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]

Pakistan regards India as an existential threat: US defence intelligence annual report - The Economic Times


https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/pakistan-regards-india-as-...

"Pakistan regards India as an existential threat and will continue to pursue its military modernisation effort, including the development of battlefield nuclear weapons, to offset India’s conventional military advantage," the report metions.

"Pakistan is modernising its nuclear arsenal and maintaining the security of its nuclear materials and nuclear command and control. Pakistan almost certainly procures WMD applicable goods from foreign suppliers and intermediaries," it added.

Further, the report says Pakistan's top priorities will likely remain cross-border skirmishes with regional neighbors.


"Despite Pakistan’s daily operations during the past year, militants killed more than 2,500 people in Pakistan in 2024," it added

US also said that Pakistan is the "primary recipient" of China’s economic and military generosity and foreign materials and technology supporting Pakistan's armed forces are very likely acquired primarily from suppliers in China

"Pakistan primarily is a recipient of China’s economic and military largesse, and Pakistani forces conduct multiple combined military exercises every year with China’s PLA, including a new air exercise completed in November 2024," the report said.

"Foreign materials and technology supporting Pakistan’s WMD programs are very likely acquired primarily from suppliers in China, and sometimes are transshipped through Hong Kong, Singapore, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. However, terrorist attacks targeting Chinese workers who support China Pakistan Economic Corridor projects has emerged as a point of friction between the countries; seven Chinese nationals were killed in Pakistan in 2024," it added.

[Riaz Haq]

Sushant Singh
@SushantSin
So this is being done without any backchannel or official talks with Pakistan, or via a third party interlocutor like the US, when Modi claims that there has been no ceasefire and the military operation is still on.

https://x.com/SushantSin/status/1926512146721980920

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

Pause in India-Pak military action, Army works on plan to ‘rebalance’ troops at border | India News - The Indian Express

https://indianexpress.com/article/india/to-dial-down-army-works-on-...

A fortnight into the pause of military action in the wake of the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack, a proposed plan for “rebalancing of troops” is being discussed within the military to avoid any fresh escalation at the borders, The Indian Express has learned.

This even as Operation Sindoor is on pause and all alerts remain at their heightened levels.

While Indian and Pak armies are focusing on multiple confidence-building measures, plans for de-escalating troops and equipment from the borders within the next fortnight are being considered.

Sources said Pakistan, which carried out major reinforcements of troops and equipment over the last few weeks, will also pull them back to pre-April locations.

Incidentally, India had not ordered large-scale mobilisation or deployment of offensive formations over the last month. Limited equipment and corresponding troops, which had been moved from their permanent locations to operational ones, are now planning to go back to their regular locations.

During Operation Sindoor, the density of troops along the borders had increased but that was more because of curtailing leave and less essential movement. However, sources said, these restrictions have now been lifted. Even short-term courses, which were to be cancelled temporarily, will now continue as per slated schedules.

According to sources, after the first two days following the ceasefire agreement, no aerial violations by Pakistani drones were reported though the occasional stray drones were sighted in Jammu and Kashmir.

They added that there are orders in place to avoid firing on them without appropriate clearances, even as any ceasefire violations at the LoC will be responded to by the troops.

As Prime Minister Narendra Modi had flagged, in his address to the nation, Operation Sindoor is only on pause. This would imply that the military would continue to remain at a heightened state of alertness and operational readiness, while maintaining a strong defensive posture throughout.

There has been no official statement from the government on whether there have been DGMO-level talks on the de-escalation after May 12.

On May 12, DGMO Lieutenant General Rajiv Ghai spoke to his Pakistani counterpart Major General Kashif Abdullah – their second conversation since they agreed to stop all military action—during which it was agreed that both sides would consider immediate measures to ensure troop reduction from the borders and forward areas.

Sources said that stopping aerial violations was also discussed in the meeting.

An Army statement had also mentioned that issues related to continuing the commitment that both sides must not fire a single shot or initiate any aggressive and inimical action against each other were discussed in the talks.

The Indian Express had earlier reported that within days following May 12, both sides were scheduled to exchange plans on the modalities of de-escalation of troops and equipment deployed along the borders.



Two days after the May 12 talks, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar had claimed that Pakistan had agreed to extend the ceasefire with India until May 18 following DGMO-level talks between the two sides.

Without commenting on whether the two sides spoke, the Indian Army said both sides will continue the confidence-building measures to reduce the alertness level. It clarified that there is no expiry date to the understanding reached between the two militaries on May 10 to “stop all firing and military action from land, air and sea.”

[Riaz Haq]

Does the Chinese defense industry benefits from Pakistan military's performance against India?

