By: Shreya Dabral, Research Analyst, GSDN

South Asia has never been an example of simple geopolitics, in which the bitterness of history, the hostility of the region, and international strategic interests intersect. The warming of relationships between Pakistan and Bangladesh is one of the more recent changes that are transforming the strategic environment of the region. These two countries, which fought and were bitter foes in the past, linked through culture, language, and geography, and are separated by a bloody past-are starting to consider a path of diplomatic, economic, and security partnership.

This newfound intimacy poses numerous problems to India, which has hitherto enjoyed great leverage in Bangladesh and has a strained but a tactically indispensable relationship with Pakistan. To go with the diplomatic adjustments are regional security ramifications, economic impact and overall Indian orientation to its geopolitical strategy. It is important to understand such developments, drivers of these developments and the possible effects of such developments to assess the strategic posture of India in South Asia.

History: Common Ground to Division

The history of the present geopolitical situation has its origins in South Asia. The division of British India in 1947 gave birth to Pakistan, a country with separated wings (geographically) West Pakistan (modern-day Pakistan) and East Pakistan (modern-day Bangladesh). Since its formation, Pakistan had struggled with integrating East Pakistan politically, economically, and culturally. East Pakistanis believed they had been politically sidelined, exploited economically, and inherently neglected in terms of cultural practices and governance as West Pakistan prevailed within national institutions, commerce and administration.

In 1971, this situation came to a breaking point. The autonomy requested by East Pakistan triggered a military crackdown by West Pakistan that caused many atrocities and humanitarian crisis. Strategic, humanitarian, and political interests made India intervene and thus created Bangladesh. The Bangladesh population was profoundly scarred psychologically by the war with a legacy of mistrust of Pakistan that continues to date.

Bangladesh adopted an Indian-friendly foreign policy to a great extent after independence and began cooperating with India economically and in security matters. Meanwhile, Pakistan was diplomatically isolated in the subcontinent, and it had a limited and mostly ceremonial relationship with Bangladesh. It is against this historical background that India had a long history of influence in Bangladesh, owing to a joint struggle, similarity of culture and strategic interests.

The Political Change of Direction and Foreign Policy Reorganization in Bangladesh

Political change took place in Bangladesh in August 2024. When the Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, was ousted after a mix of civil unrest, student movement, and extraneous factors, an interim government was formed under the leadership of Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus which started having an anti-India stance and started gravitating towards China & Pakistan. This was a break of the conventional India-focused foreign policy in Bangladesh.

The strategic pivot in Bangladesh has several reasons behind it:

• Economic Diversification: Bangladesh has also been pursuing a solution to excessive reliance on India in trade and investment. Interaction with Pakistan will provide access to new markets, joint ventures, and export opportunities especially in the textile industry, farm produce and technologies.

• Strategic Autonomy: Bangladesh presents its independence at the regional level, by balancing its relations with India and Pakistan. An attitude like that makes Bangladesh seem less of a satellite of one power, giving it a greater diplomatic advantage.

• Security Concerns: Overlapping areas of common interest in defensive cooperation have been established in counterterrorism, maritime security and calamity control. The willingness to cooperate is demonstrated by the fact that Bangladesh has been part of the military drills organized by Pakistan, such as AMAN-2025.

• Domestic Political Signalling: The new administration wants to demonstrate itself as a decisive force in foreign affairs, exercising agency to its audiences back home and projecting experience abroad.

• Historical and Cultural Interactions: The culture and language that binds Pakistan and Bangladesh together is gradually re-discovered with uneven speed due to the historical wrong and as a new platform to build another partnership.

Strategic Motivation in Pakistan

With its past diplomatic isolation and economic stagnation, Pakistan is particularly happy about the prospect of renewed interaction with Bangladesh:

• Diplomatic Bait: Co-operative Bangladesh would increase the influence of Pakistan in the region, and Islamabad would be able to offset the traditional influence of India in Dhaka.

• Economic Cooperation: Bangladeshi markets and trade access would provide Pakistan, opportunities to augment exports, share investments and strengthen its economic position within South Asia.

• Strategic Signalling: As long as Pakistan balances its strategic interests and can project a vision that involves reconciling the region, it should be perceived as malleable and as reflecting a wish to resolve historical animosities.

• Regional Deals: Greater integration with Bangladesh will open opportunities to do coordinated business with China, which will enhance the strategic position of Pakistan through India.

Economic Cooperation and Implications

Pakistan and Bangladesh are going through nascent economic cooperation:

• Trade Agreements: The two countries have started negotiating to lower trade barriers, consider tariff concessions, and promote joint ventures in the industrial sphere. This may involve joint ventures in textiles, pharmaceuticals and agriculture.

