By Dr. James M. Minnich

Shifting Strategic Terrain
South Asia is undergoing a strategic and industrial realignment that is reshaping its defense posture, regional partnerships, and security dynamics. In this episode of Dialogue, Professor Shyam Tekwani, a leading expert on South Asian security, shares insights from decades of experience in the region, offering a sober yet forward-looking analysis of the forces remaking South Asia’s strategic landscape.

India’s Escalatory Resolve

Discussing the recent India-Pakistan crisis, Tekwani emphasizes that India’s retaliatory strikes mark a shift in doctrine. Quoting India’s implicit message, he says the signal was clear: “Enough is enough. Enough of using proxies.” Since 2016, India has moved from restraint to demonstration, using calibrated force below the nuclear threshold to assert deterrence. However, he cautions, “This time, we haven’t seen the evidence,” potentially referring to clear attribution or conclusive intelligence regarding the Kashmir attack. The absence of such evidence raises questions about proportionality and precedent. The episode underscores India’s evolving strategic posture—and the risks of future miscalculation.

Industrial Alignment Rising

India’s pursuit of strategic autonomy does not preclude deeper ties with the United States. Tekwani notes several drivers nudging India toward U.S. defense industrial cooperation: the China threat, declining Russian reliability, and India’s demand for co-production and technology transfer. “These are not ideological shifts,” he explains, “but strategic recalculations based on emerging realities.” The path forward, he argues, lies in joint development frameworks that embed trust and mutual benefit.

Pakistan’s Strategic Pivot

Pakistan’s quiet pivot from U.S. alignment to a deeper embrace of China and tactical ties with Russia presents challenges and opportunities. For the United States, Tekwani advocates a policy of selective engagement that avoids resurrecting the outdated India-Pakistan equivalency. “Engagement must be issue-based,” he argues, “tied to counterterrorism, border security, and economic resilience.” Avoiding public condemnation while offering conditional support is key to preserving regional credibility.

Agency of Smaller States

Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal are asserting themselves as strategic balancers with unique defense needs. Tekwani urges the U.S. to respect their agency: “These states are not passive spectators. They want partnerships that expand capacity and reduce dependency.” Maritime awareness, logistics support, and cyber capabilities top their agendas. Supporting their ambitions means investing in tailored, non-coercive cooperation.

Beyond Sales to Co-Development

Across the region, there is a shift from equipment sales to industrial partnerships. Tekwani explains: “South Asia doesn’t just need equipment. It needs embedded ecosystems,” particularly in areas like maintenance and long-term support for advanced platforms. The U.S. must move beyond Foreign Military Sales (FMS) to joint ventures, pre-cleared tech transfers, and adaptive offset frameworks. Whether it is India’s “Make in India” campaign or Bangladesh’s “Forces Goal 2030,” American firms can gain ground by supporting local aspirations.

Competitive Strategic Landscape, Carefully Applied

In a competitive strategic landscape, China offers speed and scale, Russia offers legacy systems, and the U.S. offers high-end capability—if accessible. Tekwani argues that “the U.S. must embed not just tools, but operational trust across industrial, digital, and doctrinal layers.” That includes not only co-developing technology but also building regional tech corridors and interoperable platforms.

Engage with Clarity

This is a pivotal moment. “South Asia’s terrain is uneven, and the forces at play are fluid,” Tekwani warns. Strategic clarity, bureaucratic agility, and political reliability will determine whether U.S.-South Asia partnerships grow deeper or fray under pressure. As Tekwani concludes, “The key is managing one relationship without compromising the other.” In an era of realignment, nuance is not an option—it is a necessity.