AI Overview

Yes, the recent clashes between India and Pakistan have provided a significant boost to the Chinese defense industry. Pakistan's use of Chinese-made fighter jets and missiles in the conflict has raised awareness of their capabilities and sparked interest in Chinese military technology globally.
Here's why this is the case:

Battle-testing and marketing:

The conflict has served as a proxy battle-testing ground for Chinese military hardware, showcasing its potential to a global audience. This has effectively advertised Chinese weapons to a wider market, potentially increasing sales.

National pride and heightened perceptions:

The reported success of Chinese-made weapons in the conflict has boosted national pride in China and has also heightened global perceptions of Chinese military prowess and ingenuity.

Intelligence gathering:

The conflict provides China with valuable intelligence on its own weapons systems as they are used in a real-world scenario by Pakistan.

Increased demand and potential sales:

The perceived success of Chinese weapons could lead to increased demand for these systems from other countries, particularly those seeking more affordable and effective military technology.

Shift in perceptions of military technology:

The conflict has challenged the long-standing belief in the superiority of Western military technology, particularly in the context of affordability and effectiveness.

Strategic partnership:

China and Pakistan have a strong strategic partnership, with China being Pakistan's primary arms supplier. This close relationship allows for easier access to Chinese military technology and expertise.

Increased stock value:

The positive performance of Chinese-made weapons in the conflict has led to a surge in the stock prices of Chinese defense companies.

[Riaz Haq]

Political handling of Operation Sindoor was incompetent and irresponsible; constant need to claim credit will be our undoing: Ajai Sahni, Executive Director, Institute for Conflict Management, to Karan Thapar for The Wire

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81xS7V0rE8U

.......................................... 

 

 In an interview that could rattle the government, the Executive Director of the Institute for Conflict Management and one of India’s foremost authorities on terrorism has said that the political handling of Operation Sindoor was incompetent and irresponsible. Dr. Ajai Sahni also said that the constant need to claim credit will be our undoing. He said one of the consequences of India’s policy of treating every act of terror as a declaration of war is that in economic terms “India looks like an excitable and very unreliable partner”. In a comprehensive 45-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire, Dr. Sahni, who is also the Executive Director of the South Asia Terrorism Portal, was asked who had the upper hand when the 4-day conflict between India and Pakistan ended and said “both are losers … measured by the environment we have created”. Dr. Sahni said that “no lasting damage” has been done to the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed and claims by the Indian Express that 20% of Pakistan’s air force infrastructure has been destroyed are “ludicrous”. Dr. Sahni explains that he does not believe that the LeT and Jaish have been deterred and, worse, the Pakistan army and ISI may increase their efforts to build-up capacity for these groups. It is, therefore, quite possible the problem of terror could get worse. A very significant chunk of this interview is about the reasons why Dr. Sahni believes the political handling of Operation Sindoor was incompetent and irresponsible. I am deliberately not giving you details of what Dr. Sahni said because I think you should hear them for yourself. I am only giving you the headline which Dr. Sahni confirmed two or three times in the interview. I don’t want to run the risk of wrongly paraphrasing or précising Dr. Sahni’s arguments.

[Riaz Haq]

Political handling of Operation Sindoor was incompetent and irresponsible; constant need to claim credit will be our undoing: Ajai Sahni, Executive Director, Institute for Conflict Management, to Karan Thapar for The Wire


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81xS7V0rE8U



18:49
Pakistani response and all reports indicate that China is already
to a far more vigorous support You know Pakistan is a great investment for
18:56
China in this sense Uh first of all they get to test all their weapons They get
19:01
to showcase all their weapon systems to the world and already the world has taken
19:07
notice Secondly what they are doing is without any losses to themselves in terms of
19:14
life or uh significant material what they are uh doing is securing their
19:22
strategic objectives in the South Asia region which is to contain
19:29
India through their support to Pakistan So Pakistan will do whatever fighting is
19:35
necessary and India will suffer the consequences And a third factor is that
19:40
the demonstration of their weapon systems will bring them enormous
19:45
financial returns

[Riaz Haq]

shoaib daniyal
@ShoaibDaniyal
Remember the Karachi port attack and PAF pilot capture fake news that so many journalists ran?

@AnantGuptaAG
has a behind-the-scenes look into how that happened in this report.

https://x.com/ShoaibDaniyal/status/1926902361756233810
------------------

Who won the media war?

A Scroll analysis of Western media reporting and interviews with experts show that Pakistan had an advantage over India in the information war.
Anant Gupta


https://scroll.in/article/1082684/can-indian-mp-delegations-reverse...

A Scroll analysis of foreign media reporting and interviews with several experts show that Pakistan has indeed edged out India in the information war. Will the Modi government be successful in its effort to fix the global narrative about the conflict and put the focus back on Pakistan’s use of terrorism against India?

