India and Pakistan used to dance together; locked in step, even if offbeat. Now, they move in opposite directions, occasionally brushing shoulders, never quite facing each other.
Take this month. On one hand, India is set to join the Central Asian Football Associationโs (CAFA) Nations Cup; a sporting signal of its growing diplomatic footprint across post-Soviet Asia. On the other hand, India pulled out of the WCL 2025 cricket semi-final against Pakistan, citing the tragic Pahalgam terror attack. The result? Pakistan walked into the final uncontested.
Two headlines. Two very different moods. One shows India gaining legitimacy in a new regional club. The other reflects how fragile the bilateral dance with Pakistan remains.
This isnโt about right or wrong. Itโs about a diplomatic rhythm thatโs hard to follow. India sometimes excels abroad while faltering at home, its domestic football system is teetering, its Super League in limbo, and its national team languishing. Sunil Chhetri, the 40-year-old legend, returned from retirement not to take a victory lapโbut to hold the system together.
โEverybody in the Indian football ecosystem is worried, hurt, scared,โ he posted on X.
And yet, Indiaโs being invited to stages it never used to grace. A non-Stan playing among the Stans. Meanwhile, Pakistan, linguistically and geographically arguably a Central Asian lowland, isnโt even in the conversation.
The irony isnโt lost on anyone. Two countries forever linked by history and rivalryโฆ now circling each other at distance, skipping the tango and dancing with everyone else.
And yet, from a Bahรกโรญ view, itโs all a bit tragic. โThe Earth is but one country and mankind its citizens,โ Bahรกสผuโllรกh reminds us. But here we are; refusing to play, competing for soft power, caught in new versions of the old Great Game.
India might win the optics. Pakistan might win a walkover. But the region? It keeps moving. And the music plays on.
I’ve been watching the Lok Sabha ‘debate’ on operation sindhoor. The commonality for both sides is the Pak bashing.
On one hand Amit Shah chides Gaurav Gogoi for visiting Pakistan and says that during the congress tenure there was no need for terrorists to infiltrate as they could simply get a visa. Owaisi then takes the govt to task for allowing any sort of sporting contact with Pak, asking what shame is left if the widows are insulted with a match on TV.
The congress main thrust of attack is on the govt failings to convince the world about joining the ostracization of Pakistan.
A detente is the last thing on anyone’s mind.
It also puts me in mind of Pandit Browns comment,
“Just as earlier generations of non-Congress politicians had to genuflect before the established Nehruvian ideology, so now do Congress-members and people of non-BJP parties must treat Hindutva as the default assumption of the voters even while protesting it.”
This makes things inconsistent on the congress side, while representing the secular-minority anti-hindutva compact they are also trying to wrestle the bjp boys into the ‘weak on Pakistan’ box, which was their traditional abode.
Ideally the opposition is better served by quickly wrapping up this debate and hit the BJP hard on social cohesion and economic inefficiency, that’s a continually replenishing well.
the Overton Window has shifted; I had to take a step back when I realised what Owaisi was saying!
Owaisi has always made strongly anti-Pakistan statements. As a member of a threatened minority he has to be “more loyal than the king”
On Congress: Just because they stand up for secularism and minority rights doesn’t mean that they aren’t nationalistic. It was Indira Gandhi that broke Pakistan into two. Modi can’t dream of achieving anything similar.
Standing up for the Muslim minority within India doesn’t mean Congress is soft on Pakistan. If a Pakistani political party stands up for the rights of Pakistani Hindus that doesn’t mean they are soft on India.
that’s a good point
Not to engage needlessly but I don’t think that’s completely accurate. Of course one can never gauge a person’s mind and motivations with certainty but I’ve been a long time observer of Owaisi.
1. He’s been a long term Muslim voice against Pakistan, his favourite statement is those who left are Razakar and those who stayed are Wafadar.
2. He is an exception, there is no other popular Muslim leader who publicly bashes Pakistan, largely because he is based out of Hyderabad which is both exceptionally peaceful and has a large Muslim population. I cannot actually remember any riots or bomb blasts in the city (pls no pedantic fact checking)
3. He’s both extremely well educated, articulate in multiple languages and an excellent politician. Basically he’s smart enough to both catch the mood of the moment and polished enough to provide soundbites to media and disparate audiences.