• Investment Opportunities: Pakistan is looking at investing in Bangladeshi industries (especially the energy and infrastructure) which might have been earlier on, attracted Indian investment.

• Dynamics of Regional Markets: Regional level economic initiatives would alter the flow of trade, slightly weakening the old-standing economic advantage of India in Bangladesh. An example is the re-placing of regional supply chains to garments or raw materials with Pakistan, which would impact the market share of India.

• Long-term Economic Realignment: The sustained collaboration can stimulate other area participants to consider multilateral initiatives with Pakistan-Bangladesh, which will form a new economic bloc in the eastern region of South Asia.

Defense and Security Cooperation

The most delicate aspect of the rapprochement between Pakistan and Bangladesh is perhaps defense cooperation:

• Military Exercises: The involvement of Bangladesh in drills organized by Pakistan especially the maritime security exercises show the coordination of operations and common interests.

• Intelligence Sharing: There have been talks of counterterrorism intelligence exchange, which is a reflection of common apprehensions with regard to transnational security threats.

• Strategic Posture: Although not blatant, this type of cooperation will require the recalibration of India in the eastern border and in the Bay of Bengal. Even a restricted version of a joint strategy between Bangladesh and Pakistan will have a shaping impact on the Indian regional strategic decisions.

• Counterterrorism Dynamics: Pakistan has been accused in the past of leveraging regional networks to spread extremism. Further cooperation with Bangladesh may make it difficult to track cross-border terrorist activities even inadvertently, by India.

Diplomatic and Regional Implications

The developing Pakistan-Bangladesh alliance should also be considered in the context of the geopolitics of the region:

• China and its influence: China is a strategic partner to Pakistan, and a potential investor to Bangladesh, meaning that improved Bangladesh-Pakistan relations will advantage China. Planned programs in line with Chinese infrastructure projects have the potential to support a further strategic presence of Beijing in South Asia.

• The Role of the United States: U.S involvement in South Asia, policy changes in relation to Pakistan, Bangladesh and India will determine the future of bilateral relations. A change in American strategic priorities can change the cost-benefit calculus of both Dhaka and Islamabad.

• Regional Forums: Regional blocs like SAARC and BIMSTEC can be used as the platforms of increased Pakistan-Bangladesh collaboration, which can leave India behind unless New Delhi takes the initiative.

• Geopolitical Message: New relationships indicate to the world that old animosity can be put aside in a practical way and the relationships in the South Asian region redefined. India has to read these signals and alter its regional diplomacy.

Implications for India

This changing partnership poses a complex environment to India:

• Strategic Enforcement: Greater cooperation between Pakistan and Bangladesh has the potential to impact the eastern security dynamics of India, thereby putting a strain on strategic choices in the Bay of Bengal and frontier areas.

• Economic Competition: Dislocation of investment and markets out of India by the joint trade and industrial projects would affect the regional economic competition and commercial interests of India.

• Security Dilemmas: Intelligence and maritime coordination between Bangladesh and Pakistan may require re-alignment of the Indian defense planning.

• Diplomatic Constraints: A shift in favour of Pakistan lowers the bargaining power of India in Bangladesh and may lessen its influence in the regional forums and multilateral bargaining.

• Historical Sensitivities: Unresolved issues of the 1971 war, such as unresolved grievances, can have a latent effect on the foreign policy of Bangladesh and this makes the task of India to have a strategic presence in Bangladesh difficult.

Indian Strategic Options

India needs to take a multi-pronged approach to offset such developments:

• Firm Bilateral Relationships: The relationship with Bangladesh should be reinforced through trade, investment, cultural exchange and infrastructure cooperation, which is also imperative to reestablish authority.

• Economic Incentives: There are specific economic packages, joint ventures and technology alliances that can be applied to counter the increasing attractiveness of Pakistan.

• Defense Cooperation: Joint security drills, maritime cooperation, and counterterrorism cooperation will aid in ensuring that India has a strategic advantage.

• Cultural Diplomacy: Education, media and people-to-people exchanges: imports and exports build a sense of goodwill and enhance historical bonds.

• Regional Leadership: Active involvement and membership in SAARC, BIMSTEC and other regional groups will mean that the interest of India is represented and the Bangladesh-Pakistan axis does not turn its back on New Delhi.

• Strategic Communication: The articulation of the vision of regional stability, economic development and security of India will be clear and will help to sway the perceptions of international interests.

Case Studies and Hypothetical Scenarios

• Maritime Security in Bay of Bengal: Imagine that Pakistan and Bangladesh are co-operating in conducting naval patrol. India would require a greater level of surveillance and may even plan with the other regional allies to have free navigation and ensure strategic balance.

• Economic cooperation in Textile: A hypothetical joint venture in the production of garments between Pakistan and Bangladesh may compete directly with the Indian exports, forcing India to innovate or give incentives to keep business.

