India’s Dilemma in the Indo-Pacific Theater

India's Role in the US Indo-Pacific Strategy

India with its leverage lost in Afghanistan is reportedly considering reopening its embassy in Kabul.

This comes at a time when India is seeking its role in Afghanistan; either through ‘Asia-Pacific’ group – 18th Russia-India-China (RIC) foreign ministers’ meeting, or through United States-led initiatives, such as Quad.

This becomes contrasting as the RIC group comprised of the states, the US has created a democratic alliance – Quad, against – this raises a pertinent question regarding how reliable India’s role can be when it comes to the US Indo-Pacific Strategic Framework, in which Quad’s role is significant for the US foreign policy.

Recently, at the 5th edition of the India-US Forum, in his remarks on “QUAD and Future of the Indo-Pacific”, the Indian Foreign Secretary talks about the international rules-based system, when India’s democratic ratings have already been dropped and the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has presented its recommendations to designate India as a country of particular concern for its dismal record.

Moreover, India’s status as a free country has also been changed to “partly free”, as per the annual report on global political rights and liberties. The US think tank Freedom House in its report Democracy under Siege points out that the civil liberties in India have been in decline since Prime Minister Modi came to power in 2014 – a “multiyear pattern in which the Hindu nationalist government and its allies have presided over rising violence and discriminatory policies affecting the Muslim population and pursued a crackdown on expressions of dissent by the media, academics, civil society groups, and protesters”, has caused this decline in India’s democratic ratings.

Here it is essential to recall India’s inclusion into the US equation of the Indo-Pacific Strategic Framework. It has begun in 2009, when in the “Shangri La Dialogue”, Mr. Robert Gates, the then Defence Secretary of United States, stated, “We look to India to be a partner and net provider of security in the Indian Ocean and beyond…” Later the term surfaced in relation with India again in the 2010 “Quadrennial Defense Review” of the USA, “…as its military capabilities grow, India will contribute to Asia as a net security provider in the Indian Ocean and beyond”. This basically provides context to India’s placement in Quad, however, amid the US-Iran conflict and a series of attacks on oil carrier watercrafts, India instead of joining the US-led coalition, initiated Operation Sankalap but failed to establish its stature as a ‘net security provider’ in the Indian Ocean Region.

Also See: Afghanistan Endgame or a Beginning of a New Game?

What is more is that the Indian vision and policy-making paradigm concerning Indo-Pacific as a “net security provider” is grounded more on its maritime policy towards the Indian Ocean and less on the Pacific Ocean, where the Chinese assertiveness is becoming a matter of concern for the US, Australia, and Japan.

India, unlike US views the Indo-Pacific Framework stretching from the cost of Africa to western and southern Pacific Ocean including the Middle East routes.

Therefore, with this divergence of vision regarding the Indo-Pacific Strategy between India and the US, how in a broader prospect this alliance will function, needs exploration. In addition, another point in this case is India’s relationship with Russia; India purchasing the Russian S-400 while being in partnership with the US, despite the US has raised “concerns”– Perhaps time to recall the Australia-France submarine deal or reminiscent of Washington’s sanctions against its NATO ally Turkey?

Moreover, with India’s democracy at risk by an ever-increasing Hindutva tendencies and RSS-driven ideologies influencing the governance system of India – how can it be a reliable ally in the US drive to maintain the international rules-based system?

As president Biden envisions Quad as an anti-China “alliance of democracies” how can India’s role reliability be determined when India has so far refrained from advocating and adopting the democratic ideals of governance?

Isn’t an undemocratic India undermining the moral basis of the US Indo-Pacific Strategic Framework leaving the US to justify its partnership with India? This requires the US to pursue a conscious strategic approach reconsidering India’s role in the US Indo-Pacific Strategy, especially in the context of Afghanistan, taking into account India’s contribution towards US failure in the US-led war against terrorism in Afghanistan.

SAT Editorial Desk

Your go-to editorial hub for policy perspectives and informed analysis on pressing regional and global issues.

Recent

When Insurgents Rule: The Taliban’s Crisis of Governance

When Insurgents Rule: The Taliban’s Crisis of Governance

The Taliban’s confrontation with Pakistan reveals a deeper failure at the heart of their rule: an insurgent movement incapable of governing the state it conquered. Bound by rigid ideology and fractured by internal rivalries, the Taliban have turned their military victory into a political and economic collapse, exposing the limits of ruling through insurgent logic.

Read More »
The Great Unknotting: America’s Tech Break with China, and the Return of the American System

The Great Unknotting: America’s Tech Break with China, and the Return of the American System

As the U.S. unwinds decades of technological interdependence with China, a new industrial and strategic order is emerging. Through selective decoupling, focused on chips, AI, and critical supply chains, Washington aims to restore domestic manufacturing, secure data sovereignty, and revive the Hamiltonian vision of national self-reliance. This is not isolationism but a recalibration of globalization on America’s terms.

Read More »
Inside the Istanbul Talks: How Taliban Factionalism Killed a Peace Deal

Inside the Istanbul Talks: How Taliban Factionalism Killed a Peace Deal

The collapse of the Turkiye-hosted talks to address the TTP threat was not a diplomatic failure but a calculated act of sabotage from within the Taliban regime. Deep factional divides—between Kandahar, Kabul, and Khost blocs—turned mediation into chaos, as Kabul’s power players sought to use the TTP issue as leverage for U.S. re-engagement and financial relief. The episode exposed a regime too fractured and self-interested to act against terrorism or uphold sovereignty.

Read More »
The Indo-Afghan Arc: Rewriting Pakistan’s Strategic Geography

The Indo-Afghan Arc: Rewriting Pakistan’s Strategic Geography

The deepening India-Afghanistan engagement marks a new strategic era in South Asia. Beneath the façade of humanitarian cooperation lies a calculated effort to constrict Pakistan’s strategic space, from intelligence leverage and soft power projection to potential encirclement on both eastern and western fronts. Drawing from the insights of Iqbal and Khushhal Khan Khattak, this analysis argues that Pakistan must reclaim its strategic selfhood, strengthen regional diplomacy, and transform its western border from a vulnerability into a vision of regional connectivity and stability.

Read More »
Pakistan’s rejection of a Taliban proposal to include the TTP in Turkey talks reaffirmed its sovereignty and refusal to legitimize terrorism.

Legitimacy, Agency, and the Illusion of Mediation

The recent talks in Turkey, attended by Afghan representatives, exposed the delicate politics of legitimacy and agency in Pakistan-Afghanistan relations. By rejecting the Taliban’s proposal to include the TTP, Pakistan safeguarded its sovereignty and avoided legitimizing a militant group as a political actor, preserving its authority and strategic narrative.

Read More »