At the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit, India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar made headlines for his pointed call to China: respect the SCO’s founding charter, particularly its anti-terror and anti-separatist agenda.
On the surface, his statement seemed firm, principled. But if you scratch even lightly beneath, a more complex and revealing picture emerges, not of a state being isolated, but one increasingly choosing to stand apart, while accusing others of encirclement.
A Familiar Pattern: Strategic Posturing, Regional Silence
India has increasingly projected the idea that China and Pakistan are colluding to “isolate” New Delhi in the region, whether in SAARC, through Belt and Road corridors, or trilateral dialogues like China-Pakistan-Afghanistan or China-Pakistan-Bangladesh. This narrative, however, masks a harder truth: India’s own actions are shrinking its room for credible leadership in South Asia.
Jaishankar’s SCO remarks come against a backdrop of diplomatic contradictions. For instance, India refused to sign two recent SCO joint declarations on condemning Israeli strikes inside Iran. This stance raised eyebrows across member states. Meanwhile, India also declined to endorse the condemnation of the Jaffar Express terrorist attack in Pakistan, but quickly invoked regional support after the Pahalgam incident in Kashmir.
This issue-based engagement, or what the word may call “selective multilateralism”, is against sustainable diplomacy. It sends a signal that India wants to reap the benefits of regional forums without subscribing to their collective principles.
Multipolarity in Words, Military Blocs in Practice
India loves to speak the language of multipolarity, but often acts otherwise. While calling for a balanced world order, New Delhi has deepened military ties with the West, particularly through: QUAD, holding annual military drills like Malabar, joint operations under INDOPACOM, strategic dialogues within I2U2, and increased cooperation with AUKUS-aligned partners in the Indo-Pacific.
Let’s suppose if these alignments are about balancing China, they must also be recognized for what they are: bloc politics in action, India must acknowledge it. And when such alignments contrast so sharply with stated commitments to multipolarity and strategic autonomy, regional partners at initiatives like SCO takes note.
The China-Pakistan Equation: Is It Really About Isolation?
It’s convenient for Indian commentators to frame China’s South Asia engagements as part of a broader “Sino-Pak axis” designed to counterbalance India. But this framing is less analysis and more insecurity on part of India.
The fact is: China has filled a regional vacuum that India helped create. After India’s 2016 boycott of the SAARC summit post-Uri attack, multilateral cooperation in South Asia began to wither. India shifted its focus to BIMSTEC, a grouping that, by design, excludes Pakistan. That pivot, seen from the region, was a signal: India preferred selective engagement to regional consensus backed by its western alliances.
Meanwhile, China ramped up infrastructure, port access, energy corridors, and digital connectivity across South Asia. From Gwadar in Pakistan to Padma Bridge in Bangladesh, from hydropower in Nepal to rail investments in Sri Lanka, China’s footprint grew not certainly because of ideology, but because of opportunity.
As of 2024, China invested over $100 billion in South Asia through direct infrastructure and development projects. You can compare that to India’s own regional investments and the contrast is sharp and telling. India has only invested in proxy networks rather than mutual cooperation projects.
Regional Concerns: India’s Coercive Diplomacy
India’s challenges in the region are not just about geopolitics. They’re about India’s perceptions of power and how it is used.
Countries like Bangladesh and Nepal have expressed concerns about citizenship laws like the NRC and CAA, which have cross-border demographic implications. Water-sharing disputes, trade conditionalities, and electoral interference have added to a sense that India’s leadership comes with strings attached. This is not lost on regional partners who now view China’s economic overtures as more transactional, less politicized, and more predictable.
The SCO Moment: A Reflection of Strategic Misalignment
The SCO summit became more than a policy forum for India, it is a mirror. India’s attempt to frame itself as the principled regional power was undercut by its own record: skipping key statements that don’t align with its Western alliances, calling out others for terror sponsorship while allegedly funding proxies (as claimed by Canadian, Pakistani, and UK intelligence reports), advocating cooperation which only suits it, while practicing regional exclusion.
What India expects as a consequence? Regional dynamics are shifting and no one can pretend to be the only might any longer. And that’s the reason that India can surely meet silence, but not isolation because this is not how multilateral platforms like SCO work.
Final Thoughts: Earning Centrality, Not Demanding It
Power in the region today is less about size and slogans, and more about responsiveness, inclusivity, and consistency. China, for all its strategic assertiveness, has leaned into connectivity and development, while India, under Modi, has leaned into security maximalism and ideological politics.
The region is moving, not necessarily away from India, but toward cooperation that works. If India wishes to reclaim its centrality, it must earn it back, not by blaming others, but by rethinking how it leads.
India’s Westward Gaze and the Eastward Manipulation
At the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit, India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar made headlines for his pointed call to China: respect the SCO’s founding charter, particularly its anti-terror and anti-separatist agenda.
On the surface, his statement seemed firm, principled. But if you scratch even lightly beneath, a more complex and revealing picture emerges, not of a state being isolated, but one increasingly choosing to stand apart, while accusing others of encirclement.
A Familiar Pattern: Strategic Posturing, Regional Silence
India has increasingly projected the idea that China and Pakistan are colluding to “isolate” New Delhi in the region, whether in SAARC, through Belt and Road corridors, or trilateral dialogues like China-Pakistan-Afghanistan or China-Pakistan-Bangladesh. This narrative, however, masks a harder truth: India’s own actions are shrinking its room for credible leadership in South Asia.
Jaishankar’s SCO remarks come against a backdrop of diplomatic contradictions. For instance, India refused to sign two recent SCO joint declarations on condemning Israeli strikes inside Iran. This stance raised eyebrows across member states. Meanwhile, India also declined to endorse the condemnation of the Jaffar Express terrorist attack in Pakistan, but quickly invoked regional support after the Pahalgam incident in Kashmir.