• Sharing of Intelligence on Counterterrorism: In case Pakistan and Bangladesh liaise on intelligence, India has to come up with similar systems of ensuring that it is in the know on the possible cross border threats.

These situations depict practical challenges India has to look forward to in order to retain security and influence.

Conclusion

The increasing intimacy between Pakistan and Bangladesh is a radical change in the geopolitical situation in South Asia. In the case of India, the consequences are diverse- in security, economic, and diplomatic terms. Although the rapprochement presents possible risks, it also offers an opportunity to India to re-strategize its policy and increase bilateral involvement and re-establish its status as a regional leader.

India can overcome these changes by taking a proactive, subtle, and strategic course of action, including diplomacies, economic incentives, defense partnership, and cultural interaction. The Bangladesh Pakistan axis can redefine the regional dynamics however with the site and proper planning, India can preserve its interests, keep the region stable and remain in an influential position in South Asia.

By: Sanjay Mummana, Research Analyst, GSDN

The Middle East is never just a desert between Asia and Africa; it is the place of the birth of empires, of religions, and of civilizations in conflict. Yet, when the world today thinks of this land, one word comes to mind: war. From the fall of the Ottoman Empire to the wars going now, the Middle East has seldom been a peaceful place. One conflict ends another begins, as if the region is trapped in an endless cycle. Peace in Middle East isa question shaped by both politics and history. Let us first examine the history of the Middle East, to understand the roots of its persistent conflicts.

The 1910s and 1920s: Promises and Betrayals:

The first decade of the twentieth century changed the history of the Middle East. At that time, Britain was still very dependent on oil from the United States (U.S.), and the American position on anti-colonialism made the British nervous. To reduce dependence, they turned to the oil-rich Middle East and chose to break the Ottoman Empire’s hold on the region. Arabs who had rebelled against the Ottomans thought that Britain promised them independence through the McMahon-Hussein Correspondence but their fate had already been sealed. On May 16, 1916, the Sykes-Picot Agreement divided the land between Britain and France, and on November 2, 1917, the Balfour Declaration called for a Jewish homeland in Palestine, without regard to the Arab majority living there. The Treaty of Sevres (August 10, 1920) ended the Ottoman Empire and divided its territories among the European powers. By the 1920s, instead of actual independence, Arabs were given artificial states under foreign rule, sowing mistrust and conflicts that continue to this day as well.

The 1930s and 1940s: Rising Nationalism and the Birth of Israel:

In the 1930s, anger grew in Arab lands under European control, especially in Syria, Iraq, and Palestine. Jewish migration to Palestine increased, and pushed further by Nazi persecution, which led to clashes with local Arabs. After the Holocaust, pressure rose to create a Jewish homeland, and on November 29, 1947, the United Nations voted to divide Palestine into Jewish and Arab states. On May 14, 1948, Israel declared unilateral independence, and the very next day Arab countries attacked, starting the first Arab-Israeli War. Jews lost millions of lives in the Holocaust, finally got a place to live, and when others tried to take it away, they fought till the last drop of blood and won. For Arabs, it was the opposite. They saw it as their land unfairly given to others. For Palestinians, it was the Nakba (“catastrophe”), when many were killed and hundreds of thousands were forced from their homes.

The 1950s and 1960s: The Age of Coups and Wars:

Arab nationalism grew stronger in the 1950s and 1960s. Leaders like Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt wanted to unite Arabs under socialism and reduce Western control. This came to a head during the Suez Crisis on October 29, 1956, when Egypt took control of the Suez Canal. Britain, France, and Israel attacked, but they were forced to withdraw under pressure from the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The Arab-Israeli conflict rose again on June 05, 1967, in the Six Day War, when Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza, Sinai, and Golan Heights, causing more Palestinian displacement.

The 1970s and 1980s: Oil, Peace, and Proxy Wars:

The 1970s were transformative. On October 06, 1973, Egypt and Syria launched the Yom Kippur War against Israel to regain territories. Israel pushed back, the Arab oil producers then used the “oil weapon,” cutting supplies to the West and quadrupling the prices. This showed the world the power of Middle Eastern oil. At the same time, there were efforts for peace. On September 17, 1978, the Camp David Accord between Egypt’s Anwar Sadat and Israel’s Menachem Begin, led by U.S. President Jimmy Carter, resulted in Egypt officially recognizing Israel. While Sadat was praised abroad, at home he was assassinated on October 6, 1981, by extremists who saw peace with Israel as betrayal. The February 11, 1979 Iranian Revolution also reshaped the region. Iran removed U.S. backed Shah and became an Islamic Republic under Ayatollah Khomeini, opposing Western influence and encouraging Islamist movements across the Middle East.

