Opinion | The Six South Asian Dominoes |
In a recent speech, NSA chief Ajit Doval pointed out that the regime changes in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal were the result of weak governance in these nations. This observation prompts us, as Indians, to broaden our perspective on the region and the ongoing great power rivalry.
The two primary regional powers, India and China, have increased their influence — both soft and hard — throughout the subcontinent. This situation requires a closer examination of what can be termed the Asian Dominoes: Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Nepal, Maldives, and Bhutan.
The shift these dominoes made around 2008, diving into free elections and seeking more independence, was based on a mistaken belief that they could develop autonomously with the assistance of great powers acting out of goodwill. Unfortunately, this naive perspective has resulted in their decline as functional states.
Countries like Sri Lanka, Myanmar, and Nepal found themselves caught in the crosshairs of the ambitions of India, China, and the USA, ultimately reduced to pawns in a broader geopolitical game.
To grasp the dynamics at play, one must consider both the populations of these smaller nations and their historical context. When these countries achieved “independence," it was framed through a Westphalian lens — an approach centred around European notions of nation-states that doesn’t resonate with the realities of Asia. The boundaries established by colonial powers did not successfully transform historically integrated communities into distinct entities with unique identities. Instead, they perpetuated fragmentation among groups that have long been interwoven.
The dominoes of Southeast Asia have undergone significant political experimentation, navigating through various forms of governance ranging from authoritarian regimes to democratic systems. However, each of these attempts has ultimately culminated in failure. It is essential to recognise that attributing these failures solely to the interference of external powers is overly simplistic and misleading for two main reasons. First, such a perspective reduces complex issues to a single narrative, thereby neglecting the deeper, more intricate problems at hand. Second, interference and power dynamics are inherently woven into the fabric of international relations; they are natural elements of global governance.
Take, for instance, the situation in Myanmar. While it is easy to point fingers at nations that provide........