Welcome to Foreign Policy’s South Asia Brief.
The highlights this week: Pakistan ups its engagement in the Middle East, new U.S. ambassadors to Bangladesh and India assume their posts, and a promising political candidate rises in Nepal.
Pakistan’s High-Stakes MENA Play
Pakistan is stepping up its engagement in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).
Last Friday, Reuters reported that Pakistan is close to finalizing a $1.5 billion weapons deal with Sudan, following reports last month of a separate $4 billion arms package with the Libyan National Army (LNA). Pakistan is also negotiating a new arms deal with longtime ally Saudi Arabia, with whom it recently inked a mutual defense treaty. There are indications that another close partner, Turkey, could soon join that pact. Furthermore, Pakistan has expressed interest in joining an international stabilization mission in Gaza.
With recent developments across the MENA region consuming global attention, Pakistan is leveraging its geographic proximity and strong ties with key states to make a case for its strategic relevance.
There are many potential motivations for Islamabad’s outreach. Interest in Gaza likely reflects a desire to strengthen ties with Washington. The arms deals—many of which center on fighter jets—aim to capitalize on the Pakistan Air Force’s impressive performance in last May’s conflict with India. Islamabad may also hope to counter India’s influence in the Middle East and compensate for its difficulty forging deep partnerships in its own neighborhood.
Though Pakistan’s MENA play could bolster its credentials as an emerging net security provider, it also risks entanglement with geopolitical rivalries it has long sought to avoid. Pakistan has close ties with both Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, but arms transfers to Sudan could embroil Pakistan in their tensions over the Sudanese civil war. Bringing Turkey into the Pakistan-Saudi Arabia pact is similarly risky, given that these countries have backed opposing sides in Libya (though in recent months Ankara has signaled a policy shift and pursued deeper engagement with the LNA).
Another element of Pakistan’s MENA play is its attempt to mediate U.S.-Iran tensions, which yielded modest results last summer and was well received by Washington. Some analysts have urged Islamabad to revive these efforts to help forestall possible U.S. military action in Iran, where it has strong incentives to prevent escalation.
While Pakistan and Iran maintain generally cordial ties, with several high-level visits over the last year, the relationship is fragile. A brief military clash in 2024 highlighted persistent concerns over cross-border militancy and Pakistan’s alliance with Saudi Arabia. Growing ties with Washington also won’t sit well with Tehran, limiting Islamabad’s leverage as a mediator.
Pakistan has long sought to project itself as a neutral actor in the Middle East while shielding itself from regional instability, even as it protects its sizable commercial interests and large expatriate population, particularly in the Gulf.
As Islamabad deepens its footprint in this volatile region, it will need to balance its security partnership ambitions with careful risk management. Given ongoing tensions with Afghanistan and India and the serious terrorism challenges it faces at home, Pakistan can ill afford new sources of instability further afield.
What We’re Following
New U.S. ambassadors. The new U.S. ambassadors to Bangladesh and India assumed their posts this past week—and their backgrounds are as different as the relationships they will be overseeing.
The envoy to Bangladesh, Brent Christensen, is a seasoned diplomat who was previously posted to the country and knows it well. In contrast, the envoy to India, Sergio Gor, is a powerful political figure in Washington, though he lacks diplomatic and regional experience. He’ll double as U.S. special envoy for South and Central Asia.
U.S.-Bangladesh ties are modest but cordial. Since U.S. President Donald Trump’s return to office, the two sides have held a series of high-level engagements and conducted several joint military exercises. With few major points of friction, Christensen’s experience and strong reputation in Dhaka should be good for the relationship.
Meanwhile, U.S.-India ties are in crisis. Tensions over tariffs, India’s relationship with Russia, and growing U.S. engagement with Pakistan have eroded trust in New Delhi. Yet Gor struck an optimistic tone during his Senate confirmation hearings, praising the U.S.-India partnership. In a speech Monday, he also announced that India would be invited to join Pax Silica, an artificial intelligence supply chain initiative.
Given Gor’s political clout within the Trump administration, his pro-India stance is a positive sign. Still, rebuilding the trust that Washington has squandered in New Delhi will be a formidable challenge.
U.S.-India trade talks. U.S. officials have indicated that trade talks with India are ongoing, with further discussions taking place this week. Months of negotiations have thus far failed to reduce the 50 percent U.S. tariffs on Indian goods, among the highest imposed on any country.
Last week, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick implied that India may have missed its best chance to finalize an agreement, after Prime Minister Narendra Modi declined to call Trump to seal the deal last year—an account New Delhi disputes.
Complicating matters further, a recent bipartisan bill in the U.S. Senate would impose whopping 500 percent tariffs on countries importing Russian energy. If enacted, it would be a massive blow to trade talks. India has already reduced its Russian oil purchases since new U.S. sanctions were introduced in November, and New Delhi likely believes it has met U.S. demands in this respect.
This leaves New Delhi in a difficult political position: reluctant to offer further concessions to an administration that has badly angered the Indian public, yet under continued U.S. pressure to open its heavily protected agricultural sector—another demand fraught with domestic political risk.
New political platform in Bangladesh. Earlier this week, a group of former members of Bangladesh’s National Citizen Party (NCP)—many of them young leaders of the 2024 mass uprising that ousted former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina—announced a new political platform. The group has not said whether the initiative, set to formally launch Friday, will become a political party. But it has emphasized its desire to break from traditional party structures, including through a rotating leadership model meant to distribute power more evenly.
The new initiative is a blow to the NCP. While many of its policy positions resonate with the public, the party must contend with the vast resources and entrenched base of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), the clear favorite for the upcoming February elections.
Despite its emphasis on new leaders and parties, the NCP recently formed an electoral alliance with Jamaat-e-Islami, a long-established Islamist party. While a Jamaat-led alliance may pose the strongest challenge to the BNP, unseating the party will be difficult.
FP’s Most Read This Week
Under the Radar
With Nepal’s March elections approaching, Balendra Shah is a figure to watch. A former rapper and the current mayor of Kathmandu, Shah has his sights set on becoming prime minister. Late last month, he formed an alliance with another unconventional political figure, Rabi Lamichhane—a television host who founded the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) in 2022.
Together, they are betting that public appetite for younger, nontraditional leadership will give the RSP an electoral boost. While Lamichhane, 51, isn’t young, he draws strong support from younger voters despite ongoing legal challenges tied to fraud allegations.
At 35, Shah is better placed to be a youth candidate. What makes his story especially interesting is that he is contesting the election from a Kathmandu constituency long dominated by KP Sharma Oli, the prime minister ousted in mass protests last year. Shah was floated as a possible interim prime minister and played a role in forming the interim government, further raising his profile.
Shah is also a bit of a paradox: Despite his celebrity status, he doesn’t communicate much with the public and the media, relying largely on his own social media. Supporters argue this helps him avoid overpromising to voters, but the approach risks hurting him at the polls by making him appear aloof and out of touch.