The 1980s were violent. The Iran-Iraq War (1980 – 1988) took the lives of more than a million people. Saddam Hussein, with the help of the West and Arab countries, attempted to prevent Iran, but the war did not conclude with a victory. From 1975 to 1990, Lebanon was during a civil war involving Israel, Syria, and numerous local militias. Israel invaded Lebanon in June 6, 1982 to drive out the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which only led to more fighting. It was also the period in which the Shiite militant organization Hezbollah was born, backed by Iran. The First Intifada started in December 9, 1987 with mass protests, boycotts against Israeli occupation in the West Bank and Gaza.

The 1990s and 2000s: Hope, Terror, and Occupation:

In August 2, 1990, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, shocking the Arab world. On January 17, 1991, a U.S.-led coalition launched Operation Desert Storm. Soon, Saddam’s army was defeated and Kuwait was freed. But U.S. troops stayed in Saudi, which angered many Arabs. This presence became one of the reasons extremists like Osama bin Laden later turned their anger against the West.

Even in this tense time, the 1990s gave some hope for peace. On September 13, 1993, the Oslo Accords were signed, and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat shook hands. Later Jordan also signed peace with Israel. For a short while, it seemed peace might be possible. But this hope was shaken when, Rabin was killed by an Israeli extremist. His death showed that peace could be destroyed not only by enemies but also from within one’s own side.

The first decade of the 21st century was even more turbulent. On September 11, 2001, the U.S. was attacked by al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, in the 9/11 attacks. This resulted in the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan to remove the Taliban who were sheltering al-Qaeda. Two years later March 20, 2003, the U.S. invaded Iraq, claiming that Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction. Saddam was captured and executed on December 30, 2006, but such weapons were not found. The war left Iraq unstable with bombings, sectarian violence, and the rise of new extremist groups that would later become ISIS.

The 2010s and 2020s: The Arab Spring and Continuing Struggles:

The Arab Spring (2010-2011) originated in Tunisia and spread throughout the Arab world. Ordinary people took to the streets demanding freedom and dignity, revolting against rulers. Hosni Mubarak was overthrown in Egypt. Muammar Gaddafi was killed in Libya. But in Syria, the protests lead into a civil war that drew in world powers and produced the worst refugee crisis.

The 2020s began with some hope for peace. On September 15, 2020, the Abraham Accords normalized relations between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and later a few other Arab states. However, this peace did not include the Palestinians. Later, the Israel–Gaza conflict broke out on October 07, 2023, leaving Gaza in ruins. Syria is still stuck in war, Yemen faces one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises, and Iran and Saudi Arabia continue to compete for power.

Recently U.S. and Israel launched attacks on Iran because they feared that if Iran built nuclear weapons, it would threaten the whole region. Their worry was also linked to the groups Iran supports. Hezbollah in Lebanon is a powerful militia and political force that has fought many times with Israel. Hamas in Gaza is the group leading the fight against Israel and is behind many rocket attacks. The Houthis in Yemen are fighting a long war against the Saudi-backed government and have targeted ships and cities in Saudi. Because of these ties, many countries see these groups as terrorist organizations. Iran’s backing of them, along with its nuclear ambitions, made it a key target of U.S. and Israeli action.

Looking back at the past century, several factors have kept the Middle East locked in a cycle of conflict. In my view, some of these are as follows:

• The Middle East is a mix of ethnic groups (Arabs, Persians, Kurds, Armenians, Jews, Copts, etc.) and religious groups (Sunni and Shia Islam, Orthodox and Catholic Christianity, and Judaism). These identities have been used historically and politically to divide people even more. The Sunni–Shia divide has been one of the deepest tensions. Saudi, as the leading Sunni power, is strongly backed by the U.S., while Iran, the main Shia power, supports Shia-linked groups in different countries. To spread its influence, Iran relies on proxy groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthis in Yemen. The goal of these proxies is not only to weaken Iran’s rivals but also to spread Shia dominance in the region. Whenever these groups gain more ground, Iran’s influence grows, creating constant friction with Saudi Arabia, Israel, and their allies.

• After World War I, Britain and France drew borders without any regard to existing tribal, ethnic, or religious realities. This produced states with internally divided populations. As a result, in many countries, certain groups became minorities and were denied equal rights. Many conflicts, such as those between Israel and its neighbours, the Kurdish, and tensions in Iraq and Syria, have their origins in these colonial era decisions.

• Large oil, gas, and mineral reserves have been both a blessing and a curse. Wealth creation has been accompanied by internal power struggles, wars, and foreign interventions as control over resources is constantly contested. Often, competing claims have worsened tensions within countries and across borders.

• Decades of authoritarian rule, corruption, and fragile institutions have left many states incapable of providing for the basic needs of their populations. This failure has led to public anger, revolutions, and extremist movements, as seen in the Arab Spring and the ongoing conflicts in Syria and Yemen.

• Middle Eastern oil has made the region a playground for global powers. The U.S. relies on Saudi Arabia not just for oil but also to maintain a strong Sunni front against Iran. On the other hand, Russia and China lean towards Iran. China is the largest importer of Iranian oil and pays using its own currency, giving China a strong economic lifeline and leverage against U.S. sanctions. For Russia, Iran is strategically important because it acts as a barrier against NATO expansion and holds key gas pipeline routes that connect to Europe and Asia. This great power rivalry means that local conflicts are often turned into proxy wars between Washington, Moscow, and Beijing.

• One of the biggest dangers comes from the possibility of Iran developing nuclear weapons. Israel sees this as an existential threat, as it fears that if Iran gets nukes, they could be passed down to proxies like Hezbollah, Hamas, or the Houthis. If such groups were ever to gain nuclear capability, the region could face uncontrollable chaos. This fear drives constant strikes, sanctions, and political pressure to stop Iran’s nuclear program.

Although there have been peace treaties, like the Oslo and the Abraham Accords, the Middle East is still full of conflicts. Real peace does not come just from signing agreements. It needs solving deeper problems. History shows that change is possible. Europe, once torn apart by many wars, rebuilt itself by talking and working together. This led to the European Union, where countries cooperate for shared goals. The Middle East can also move toward lasting peace if its nations focus on working together instead of fighting.

At this moment each nation and organization pursue its own interests, and the interests are not similar very often. And this is why peace operations cannot work. Imagine the fight as a tree – the top branches can be cut away but the roots of religion, identity, and history run deep. Without resolving the issue at root level, violence will continue to reappear. According to Mahabharata, in war there are no winners or losers but only widows and orphans. In the Middle East, this is particularly so where the common people bear the brunt. Leaders should prefer knowledge over vengeance, hope over fear, and long-term peace rather than immediate benefits. Then only peace will cease being a dream, and become a reality.

By: Prof. Bawa Singh, Anjana VS and Jay Koche

China and the Central Asian Republics (CARs) have signed the Treaty of Permanent Good-Neighbourliness, Friendship, and Cooperation in June 2025. The treaty is considered as a landmark agreement that formalized Beijing’s strategic depth across Eurasia. Literally and linguistically, the treaty emphasized harmony and mutual respect for each other, but its subtext has concealed a deeper ambition i.e., institutionalization of China’s leadership in a region that was long dominated by Russia and contested by the West.

The evolving regional framework that is being dubbed as the “Xi’an Consensus” soon after the inaugural 2023 summit in Xi’an. It marks a shift from transactional diplomacy to a rules-based, multilateral architecture covering infrastructure, security, and soft power. It is being perceived as China’s most ambitious attempt, yet to reshape the regional norms and embed its influence through legal, economic, and cultural means.

Strategic Depth

China has been emerging as hegemon in in the economic region architecture. The  China–Central Asia trade had reached to a phenomenal record level to the amount of US$ 94.8 billion in 2024, from just US$ 460 million in 1992. In the just first five months of 2025 alone, China and Central Asia trade surged to the amount of US$ 39.8 billion, with Kazakhstan accounting for nearly half. Concomitantly, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has transformed the region from a post-Soviet periphery into a Chinese backyard and logistical artery, linking China to Europe. Chinese  direct investment stock in Central Asia reached to the amount of  US$ 17 billion in 2024. The investment is growing with a focus on critical minerals and green energy. The same further strengthened by projects like the China–Kyrgyzstan–Uzbekistan railway, which broke ground in December 2024 and anticipated that it would cut freight time to Europe by 10 days.

The Treaty of Permanent Good-Neighbourliness, Friendship, and Cooperation (2025) has institutionalized s the BRI through the legally binding multilateralism. The treaty has offered to China a regulatory anchor and geopolitical firewall. It includes clauses on non-interference, dispute resolution, and security cooperation, reducing risks of instability that could derail infrastructure corridors. China has expanded its geostrategic footprints by some measures like joint counterterrorism drills with Tajikistan and security assistance to Kyrgyzstan. These measures signal a quiet entrenchment   into domains, which were once dominated by Russia. The establishment of China–Central Asia Secretariat in 2023, now the same has been coordinating the  regional multilateral engagements with China covering the trade, education, and climate resilience.

