04. Haider Ali Khan-India-Bang-Fric-Oped thumbnail-Feb-2025-AP

Once hailed as India’s key ally in the region, Bangladesh is drifting away due to India’s overbearing foreign policy. India’s unfriendly disposition has dealt a heavy blow to its regional influence, as even the states most dependent on India have begun exploring alternatives within the region and beyond. As nations in the region gravitate towards China, the inconsistencies in India’s perception of its character as a regional leader become increasingly evident. India’s self-identification as a leader in South Asia is rooted in historical and cultural perspectives that translate into its foreign policy. However, this notion is not shared by other states in the region which deem it coercive, paternalistic and dismissive of their sovereignty and national integrity. Bangladesh is a recent addition to the growing list of nations wary of India,  shaped by a stark contrast between perception and identity, where nationalist identities, hegemonic ideals and state interests intersect and collide.

Sheikh Hasina, a long-term ally of India, was ousted from office in August last year in a popular uprising. The result was a swift deterioration of diplomatic relations between India and the new interim setup in Bangladesh, shaping the entire course of bilateral relations in a few months which took years to build. Despite notable economic development under Hasina, the Bangladeshi public resented her close ties with India. Although Hasina won the last elections and came to office for her fourth term, her legitimacy remained questionable.  The anti-Hasina protestors in Dhaka chanted ‘India Out’ slogans to express their distrust of the government. This indicated a prevailing sentiment of Indian interference in the electoral process of Bangladesh, undermining its democratic instincts.

‘India Out’ protests also took place in the Maldives a year earlier, paving the way for Mohammad Muizzu’s government. Although Moizzu has taken steps to recalibrate ties with Delhi since coming to power, his policies remain predominantly independent. He has also signed key defence and economic agreements to enhance bilateral relations with China. Recent developments in China-Nepal bilateral ties also raised concerns in Delhi when Nepal’s Prime Minister Sharma Oli visited China in December last year breaking the long-standing tradition of visiting India first. Sharma Oli’s visit was focused on discussions regarding the much-awaited BRI cooperation framework.

China’s ingress plays a significant role in the contemporary geopolitics of South Asia, and Beijing’s growing contiguity with smaller South Asian nations has brought Delhi into a contest for power and influence in the region. Indian concerns arise from its economic advancements being overshadowed by its inability to forge stronger ties with neighbouring states – a gap increasingly filled by China’s strategic cooperation with South Asian nations.  The failures of India’s ‘Neighbourhood First Policy’, due to its overbearing attitude have created strategic gaps for China to increase its regional influence by partnering with nations such as Bangladesh, Maldives and Sri Lanka on key strategic economic initiatives such as BRI and Global Development initiative, which is in line with China’s global initiative for south-south cooperation. Moreover, nations such as Nepal and Bangladesh are leveraging relations with China to balance India’s dominance and pursue a more independent foreign policy beyond Indian influence.

Unresolved bilateral issues with the neighbouring states also play a role in smaller South Asian nations steering away from the Indian sphere of Influence. Long-standing border and territorial disputes and disregard for settling disagreements with countries such as Bangladesh also add to the existing conundrum of mistrust and geopolitical rivalry. Moreover, the normative mismatch is also evident in the bilateral relations in the region, as India portrays itself as a benevolent regional leader but its smaller counterparts feel increasingly disenfranchised.

As India is embroiled in a diplomatic crisis with its eastern neighbour, its failures allowed China to advance its geopolitical objectives in South Asia. Strategic imperatives and geopolitical rivalries compel South Asian states to redefine their foreign policy postures in the regional context. This is imperative, as South Asian actors find the regional cooperation frameworks such as SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) and BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation) largely ineffective. This provides ample room for China to pursue an independent foreign policy with the smaller nations, undermining Indian influence in the region. Geopolitical prudence demands a consensus in South Asia with the involvement of major stakeholders to redefine the role of inclusivity in the regional political milieu.

Haider Ali Khan is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. He can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »