India's hegemonic designs
One reality which emerged out of the recent India-Pakistan conflict is that India is one among equal in the fraternity of South Asian nations. India has long positioned itself as the dominant regional power in South Asia, leveraging its demographic, economic, and military superiority.
However, the recent conflict between India and Pakistan has exposed critical vulnerabilities in this hegemonic posture. This article examines the implications of the conflict on India's regional dominance, highlighting the growing parity between India and Pakistan in diplomatic and military affairs and the increasing strategic autonomy of smaller South Asian nations. It argues that the traditional notion of Indian hegemony is being challenged by an emerging more multipolar and assertive regional order
India's involvement in regional organizations like the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) also illustrates its ambitions to play a leadership role in South Asia. Yet, this perceived hegemony has often been met with resistance from neighboring countries.
Indian leadership's role in South Asia has been underpinned by a combination of soft power, economic leverage and strategic dominance. New Delhi has frequently acted as a security guarantor, development partner, and political influencer in countries like Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and the Maldives.
However, these relationships have often been marked by tensions, with smaller states resisting perceived Indian overreach. Pakistan, influenced by historic parity between the two carved out countries, remained out of the orbit of India's hegemony.
Countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka have increasingly asserted their sovereignty and economic independence. Bangladesh has pursued extensive economic partnerships with China and Japan and lately with Pakistan, while Nepal has defied Indian pressure on constitutional and territorial matters. Sri Lanka, Bhutan and the Maldives have oscillated between pro-India and pro-China alignments, reflecting a desire for strategic balance rather than dependence.
Nevertheless, this hegemonic stance has increasingly come under scrutiny, particularly in the wake of the recent India-Pakistan conflict, which has revealed significant constraints on India's ability to unilaterally influence regional and global outcomes. India's relative military and economic superiority did not translate into strategic dominance in this conflict.
The parity in tactical outcomes has dented the myth of India's invincibility in conventional military terms. Pakistan's nuclear deterrence, improved air defence, and effective diplomacy neutralized India's attempts to impose strategic costs, creating a deterrent equilibrium.
The conflict illustrated that conventional superiority does not guarantee dominance in modern asymmetric and nuclear-influenced warfare. The rapid military responses on both sides underscored the limits of escalation without mutual destruction.
The conflict has affirmed Pakistan's continued relevance in global diplomacy. Despite India's growing alignment with the West, especially the US, , France and Russia, these powers refrained from taking a partisan stance. Instead, international diplomacy focused on de-escalation and parity-based dialogue. This reinforces the notion that, in matters of regional security and peace, India is not the sole interlocutor, and Pakistan remains a necessary counterpart.
Diplomatically, both countries engaged with major global powers to narrate their versions of the conflict. Crucially, the international community treated both states as equally responsible actors, calling for restraint and dialogue. The ceasefire agreement, reportedly influenced by external mediation from actors like the US and the United Arab Emirates, further undermined India's insistence on bilateralism and highlighted its vulnerability to international pressure.
Moreover, internationally, both India and Pakistan engaged in parallel diplomatic offensives, apprising the world capitals of their narratives. Significantly, none of these powers outrightly condemned either side. Instead, global calls for restraint and dialogue placed both nations on an equal diplomatic footing.
India's inability to dictate the terms of the conflict's resolution represents a broader erosion of its regional and global influence. This shift is not only due to Pakistan's strategic resilience but also because of the changing dynamics among other South Asian nations, many of whom are actively diversifying their diplomatic and economic engagements. The cumulative effect of these developments is a region that is moving away from a unipolar Indian-led order toward a more multi-polar framework.
South Asian states are no longer content with passive roles in a hierarchy led by India; instead, they are engaging in multilateral diplomacy, leveraging international partnerships, and resisting hegemonic pressures.
The recent India-Pakistan conflict serves as a critical inflection point in South Asia's geopolitical trajectory. It challenges the long-standing assumption of Indian hegemony and underscores the emergence of a more balanced regional order. India's strategic and diplomatic parity with Pakistan in the conflict, coupled with the assertiveness of smaller neighboring states, signals the decline of unilateral Indian dominance.
Moving forward, India's future role in South Asia will depend not on its ability to dominate, but on its willingness to engage as a partner among equals. In a region characterized by rising nationalism, economic competition, and strategic realignments, hegemonic posturing may prove not only unsustainable but counter-productive.