Debt, Distrust, and Strategic Exclusivity

Without an iota of doubt, geostrategic footprints of China have been phenomenally growing in the Central Asian region. On the contrary, yet the Xi’an Consensus is not without challenges, contradictions and criticism. The critics have been highlighting the Chinese  debt-trap diplomacy in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. In these countries, the Chinese debt accounts for 40% and 27% of GDP respectively. Concurrently, the environmental concerns are spreading their tentacles. The  BRI projects often bypassing and ignoring the environmental safeguards and exacerbating ecological stresses. Public discontentment is also growing. The protests against the Chinese investment and projects are frequent, especially in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan due to  local distrust stemming from land loss, labour practices, and opaque governance. Critics argue that Article 3 of the China–Central Asia Treaty may strategically exclude  Central Asian states from alliances like Westerns Alliances  limiting their foreign policy flexibility. While this framed as non-alignment, but the analysts warned it as a China-centric regional framework.

Moreover, compared to other external powers, China has emerged as the dominant external actor in Central Asia, with trade reaching a record US$ 94.8 billion in 2024, as compared to Russia (US$ 18–20 billion) the EU (US$ 15–17 billion) and the US (US$ 5–6 billion).  Similarly, China is sharing strong connectivity through projects like the China–Kyrgyzstan–Uzbekistan railway and the Khorgos dry port. China’s strategic influence has institutionalized through the China–Central Asia Secretariat and the Xi’an Consensus.  Although,Moscow retaining the cultural and linguistic influences, but its economic and strategic primacy have been shrinking. Some analysts at CEPA and CNAS highlighted that  that Russia has learned to accept and accommodate China’s rise in the region.

Realizing the geopolitical and geostrategic concerns, the Central Asian countries also have not been remained passive. The CARs are pursuing multi-vector diplomacy, engaging with major external powers such as the India, US, EU, Japan etc.

At last, it is argued that the Xi’an Consensus is not a formal alliance, rather it’s a blueprint. China has been expanding its geostrategic tentacles through the connectivity, diplomacy, debt, infrastructure, and soft power means. China has embedded into the multi-dimensional fabric of Central Asia. China’s these strengths proving to be hedges against Russian security, historical and cultural influences.   On the other hand, it’s a mix of opportunities and constraints for the CARs. Concomitantly, it is a reminder for Russia that its multilateral influences and CARs as backyard, once for always cannot be taken for granted, rather, now it must be revisited and reframed. Thus, new Eurasian order is emerging with the Chinese influence gaining and waning Russian with zero sum and positive sum game, being built, bargained, and quietly signed into permanence.

By: Lt Col JS Sodhi (Retd), Editor, GSDN

Two contrasting statements by the Donald Trump Administration in just a span of over five years, pretty much explains the tough position Taiwan finds itself in, as China’s war for Taiwan is clearly visible on the horizon.

One, as the Covid-19 pandemic was unleashing its full force and fury globally in 2020 with deaths being reported by the dime and dozen every second, the 45^th US President Donald Trump posted on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) on March 17, 2020 terming the Corona virus causing this deadly pandemic as the “Chinese Virus”. China took strong objection to this statement and the relations between the USA and China nose-dived for the balance of Trump’s Presidential tenure that ended in January 2021.

Two, on April 12, 2025, Pete Hegseth, the Defence Secretary of the 47^th US President Donald Trump’s administration shocked the world when in a candid statement he admitted that China’s hypersonic missiles could destroy the 11 US Navy aircraft carriers in just 20 minutes. He further added that in every war game conducted in the US Military, the Americans always loose to the Chinese. War games are conducted in all militaries the world over to assess the readiness of military strategies and are designed to simulate real-war scenarios.

No wonder as Donald Trump after getting elected as the US President on November 05, 2024, was briefed on various operational and security aspects of America including the military capabilities of USA’s main adversary China, before being inaugurated as the 47^th US President on January 20, 2025, invited the Chinese President Xi Jinping for his inauguration ceremony in Washington D.C. This Presidential invite was amongst the few extended to world leaders known as strong allies of Donald Trump that included the Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and the Argentinian President Javier Milei amongst the specially selected.

Though Xi Jinping did not attend the inauguration but he sent China’s Vice President Han Zheng for the inauguration. The Presidential invite for Xi Jinping marked a turning point in Donald Trump’s change in attitude towards China in just five years from calling out China as culpable for the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic to inviting the Chinese President for his inauguration.

The US-China tango had just started and as time would reveal, Donald Trump would have a soft attitude towards China as he spared no other nation, apart from Russia, in the pursuit of “Making America Great Again”.

“Making America Great Again” also called MAGA, the slogan that caught the American voter’s fancy in the run-up to the US Presidential elections last year, gave Donald Trump resounding victory in the elections though almost every media house, think-tank and political analyst in the USA had predicted Donald Trump’s defeat to Kamala Harris, the Democrat Presidential nominee. After Donald Trump refused to have his next Presidential Debate with Kamala Harris as the solitary Presidential Debate with her had ended as a disaster for Trump, it was a forgone conclusion that Donald Trump would never return to the White House as America’s President.

