After 9/11, when the Nato alliance led by the US launched the ‘war on terror’ against militant groups, the US swiftly overthrew the Taliban government and took control of Afghanistan. Pakistan had been America’s principal ally during the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan. However, when Pakistan later expressed support for Afghan self-governance, Washington shifted its strategic partnership toward India in the reconstruction of Afghanistan.
For the first time, a Washington-Delhi strategic alliance took shape. Preoccupied with the war on terror in Afghanistan and responding to India’s allegations of Islamist militancy in Bangladesh, the US effectively subcontracted the Bangladesh chapter of the war on terror to New Delhi.
This paved the way for Bangladesh’s military-backed ’1/11’ government. Later, under the political patronage of Indian politician Pranab Mukherjee, the Awami League came to power. In the narrative promoted by Indian media and Bangladeshi media aligned with Indian interests, the Awami League, steeped in India’s political doctrine, was presented as the only reliable antidote to the perceived threat of militancy.
During the BNP-Jamaat coalition government of 2001-06, the militant organisation Jama’atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) emerged. Its leader, Shaykh Abdur Rahman, was a relative of Awami League leader Mirza Azam. Siddiqur Rahman, better known as Bangla Bhai, who had once joined the anti-Soviet Afghan Mujahideen from Bangladesh, even gave interviews to Prothom Alo. He first emerged as the protagonist and later the villain in what is India’s ’necessary illusion’ of militancy in Bangladesh.
It was during the BNP-Jamaat administration that this alleged militant threat was eliminated through the courage of Bangladesh’s law enforcement agencies. Colonel Gulzar, who played a leading role in the anti-militancy campaign, was killed during the Pilkhana massacre on February 25, 2009. Allegations and purported evidence have linked India to that massacre.
The ancient Indian strategist Chanakya advised: “Befriend the kingdom beyond your enemy’s borders, then strike your enemy from there”. Following this principle, India established a number of consulates along Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan, the country lying beyond its longstanding rival.
With American backing during Afghanistan’s reconstruction, India sent teachers to Afghan educational institutions. Indian teachers are widely recognised for their dedication and commitment. As a result, many Afghan students developed deep respect for their teachers, which gradually translated into goodwill toward India itself. Even after the Taliban drove the US out of Afghanistan, they continued to ensure the safety of their Indian teachers.
The Taliban received support from Pakistan’s then prime minister Imran Khan in their campaign to force the US out of Afghanistan. But after Imran Khan was removed from office, the Shehbaz Sharif government rebuilt close ties with Washington. During the anti-Soviet Afghan war, around three to four million Afghan refugees had taken shelter in Pakistan. After the Taliban returned to power, the Shehbaz Sharif administration attempted to repatriate them. This angered many Afghans, who had become settled in Pakistan. Many children born into refugee families regarded Pakistan as their homeland and wished to remain.
The goodwill India cultivated in Afghanistan through the dedication and affection of its teachers has now begun to yield political dividends for Delhi.
Following the terrorist attack on a Pakistani school in 2014 that killed numerous children, Pakistan launched an intensive nationwide campaign against militancy. To secure its removal from the Financial Action Task Force’s grey list, the Pakistani government imposed tighter oversight over madrasaa curricula and financial affairs. Under these circumstances, the TTP was forced to relocate to Afghanistan. Since the TTP functions as a mercenary force, India began using it to carry out terrorist attacks inside Pakistan. The group adopted a strategy of crossing from Afghanistan into Pakistan’s Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provinces to launch attacks before retreating back across the border.
Because China’s flagship economic corridor passes through Balochistan, every terrorist attack there serves India’s interests by simultaneously targeting both Pakistan and China.
After Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi failed to achieve the desired results through surgical strikes and Operation Sindoor along Pakistan’s eastern border, India turned to encouraging militant attacks from Afghanistan along Pakistan’s western frontier, pursuing its long-cherished objective of weakening Pakistan and its more ambitious aspiration of establishing an Akhand Bharat, or ‘Undivided India’.
More recently, Pakistan’s emergence as a mediator in the US-Iran conflict, coupled with China’s growing investments in Afghanistan, has limited the Taliban’s ability to openly align with India’s interests. However, if Taliban leaders begin making regular visits to Delhi and become politically ‘baptised’, much as Awami League leaders did, such cooperation may well become possible.
Ever since the arrest of Indian intelligence operative Kulbhushan Jadhav in Balochistan, Islamabad has consistently accused Indian intelligence agencies of involvement in terrorist activities in the province. For many years, the idea of creating an independent Balochistan was regarded as little more than an Indian aspiration. However, following Pakistan’s mediation efforts aimed at easing the recent US-Israeli military confrontation with Iran, Israel openly expressed deep dissatisfaction with both Iran and Pakistan.
Given that India is widely regarded as Israel’s closest regional partner, there are now reports that Israel may also be taking an interest in the Balochistan issue. Iran’s Sistan and Baluchestan Province is home to another significant Baloch population. Recent developments indicate that India and Israel are working in tandem toward the creation of a Greater Balochistan comprising Pakistan’s Balochistan and Iran’s Sistan and Baluchestan. The underlying assumption is that such a state would significantly weaken both Pakistan and Iran.
At the same time, the enduring hostility between India and Pakistan serves another purpose. It enables political leaders in both countries to obscure governance failures while justifying ever-expanding military budgets. In the end, politicians, military establishments and business interests on both sides benefit from this perpetual game of brinkmanship.
India’s strategy of projecting influence through education and culture while simultaneously pursuing proxy warfare and regional dominance is compelling. Through its films, India crafts history to suit its preferred narrative with the artistry of fairy tales, portrays imagined military triumphs and plants dreams of a mythical India in the minds of people whose lives remain overshadowed by poverty and hardship.
The writer is the editor-in-chief of E-SouthAsia. He can be reached at: [email protected]