The way forward lies in fostering regional integration, resolving bilateral issues through dialogue, and embracing a pluralistic vision of South Asian solidarity. India can play a significant role in making this happen.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
2 hours ago
- Express Tribune
US B-2 bombers used Indian airspace to attack Iran's nuclear facilities
Listen to article US B-2 stealth bombers reportedly used Indian airspace to carry out strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, according to regional sources cited in multiple reports on Sunday. Sources claimed the US Air Force's strategic bombers departed from Guam Island in the western Pacific, passed over the Andaman Sea, and then traversed central Indian airspace before reaching their strike zone near Iran via the Arabian Sea. The route reportedly covered coordinates including 15°N, 145°E (Guam), through 10°N, 95°–100°E (Andaman Sea), crossing 20°N, 75°–80°E (central India), and reaching the vicinity of 25°–30°N, 60°–65°E (near Iran's borders). The development comes amid escalating tensions in the Middle East following recent US airstrikes targeting Iranian nuclear sites — an escalation triggered by over a week of Israeli aggression, according to Iran. Defence analysts have called this a potentially significant signal of India's evolving strategic role in the region. 'The reported use of Indian airspace by US bombers could mark a new chapter in the regional security calculus,' one analyst told local media. There has been no official confirmation from the Indian government or the US military regarding the use of Indian airspace for these operations. Washington enters Iran conflict US forces struck Iran's three main nuclear sites, President Donald Trump said in a televised speech late on June 21 and he warned Tehran it would face more devastating attacks if it does not agree to peace. The US strikes included 14 bunker-buster bombs, more than two dozen Tomahawk missiles and over 125 military aircraft, in an operation the top US general, General Dan Caine, said was named "Operation Midnight." After days of deliberation and long before his self-imposed two-week deadline, Trump's decision to join Israel's military invasion against its major rival Iran is a major escalation of the assault and risks opening a new era of instability in the Middle East. "A short time ago, we carried out massive precision strikes on three nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime," announced Trump. Read More: Tehran vows self-defence with 'all force' after US strikes three nuclear installations The strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump said in the White House televised address. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." Iran's Foreign Ministry has strongly condemned a US military strike on its nuclear facilities, calling the action an unprecedented breach of international law and a grave violation of the UN Charter. In a statement, the Islamic Republic of Iran accused the United States of a 'brutal military aggression' against its peaceful nuclear infrastructure. Tehran held Washington fully responsible for what it called a 'heinous crime' and warned of 'dangerous consequences' stemming from the attack.
Express Tribune
8 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil vows to fight on after release
Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil speaks to media after being released from immigration custody in Jena, Louisiana, U.S. June 20, 2025. Photo:REUTERS Listen to article Mahmoud Khalil vowed to resume pro-Palestinian activism as he returned to New York a day after he was released on bail from a jail for immigrants, even as US President Donald Trump's administration said it will continue its efforts to deport the recent Columbia University graduate. He arrived at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey on Saturday afternoon to cheers and ululations from friends and supporters. Khalil, 30, was reunited with his wife, a US citizen, and greeted at the airport by US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat from New York. Shortly after returning to the New York City area and reuniting with his wife and child, Mahmoud Khalil delivered the following message: 'I will continue to protest with everyone of you. Not only if they threaten me with detention. Even if they would kill me I would still speak… — BreakThrough News (@BTnewsroom) June 21, 2025 "Not only if they threaten me with detention, even if they would kill me, I would still speak up for Palestine again," Khalil said, holding a bouquet of flowers. "I just want to go back and just continue the work that I was already doing, advocating for Palestinian rights, speech that should actually be celebrated rather than punished." Khalil, who recently graduated from Columbia University in Manhattan, was a prominent figure in the pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel student protest movement that swept campuses last year. Federal immigration agents arrested him in the lobby of his Columbia apartment building on March 8, making him the first target of Trump's effort to deport international students with pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel views. Read: Pro-Palestinian activist Khalil walks free after US judge orders release Ocasio-Cortez, speaking alongside Khalil