4. He is very non-syncretic, he’s quite into talking about how India is a holy land for Islam by virtue of all the most eminent clerics who originate from here.
5. He does a little tag-team with his brother. Asaduddin is the statesman and media figure. Akbaruddin is the attack dog, he whips up anti-hindu sentiment around elections and keeps the more extremist elements happy.
The point is that Owaisi could not have a political career in India if he weren’t anti-Pakistan. Many Indians already think of Indian Muslims as a fifth column.
Similarly, Pakistani Hindu parliamentarians (as well as those from other minorities) have to be much more stridently pro-Pakistan than the Muslim majority. They are also seen as a fifth column.
Partition really messed us all up.
If I remember correctly Owaisi is pretty much a Nepo politician, his family is very closely associated with the Nawabs of Hyd and have been leading the Muslim populace for generations. Pakistan bashing is just what he finds politically expedient. Congress Muslim politicians almost never engage in this.
There’s a lot of nuance in these things.
I read the Wiki article. MIM started out as a communal party advocating independence from India. After Partition, they had to rebrand as AIMIM. Owaisi inherited his father’s constituency.
Owaisi is also anti Ahmadi (he doesn’t think they are Muslims) so there is a lot to dislike about him.
Congress Muslim politicians may not explicitly make anti-Pakistan statements (I don’t know enough about this) but they cannot be seen as being soft on Pakistan either. That’s my point.
Actually at the risk of infuriating you, I feel your point has subtly changed over this discussion.
You started off with stating that as a member of the minority Owaisi has to express his loyalty more than others.
He doesn’t have to, it’s his choice. Most Muslims in India don’t. He specifically does. Also the media are super eager to cover him and social media gives outsize notice.
Your next assertion was that he can’t have a career without doing so. This isn’t true at all, the seat he wins is very safe and his margins are very comfortable. I imagine his base would be happier if he didn’t go so hard (Hyderabad used to have lots of fireworks when Pakistan won in cricket, not so much nowadays)
No politician can be soft on Pakistan in the current climate. So your latest assertion is a bit tautological.
Finally Owaisi has a conservative Muslim base to deal with too, he’s walking a fine wire, I think the Ahmadiyyas are just politically expendable.
Happily for the Ahmadiyyas, it’s not a big deal in India, they have no physical threat
“Most Muslims in India don’t”– Most Muslims in India are not in the parliament. As a politician from a minority community he has to prove his patriotism. Especially because his party started out as a separatist outfit. I don’t imagine people forget that fact.
He’s a right-wing Sunni (This is not my subjective judgment. Wiki notes AIMIM is a right-wing party). His views on Ahmadis make sense in that context.
Most Muslim Politicians in India I meant. You’re probably right about Owaisi’s specific reasons though, the point is he is the exception and his reasons do not transpose to others.
Another thing I found telling (I saw this on twitter) was that Priyanka Gandhi made a speech in which she referred to the victims of Pahalgam as “Indians”. The BJP representatives were quick to correct her language and call the victims “Hindus”.
Obviously, they were Hindu but Congress wants to focus on their identity as Indian citizens while the BJP wants to focus on their religion.
well they died because they were Hindus..
Someone needs to get that family out of politics at this point they can’t tell their ass from their elbow.
Case in point, when Rahul Gandhi is asked about Trump’s comment that the Indian economy is a dead economy – “He’s right, everybody knows this”.
Every other congress leader is circling the wagons against the Americans while this moron…
But they were also Indian citizens.
This just says a lot about the difference between Congress and the BJP. Congress looks at this incident as an attack on India. BJP looks at it as an attack on Hinduism.
Suppose there was a terrorist attack on Pakistan and some Pakistani political parties emphasized that the victims were “Pakistani” while other political parties focused on them being “Muslim”. Which party would you side with?