This issue-based engagement, or what the word may call “selective multilateralism”, is against sustainable diplomacy. It sends a signal that India wants to reap the benefits of regional forums without subscribing to their collective principles.
Multipolarity in Words, Military Blocs in Practice
India loves to speak the language of multipolarity, but often acts otherwise. While calling for a balanced world order, New Delhi has deepened military ties with the West, particularly through: QUAD, holding annual military drills like Malabar, joint operations under INDOPACOM, strategic dialogues within I2U2, and increased cooperation with AUKUS-aligned partners in the Indo-Pacific.
Let’s suppose if these alignments are about balancing China, they must also be recognized for what they are: bloc politics in action, India must acknowledge it. And when such alignments contrast so sharply with stated commitments to multipolarity and strategic autonomy, regional partners at initiatives like SCO takes note.
The China-Pakistan Equation: Is It Really About Isolation?
It’s convenient for Indian commentators to frame China’s South Asia engagements as part of a broader “Sino-Pak axis” designed to counterbalance India. But this framing is less analysis and more insecurity on part of India.
The fact is: China has filled a regional vacuum that India helped create. After India’s 2016 boycott of the SAARC summit post-Uri attack, multilateral cooperation in South Asia began to wither. India shifted its focus to BIMSTEC, a grouping that, by design, excludes Pakistan. That pivot, seen from the region, was a signal: India preferred selective engagement to regional consensus backed by its western alliances.
Meanwhile, China ramped up infrastructure, port access, energy corridors, and digital connectivity across South Asia. From Gwadar in Pakistan to Padma Bridge in Bangladesh, from hydropower in Nepal to rail investments in Sri Lanka, China’s footprint grew not certainly because of ideology, but because of opportunity.
As of 2024, China invested over $100 billion in South Asia through direct infrastructure and development projects. You can compare that to India’s own regional investments and the contrast is sharp and telling. India has only invested in proxy networks rather than mutual cooperation projects.
Regional Concerns: India’s Coercive Diplomacy
India’s challenges in the region are not just about geopolitics. They’re about India’s perceptions of power and how it is used.
Countries like Bangladesh and Nepal have expressed concerns about citizenship laws like the NRC and CAA, which have cross-border demographic implications. Water-sharing disputes, trade conditionalities, and electoral interference have added to a sense that India’s leadership comes with strings attached. This is not lost on regional partners who now view China’s economic overtures as more transactional, less politicized, and more predictable.
The SCO Moment: A Reflection of Strategic Misalignment
The SCO summit became more than a policy forum for India, it is a mirror. India’s attempt to frame itself as the principled regional power was undercut by its own record: skipping key statements that don’t align with its Western alliances, calling out others for terror sponsorship while allegedly funding proxies (as claimed by Canadian, Pakistani, and UK intelligence reports), advocating cooperation which only suits it, while practicing regional exclusion.
What India expects as a consequence? Regional dynamics are shifting and no one can pretend to be the only might any longer. And that’s the reason that India can surely meet silence, but not isolation because this is not how multilateral platforms like SCO work.
Final Thoughts: Earning Centrality, Not Demanding It
Power in the region today is less about size and slogans, and more about responsiveness, inclusivity, and consistency. China, for all its strategic assertiveness, has leaned into connectivity and development, while India, under Modi, has leaned into security maximalism and ideological politics.
The region is moving, not necessarily away from India, but toward cooperation that works. If India wishes to reclaim its centrality, it must earn it back, not by blaming others, but by rethinking how it leads.
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentaries, a collection of insightful social media threads on current events and social issues, featuring diverse perspectives from various authors.
Recent
A History of Failed Israeli-Palestinian Peace Negotiations
Since the 1973 Yom Kippur War, numerous US, Arab, and international peace plans have sought to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, yet none have succeeded. A consistent pattern has seen these efforts fail in the face of core disagreements over Palestinian sovereignty, Israeli security, and the ongoing expansion of Israeli settlements. This backgrounder explains the historical context of the conflict, the major peace initiatives since 1973, why they failed, and the primary obstacles that remain.
A Strategic Checkmate: The Defense Pact Reshaping the International Relations
The 2025 strategic defense pact between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia marks a major diplomatic milestone. Strengthening military and economic ties, it enhances Pakistan’s regional influence, bolsters Gulf security, and positions Islamabad as a key player between China, the US, and the Middle East. The agreement reflects a blend of constructivist and realist strategies, reinforcing Pakistan’s leadership role in the Muslim world.
Anatomy of a Diplomatic Failure: The 20-Point Gaza Plan
A 20-point Gaza peace plan, initially hailed by a coalition of eight Muslim-majority nations, represented a rare moment of consensus in Middle East diplomacy. But this optimism was short-lived. Following a pivotal meeting between US and Israeli leaders, the plan was radically altered, transforming a multilateral framework into a security-centric arrangement that alienated its initial backers and triggered a crisis of trust. This is the story of how a potential breakthrough unraveled into a diplomatic failure.
Nepal’s Counter-Revolt: Challenge for the Communist and the Left in South Asia
Nepal’s counter-revolt exposes decades of political betrayal by mainstream and leftist parties alike. Despite revolutionary promises to abolish feudalism, ensure sovereignty, and deliver land reforms, leaders from Congress to Maoists succumbed to corruption and power politics. Today’s uprising is both a rejection of failed communist leadership and a warning for the Left in South Asia.
Rich Land, Poor People: The Struggle to Unlock Pakistan’s Mineral Fortune
Unlocking Pakistan’s mineral fortune is less a matter of geology and more a test of governance. It hinges on attracting investment, implementing equitable policies, and navigating deep-seated grievances to avoid the resource curse that has plagued other nations.