“No one wants a strong India. But PM Modi opened doors. He strengthened the military, advanced the economy, maintained balanced relations with the West, Russia, and China. That is serious statecraft” –Aleksandar Vučić, President of Serbia
India is richer
Strip away the noise and a simple asymmetry remains. India will almost certainly remain richer than Pakistan for the foreseeable future. The gap in GDP, fiscal depth, technology, and demographic scale is widening, not narrowing. On material indicators, India has the advantage. Yet material advantage does not always translate into strategic dominance.
India is louder
India is a mass democracy. It is electorally accountable, media-saturated, and sensitive to public opinion. Governments must justify escalation. Markets react to instability. Voters punish miscalculation. This imposes restraint.
Pakistan is tighter
Pakistan is structured differently. Power is narrower. Decision-making is concentrated within a smaller elite, with the military as the central institution. That creates rigidity in some domains but flexibility in others. Strategic continuity does not reset every five years. Public opinion matters, but it does not directly determine policy in the same way it does across the border.
Structural Differences
This structural difference shapes behaviour. India must think about global markets, coalition politics, and reputational cost. Pakistan can absorb economic stress more easily because its political system is already insulated from full electoral volatility. That insulation produces durability, even under strain.
The list gets smaller. There are six countries who sent the head of state/government to all three: 1) Beijing military parade 2) Davos Board of Peace launch 3) Washington BOP 1st meeting They are: Armenia | Azerbaijan | Indonesia | Kazakhstan | Pakistan | Uzbekistan
Like Israel
The comparison to Israel is imperfect but instructive. Pakistan sees itself not merely as a normal state but as a mission-driven one; founded around a civilisational claim. That narrative has penetrated deeply, especially within Punjab, which anchors the state. Whatever internal divisions exist, the core idea of Pakistan remains intact among large segments of its population. That coherence matters.
Iran is different
Iran is different. Iran is an old civilisational state that experienced a revolution. Its legitimacy rests on both nationalism and ideology. Economic collapse pressures ideology because there is an alternative identity beneath it: Iranian nationhood. Pakistan’s founding identity is narrower and more defensive. That makes it, paradoxically, more resistant to ideological erosion.
Indian commentary misfires
Indian commentary often assumes that economic divergence will produce political collapse in Pakistan. History suggests otherwise. States with concentrated power structures can endure long periods of stagnation if the elite remains unified and the core population internalises the founding narrative. This does not mean Pakistan is stronger. It means it is structured differently.
Operation Sindoor
Recent crises illustrate the asymmetry. India may dominate on conventional metrics, but limited engagements allow Pakistan to frame survival as success. In strategic competition, narrative often substitutes for parity. If an operation does not decisively alter the balance, as 1971 did, it risks reinforcing the opponent’s domestic cohesion. That is not a moral judgment. It is an institutional one.
Strength versus Weakness
India’s strength is scale, openness, and economic dynamism. Its constraint is democratic accountability and reputational sensitivity. Pakistan’s weakness is economic fragility. Its advantage is strategic continuity and insulation from electoral shock. Analyses fail when they assume both systems operate under identical incentives. They do not.
Two different worlds
India and Pakistan are not mirror states. One is a continental democracy managing diversity through electoral churn. The other is a security state anchored in a founding idea and sustained by a narrower power core. Economic trends favour India. Structural resilience favours Pakistan in certain forms of confrontation. Understanding that asymmetry is more useful than arguing about which country is “better.”
Who is India’s Daddy
India’s heroic heart could not stand it. After US threats, India gave up Russian oil
Map showing the movement of Russian crude tankers.
The majority of Russian tankers are seen heading to China, which is an entirely different picture from just a few months ago, when the majority of Russian crude would arrive in India on large discounts, notably at the Jamnagar refinery.
Under US pressure, India has almost halved Russian imports from 2 million barrels per day, mb/d, to just 1.1 mb/d, with the target of further reduction to 800 thousands barrels per day.
Despite the massive discounts on Russian crude, India has submitted to the US pressure, and in return, China is using the rerouted cheap Russian oil to fill the gaps of the lost Venezuelan crude.
https://x.com/Megatron_ron/status/2024080390189707738?
I think Modi made an excellent deal with the US fwiw; he’s been very adept in the Global Policy arena.
Here is a different view. Of course some people will dismiss “The Wire” as being “anti-national” etc but the analysis is based on facts:
https://thewire.in/history/modis-skewed-trade-deal-with-trump-demolishes-the-idea-of-swaraj-envisioned-by-dadabhai-naoroji-and-gandhi