7 hours ago
What America doesn't get about South Asia: India and Pakistan can't be equated
Written by Milinda Moragoda
For decades, US foreign policy has framed India and Pakistan as parallel actors in a regional rivalry — an outdated assumption rooted in Cold War thinking. This legacy framework has become a liability. It fails to account for how dramatically the two countries have diverged — economically, politically, and strategically — and risks misaligning US interests in a multipolar world.
India, the world's most populous democracy, is poised to become the third-largest economy. It is a global leader in technology and space exploration, and home to a vast and influential diaspora. Its institutions remain rooted in a democratic tradition that supports long-term growth and international engagement. India is increasingly viewed as a stabilising force in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond. It plays a leading role in the Quad, recently concluded its G20 presidency, and is deepening partnerships across Asia, Africa, and the West.
Pakistan presents a sharply different picture. Born out of a hasty Partition in 1947 and fractured by civil war in 1971, Pakistan has never fully emerged from the shadow of military control. Civilian governments remain weak and often short-lived. The economy is in recurrent crisis, sustained by external bailouts. Radicalisation continues to permeate parts of the political and military establishment. Journalists, judges, and civil society actors often operate under intense pressure, while political dissent is routinely suppressed.
Washington has contributed to this imbalance. During the Cold War, the US propped up Pakistan as a counterweight to India, and later relied on it as a staging ground during the Soviet-Afghan war and the War on Terror. Even as Pakistan covertly developed nuclear weapons throughout the 1980s, Washington turned a blind eye in the early stages — responding later, by which time the programme was already well advanced. These tactical decisions sidelined Pakistan's democratic institutions, empowered its military intelligence complex, and entrenched a culture of impunity that persists to this day.
The fallout is stark. While India has established its credentials as an important player in a multipolar world and has staked a rightful claim to a permanent seat in the Security Council, Pakistan remains geopolitically transactional and internally unstable. Pakistan's capable citizens — entrepreneurs, academics, reformers — are constrained by a system that discourages institutional reform and relies instead on geopolitical leverage.
The US withdrawal from Afghanistan has only intensified regional challenges. India is left to absorb the consequences: A collapsed Afghan state, rising extremism, and a neighbour with an increasingly fragile grip on security and economic stability. Instability in Pakistan and Afghanistan now reverberates across South Asia, threatening hard-won regional gains.
Despite these realities, parts of the Washington policy establishment continue to default to 'balanced' diplomacy — treating both countries as parallel entities with equal claims on US strategic bandwidth. This misrepresents the regional equation and undermines the US's geopolitical interests and credibility as a democratic ally in Asia.
Some observers argue that this policy of parity is not simply a holdover from the past, but an intentional strategy to keep a rising India in check, viewing it as a potential competitor rather than a partner. If that is true, it would be a grave miscalculation. Such thinking is counterproductive and would suggest that the US has yet to absorb the lessons of its own Cold War-era missteps in South Asia. It also risks alienating one of the world's most consequential democracies. Even though India's foreign policy may not always align with US preferences, it is fundamentally a constitutional democracy with enduring institutions and a vibrant civil society. Pakistan, by contrast, is a military-dominated state whose political cycles and economic direction are shaped more by external influences than domestic consensus.
To remain effective in South Asia, US policy must reflect this asymmetry. Treating India and Pakistan as interchangeable partners sends the wrong signal to allies, undermines US credibility, and weakens regional stability. It perpetuates a flawed narrative that has outlived its strategic purpose.
The time has come for Washington to adopt a more strategic approach that is based on institutional strength, democratic resilience, and long-term alignment, rather than on historical convenience. This shift is not about abandoning Pakistan, but about acknowledging the costs of maintaining a policy of false parity.
In an era of multipolar complexity, where strategic clarity is essential, the US must recalibrate its approach. The stakes — for South Asia and for US influence in the Indo-Pacific — demand nothing less.
The writer is a former Sri Lankan cabinet minister, High Commissioner to India, and founder of the Sri Lankan strategic affairs think tank, Pathfinder Foundation