at the airport, condemned the Trump administration for what she called "persecution based on political speech". "Being taken is wrong. It is illegal," she said. "It is an affront to every American." Free Palestine!" Khalil said with a raised fist as he left the airport. Khalil was born and raised in a Palestinian refugee camp in Syria and became a U.S. lawful permanent resident last year. Nonetheless, citing an obscure part of federal immigration law that has not been invoked in more than 20 years, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he had determined that Khalil and several other foreign pro-Palestinian students at US schools must be deported because their presence here could harm the government's foreign policy interests. Protesters, including some Jewish groups, say the government wrongly conflates their criticism of the Israeli government, one of the United States' closest allies, with antisemitism. Earlier this month, US District Judge Michael Farbiarz in New Jersey ruled that the government could not detain or deport Khalil based on Rubio's determination, finding the Trump administration was violating Khalil's constitutional right to free speech. On Friday, he ordered the Trump administration to release Khalil on bail while he continues to fight the government's deportation efforts and his lawsuit accusing the government of wrongful detention. A spokesperson for Trump said in a statement after the ruling that Khalil should be deported for "conduct detrimental to American foreign policy interests" and for omitting or incorrectly describing his employment history on his application for form to become a permanent resident. Khalil has said his application form was correct and the allegations of omission are spurious. Mahmoud Khalil upon his return: 'The genocide is still happening in Gaza…the US government is funding this genocide and Columbia University is investing in this genocide. This is why I was protesting, and why I will continue to protest with every one of you…not only if they… — Meghnad Bose (@MeghnadBose93) June 21, 2025 Also on Friday, an immigration court in Louisiana ruled that Khalil must be deported. He will now challenge the decision in the immigration court, which is run by the Department of Justice rather than the government's judicial branch, through the Board of Immigration Appeals. The Trump administration appealed Farbiarz's rulings on Friday evening to the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Previously, Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil walked out of a Louisiana immigrant detention center on Friday, hours after a judge ordered his release, a major victory for rights groups that challenged what they called the Trump administration's unlawful targeting of a pro-Palestinian activist. "Although justice prevailed," he said upon his release in the rural town of Jena, "it's long, very long overdue. And this shouldn't have taken three months."
Express Tribune
10 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Did India use commercial flights as ‘human shields'?
In the ongoing information warfare between India and Pakistan, narratives clash with great fervor. India has, over the past few weeks, come forward accusing Pakistan of using civilian airliners as 'shields' for their military aircraft during high tension timelines. However, a deep dive into the OSINT data encompassing flight logs, social media timestamps, and official military briefings reveals a most sinister exploitation of commercial flights. It suggests that rather than simply getting caught in the crossfire, these airplanes were intentionally steered by Indian air traffic controllers towards the crosshairs of the IAF strike packages, which were positioned in the Kashmir and Jammu regions, instead of the safer east-south-easterly routes. As the provided OSINT images suggest, air traffic control cynically turned these passengers into 'human shields' for IAF fighter jets. Diverting civilian aircraft into a conflict zone, especially for military purposes, is an outrageous breach of humanitarian law. It also depicts utter contempt for human life and violently disrupts the sacredness of civilian airspace. The military maneuvers alongside flights conducted by commercial airlines leave an unnerving imprint, which calls for thorough investigation of responsibility and instant global attention. Commercial flights pushed into danger In contrast to the tracks navigated by these specific aircraft, commercial flights operating in these sectors were supposed to take well-timed and east-south-east directions avoiding 'danger-zones'. However, OSINT offered evidence records which clearly demonstrate the opposite hypothesis during the claimed periods of IAF military activities. Let's talk about the baseline first: The preset 'normal route' for these airliners is showcased as a magenta line in the image below. Normal Flight Path followed by Air Asia at 2202 PST on 6 May 2025 This 'standard flight path' of the route was not to be! And the airliners were tracked in a northward direction, which purportedly brought civilian flights deep into the core of the military action zone. Flight tracker data from 6 May 2025, 19:30 UTC shows a bobbing cluster of commercial aircraft including THA961, KAC-381, THA911, THA931 to mention a few as per above video 1. They seem to have a northern