The militants asked for the names and religions of the tourists,[19] and specifically targeted those who were Hindus.[8][2] The attackers killed the Hindu men after separating them from the Muslim men.[68] Some tourists were asked to recite the Islamic verse of kalima, so that the militants could segregate them by religion.[20][69] Some Hindu men were forced to remove their trousers to check for a lack of circumcision before being shot at close range.[63][70] The militants told some Hindu women that they were spared so that they could narrate the horrors of their men’s killing to the Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi.[71][24]
The first tourist to be shot was newly married Shubham Dwivedi from Kanpur, who was visiting Kashmir with his wife.[23] The militants approached the couple and asked, “Are you a Hindu or a Muslim?” and Dwivedi responded that “We are Hindus” and was shot point-blank in the head.[8][23] Another newlywed victim was Indian Navy lieutenant, Vinay Narwal from Haryana, who went to Pahalgam six days after his wedding with his wife.[72] In a viral video of the attack, his wife is heard saying “a man suddenly came and said he’s not Muslim… then shot him.”[73] The militants shot three bullets into Narwal’s neck, chest and thighs “after realizing he was a Hindu”.[8]
The daughter of a Hindu tourist from Pune recounted that militants asked her father to recite an Islamic verse, and “when he failed to do so, they pumped three bullets into him, one on the head, one behind the ear and another in the backโ.[74] The wife of another victim from Andhra Pradesh told the state’s deputy chief minister Pawan Kalyan that she and her husband lay on the ground, and the terrorists asked twice, “Hindu hai, muslim hai?” (lit.โ’Are (you) Hindu? Are (you) Muslim?’), and when they did not respond, her husband was shot dead.[75] A Bengali Hindu professor from Assam, who hid his identity by reciting the Islamic kalima escaped the killing,[76] while a Christian man from Madhya Pradesh was shot dead after being unable to recite the kalima.[77] His wife said the attackers took selfies with the dead bodies.[78]
Yes, I know all that. Not denying any of it.
But the point is the framing of the incident. I make no bones about the fact that the Congress’s framing is far more defensible.
If a similar attack happened in Pakistan, I would also prefer the framing that this was an attack on Pakistanis as opposed to on Muslims.
Not going to belabor this point further.
Framing the Pahalgam attacks as merely โIndians being attacked erases the central truth: that the victims were targeted specifically because they were Hindu. This wasnโt a random act of violence against citizens; it was a communal massacre.
To generalize the victims as just โIndiansโ is like saying the Holocaust was about European citizens dying, or the Armenian genocide was about Ottoman citizens. It dissolves the targeted identity that defined the crime.
The moral clarity of naming the victimsโ identity is not about stoking division; itโs about honoring the truth. The victims werenโt killed for holding Indian passports. They were killed for being Hindu.
I don’t know why acknowledging persecution of Hindus is such a difficult thing for Pak Elites. Its as if, that aspect simply doesn’t count in their calculus. Massive blind spot.
That wasn’t my framing. It was Priyanka Gandhi’s. Take it up with her.
But it could equally well be said that the intention behind the attack was to kill non-Kashmiri tourists in order to hit the tourism sector in Kashmir. But of course the religious angle was there because they wanted to stoke communal division in India.
fact is, whatever remains of Kashmiri desires to ‘separate’ from India, is inexorably and inseparably conflated with religious and ethnic bigotry. And the Pahalgam massacre is but one instance of that. The nakedly racist vicious rhetoric against Biharis, ‘darker skinned’ Indian mainlanders, or the infidel Indians has always been a mainstay of the so-called Kashmiri struggle.
Not unlike the “Pakistani” desire to be seen as more ‘turkic’ or ‘central asian’ than ‘those Indians’. Unfortunately, no amount of larping as Ertrugul is going to change the perception of the children of the Indus in the Middle East or anywhere else for that matter.
I actually agree with you that the Ertrugrul thing was stupid.
I have a very long history on this forum and I have consistently maintained that Pakistanis are South Asian.
Sports (and culture) should be separated from geopolitics/foreign policy. Refusing to play cricket with Pakistan is a counterproductive step on India’s part.
that’s true but public opinion is public opinion.
26/11 is what essentially ended the Congress comeback..
26/11 happened in 2008. Congress was in power until 2014. So that point is factually incorrect. Arguably corruption is what brought down the Congress.
