• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [
    "C. Raja Mohan"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie China",
    "Carnegie India"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie India",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "United States",
    "South Asia",
    "Pakistan",
    "India"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie India

Raja Mandala: Possibilities Amidst Flux in South Asia

New Delhi must find ways to effectively intervene in the limited but inviting strategic space that is opening up between the United States, Pakistan, and Afghanistan.

Link Copied
By C. Raja Mohan
Published on Oct 18, 2017

Source: Indian Express

When the US President Donald Trump talked tough on Pakistan, underlining a new South Asia policy many in Delhi were ecstatic. For the public, American presidential bashing of Pakistan was unprecedented. Pessimists in Delhi, however, cautioned that the change of course in Washington towards Pakistan might be more apparent than real.

Their scepticism seems warranted after Trump’s tweet last week welcoming Pakistan’s assistance in rescuing a Canadian-American family from the clutches of their extremist captors. The pessimists point to the recurring pattern in which the US issues threats and Pakistan offers some minor concessions to placate America. Washington then returns to acquiescing in Pakistan’s bad behaviour.

In his August speech, Trump had accused Pakistan of taking billions of dollars of American money and undermining it in Afghanistan through terror groups. Pakistan is “housing the very terrorists that we are fighting. But that will have to change, and that will change immediately,” Trump had declared. Has America’s much vaunted pressure on Pakistan come to an end in barely two months?

Realists would say, “not so fast”. Since he moved into the White House at the beginning to 2016, no one has accused Trump of consistent articulation of policy. A tweet today from the president could be very different in tone and substance from the tweet yesterday. Some would say “unpredictability” is very much a part of Trump’s overall strategy. If you read Trump’s tweets on North Korea and China over the last few months, you will find multiple about-turns.

Senior officials in Trump’s cabinet have been far less effusive than the president in assessing the significance of Pakistan’s assistance in hostage rescue. James Mattis, the US Secretary of Defense, was quite cautious in expressing the hope that Pakistan’s cooperation was the “harbinger” of a new approach in Rawalpindi towards terrorism in the region. “We intend to work with Pakistan in a collaborative way in the future to stop terrorism and that includes kidnapping,” Mattis added. The US Homeland Secretary, Tom Bossert, welcomed the hostage rescue but insisted that “one action, though, does not constitute a reversal of a trend of unfortunate behaviour”.

While it is too early to jump to conclusions on where the Trump administration and Pakistan are headed, there is no denying the complex issues at hand in the US policy towards Pakistan. Many old South Asia hands in Washington have argued that Trump’s hardline posture towards Pakistan was neither desirable nor sustainable. Some in Washington believe that American concerns about nuclear stability in the region and the need for Rawalpindi’s support in America’s global war on terror tend to limit America’s coercive options towards Pakistan.

Others, however, insist that the full spectrum of possibilities for compelling Pakistan to change course on destabilising Afghanistan and India have not been tried out. On the face of it, the White House appears ready to use some stick to get Pakistan to see reason. It can indeed claim that pressure on Pakistan is beginning to work as the Pakistan army begins to reach out to Kabul and offers to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table.

That there are major differences in Washington within the administration and in the larger strategic community on how to deal with Pakistan is not a secret. But few in Washington disagree with the proposition that frustration with Rawalpindi in both the executive and legislative branches of the US government has reached a peak. This does not mean the US is about to give up on Pakistan. As Secretary Mattis put it, Washington wants to give another chance to Rawalpindi.

The renewed negotiations between the two sides involves a number of imponderables. What kind of benchmarks is the US laying out for Pakistan on terror sanctuaries, the peace process in Afghanistan, and the anti-India terror groups? What are the rewards for Pakistan if it measures up fully or partially to the metrics set by Washington? What coercive measures should America unveil against Pakistan and when?

Trump’s August speech and Pakistan’s responses so far constitute only the first act in the unfolding US effort to recalibrate relations with Pakistan and Afghanistan. There is much more to follow. While the public mood in India might swing violently in response to Trump’s tweets, official Delhi must remain focused on the particulars of the diplomatic two-step between Washington and Rawalpindi.

Instead of prejudging the final outcome of the current round of jousting between Washington and Rawalpindi, Delhi must find ways to effectively intervene in the limited but inviting strategic space that is opening up between America, Pakistan and Afghanistan. India’s renewed economic assistance to Afghanistan constitutes one set of tools. Expanded military assistance is another.

At the end of National Security Adviser Ajit Doval’s visit to Kabul on Monday, a joint press release “welcomed the opportunities created by the new US strategy for bringing peace and security in Afghanistan”. Unlike the perennial pessimists in Delhi, the government seems quite alive to the new possibilities in the north-western marches of the Subcontinent opened up by the Trump administration. While US-Pak ties may yet return to a presumed default position, India has little to lose by playing on the front foot in the interim.

This article was originally published in the Indian Express.

About the Author

C. Raja Mohan

Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India

A leading analyst of India’s foreign policy, Mohan is also an expert on South Asian security, great-power relations in Asia, and arms control.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Deepening the India-France Maritime Partnership

      C. Raja Mohan, Darshana M. Baruah

  • Commentary
    Shanghai Cooperation Organization at Crossroads: Views From Moscow, Beijing and New Delhi
      • Alexander Gabuev
      • +1

      Alexander Gabuev, Paul Haenle, C. Raja Mohan, …

C. Raja Mohan
Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Carnegie India
Foreign PolicyUnited StatesSouth AsiaPakistanIndia

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Article
    India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible Pathways

    A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.

      Rajiv Bhatia

  • Commentary
    The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor Cooperation

    The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.

      Shruti Mittal

  • Commentary
    Emerging From the “Zombie State” of Trade Agreements: The India-EU FTA

    The India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is shaping up to be one of the most consequential trade negotiations, both economically and strategically. But, what’s in the agreement, what’s missing, and what will determine its success in the years ahead

      Vrinda Sahai, Nicolas Köhler-Suzuki

  • Article
    Outlooks on Open-Source Innovation at the India AI Impact Summit 2026

    Drawing on ten public discussions from the India AI Impact Summit 2026, this article highlights key outlooks on open source in AI that are likely to shape policy and governance conversations going forward.

      Shruti Mittal

  • Research
    For People, Planet, and Progress: Perspectives from India's AI Impact Summit

    This collection of essays by scholars from Carnegie India’s Technology and Society program traces the evolution of the AI summit series and examines India’s framing around the three sutras of people, planet, and progress. Scholars have catalogued and assessed the concrete deliverables that emerged and assessed what the precedent of a Global South country hosting means for the future of the multilateral conversation.

      • +3

      Nidhi Singh, Tejas Bharadwaj, Shruti Mittal, …

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.