heading. Instead of being diverted southwards and out of a possible conflict, these flights seem to be kept or actively routed towards the Jammu & Kashmir parts of the region. Diverted Path followed by Airliners at 0030 - 0032 PST on 7 May 2025 / 1930 – 1932 UTC, 6 May 2025 The observation is supported by another snapshot from the same day at 19:32 UTC. Airliners such as KLM871 and THA925 were also continuing their journey along northern routes a mere three minutes before the purported peak of military activity. The persistent flow of civilian traffic, apparently ordered or allowed to continue on that northern heading, sharply contrasts accepted risk management practices in aviation safety during armed conflicts. The screenshot below of flight KLM809's (Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur) KLM Airways flight shows the normal operating track which differs grossly from the unsettling practice which took place on that fateful night. This image demonstrates that the very same "normal route" – which was vectored northwards – commonly follows the depicted track under run-of-the-mill circumstances. This suggests not an accidental momentary lapse, but a consistent operational pattern. Normal Flight Path followed by KLM at 0945 PST (0445 UTC) on 6 May 2025 IAF's concealed maneuvers The timeline of this scenario proceeded with IAF operations started at 0010 hours PST 7 May 2025 & 6 May 1910 UTC with Indian airstrike within Pakistan's borders at 35 minutes past midnight which is 0035 PST 7 May 2025 &1935 UTC 6 May 2025. A PAF response was activated at 0012 hrs PST & 1912 UTC. Added to the list of projectiles fired at the heart of Pakistan were Bahawalpur to the south, Muzaffarabad mosque in the north, alongside a presumed Muridke compound. The most concerning tale of pertaining to 'human shield' disclaimer is the control airspace of the IAF over regions of Indian Kashmir and Jammu as it is proven that commercial flights were routed into these zones. Official Images released showing active Indian Operations at 0035 PST IAF's presence and civilian overlap The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) gave a press briefing with the slide 'RECONSTRUCTION OF EVENTS' as below, when a photograph in the slide strikingly caught the attention of the author. It shows IAF strike packages marked with red boxes and dotted over the LOC as well as the Indian Kashmir and Jammu region. PAF Brief showing location of IAF Package at 0030 PST Combining PAF's reconstruction with actual civilian flight data tells a similar story. The flight tracker info showing 6 May 2025, UTC 19:35:06 timestamped below Image 8 shows civilian air traffic feeding into the so-called 'operational zones' of IAF redacted strikes. The picture exhibits superdense garrisoned traffic of jets in the construed airspace of the north. The display provides uncanny resemblance to random intersections of civil flight paths with IAF fighter activities. Airliners diverted over the IAF Package and S-400 Site Shown in the image below, the overlap is reemphasized with OSINT along the dangerous corridor where Qatar Airways flight QTR85V and China Southern Airlines flight CSN8070 are located, corroborating the timeline. As for their flight paths, QTR85V is visible south of Bhatinda and south-west of Adhampur, locations that, according to PAF charts, were close to where a Rafael aircraft was operating (288 / 19 NM from Bhatinda) and where an S-400 was reportedly deployed. CSN8070 is also in almost the same critical location. Noteworthy is that Vietnam Airlines flight HVN18 also traversed this sensitive region. With the same timing, this flight was flying east to Hanoi from Paris, and put through 'beelining' around the highly contested area. Chinese, Qatari, Vietnamese and Dutch Airliners being flown over the battle space Acquired information, as per the following image, suggests there was also Kuwait Airways flight KAC381 (Kuwait City – Delhi) appears to have taken the most curious detour crossing the furthest to 'exotic' combat zones as well. Its flight path castles a continuous line which markedly contradicts the usual routes airline flights take through the LOC which appears even more transparent as it virtually flies straight to the spot 'to protect IAF indeed'. This precise positioning of multiple civilian airliners near key Indian military assets and operational zones intensifies the 'human shield' claim. Kuwait Airways flew a diverted path all along the International Border and LOC while a large number of IAF and PAF fighters were airborne All went quiet on the eastern front as soon as 1945 UTC – 0045 hrs PST. Once the IAF had completed its weapons release and its munitions had hit their targets. All airliners diverted and jumbled up now being reverted back at 0045 PST to their destination path also ensuring safe exit of IAF fighter after their strikes The "Kill Chart" and strategic positioning Seen in the official PAF brief, the 'Kill Chart' shared with media representatives featured IAF aircraft such as the Rafale, MiG 29, Su-30 MKI, with shooting ranges marked relative to important locations like Srinagar, Jammu and the International Border. In the modified image of the 'Kill Chart' below, the red box highlights an area where civilian airliners were flying heavily around the time the alleged strikes occurred. The area where the IAF