The point is that playing or not playing cricket is not going to change Pakistan’s foreign policy nor is it going to have any impact on terrorism.
To the extent possible, sports and culture (people-to-people ties more broadly) should be insulated from geopolitics/foreign policy. The Indian government is entitled to make whatever choices they want but they are not going to make the situation better.
oh yes I thought there was another incident that really brought Modi into power?
I am into people to people contact fwiw
Congress actually got reelected in 2009 (post 26/11). I don’t think the Indian voter really makes voting decisions on the basis of foreign policy or Pakistan policy.
People to people contact is necessary. The current situation where the borders are shut not just for people but also books and medicines etc is really counterproductive.
But what’s more important is a political process leading to a negotiated settlement. Pakistan will have to talk terror, India will have to talk Kashmir. If we ever want to move on from the past that is what has to happen. Otherwise, we will have to live with the current status quo–a cold war with periodic bombing of each other’s territories.
“people to people contact” is necessary for Pakistanis. Overwhelming majority of Indians have moved on from that position after the obligatory 100+ Shishupal-ian errors by Pakistanis.
“Tum udhar, Hum idhar” for the forseeable future. This is the whirlwind reaped by Pakistani elites after enthusiastically supporting jihad against India in the 80s & 90s, and quietly supporting it after that. Especially after 26/11.
There was a time when those Pakistani kids died in a military school a while back – when majority of the Indian public expressed sympathy for Pakistani victims of terrorism. Today, the fatigue after dozens upon dozens and hundreds of Pakistani terrorist murders, such incidents are viewed as deserved comeuppance.
Until Pak Elites comprehend this difference, and get their government to substantially change their policy on non-state actors, there will simply be no market for going back to “people to people contact” and other such BS.
And yes, its sub-optimal, undesirable even. But a very small price to be paid, even if its an unsuccessful attempt at deterrence.
Wow! Pakistani children dying is “deserved comeuppance”. Do you hear yourself?
“Pak Elites” have no power over the Army. What don’t you understand about this? The Army runs the show. The politicians know that if they speak one word out of line they will no longer be Prime Minister and will end up in jail. All that most of these politicians care about anyway is the perks of power.
how convenient. Just blame the army for terrorism, but then cheer for them when they garland leaders of terror organizations. Naah, this janus faced justification is not working anymore.
btw, way to miss the point, and fabricate this “kids dying is deserved” out of nowhere. And in the next breath, you’ll say you have no ‘hostility’ towards anybody except 2 of the contributors.
You used the phrase “deserved comeuppance”. Do you even read what you write?
XTM: Is it acceptable on BP to say that the deaths of Pakistani children in the Army Public School incident is “deserved comeuppance”?
C’mon, he’s saying that there was a lot of sympathy when the attack happened and there would not be so much sympathy nowadays it would be treated as deserved comeuppance, he’s not saying it is, just that attitudes are shifting.
Make the moderators job easier not harder.
It’s an unacceptable comment. Don’t tell me that I can’t comprehend English. His statement was very clear and now he’s trying to walk it back.
Celebrating anyone’s death is wrong. Especially the deaths of children.
There need to be some red lines for what is acceptable discourse on this site.
your non-passive aggression towards me is what’s unacceptable. Simply because you dislike the perspective that I express. Honestly, grow up a bit.
He intentionally misinterprets my comments as if its a middle school debate competition. Its…ridiculous really. Its the “I am very smart” complex writ large.
I find this calling the moderator business terribly embarrassing, it’s like getting called up to the principal all the time.
Kabir, maybe get a friend to read the comment and see if they agree with your interpretation of it.
We all need to follow the commentator guidelines that XTM has established.
It’s not about “interpretation”. Even implying that the deaths of Pakistani children (or children from any other country) are “comeuppance” is deeply deeply offensive.
Finally people are free to express whatever perspective they like. What is not acceptable is rudeness and aggression towards me.
I understand your sentiment but your language is extremely clunky.
Dehumanising civilians, or even abetting that, is always the wrong step.
A true sign of humanity is being able to put ourselves in the shoes of our enemies.