But the American voter saw merit in MAGA as it entailed getting back manufacturing to the USA and Trump’s promise on not taking part in any war/conflict in the world, and elected Donald Trump as the USA’s 47^th President with a thumping majority.

Within a few weeks of settling down as America’s 47^th President, Donald Trump unleashed the Tariff War on April 09, 2025. And each day the world would wake up to new set of tariffs being announced by President Trump. So much so, that within a few weeks, one lost count of what tariffs were imposed on which nation. The media and social media were in a frenzy discussing Trump’s Tariff War.

But two nations remained unfazed – Russia & China. The messaging was clear as events would unravel soon.

China struck back at the USA by imposing tariffs on American imports. The Chinese Embassy in the USA retorted that China was prepared for any war with the USA, be it a tariff war, a trade war or any other type of war and that China was ready to fight till the end.

Russia too struck back on August 05, 2025 by calling the American tariffs as ‘neocolonial’ and accused Washington of attempting to maintain its hegemony.

But beneath these strong statements, neither China nor Russia were affected by the US tariffs as Donald Trump had exempted major trading commodities of Russia and China from tariffs.

The bonhomie visible between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin during the Alaska summit in Anchorage on August 15, 2025 and the US President’s statement that he was planning to visit China later this year, brings to fore that there is nothing amiss between the three Superpowers.

The USA, Russia & China have in an unwritten pact decided not to meddle in each other’s domain. The world has been unofficially divided into three regions with each Superpower deciding not to transgress in the other’s domain.

The first loser of this unofficial pact between the three Superpowers will be Taiwan as the next major war the world is going to witness is China’s war on Taiwan.

On February 03, 2023, William Burns, the Director of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), USA officially tasked with gathering, processing and analysing national security information from around the world, said in a statement that USA and China will go to war over Taiwan in 2027.

And this year, on May 31, 2025, Pete Hegseth, the US Defence Secretary warned that China is actively training to invade Taiwan.

In March 2025, the American Portrait Survey found that 59.6% Taiwanese citizens do not consider the United States trustworthy. The Brookings Institution Report released on April 25, 2025 noted that 60.9% of the Taiwanese disagreed with the statement that “Taiwan is safer than before with Trump as President”.

The Taiwanese are absolutely correct. On July 27, 2025, Donald Trump’s administration denied permission to Taiwan’s President Lai Ching-te to stop in New York enroute to Central America after Beijing raised objections with Washington about the visit.

Incidentally, in 2023 the Joe Biden administration had allowed the then-Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen to stop in New York on her way to Belize and Guatemala in South America.

Reminiscences of the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis

Perhaps the reason behind the Donald Trump administration not allowing the Taiwanese President for the stopover in New York was The Third Taiwan Strait Crisis which began in a rather unmilitary background when President Lee Teng-hui, the then President of Taiwan during whose currency as the Taiwanese President, the martial law ended and Taiwan became a democracy, decided to accept an invitation in 1995 from his alma mater, the Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, USA, to deliver a speech on “Taiwan’s Democratisation Experience”.

China vehemently opposed USA giving a visa to President Lee Teng-hui as by that time USA in accordance with the One China principle was diplomatically recognising China and not Taiwan.

However, the US Congress passed a concurrent resolution, allowing the issuance of visa to President Lee Teng-hui and the Taiwanese President visited USA on June 09-10, 1995 to deliver the speech. China was infuriated and branded the Taiwanese president as a traitor attempting to “split China”.

Jiang Zemin, the Third Paramount Leader of China, extremely furious and angry over the Taiwanese President’s visit to USA, ordered the mobilisation of PLA and directed PLA to conduct missiles tests on July 07, 1995. The missile tests began on July 21, 1995 and lasted a few days with the sole aim of intimidating Taiwan.

Live ammunition military exercises were conducted by China from August 15-25, 1995, followed by naval amphibious assault exercises. USA immediately responded to China’s military overtures by sending two aircraft carrier groups in the vicinity of Taiwan – the USS McClusky and USS Nimitz in December 1995. On March 08, 1996 US President Bill Clinton announced that the Carrier Strike Group 5, would deploy in international waters near Taiwan. However, undeterred by all these American naval deployments, China continued its live ammunition firing exercises.

On March 11, 1996 USA despatched its Carrier Strike Group 7 from the Persian Gulf to the international waters near Taiwan. With two US Navy Carrier Strike Groups stationed near Taiwan, China had no option and the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis ended on March 23, 1996 in a whimper with no combat taking place between China and Taiwan.

But militarily China has expanded manifold since 1996. Being the global leader today in 57 out of the 64 critical technologies that exist today and boasting of the world’s biggest navy apart from the distinction of being the only military in the world to have declared its capacity and capability to fight any war in the world in all six domains of modern warfare – land, sea, air, cyber, electromagnetic spectrum and space in 2014, America knows that militarily the odds favour China exponentially.