aircraft were said to be operating overlaps and is key to the 'human shield' narrative. Red Box indicating PAF avoided shooting IAF fighters in the area with human shield airliners. The implication is stark: Pakistani fighter jets took great care taking 'shots of opportunity in Grind' while in BVR (Beyond Visual Range) air combat mode and 'sorting' the targets avoiding the commercial jets in the area. As well as defend themselves from crossfire during any aggressive attempts from IAF jets which were indeed present in the conflict zones of Indian Kashmir and Jammu. If IAF jets had commanding presence over these particular zones – which was not to be – and civilian airliners were forced or retained on to the Northern paths to these zones, it would cripple all attempts by Pakistan air defence to intercept or counter fire. This specific approach makes defendable every argument around the possible killing of thousands of innocent civilians under the guise of military operations. A grave violation: the purposeful proximity The integration of OSINT, including flight tracking data, local Bahawalpur tweet – image 14 – reporting impacts around 0040 PST, and military replays, provides a coherent yet disturbing analysis. The critical concern is: Why were commercial airlines actively instructed to forcefully maneuver into, and purportedly stay within, an airstrike package IAF purportedly positioned over Kashmir and Jammu, rather than being safely, international airspace guideline compliant, routed well south of the conflict zone? A tweet from local shows that by 0040 PST the airstrikes had struck their targets Best practice aviation safety risk management protocols order the immediate air space clearance of commercial aviation during any aviation military activity. Regardless, the OSINT data paints a picture that not only were those protocols completely disregarded, but an illogical dangerous northern route was enforced or followed. Implications: a deliberate act of endangerment This glaring absence of southward diversions, coupled with the dense civilian air traffic being funnelled northwards, compels a severe examination of the implications for India's conduct… Gross Negligence and Strategic Misjudgment: One possibility points to an appalling failure of coordination and judgment within India's command and control. Such a lapse, leading to thousands of civilian lives being knowingly exposed to a conflict zone, would constitute a profound breach of aviation safety and human ethics. One possibility points to an appalling failure of coordination and judgment within India's command and control. Such a lapse, leading to thousands of civilian lives being knowingly exposed to a conflict zone, would constitute a profound breach of aviation safety and human ethics. A Deliberate 'Human Shield' Tactic: The most chilling implication, and the focus of the counter-narrative which the writer offers here, is the allegation of an 'intent strategy'. Steering civilian airliners into an active operational zone transforms the aircraft and passengers into a 'human shield' that inhibits effective defensive countermeasures. If this hypothesis was proven, the consequences would not only be devastating in terms of international humanitarian law—particularly the principle of distinction—but also represent a deeply immoral act of civilian life cannibalization for the purposes of warfare. The human cost and the call for accountability Above and beyond the specific intricacies of flight paths and military maps lies an unquestionable human dimension. Every yellow symbol on those flight tracker maps conveys hundreds of individuals, including passengers, pilots, and cabin crew, unaware that their routine flight was allegedly meant to be turned into some sort of a dangerous military operation. It is deeply disturbing and morally distressing to contemplate that these people might have been intended to be a shield for military operations behind the scenes. The comprehensive collection of open-source intelligence provided in this case, such as detailed flight tracking data, contemporaneous social media reports, and official military briefings, along with others, raises some of the most profound and unsettling questions alongside the ones that have already been answered. It strongly indicates that civilian airliners were purposely steered dangerously close to IAF operational zones, directly undermining the narrative India has been pointing out against Pakistan. It goes beyond the issues of international relations or military maneuvers; it is an investigation into law and morality, along with the fundamental right to unimpeded access to traversing through airspace regarded as civilian without risk. There needs to be an investigation done by an outside entity because 'unbiased' has become a myth in modern discourse. It is necessary to understand so that measures can be put in place to prevent what can been bluntly described as 'contemptable'. Every single honest citizen of the world is yet to receive answers on what these innocent individuals did to deserve being jammed into the space just above the so-called weapon delivery zone and who bears the ultimate responsibility for this alleged act of deception and endangerment. Fahad Masood is an aviation analyst and freelance contributor All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the author
