American Prof John Mearsheimer on International Geopolitics in South Asia

[Riaz Haq]

Professor John Mearsheimer, a renowned international relations expert known for his theory of "offensive realism", has recently spoken to India's CNN-News18 about the impact of US-China competition on geopolitics in South Asia. Sharing his thoughts in interviews on India-Pakistan conflict after the Pahalgam attack, he said: "There is really no military solution to this (Kashmir) problem. The only way this can be solved once and for all is through a political solution that both sides find acceptable". 

Professor John Mearsheimer on India-Pakistan Conflict

Professor John Mearsheimer is a highly respected professor of political science at the University of Chicago. Here's how he introduces himself on his personal website:  "I am the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor in the Political Science Department at the University of Chicago, where I have taught since 1982. Above all else, I am an international relations theorist. More specifically, I am a realist, which means that I believe that the great powers dominate the international system, and they constantly engage in security competition with each other, which sometimes leads to war". 

He has said that neither China nor the US want a full-scale war between India and Pakistan that could escalate into a nuclear war. However, it is in China's interest to "see significant tensions between India and Pakistan to get India to devote a lot of its strategic thinking and resources against Pakistan" rather than on China. The US, on the other hand, wants India to focus all its energies on countering China. 

Talking about the recent "Operation Sindoor" launched by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi against Pakistan, Mearsheimer said it will not deter Pakistan. "By Operation Sindoor, India has responded like it has in the past. Don't think India wants a major war with Pakistan, it can't dominate on the lower or even the middle rungs of the escalation ladder", he said. 

On Chinese involvement in South Asia, Mearsheimer said: "China-Pakistan relations are quite good. The Chinese are providing excellent weaponry to Pakistan and will provide even better weapons in future".  "I don’t think China wants an India-Pakistan war but it wants to see significant tensions between India and Pakistan to get India to devote a lot of its strategic thinking and resources against Pakistan", he added. 

Talking about the US interest in South Asia, he said: "When it comes to countering China, India is the most important country for the US in South Asia. But the US also wants to maintain good relations with Pakistan to try to peel it away from China". 

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

South Asia Investor Review

Pakistan Downs India's French Rafale Jets in a Major Aerial Battle

Has Modi Succeeded Diplomatically or Militarily Against Pakistan Af...

Has Pakistan Destroyed India's S-400 ADS?

Pakistan's Aircraft Exports

Pakistan Navy Modernization

West's Technological Edge in Geopolitical Competition

Modi's India: A Paper Elephant?

Pahalgam Attack: Why is the Indian Media Not Asking Hard Questions?

Ukraine's Lesson For Pakistan: Never Give Up Nukes!

Pakistan Economy Nears Trillion Dollars

Pakistan's Sea-Based Second Strike Capability

Riaz Haq Youtube Channel

VPOS Youtube Channel

[Riaz Haq]

Ghazala Wahab
@ghazalawahab
India lost d plot in #IranIsraelConflict because of its need to stand with Israel. Convergence of Islamophobia & military dependence made India irrelevant even in ME, after its irrelevance in South Asia. Foreign policies r based on pragmatism but draped in morality. Ours has none

https://x.com/ghazalawahab/status/1938081035155071238

----------------------
Fidato
@tequieremos
India has twice refused to sign SCO joint statements this month.

Earlier, it declined to endorse a communiqué condemning Israeli attacks on IAEA-monitored nuclear sites in Iran, an NPT signatory.

More recently, it rejected the SCO Defense Ministers’ joint statement apparently because the bloc, led by China and Russia, did not cater India’s unsubstantiated allegations against Pakistan but mentioned India’s sponsor of terror in Balochistan.

These repeated rebuffs underscore two broader mutually reinforcing trends in Indian foreign policy.

First, India, once an aspirant leader of the Global South, is rapidly losing influence due to strategic arrogance and an inflated self-image. Increasingly, its role appears more that of a spoiler than a leader.

Second, these setbacks have forced India to pander before the US-led Western bloc.

In a bid to align with Washington, India has notably shifted from its historical stance on Palestine and abstained from a Gaza ceasefire vote last month and reportedly supplying arms to Israel amid its genocidal campaign in Gaza.

Further, India’s obstruction of BRICS efforts to adopt a common currency is another sign of its westward tilt.