You should be very sensitive when speaking on sensitive matters like the massacre of innocent school boys.
And by the way Sikhs, Indian Muslims and other minorities (and non UC South Indians) are not anti-Pakistan.
This is North Indian upper-broader caste anti-Pakistanism that is also expedient politically. It eventually then spills over to Islamophobia quite easily.
Itโs easy to accuse me of bias but I wrote on Akhand Bharat when Iโm triggered by Kabir so presumable I can both sides pretty well.
This deserves a post..
Thank you. People are allowed their views on Pakistan (I’m OK with whatever as long as its expressed respectfully). But being cavalier about the deaths of children crosses so many red lines.
I’m OK with you writing about “Akhand Bharat”. Obviously, I disagree but I had written a rebuttal. Shashi Tharoor also disagrees with the concept of the “civilizational state” (at least he did in 2023 when he wrote that essay).
26/11 devastated me, as a Bombay expat. I remember being disgusted by Modi’s cynical glory hounding. His late 90s, early 2000s political rhetoric repulsed me. The fact that he’s moved noticeably towards the secular center, and the congress party’s utter shameless failure across multiple domains of policy, has made me support the BJP and even NM.
And yes, as far as Pakistan is concerned, it ended my optimism and support for the Aman ki asha baqwaas. The fact that Pakistanis baldfacedly supported their government’s blatant denials, and failure to – forget extradite, but even properly prosecute and punish the proven perpetrators – this was eye opening for me.
The performative faux liberalism pantomimed by Pak Elites stood nakedly exposed.
I was in Bombay for the 92 blasts. My friend’s dad worked in the Jewelers market, where one of the bombs exploded. His coworker lost an arm.
The months following there was a lot of fear of riots. Knowing what we know now, that this was all intentionally planned and inflicted by the Pak Govt….. truly evil.
hard disagree. It is GoI’s moral and legal duty to use any and all means at its disposal to deter terrorism attacks by PakMil proxies. Creating a stick by denying carrots is eminently sensible. It creates a non-trivial financial disincentive for Pak elites who otherwise can just comfortably blame their military for terrorism, while doing nothing to change the status quo.
Literally no one cares if you don’t want to play cricket with us. India just forfeited the match.
If you think this will change Pakistan’s foreign policy, you’ve got another think coming.
you may personally not care. You can bet the Pakistani players who are missing out on some serious IPL cash care. So do the PCB administrators whose gravy train has been massively reduced.
Same goes for the musicians and actors who are missing out on potential income.
I understand that discussing this ‘boycott’ gets some Pakistanis emotionally hot and bothered. And the need to indulge in denialism is strong. But in reality, the protestations that the grapes are sour…don’t really carry much traction.
Humans respond to incentives. Its not exactly rocket science. And the sheer amount of squealing that’s generated by just the cricket over the last decade or so, speaks quite loudly to its efficacy.
The point is it is not going to change Pakistan’s foreign policy. You do realize foreign policy is decided by Pakistan Army and there is nothing anyone else in the country can do to change it. Nawaz Sharif tried to make peace with India and found himself unceremoniously removed from power. He also mildly criticized Pak Army regarding their handling of terrorism (this was the “DAWNleaks” case) and found himself removed from power a second time.
If Pakistan Army wants to use “non-state actors” to destabilize India they will continue to do so. Playing cricket or not playing cricket isn’t going to effect them one way or the other.
I don’t even watch cricket. I don’t care either way.
To make it clear: I’m not a huge fan of Pakistan Army. However, when India bombs Pakistan, everyone in the country will rally behind Pakistan Army (whatever our thoughts on their policies are).
It may not impact it directly. But incentives matter. sanctions can be argued as being ‘ineffective’, but apartheid South Africa eventually had to change its ways to escape them. It is the legal and moral duty of the Indian government to similarly attempt deterrence and change in Pakistani policy towards its citizens. Thats my point.
Repetitively stating ‘nobody cares’ isn’t really a meaningful argument against it.
>>>>>If Pakistan Army wants to use โnon-state actorsโ to destabilize India they will continue to do so. Playing cricket or not playing cricket isnโt going to effect them one way or the other.
