplomatic blitzkrieg, and navigate an anxiety-ridden global order with greater resilience and confidence.
Greenland’s geopolitical prominence illustrates how a distant region can reflect deeper shifts in global power, economics, and security. For countries like India, Greenland is not about territorial ambition; it is a reminder that structural shifts in global power dynamics transcend geography. In a realist world, engagement is not optional; it is necessary for safeguarding long-term interests in a system where power continually redistributes itself.
According to realist paradigms, nuclear weapons can be seen as the ultimate guarantee of national security and when there will be no restrictions, states will strive to dominate or achieve parity. Lapse of New START can thus create worsening security dilemmas, where efforts of any state to enhance its deterrent value is seen as a threat, and the state retaliates. The position of nuclear weapons as power projectors will, therefore, be more intense.
Ultimately, the India–Nepal border dispute is not only about the origin of a river. It is about how neighboring countries engage with shared history, evolving national identities, and shifting geopolitical environments. In a region shaped by growing strategic competition and enduring historical legacies, the conversation around Kalapani and Lipulekh remains a significant chapter in South Asian diplomacy
Amid fragmented supply chains, the Russia-Ukraine war, Russia-China convergence, and escalating US-China tensions, India’s nuclear cooperation with Russia helps hedge against overdependence on the West and ensures Moscow remains embedded within India’s strategic ecosystem. While Russia needs stable export markets, India needs dependable technology and supply chains — a mutual dependence strengthened by sanctions and geopolitical flux.
The Brotherhood’s strategy is global. In India, pro-Palestinian protests have been weaponized by groups including Jamaat-e-Islami, Jaish-e-Muhammad, Lashkar-e-Taiba, ISIS-linked entities, and Pakistan’s ISI to stoke communal hostility and recruit young Muslims into political Islam. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been funneled toward campus radicalization, media manipulation, and political influence campaigns that demonize Hindus and normalize Islamist narratives.
Even reciprocal communal violence is spreading between Bangladesh and India through generative AI tools. Meta AI’s text-to-image generation feature is producing and propagating hate against Muslim minorities in India, which is creating an anti-India narrative in Bangladesh. Similarly, Several AI-generated images were found circulating on X and Facebook showing burning temples and torched bodies of the Hindu minority in Bangladesh
India’s multi-dimensional and wide-ranging relationship with Russia, with strategic issues, defence and energy security as bulwarks, has been one of the critical pillars of its foreign policy, one it will try to ensure remains vibrant and mutually beneficial and supportive during Putin’s visit, despite pressures. If, additionally, it can gain global stature by furthering a peace agreement on Ukraine, New Delhi will consider it a visit well done.
Foreign observers sometimes miss the broader shift. Since 2022, Pakistan’s national-security leadership has been engaged in what scholars would call a “deterrence-rebuilding project” across multiple fronts: Balochistan, the former tribal areas, the eastern border, and now the west. Each operation has been calibrated to restore the adversary’s respect for Pakistani red lines without triggering an all-out war.
What makes this moment especially dangerous is the eerie sense of déjà vu. Bangladesh has stood at crossroads before: 1996, when disputed elections pushed the country into chaos; 2006, when clashes opened the door for a military-backed caretaker; and 2014, when an opposition boycott led to a hollow election. Each time, the consequences were severe; each time, political leaders promised the nation had learned its lesson. Yet here we are again, watching democracy unravel in slow motion.
Investigations by India’s National Investigation Agency (NIA) and Delhi Police in the recent Delhi bombing have indicated the plausibility of a transnational chain of coordination, linking operatives in India with handlers abroad, including individuals based in Turkey. NIA investigations identified a handler, codenamed 'Ukasa', reportedly located in Ankara, Turkey. Travel records confirmed several accused in the case of having visited Turkey between August and September 2022, where they reportedly met Syrian operatives while communicating with Pakistan-linked handlers.
This is not an argument against the personal faith of soldiers, nor a denial of the cultural identity of the majority. It is an argument for institutional restraint, for secular professionalism, and for recognizing that the military must represent all Indians, not only the largest community or the ruling party’s ideological core.
On the evening of 10th November, a car exploded near Delhi’s Red Fort which took the lives of 13 people. Within the next six hours of the explosion, a confessional video in perfect Hindi language from Jaish-e-Muhammad starts circulating on WhatsApp and national television in India. In the next 12 hours the video had been seen by 40 million people. But what made it intriguing was that within 24 hours many of the AI detection tools marked the video 99.9% synthetic.
The ISI–LeT nexus remains the most destabilizing factor in South Asia’s security architecture. With Pakistan actively leveraging its ideological networks in Bangladesh, the region faces the prospect of a renewed wave of cross-border terrorism. The alignment of extremist elements across Pakistan and Bangladesh not only threatens India’s national security but also endangers the stability of the entire subcontinent.
Iran’s influence among Shia communities across South Asia represents an additional layer reinforcing its position in the Muslim world—one that has not been decisively weakened by the 12-day conflict. On the contrary, anti-Israel and, in some cases, anti-Western sentiments among South Asian Muslims have intensified, offering Tehran new opportunities to leverage these emotions in favour of its strategic endgame.
Perhaps the gravest failure of the UNFCCC process is its lack of accountability. As Guterres stated, “It’s no longer time for negotiations. It’s time for implementation.” But what happens when countries do not implement? Seventy-nine countries have yet to submit their 2025 NDCs—even after extended deadlines. Surprisingly, this includes India, the only major economy not to submit revised NDCs, and the only South Asian country (excluding Afghanistan) yet to do so. These NDCs were critical for initiating the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG).
Walk into a gathering of South Asians abroad, in the U.S., the Gulf, Europe, and you will see Akhand Bharat in its simplest form. People do not ask, “Are you Indian or Pakistani?” They connect over language, food, festivals, music, accents, humour, and the familiar comfort of shared culture. A Tamilian and a Sindhi, a Bengali and a Pashtun, a Punjabi Hindu and a Pakistani Muslim, outside the subcontinent, they all recognise the common civilisational thread instantly. What divides them here, unites them there.
Handing over strategic projects in Balochistan to China or the US raises serious concerns of neo-colonialism. Both states pursue imperialist designs and expansionist ambitions to protect their own interests, which could further inflame the insurgency and unrest in the province. The state is playing with fire and must carefully reconsider its approach to such a sensitive region.