Yet, this pivot has yielded little strategic return: the US and EU continue to overlook India’s anxieties regarding Pakistan, possibly expecting New Delhi to "do more."

https://x.com/tequieremos/status/1938147861473989017

----------
Post

See new posts
Conversation
Ali K.Chishti Official
@thewirepak
India tried to overplay its hand by inserting Pahalgam into the SCO document, only to be dismissed outright for the absurdity. Rajnath Singh refused to sign the final communiqué… no one cared. Another diplomatic embarrassment.

https://x.com/thewirepak/status/1938156413387149499

[Riaz Haq]

Ashok Swain
@ashoswai
Sanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) has 10 member countries: China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, India, Pakistan, Iran & Belarus. No one sided with India while 9 members wanted a pro-Pakistan resolution. Is this way, Modi isolating Pakistan?

https://x.com/ashoswai/status/1938322680412881030

[Riaz Haq]

OPINION - Türkiye’s Asia Anew initiative: Strengthening ties with Malaysia, Indonesia and Pakistan
Türkiye is positioning itself in three crucial geographical, geopolitical, geoeconomic, and geostrategic hubs, where these countries act as 'key allies' in the Southeast and South Asia region
Md. Nazmul Islam |

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/opinion/opinion-turkiye-s-asia-anew-initia...

Nations such as Malaysia, Indonesia, and Pakistan perceive Türkiye as a reliable ally, believing that if they were to face external challenges, Türkiye would be among the first or possibly the only country to offer support

-----------

What makes Asia a priority, and why were Malaysia, Indonesia, and Pakistan chosen?

In recent times, global politics has been shifting significantly, largely due to China’s rise and its strategic influence, particularly in Asia. The USA's response to China’s expansion further underscores the region’s growing geopolitical importance. Additionally, initiatives such as China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, or BRICS, alongside the US Indo-Pacific Strategy, Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), or AUKUS, highlight why Asia remains a focal point for international politics, especially for nations aspiring to attain great power status.

Given this perspective, it is obvious that Türkiye, following its crucial role, advocacy, and support, if needed for Syria, Azerbaijan, Somalia, or Qatar, is on the path to becoming an emerging great power. However, to achieve this goal, Türkiye needs more reliable partners and strong allies. In this context, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Pakistan stand out as strategic choices, offering Türkiye the necessary support and opportunities to establish a stronger presence in the region.

Strategically, the geopolitical significance of these three countries explains why Türkiye has chosen to strengthen its cooperation with them. Türkiye is positioning itself in three crucial geographical, geopolitical, geoeconomic, and geostrategic hubs, where these countries act as "key allies" in the Southeast and South Asia region. The entire partnership is founded on a mutually beneficial ‘win-win’ cooperation.

Türkiye aims to prioritize expanding trade and economic ties, followed by enhancing defense cooperation through this partnership. Malaysia and Indonesia are particularly strategic choices for Türkiye due to their significant geoeconomic and geostrategic positions, as both hold strong economic influence globally and regionally. While the partnership initially focused on economic collaboration, both Malaysia and Indonesia have shown a keen interest in deepening defense relations. Türkiye already has a strong defense presence in these countries, with ASELSAN operating a branch in Malaysia and BAYKAR recently signing a major defense partnership with Indonesia during the latest visit. This demonstrates a shared commitment to expanding collaboration beyond trade to include cultural, educational, and broader economic cooperation.

Pakistan’s inclusion is also crucial due to its significant geopolitical role for Türkiye, particularly in shaping its future role in international politics. As highlighted by President Erdogan’s recent visit, Türkiye is seeking not only to expand trade with Pakistan but also to establish a stronger geostrategic and geo-security presence in Central and West Asia. Looking ahead, Türkiye’s growing engagement in Central Asia will be more effective with a solid foothold in Pakistan. To achieve this, Türkiye should prioritize forging a robust defense pact with Pakistan, which could later be expanded to include countries like Bangladesh, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Such a strategic alliance would bolster Türkiye’s regional leadership while allowing it to maintain an independent stance without being drawn into the power struggle between the USA and China.

[Riaz Haq]

Rabia Akhtar
@Rabs_AA
When a leading analyst like Ashley Tellis argues that India’s Pakistan obsession is self-defeating and strategically incoherent, it’s worth paying attention. His Foreign Affairs piece lays bare how New Delhi’s fixation on outmaneuvering Pakistan continues to undercut India’s ability to confront its real challenge: China.

