MD NURUL HAQUE

“Power is not control. Power is strength, and giving that strength to others.” These words from singer-songwriter Beth Revis resonate more deeply when considered in the context of the current political climate in South Asia. Once regarded as a regional anchor of peace and democratic values, India is now increasingly perceived by its neighbors not as a supportive elder brother but as an imposing, controlling figure. The shift from a benevolent regional leader to an assertive and, at times, domineering power has not happened in a vacuum. Instead, it reflects internal discontent and strategic missteps that have alienated regional partners and fractured India’s unity.

In October 2024, Nepal and China held a joint military exercise—Uabatbang Ritrabahfangjarr-2024—reverberated far beyond its strategic goals. What seemed like a routine drill carried the weight of geopolitical realignment. With training support, military hardware, and ammunition flowing from Beijing, Kathmandu was signaling more than a defense upgrade, expressing disillusionment with New Delhi. Nepal, long seen as under India's security umbrella, is now venturing towards a multipolar diplomatic posture. This shift highlights how trust in India has transformed into cautious pragmatism. Where New Delhi once held unchallenged influence, its regional dominance now appears eroded and increasingly contested.

India’s 'Neighbourhood First' policy was once framed as an inclusive initiative that promotes regional connectivity and cooperation. However, to many of its smaller neighbors, the policy has assumed the contours of coercive diplomacy. India's sheer size and strategic advantage often manifest as an overbearing presence rather than one of collaboration. Bhutan, the Maldives, and even friendly Bangladesh now express quiet discomfort with New Delhi’s unilateral expectations. This assertiveness, evident in border disputes and diplomatic postures, has increased estrangement. Meanwhile, as tensions with China deepen, India’s neighbors are finding in Beijing not just an economic partner but a strategic counterweight. China offers roads, ports, and capital through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)—often without the political lecturing that characterizes Indian diplomacy. In response, countries like Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Nepal are recalibrating their foreign policies, viewing China as a more predictable and less intrusive partner.

India’s status as a regional power is further undermined by its management of contentious issues with neighboring countries. Kashmir continues to poison relations with Pakistan. Border disputes with Nepal linger unresolved. Ongoing concerns regarding India’s National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the long-awaited Teesta water-sharing agreement have fostered suspicion in Bangladesh. India’s involvement in Sri Lanka’s Tamil politics and its frequent assertiveness in the Maldives and Bhutan are perceived not as a concern but as interference. Regional forums like SAARC and BIMSTEC, once seen as vehicles for collective growth, have become mainly ineffective due to India’s reluctance to engage on equal terms with smaller nations. In seeking to lead, India has failed to listen.

However, mirroring this pattern within India's borders is more alarming. The internal fractures are not merely reflections of social discord but symptoms of a centralised approach that seeks to impose uniformity over diversity. India’s strength has always been its linguistic, religious, and cultural pluralism. Yet today, this pluralism is under siege. The country's 200 million Muslims face increasing marginalisation. Policies such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the NRC, paired with growing incidents of communal violence, mob lynching, and hate speech, have pushed the community towards a state of fear and alienation. Their exclusion is a moral and strategic failure, weakening the internal unity necessary for any great power.

Religious extremism rarely arises in a vacuum. It germinates in the wounds left unattended by the state. When one of the largest communities in the country feels consistently sidelined, the risks are social and related to security. National cohesion cannot coexist with targeted exclusion.

The cultural fault lines are deepening as well. India’s attempts to enforce Hindi as a national language have met stiff resistance, especially in Tamil Nadu. The scars of the 1965 anti-Hindi agitations remain vivid, and each new policy to “standardise” linguistic identity is viewed as an act of cultural erasure. The Northeast, already fraught with ethnic and linguistic tensions, perceives such moves as another layer of imposition from a distant and indifferent Center. Even in Maharashtra, there is growing discomfort over the perceived dominance of Hindi-speaking bureaucrats. Centralized cultural policy is a dangerous game in a country where language is closely tied to identity.

At the fringes, the flames of separatism still smolder. In Kashmir, the abrogation of Article 370 has not silenced dissent—it has intensified it. In Nagaland, the vision of ‘Greater Nagalim’ remains vibrant. Manipur and Assam grapple with ethnic tensions, movements for autonomy, and military crackdowns. The Maoist regions of Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and Bihar continue to simmer with anger over land rights and exploitation. These are not isolated acts of rebellion but echoes of long-suppressed grievances. The over-reliance on military solutions, blanket laws like AFSPA, and a refusal to engage in meaningful dialogue only worsen the crisis. When democratic spaces shrink, insurgency flourishes.

India's external aggression and internal discord are two sides of the same coin. A nation that demands regional obedience while denying its citizens dignity and autonomy is sowing the seeds of disintegration. Cooperative federalism—the framework that holds India together—is eroded by excessive centralization and intolerance for dissent. The idea that uniformity equals unity is a critical misconception. True strength lies in recognizing and respecting differences.

India must now make a critical choice. It can either continue down the path of forced dominance, risking further alienation abroad and at home, or return to the inclusive ideals that once made it a moral force in global politics. South Asian countries are not adversaries but allies seeking mutual respect. The diverse states within India are not threats to its unity but its lifeblood. The future lies not in a clenched fist but in an open hand.

The warning signs are everywhere. The solution, although difficult, is not beyond reach. Strategic leadership demands empathy, not entitlement. The greatest empires in history collapsed not from external enemies but from internal decay. If India is to lead, within and beyond its borders, truly, it must abandon the politics of imposition and embrace the politics of inclusion. As Tagore wrote, “Freedom is the nation's soul, and respect is its heart.” Without both, no nation can endure.

The writer is an Assistant Professor of English at IUBAT and a PhD candidate at UPM, Malaysia.