View from the West
As far as the foreign press was concerned, the so-called Kashmir dispute was at the heart of the conflict from its very start – a narrative that India has always sought to avoid.

Since the Pahalgam terror attack, The Washington Post has published 21 stories about the escalating tensions between India and Pakistan. Kashmir was in the headlines 10 times. Terrorism did not appear even once.

It may bring solace to India that the The New York Times carried a story about the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Jaish-e-Mohammed, the two terrorist groups that India claimed to have targeted during Operation Sindoor.

But even so, it is unlikely that New Delhi will be pleased with how America’s newspaper of record saw the result of the fighting: a draw, not an Indian victory. A report that was published in the paper after the ceasefire announcement carried the headline: “India and Pakistan talked big, but satellite imagery shows limited damage.”

The headline to the newspaper’s first storyabout Operation Sindoor was even more damaging. “India strikes Pakistan but is said to have lost aircraft,” it read, highlighting a Pakistani claim that New Delhi has yet to confirm.

The New York Times was not alone. Other international media outlets, such as CNN and Reuters, followed up on Pakistani claims of taking down as many as five Indian fighter jets, state-of-the art French Rafales among them.

India has so far refused to publicly accept or deny any loss of planes. The loud silence made foreign journalists wary of other Indian claims as well.

“I respect anyone who is open about losses and weaknesses,” said Shashank Joshi, defence editor of The Economist. “I then trust them more when they make claims about their successes and their strengths.”

Even as Pakistani claims of downing Indian jets got play in the international press, the Indian assertion of killing over 100 terrorists during Operation Sindoor received little to no attention.

-------

Too little, too late
Given that Pakistan took the lead in shaping opinions in the West, analysts are sceptical about what the MP delegations from India will be able to achieve. Fair, the Georgetown professor, argued that these efforts to set the global narrative should have preceded military action.

“The Indians should have gone to the United Nations first,” she said. “They should have presented their evidence [about Pahalgam]. They should have gone around to global capitals first and then conducted the military operation.”

Sushant Singh, a lecturer in South Asian Studies at Yale University, said it is unclear who the MPs would meet on these visits. But the fact that the government is sending them out is, in itself, an indictment of India’s foreign policy establishment, he said.



“If you require MPs who are not part of the government to talk about cross-border terrorism, then it is clearly a failure of [external affairs minister S] Jaishankar and the whole diplomatic core that we have,” Singh said. “What is it that Shrikant Shinde is going to do that a professional diplomat with 35 years of experience can’t do?”

[Riaz Haq]

Pravin Sawhney
@PravinSawhney
Lessons of #OperationSindoor :
1. It has brought India & Pakistan closest to hot war.
2. Showed vivid clarity on the next hot war between India & Pakistan.
3. With this operation, China replaced the US as the dominant power in South Asia.
4. Signaled China's capability to change the status quo of Kashmir.
5. Created China's credible deterrence against the US & western militaries by demonstrating operational superiority of its weapons & capabilities used by Pakistan.
6. Showed China's commitment to stand by a friend (Pakistan) to the Global South nations.
I will do a video & an article on this important issue this week!

https://x.com/PravinSawhney/status/1927255806921134497

[Riaz Haq]

Defence Index
@Defence_Index
China ( Victor Gao) has made its stance clear without raising its voice: water is a shared lifeline, not a tool for bilateral leverage. Any move by India to restrict Pakistan’s access could prompt China to do the same to India.

https://x.com/Defence_Index/status/1927331276354158713

[Riaz Haq]

India is Losing South Asia to China | Council on Foreign Relations

By Joshua Kurlantzic


https://www.cfr.org/blog/india-losing-south-asia-china

In a relatively short period of time however – roughly the last two years – the tide on the subcontinent has shifted dramatically against India. Pakistan, of course, has long been India’s adversary while also being one of China’s closest partners in the world. Now, as China modernizes, that partnership benefits Pakistan in its balancing against India; in recent India-Pakistan battles, Pakistan used modern Chinese air-to-air missiles, defense systems, and advanced fighter planes to reportedly significant effect.

Other parts of the subcontinent that had enjoyed close ties to India have quickly shifted, in recent times, to building warmer links to China. Sheikh Hasina and her pro-India government no longer rules Bangladesh; she was ousted by massive protestsagainst her rising authoritarianism and corruption last year.

After her ouster, the hastily formed interim government led by Muhammad Yunus has turned to China, which has offered billions in aid and infrastructure projects, all while anti-India sentiment is spiking in Bangladesh as people are freer to speak and to condemn India’s ties to Hasina. (India gave Hasina asylum after she fled Bangladesh, which further rankles Bangladeshis).