Modi’s government is only the latest in a line of Indian leaderships that have struggled with this. As Tellis points out, India’s strategic autonomy mantra and its reluctance to align squarely with the United States has long been framed as a multipolar ideal. Yet this posture has delivered neither security nor the great-power status India seeks.

If India has not managed a fundamental shift despite two decades of deepening U.S. ties, what exactly would it take for such a redirection to happen? Until then, India remains caught in a cycle of balancing illusions, unable to transcend its own Pakistan complex and unwilling to fully anchor its future in a coherent grand strategy.

https://x.com/Rabs_AA/status/1939684438503264528

----------------
Will the Modi government’s policies and beliefs thwart India’s international ambitions?

https://www.youtube.com/live/pnev9iJ3LZI

India believes it could be a rival of China in 25 year’s time. But is that likely? India wants to be a superpower by 2050. But is that a realistic ambition? In other words, is Viksit Bharat achievable? Ashley Tellis, The Tata Chair for Strategic Affairs at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, believes India’s economic performance, its foreign affairs strategies and the authoritarian and illiberal practices of the Modi government could thwart India’s proud ambitions. That’s the message of his recent essay in Foreign Affairs magazine. But what are his reasons for coming to this conclusion?

-------------

India’s Great-Power Delusions
How New Delhi’s Grand Strategy Thwarts Its Grand Ambitions
Ashley J. Tellis

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/india/indias-great-power-delusions

Since the turn of the century, the United States has sought to help India rise as a great power.


In military terms, it is the most significant conventional power in South Asia, but here, too, its advantages over its local rival are not enormous: in fighting in May, Pakistan used Chinese-supplied defense systems to shoot down Indian aircraft. With China on one side and an adversarial Pakistan on the other, India must always fear the prospect of an unpalatable two-front war. Meanwhile, at home, the country is shedding one of its main sources of strength—its liberal democracy—by embracing Hindu nationalism. This evolution could undermine India’s rise by intensifying communal tensions and exacerbating problems with its neighbors, forcing it to redirect security resources inward to the detriment of outward power projection. The country’s illiberal pivot further undermines the rules-based international order that has served it so well.

[Riaz Haq]

Tejasswi Prakash
@Tiju0Prakash
"Pakistan was in the front, with China providing all possible support...Turkey also played a key role. During DGMO-level talks, Pakistan had live updates of our key vectors from China,"

Deputy Chief of the Indian Army

Our Army is now compelled to publicly speak about its defence requirements, as the current political leadership seems too preoccupied with photo ops and optics to pay any real attention to national security.
#OperationSindoor

https://x.com/Tiju0Prakash/status/1941079746781094292

-----------------


The STRATCOM Bureau
@OSPSF
India’s Deputy Army Chief, Lieutenant General Rahul Singh shocked by Pakistan’s ISR reach into India.

He says that during DGMO deescalation talks Pakistan had live tracking of Indian assets preparing to launch missions, which would be responded to immediately if not called back:

https://x.com/OSPSF/status/1941088112702316951

[Riaz Haq]

Indian General Making Excuses for Losing to Pakistan

By AK Chishti

You know who keeps justifying losses again and again? Losers. Just like the Indian Deputy Chief’s briefing more about calming their own people than facing reality. Pakistan didn’t just hit hard, we hit their morale. #OperationSindoor tunrns Tandoor!

-----------


Syed Talat Hussain
@TalatHussain12
His stutters and stammers aside, what he is telling you is a) how I'll-prepared India was b) how bad was their war strategy c) how poorly they anticipated the adversary's capabilities d) how vulnerable their various flanks were in the combat zone. In so many poorly-strung sentences, he is saying: we were roasted.

https://x.com/TalatHussain12/status/1941185551127777530

--------------


FJ
@Natsecjeff
"We were not fighting one adversary but three: Pakistan, China and Turkey"

Based on that logic, Pakistan could argue the same with India using weapons platforms from France, Israel and Russia.

https://x.com/Natsecjeff/status/1941141295080362318

------------

Post

See new posts
Conversation
Rabia Akhtar
@Rabs_AA
Imagine fearing an adversary so much, you convince yourself it wasn’t them but their friends that beat you. When a military starts believing that its adversary’s strength lies solely in foreign support, it stops preparing for the adversary itself. And underestimating an opponent by outsourcing their strength to others may soothe national ego but it is a dangerous way to lose the next war.

