Commentary: Pakistan’s diplomatic win is a wake-up call for India

SINGAPORE: Peace talks between Iran and the United States, hosted by Pakistan last weekend, revealed an irony and a dilemma for India. 

New Delhi has been trying to isolate Islamabad diplomatically for decades, an effort that intensified after the deadly 2001 attack on India’s Parliament by Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorists. But within the last year, Pakistan has managed to assert its diplomatic relevance, emerging recently as a mediator in the US-Iran war and demonstrating one thing: Pakistan is too important to be ignored or isolated. 

This is on account of its size and geographical location, and certainly its nuclear capability. But with public sentiment in India against Pakistan hostile, re-engaging constructively may be challenging.

The rhetoric has intensified, especially after the April 2025 terrorist attack in Kashmir that killed 26 civilians, almost all Indian tourists. India swiftly painted Pakistan as the aggressor and launched the retaliatory “Operation Sindoor” strike on what it said was terrorist infrastructure. Both sides claimed victory.

The two reached a ceasefire after the four-day armed conflict. Pakistan publicly credited US President Donald Trump for helping broker a ceasefire – something he continues to include in the many wars he claims to have ended and for which Pakistan formally nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize last year. India has repeatedly said that there was no US mediation involved in the truce. 

Pakistan has continued to make its diplomatic mark. In May 2025, Pakistan’s army chief Asim Munir – elevated to the rank of Field Marshall after Operation Sindoor – was feted in the White House, souring rosy notions of US-India strategic convergence and setting back New Delhi’s diplomatic offensive. It deepened long-standing ties with China and signed a mutual defence pact with Saudi Arabia. 

INDIA’S ZERO-SUM MENTALITY 

These developments have rankled in India, where, especially since the summer of 2025, strident nationalist propaganda fanned by both news and entertainment media has visibly deepened animosity to Pakistan.

This has created a zero-sum mentality. Even on the cricket field the teams now do not shake hands as has been customary in the sport for generations.

The Indian response to Pakistan hosting US-Iran talks ranged from dismissive to derisive. When the subject came up at a meeting of political parties, India’s Minister of External Affairs Dr S Jaishankar reportedly said: “We don’t run around asking countries what kind of dalali we can do,” using a somewhat contemptuous Hindi term for a middleman or broker. 

Jairam Ramesh, communications chief of the opposition Indian National Congress, hit back, accusing the Narendra Modi government of “colossal failures in our diplomacy, outreach and narrative management”.

In a Mar 29 opinion piece in The Hindustan Times, Indian academic Happymon Jacob called India’s response one of “competitive anxiety”. 

“At best, that is a fear of missing out,” he wrote. “At worst, it is jealousy of a smaller neighbour attracting the kind of attention some in our strategic community believe India deserves.” 

REASONS FOR PAKISTAN’S ROLE

But Pakistan has always been important both to the United States as well as China. 

In China’s case, Pakistan enables Beijing to encircle India with its own sphere of influence. 

For the US, Pakistan’s usefulness dates back to 1971 when Pakistan facilitated then-US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s trip to China, which led to then-President Richard Nixon’s historic 1972 visit. 

Pakistan was also a conduit for Washington’s support for Afghan militants fighting the Soviet Union, which invaded Afghanistan in 1979 and was eventually forced to withdraw in 1989 – an event that contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. 

There are also proximate reasons for Pakistan’s role. Pakistan has been courting Washington and has the necessary connections in Riyadh and Tehran. 

It is also worried about its significant Shia minority. A Shia mob stormed the US consulate in Karachi on Mar 1 in response to the killing of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in US and Israeli strikes; marines at the consulate opened fire, killing several protesters and injuring over 60.

“For decades, Pakistan has leveraged its geostrategic location with the global powers of the day. This has ensured that Pakistan retains its relevance,” said Dr Aparna Pande, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington DC, where her work focuses on India and South Asia.

In the case of the Iran war, mediating would be tough for India because, unlike Pakistan, it has limited leverage with the countries involved, she told me.

DIALOGUE SHOULD NOT BE SEEN AS TRAITOROUS

Though the first round of US-Iran talks in Islamabad failed, not everyone in India’s Congress party agreed with the chorus of derision. 

Congress Party Member of Parliament Shashi Tharoor in an interview with news channel NDTV said: "If Pakistan succeeds, India should be among the first to celebrate. Celebrating a neighbour's mediation does not diminish our standing; in a nuclear-armed neighbourhood, a win for stability is a win for everyone." 

With a potential second round of peace talks shaping up to be held in Islamabad once more, it is clear that Pakistan is becoming even more pivotal in resolving the conflict.

What is clear from India’s reaction to Pakistan’s time in the spotlight now is that the relationship remains toxic – perhaps irreversibly so if any suggestion of dialogue seen as almost traitorous.

Just weeks ago, Nirupama Rao, a former Indian foreign secretary with over a million followers on X, was subjected to a tsunami of online abuse for advocating even limited engagement with Pakistan.  "Fury is a mood. It is not a policy," she responded.

In an increasingly volatile world, zero-sum hyper nationalism can be almost too successful – becoming a liability and an unnecessary distraction to pragmatic diplomacy. It is obvious that India and Pakistan are fated to co-exist. They simply cannot escape geography. 

Pragmatic engagement makes more sense than the current state of permanent hostility that holds both countries hostage to the trauma of their shared history. 

Nirmal Ghosh, a former foreign correspondent, is an author and independent writer based in Singapore. He writes a monthly column for CNA, published every third Friday.