In the past two years, leaders who favored India also have lost power In Sri Lanka, the Maldives, and Nepal. Last year, the party of Maldives president Mohamed Muizzu won a landslide victory in parliament. Muizzu had won the presidency the year before on a platform of “India out,” a campaign against India’s longstanding influence over the island country. Muizzu has openly welcomed much closer links to China, and made a visit to Xi Jinping earlier this year. The indebted archipelago state badly needs external financing and is looking to China for it (it already owes much of its debt to China.)

As Al Jazeera reported, a former top Maldives government official said that “China may now be more amenable given Muizzu’s landslide win. ‘China has a lot of leverage,’ the ex-official said, and will likely seek favors in return, including the ratification of a Free Trade Agreement [with the Maldives] that has languished since 2014 and access to key east-west trade routes that Maldives straddles. Indian and Western diplomats have previously expressed worries this access may pave the way for China to secure an outpost in the Indian Ocean.”

In Nepal and Sri Lanka, too, Indian influence has shifted amidst change in domestic politics. In a shocking victory in Sri Lanka last year, a leftist alliance, the National People’s Power (NPP), not among the usual political contenders, won both the presidency and control of parliament. The alliance has not stoked anti-India sentiment as has occurred in the Maldives or Bangladesh, and this year it signed a defense cooperation agreement with India.

Still, the NPP clearly favors Beijing and has aggressively wooed China , which surely worries India. Soon after being elected president, NPP leader Anura Dissanayake lavished praise on China. The Sri Lankan ruling alliance held a pro-China rally on May 1 with guests from the CCP. Moreover, the president has regularly emphasized that Sri Lanka should follow China’s economic model and that China is the most trusted economic partner for Sri Lanka. China has reciprocated with aid, investment, and closer diplomatic links.

And in Nepal, K.P. Sharma Oli, the head of the Communist Party of Nepal, has been prime minister since last July.

[Riaz Haq]

Thomas Keith
@iwasnevrhere_
Something irreversible just moved in South Asia’s core operating system and Delhi watched it happen in real time, powerless to stop it.

On May 21, 2025, a trilateral signal was broadcast out of Beijing. Pakistan, China, and Afghanistan didn’t just meet. They aligned. Politically, infrastructurally, and doctrinally. The Foreign Ministers’ Dialogue didn’t posture, it programmed. Seven lines of protocol were codified: deepen CPEC, extend it into Afghan terrain, exchange ambassadors, suppress insurgents, and harden the regional kernel against external interference.

The extension of the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor into Afghanistan isn’t a proposal. It’s a deployment. The timing wasn’t accidental. It followed India’s attempted narrative reset with the Taliban, only for Pakistan and China to respond with a trilateral commitment, signed not in theory but in real-time coordination, with Muttaqi seated alongside Dar and Wang Yi. The next meeting? Kabul.

Delhi now operates in a recalibrated battlespace. Not just a two-front threat, but a fused system. The economic corridor is becoming a sovereign mesh, an always-on stack that integrates states not through occupation, but through shared latency budgets and infrastructural recursion. The BLA, RAW, and any residual fifth columns aren’t fighting Pakistan anymore. They’re up against a protocol written in BeiDou timestamps, sovereign data corridors, and PLA-grade predictive targeting.

India’s media class can smell it. Firstpost’s meltdown was less a broadcast than a public psychotic break. "China is no longer neutral," they cry. "It’s arming Pakistan, supplying satellite data, embedding itself in Pakistani defense grids!" They’ve realized too late: this isn’t partnership. It’s sovereign fusion and Pakistan didn’t get absorbed, it got elevated.

Wang Yi’s words weren’t a diplomatic pleasantry. “China supports Pakistan in safeguarding sovereignty and territorial integrity.” In old language, that’s a line in the sand. In new protocol, it’s a checksum handshake, India’s border probes now invoke not just military alertness but system-level pushback.

What about Afghanistan? The same Afghanistan India once treated as an appendage of its regional clout? It just committed to China’s orbit, pledged to secure China’s interests, and reiterated the One China principle. In exchange, it gets lifelines, energy, trade, reconstruction, and infrastructure. From who? Not Washington. Not Delhi. From the Belt and Road's spinal tap.

Meanwhile, Delhi still yells about “terrorists” and “state sponsors” with Cold War diction, unable to process what it’s actually watching: the strategic software of Asia being rewritten without its input. India isn’t being encircled. It’s being deprecated. Its primacy scripts don’t compile. The protocols are being updated in Beijing and Islamabad, while Indian analysts still write op-eds about buffer zones.

No insurgent, no strike, no information war can reverse what just occurred. CPEC has breached Afghanistan. Pakistan is now its sovereign co-admin. China is no longer a “partner.” It is the runtime and India, India is what gets sandboxed.

https://x.com/iwasnevrhere_/status/1926318449870987555