Lt Gen Rahul Singh’s statement is less a reflection of battlefield realities and more a projection of post-crisis insecurities. Yes, Pakistan absorbed hits and we took some damage. But what matters is what happened next. When the dust settled in May 2025, it wasn’t China or Turkey that forced India into DGMO-level talks, it was Pakistan’s calibrated, multi-domain response that exposed critical vulnerabilities in Indian assumptions.

The narrative that Pakistan acted as a 'front' and China 'tested weapons' is a convenient deflection from India’s own overreach and intelligence lapses. If 81% of Pakistani hardware is Chinese, then perhaps it's time to ask why India’s Israeli, American, Russian, and French-supplied systems still failed to prevent deep penetration strikes, drone swarms, and jamming of critical vectors.

Referring to Pakistan as a ‘live lab’ for Chinese weapons not only demeans Pakistan’s sovereign military capabilities, but also undermines India’s own credibility as a serious power if it believes its adversary's strength depends entirely on another's support.

If China is gaining operational feedback, that is a separate strategic reality. But the core issue remains: India initiated escalation, misread the deterrence ladder, and now wants to outsource blame. If anything, the May 2025 crisis exposed that imported hardware is no substitute for indigenous competence, India’s underperformance made that abundantly clear.

Next time, before India imagines hitting population centers, it might want to review the wreckage of May 2025, both literal and reputational. Strategic miscalculation is more an Indian mindset problem than a technology gap.

https://x.com/Rabs_AA/status/1941199617099444292

[Riaz Haq]

‘Now there is a threat from three fronts’: The emerging alliance of China, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, and the concerns of General Anil Chauhan

https://fukatsoft.com/b/public/BlogView/now-there-is-a-threat-from-...

Where is India Failing?


Manoj Joshi believes that “India should stop using issues like terrorism for domestic politics.” He adds, “The Modi government needs to separate foreign policy from domestic political agendas. For example, the G-20 summit was portrayed as a huge achievement, but we need less showmanship and more concrete actions on the ground. Even Bhutan did not support Operation Sand Dune.” Defense analyst Uday Bhaskar thinks that CDS General Anil Chauhan has presented a significant assessment of India's complex security challenges. He says, “Indian strategic planners had so far been focusing on two-front threats, but now they may be dealing with a three-front challenge. China seems to be successfully drawing Bangladesh into its camp alongside Pakistan. This possibility wasn’t seriously considered before the likely departure of Sheikh Hasina.” Rahul Bedi adds, “Trump’s stance has boosted Pakistan’s credibility. The U.S. invited Pakistan’s Field Marshal Asim Munir for lunch at the White House. Ten days later, Pakistan’s Air Chief also visited the U.S. It is being speculated that America might even resume arms supplies to Pakistan.”


How did Pakistan suddenly become so important for America?


Rahul Bedi says, “Pakistan’s geographical location is considered highly strategic. It shares borders with China, Afghanistan, Iran, and the Central Asian countries. This makes it a critical location. Moreover, Balochistan has rare earth minerals, which are in global demand. After Operation Sand Dune, it became clear that aside from Israel, no one supported India. International organizations condemned terrorism, but not Pakistan.” When asked whether India has made any mistakes in this situation, Bedi replied, “A prominent Indian diplomat told me that India talks a lot but does very little in practice.” “India has a strong army and navy, but when officials from countries like Japan and the U.S. come and observe things on the ground, the reality looks very different,” he added. Professor Sreeradha Datta Pathak, who teaches China Studies at O.P. Jindal University, also believes that Bangladesh joining China and Pakistan raises the security threat for India. She says, “China is working to make the Lalmonirhat air base in Bangladesh operational again, which would be a serious threat to Indian security. Naturally, India is preparing for this.” “We can’t just wait for a change of government in Bangladesh. China is trying to keep India entangled with its neighboring countries to avoid facing any direct challenge,” she emphasized. However, Professor Pathak does not believe that Pakistan’s global reputation has improved. She states, “We can't expect too much from the U.S. The West’s stance on terrorism has always been like this. Israel was the only country that said India had the right to defend itself. Unfortunately, we were part of a BRICS resolution that condemned Israel.”