>>>>I donโt even watch cricket. I donโt care either way.
Do you not see how self-serving this argument is? Give me normalcy, easy visas, access to cricket money, medical treatment subsidized by Indian taxpayers while my government will continue to target them for murder.
No. Just no. It cannot continue that way.
I (and other Pakistanis) have no power over Pakistan Army. This is not really a difficult point to understand. However, there have been many voices in Pakistan (or of Pakistani origin) that have stated they are against the use of non-state actors and of proxy wars. Beena Sarwar is one of them. But of course you will dismiss that as “Aman ki Asha baqwaas”. (The fact that you use Urdu words never fails to be cute).
To end this incredibly repetitive argument: India is free to have whatever visa policy etc it wants. Right now, the borders on both sides are closed and no one gets a visa for either country. Even in relatively better times, my brother (an American national) was told he could only get an Indian visa if he renounced Pakistani nationality–which is obviously a non-starter.
However, if you believe your visa policy and cricket etc is going to change anything the Pakistan Army does, dream on.
Lastly, Pakistan is not “my government”. I am an American national and have been so for more than 20 years. Thank you very much.
I don’t think its “cute” when you talk down to someone about their choice of using hindi words. For someone who is quick to be triggered over ‘offense’, real and imagined, some self-awareness would really help.
The visa constraints are extremely inconvenient to ‘normal’ folks, one of my Pakistani friends was unable to attend my wedding in Bombay. It was disappointing. But such inconvenience is a small price to pay. Its inconvenient to go through security screens at airports as well. But nobody questions their necessity, even though the efficacy can be argued.
Cheers.
Kabir that was me btw editing ur comment. don’t bait pls
Sorry, that was petty.
plus c’est change plus c’est le meme chose. the more things change the more they stay the same. I think Bollywood, cricket & the Punjab keep IndoPak tethered.
I think Pakistanis are over Bollywood to be honest.
The way our actors have been treated in India has really soured a lot of people here on that industry.
it’ll take a single hot minute and one ‘hit’ movie with Pakistani actors to ‘unsour’. Fact is that Indian movies dominate the cultural zeitgeist, as much as the pseudo-elites in both India/Pak like to pretend otherwise.
A decade or two down the road, when Pakistan finally has its long overdue ‘people’s revolution’, and the PakMil feudal overlords are at least curbed a bit, I can easily see a very quick reversion to frequent cricket, movies etc.
Thatโs a wrong take lol
neither of us knows what the future holds. Even the uber sophisticated Pak elites can’t help but use bollywood song references in their taunts at the Indian government. It is what it is.
Anyway, we can agree to disagree.
The more that actors like Fawad Khan and Hania Aamir are humiliated in India the more turned off Pakistanis will become of Bollywood.
Bollywood movies (most of them) are frankly garbage. I for one am glad that Pakistanis will stop rotting their minds watching them. Not that Pakistani dramas are much better.
some points:
i) if vir sanghvi, a true blue liberal writing in print, does not want cricket with pakistan, the common man’s opinion can well be gauged.
https://theprint.in/opinion/sharp-edge/india-pakistan-cricket-asia-cup-boycott-politics-terrorism/2706579/
ii) in my experience, the common muslim is not any more attracted to pakistan, and owaisi being a clever barrister is very vocal about this.
iii) also that hyderbad’s muslim areas has no alqaida or isis presence, might be due to the mafia like grip of the owaisi family.
Yes things have changed a lot. There’s been a non linear drop off in the sound of fireworks when Pakistan used to win a cricket match in Indian cities.
Then again there is a nonlinear drop off in their rate of victory too.
But Pakistans drop off in prosperity and egregious privilege system has sufficiently disillusioned their sympathisers in India.
I’ve always wondered about Owaisi. Arguably he’s kept Hyderabad far safer than Mumbai or Delhi or Ahmedabad and there’s been far more radicalization from Kerala (a much more syncretic state), but he also runs old city like a personal fiefdom.
