Tell us: As America votes, how will the U.S. election impact your country?

The following post appeared in The Washington Post's Global Opinions section on November 7, 2016.

Coming from a similarly raucous democracy, Indians follow U.S. elections with a great deal of interest. Both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have inspired a mixture of curiosity, ridicule, admiration and concern among India’s chattering classes, although surveys indicate that the broader Indian public does not hold particularly strong opinions about either candidate. Trump has offered mixed messages about high-skilled immigration to the United States, of which Indians are among the primary beneficiaries, and about India more generally.

By contrast, Clinton has a long history of engagement with India, including as first lady, as senator (when she was co-chair of the Senate India Caucus) and as secretary of state. As such, she is a known quantity in New Delhi. The stability of a Clinton presidency, a very good understanding of her positions and key advisers, and the implications her election would have for the United States more broadly make her a preferable candidate from India’s point of view.

After surgical strikes, what’s next for India-Pakistan relations?

The following article originally appeared in The Washington Post's Global Opinions section on October 2, 2016. An excerpt is below. The full text can be found here. 

India’s surgical strikes represent part of a continuing turnaround in Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Pakistan policy. Although expected by many to be a nationalist hawk when he was first elected, Modi invested considerable energy and capital in engaging Pakistan during his first two years in office. Among other things, he invited his Pakistani counterpart, Nawaz Sharif, to his inauguration ceremony in 2014, and last year visited Sharif’s home in Pakistan on an unscheduled stopover.

But India’s attitude began to harden in July, when Pakistan tried to gain diplomatic and political mileage out of popular protests in Indian-administered Kashmir. Modi responded by refusing to condemn a devastating terrorist attack in the Pakistani city of Quetta in August. For the first time, he also raised Pakistani human rights abuses in Balochistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir in his annual Independence Day speech on Aug. 15. The Uri attack only set back relations further, hardening Indian resolve.

In the days that followed the Uri attack, Indian political, military and diplomatic leaders deliberated various options. In his first speech after the attack, Modi gave a firm but measured response and made a point to distinguish between Pakistan’s people and its leadership. India’s foreign minister, Sushma Swaraj, followed up with a sharp speech at the United Nations, which framed Pakistan-based terrorism as a global challenge — with links to recent attacks in New York, Brussels, Kabul and Dhaka — and stepped up Indian rhetoric on Pakistani human rights abuses in Balochistan.

India is on the defensive in its neighborhood

The following article originally appeared in The Washington Post's Global Opinions section on September 21, 2016. An excerpt is included below and the full text can be accessed here. 

But as India and the world continue to grapple with Pakistan’s support for Islamist militant groups, another story is unfolding in the region: India is rediscovering the rest of its neighborhood. In the past few weeks, Myanmar’s President Htin Kyaw, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and Nepali Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal have all visited New Delhi. The prime ministers of Sri Lanka and Bangladesh are also scheduled to arrive soon. This is part of a conscious bid by India to give priority to its smaller neighbors, lend support when needed, increase connectivity and gradually build a sense of regionalism. This policy has come to be known as “Neighborhood First.”

India’s aggressive engagement with its neighbors over the past two years has been motivated by two interrelated concerns. One is the rising tide of nationalism, which often manifests itself as anti-Indianism in many of these countries. In Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, certain political parties or blocs have tried to exploit anti-Indian sentiments and could, once again, rise to positions of power. The governments in all three countries are, at present, relatively well-disposed toward New Delhi, but there is no certainty that such a situation will last.