The statement of Pete Hegseth, the US Defence Secretary on April 12, 2025 mentioned earlier in the article, needs no over-emphasis.

In the event of China attacking Taiwan, the island nation will have no ally to bank upon as clearly the military support of the USA is no longer assured. The other littoral nations of the South China Sea be it Japan, South Korea or the Philippines have very small militaries to assist Taiwan in the face of the Chinese aggression.

G3: An idea whose time has come

After China became the world’s third biggest economy in 2007, American intelligence agencies started sensing that China was slowly becoming assertive. Going by the current rate of the economic progress that China was experiencing, it was clear that in a couple of years China would become the world’s second biggest economy, which it eventually did in 2010.

As China’s economic rise would increase, so would its military prowess. On June 01, 2008, C. Fred Bergsten, the noted American economist in an article in Foreign Affairs proposed a grouping of three nations/organisations which at that time were economically & militarily powerful – the USA, European Union and China. Though, no name was mentioned for the proposed grouping.

Russia was not included in this grouping as the erstwhile USSR had broken up into 15 nations in 1991 and in the intervening period till 2008, Russia, the biggest nation to emerge after the breakup of the USSR, was not seen as the successor of the erstwhile USSR as the claimant to the Superpower status. However, exactly two months after the article had been published, Russia invaded Georgia on August 01, 2008 and thereby started Russia’s accession as a Superpower and with the annexation of Crimea in 2014, Russia had firmly established herself as a Superpower.

The three Superpowers of the contemporary times seem to have informally constituted the G3 or the Group of Three, wherein no Superpower is at crossroads with the other two. The Russian-Chinese strong friendship is well known and after Donald Trump has been inaugurated as America’s 47^th President, the US too isn’t at crossroads with Russia & China. Thus, the formal date for the informal G3 grouping can be assumed as January 20, 2025, the day of inauguration of Donald Trump’s second Presidency.

The world is now in a precarious position where all the three Superpowers have their own domains of operations and influence and will not interfere in the domains of the other two.

A case in point is India. After President Barack Obama announced the East Asia Strategy also known as the Pivot to Asia strategy on December 21, 2011, the relations between the USA and India grew closer. In the Indo-Pacific region, only two countries ie the USA and India are in a position to check the growing aggressiveness of China, if the two nations combine militarily. As the Indian-American friendship was deepening, so were the Chinese concerns of India’s rise increasing.

But with the way President Trump has called out India since his inauguration in January this year, the US-Indian strategic partnership to counter China is over. In his 100-minute speech on January 20, 2025, President Trump praised Pakistan but did not mention India even once.

During the February 12-13, 2025 visit of Prime Minster Narendra Modi to the USA, when the topic of persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh was broached upon, Trump left it onto India to handle. Ideally, the US President words in calling out Bangladesh for the persecution of Hindus since August 05, 2024 would have had great weight, but it didn’t happen this way.

On July 30, 2025, Donald Trump called India a “dead economy” and on August 27, 2025, India had been tariffed the maximum in the world with 50% tariffs imposed.

Clearly, the US has stepped back from the American-Indian strategic friendship that has been so solidly built in the last 14 years. And with Trump having three and half years in office left, it is unlikely that the US-Indian partnership will come back to the pre-January 2025 levels.

And this is exactly what China wanted. China is set to wage the war on Taiwan in 2027. With the strong Indian-American strategic friendship that existed till January this year, China knew that it is no position to counter the two-front war scenario with Taiwan on its eastern borders and India on its western borders.

Now, with the US weaning away from India, China is confident that its western borders will be safe when it attacks Taiwan in 2027 as India doesn’t have an aggressive defence policy, and the Indo-American strategic relationship is over.

USA has offered Taiwan on a platter to China. The US-China tango that is no longer under wraps any more, is sure trouble for Taiwan. Russia will be a mute spectator when China invades Taiwan in 2027 as the depth of Russian-Chinese partnership has increased exponentially after Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022.

Mark Rutte, the NATO Secretary General cautioned the world on June 25, 2025 about the massive Chinese military buildup and potential for Taiwan invasion. Last year, Admiral Samuel Paparo, the head of the US Indo-Pacific Command on October 28, 2024 stated that China is conducting the largest military buildup in world history.

Lyndon B Johnson’s quote “Yesterday is not ours to recover, but tomorrow is ours to win or lose” holds a deep meaning for Taiwan in specific and the World in general, as the fall of Taiwan will be disaster for democracy and rules-based world order.

After Taiwan, the next big military target for China will be the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh for which China will wage the two-front war jointly with Pakistan on India any time after 2030.

Taiwan has to be protected at all costs.