It was only a matter of time that Indian muslims completely dissociated from Pakistan. Before the information age, Pakistan was more an abstraction than an actual state. It was akin to the symbol of a political party. its not like the people who would burst crackers even knew the names of leaders, they were just “team green” Simultaneously, a place like Hyderabad has become significantly more prosperous than any place in Pakistan, with the whole world at its doorstep and an airport handling probably 5x the traffic of Karachi, the economic capital. Now you have an information enriched youth with more of a perspective of self within the wider world, and I don’t think even the young aspirational muslims even look to pakistan whatsoever. they may be taking more interest in other parts of west asia and the gulf.
Just join the site already. You have a lot of good takes, you can relegate the Kabir trolling to the recycler.
Girmit used to be active a number of years ago.
I actually liked him because he was one of the (relatively) few people who wasn’t reflexively pro BJP.
Oh dear, my bad. I thought it was another alias. My apologies gimrit and thank you Kabir.
Oh yes Girmit is a veteran Punditeer..
Indosaurus please; this is a provocative comment re Kabir
I had convinced myself it was honey Singh, I was asking him to stop trolling Kabir and join the site. Kabir – genuinely no provocation was intended.
How did you read it? Ugh, there’s so much bad blood now, I’ll just keep these I’ll judged comments to myself.
It’s fine. No offense taken.
Wow Welcome Back!
apart from ‘white’ west, indians meet pakistanis in gulf extensively.
my observations:
i) any ‘romanticism’ indian muslims would have had with pakistan is shattered. they fell safe with a hindu. pakistanis have a lower profile than hindus/indians in gulf.
ii) western ‘ coconuts’ like britsh born muslims are greatly disappointed, as gulf is more arab centric than muslim centric.
iii) indian muslims become more observant ( i.e 5 times namaz), and are more tune to the ‘true faith discourse’ of the wahhabis. they carry that back to india, where they are misfits in a sea of barelvis!!. ( eg id milad is a false worship, etc)
On a slightly tangential note: Whatever criticisms one has of the Pakistani establishment, they certainly understand how to negotiate with the US and get a good deal for Pakistan. CNN reports that Pakistan has emerged with the lowest tariff rate of any South Asian country (apparently the rate has been slashed from 29% to 19%).
I also wasn’t aware of the fact that Pakistan had oil reserves.
Indians are rightly upset that they’ve gotten a bad deal from Trump. Perhaps they overestimated how much the US actually likes India.
This would be something that BP could explore in depth.
The markets are completely discounting all the bluster. Trump is losing his volatile touch as his words and tariff declarations keep changing along with his moods.
I wouldn’t celebrate too much.
Besides India’s trade with the US is mainly diamonds and refined petrol. Those don’t carry a “made in India” sticker on them.
Supposedly electronic goods are exempt. And tariffing pharma goes heavily against his stated intention to bringing down drug prices by 1000% (his words)
The devil is in the details.
There is still a penalty on India for buying oil from Russia and Iran. Trump also has an animus against the BRICS countries.
The broader point is that the India-US relationship seems to not be in a good place. The US-Pakistan relationship is improving. Is there a broader re-alignment?
Some left-leaning Pakistanis (Asim Sajjad Akhtar in today’s DAWN) have questioned the oil deal that the Pakistani establishment has made with the US. Clearly, one POV is that the Pak establishment is always selling themselves out to the US.
this is an interesting clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4d3LW0J32SQ
US Treasury Secretary Says India ‘Has Not Been a Great Global Actor’
https://thewire.in/diplomacy/us-treasury-secretary-says-india-has-not-been-a-great-global-actor
I don’t think any reasonable person can deny that the India-US relationship is in deep trouble.
I donโt think ๐บ๐ธ is an important arbiter for a Civilisational state like Bharat.
It still reflects that India’s diplomacy is not going well.
The US is a superpower. Upsetting it is not a good strategy for any country (“civilizational state” or not).
this is the flip side of how some Indians were over-hyping the Modi-Drumpf bonhomie a few years ago.
Confirmation bias is a funny thing.
as of now, drugs are exempt from tariffs.
Right, judging by the market and India’s exports I imagine the effect of the tariffs is more symbolic than economic.
This would have fed into the tariff negotiators equations. The US ask of opening up their subsidized mechanical agriculture to pauperize small labour intensive indian farms is a no go.
All those farmer protests against the indian govt market reforms supported by US celebrities. What a joke.
you mean virtue-signaling and actual actions are not the same, quell surprise ๐
The Drumpf negotiation playbook has hysterical PR as de rigueur, GoI prefers to go super-opaque until the ‘deal’ is reached.
threats and bluster aside, I do suspect IND will have to make concessions and major ones at that. But the analysis will need to wait until the final outcome is reached.
There’s a lot of premature…expression on the current state of play.
Let some uninformed folks take premature victory laps. Drumpfy negotiations are just that. Lets assess once things are more clearer.
.
my comments are off the cuff and more of a conversation. But please, feel free to declare linguistic victory and celebrate as you see fit. May I suggest ‘Failed Marshal, Humanities’ as a signature on your comments?
Sorry, I have absolutely zero tolerance for incorrect English. It just viscerally bothers me.
Equally, your French is really bad. It’s “Quelle surprise”. “Surprise” is feminine.
While I’m at it, the comma after please is also incorrect.
Before criticizing me, please get some remedial education.
You asked me why I point out your hypocrisy. This is why.
You make mistakes too Kabir. Stop being a dick about this.
It’s not your role to point out my hypocrisy. Get over yourself.
Whatever else one can say about me, my English is absolutely perfect. In fact, it’s my native tongue. My ancestors have been speaking English for generations.
If you climb on the English correction horse and lord it around don’t cry when others climb a hypocrisy correction horse and unseat you.
Once again, who made “hypocrisy correction” your role on this website?
Do you even realize how obnoxious this is?
Kabir, you know the protocol, rather than respond, flag it to me.
Do you agree with someone deciding it is their role on this site to “correct” me?
how old are you? seriously.
did ‘advising me to get remedial education’ soothe your ego? I doubt it. Since you enjoy me using hindi words so much, here’s a popquiz for you. What’s Semolina called in Hindi?
Kabir stop pls
i) from india, u s a is seen as an unreliable partner, and u s a will see india as a reluctant partner.
ii) for india, russia is still better for arms and to some extent to manage china.
iii) with u s a insering itself in pakistan, what happens to china pak friendship?
iv) if india, at $ 5 trillion gdp is facing so much headwind, it will be a steep climb to $ 10 trillion.
PM Modi used to go on and on about how Trump was his best friend. Remember “Ab ki baar Trump sarkar”? Clearly, he’s regretting that now.
Whatever anyone’s issues with Pakistan, our establishment knows how to flatter Donald Trump. Pakistani diplomats are much more charming than Indian diplomats. Many of your own countrymen have pointed that out.
The obsessive compulsive
desireneed to be ‘better than Indians’ in ways real or imagined, strikes again. Reminds me of Gen Mushy who claimed “Pakistanis speak the better English than Indians”.There’s a gas station attendant from Sialkot who I talk to whenever I get gas there, on cricket, he wholeheartedly chooses to believe that Pakistani cricketers are the most talented in the world, and only lose because of matchfixing.
Christine Fair has pointed out that Pakistani diplomats are far more charming than Indians. She said the Indians tend to give lectures.
and you agree with everything she has to say about Pakistanis? ๐
I don’t agree 100% with anything anyone has to say about anything.
But as someone who has experience with both country’s diplomats, her views on this point deserve to be taken seriously.
yeah, that’s a wiser track to take. Touting Lady Fair on anything Pakistani is an own goal. But then again, that hasn’t ever stopped you in these threads…
‘more fatal’ is a bit of an exaggeration. US is a hyperpower even if arguably a receding one. The US establishment is using Drumpf as a bad cop and allowing him to run roughshod for a bit. A smart move would be to ‘weather the storm’, keep an eye on the long-term and not over-react on the immediate.
But thats not how the news cycle works. Kabir’s glee is ….entertaining me quite a bit. He reminds me of those NRI unkils who embraced Trump as a ‘ friend of India’ and overhyped him.
All states are self-serving. Key is to find ways to make them feel that their interests are served in advancing yours.
[…] India, Pakistan & the Central Asian Dancefloor July 31, 2025 […]