Connect with us

World

US military is 'weak,' in danger of not being able to defend national interests: study

Published

on

US military is 'weak,' in danger of not being able to defend national interests: study

Join Fox News for access to this content

Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!

Please enter a valid email address.

By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

For the second consecutive year, a study has ranked the U.S. military as “weak” and warned that a lack of action could leave the armed forces incapable of defending vital American interests.

“The current U.S. military force is at significant risk of being unable to meet the demands of a single major regional conflict while also attending to various presence and engagement activities,” reads the conclusion of the Heritage Foundation’s 10th annual Index of Military Strength, which was released Wednesday.

Advertisement

The report paints a dire picture of the state of the U.S. military, with its current posture being rated at “weak” by the index for the second consecutive year, calling into question America’s ability to meet security obligations and protect vital national interests around the globe.

The 664-page report addresses a wide range of issues, finding that almost no branch of the U.S. military is ready to face a major conflict. Those issues are most pronounced in the Air Force, which the index rated as “very weak” in 2023.

US PERSONNEL INJURED IN LATEST MILITANT BASE ATTACK IN IRAQ

The report rates each branch of service on its strength in capacity, capability and readiness, rating the branch power as either very weak, weak, marginal, strong or very strong. The Air Force rated as marginal in both capacity and capability while also rating weak for readiness. Overall, the report found that Air Force power currently rates as very weak, the lowest rating possible.

The Air Force was rated “very weak,” according to the Heritage Foundation Index. (Heritage Foundation)

Advertisement

But the issues weren’t just contained to the Air Force, with the Navy also coming in for ratings of very weak in capacity, marginal in capability and weak in readiness. That combined for an overall rating of weak, according to the index.

“For 10 years this index has monitored the U.S. Navy’s slow decline while China’s Navy has modernized and grown at a fast pace,” Robert Greenway, the director of the Allison Center for National Security at the Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital. “Meanwhile, the Navy has had too little shipyard capacity to keep its fleet maintained, too few ships to pace the threats, and misguided leadership that has instigated a recruitment crisis. Advanced capabilities alone will not offset this, and action is needed to reverse the downward trends.”

The Navy’s current power was rated as “weak,” according to the Heritage Foundation. (Heritage Foundation)

The Army didn’t trend a lot better, the report found, coming in with weak capacity, marginal capability and very strong readiness, resulting in an overall rating of marginal, according to the index.

While the rating may seem better than the Air Force and Navy, problems loom on the horizon for the Army, including a shrinking force that Greenway called “unsustainable” in the long run.

Advertisement

Army paratroopers assigned to the 54th Brigade Engineer Battalion, 173rd Airborne Brigade, prepare to breach an obstacle at Grafenwoehr Training Area, Germany, on March 6, 2022. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Ryan Parr)

In just two years, the active-duty Army has shrunk from 485,000 to only 452,000 troops,” Greenway said. “This directly impacts both readiness and effectiveness as the Army is unable to fully man its formations. The recruitment shortfalls caused the Army to cut ‘end strength’ by 12,000 in [fiscal] 2023. This is unsustainable.”

The Army’s power was rated as “marginal,” according to the Heritage Foundation. (Heritage Foundation)

CENTCOM CONFIRMS US AIRSTRIKES ON HOUTHI ANTI-SHIP MISSILES NEAR RED SEA

The U.S. military’s newest branch, the Space Force, had the same overall rating as the Army, coming in at marginal in all three categories and overall. Meanwhile, the Marine Corps recorded the only positive overall score in the index, rating as weak in capacity but strong in both capability and readiness, which resulted in an overall rating of strong.

Advertisement

The Marine Corps power was rated as “strong,” according to the Heritage Foundation. (Heritage Foundation)

A large chunk of the issue can be blamed on investment in the military, according to Heritage Foundation analyst for defense budgeting Wilson Beaver, who told Fox News Digital that U.S. spending on defense has continued to decline for “decades.”

“As a percentage of GDP, defense spending has been in decline for decades. This while the military is being tasked by the president and the Congress to do just as much as it did when it was being funded at 6 to 10% of GDP,” Beaver said.

Making matters worse is a recruiting crisis that has plagued the military in recent years, something Beaver argues has gone unaddressed by the current administration.

“The present recruiting crisis resulted in a shortfall of 41,000 in 2023 and is the worst in our nation’s history,” Beaver said. “If left unaddressed, it threatens the ability of the all-volunteer force to protect us. Rather than emphasizing merit and performance, President Biden and the senior leaders he has appointed choose to focus on the race and gender of candidates, attempting to use the military to promote their ideology.”

Advertisement

The Marine Corps recorded a positive overall score in the Heritage Foundation’s 10th annual Index of Military Strength. (U.S. Marine Corps/Lance Cpl. Blake Gonter)

A White House National Security Council spokesperson told Fox News Digital that the U.S. has “has the most powerful military in the world” and that “President Biden and his Administration are committed to ensuring the U.S. military remains capable of prevailing against any adversary.”

“President Biden and his administration are supporting our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Guardsmen, Marines, and Guardians in a multitude of ways: increasing military pay for a second year in a row, pursuing new economic opportunities for military families, expanding and modernizing the U.S. defense industrial base, and ensuring that U.S. forces have the capabilities they need to fight and win wars,” the spokesperson said. “The strongest, most professional, and most capable fighting force in the world requires support across the entirety of the U.S. Government. We again urge Congress to act quickly on the President’s supplemental funding request that will advance our national security and directly support and strengthen our military.”

When it comes to recruiting, the spokesperson added that the Defense Department is “taking several steps to meet Americans where they are and talk about the value of service. They are best positioned to talk about their ongoing efforts.”

US FORCES STRIKE 2 HOUTHI ANTI-SHIP MISSILES, TWO DEFENSE OFFICIALS SAY

Advertisement

But the problem is not unique to just one administration, according to Heritage Foundation senior research fellow Dakota Wood, who told Fox News Digital the trend of a weakened U.S. military has been ongoing for years.

“Our people are great, but they are poorly served with old equipment, too little of it, and dangerously low levels of training … all of which are essential to protecting our country, the very reason [we] call upon them to serve,” Wood said. “And this isn’t a recent phenomenon; it is the result of years of bad defense policies, badly managed programs, and troubled funding across many years and a series of administrations. If our government is truly serious about the security of our country and in serving America in ways no one else can, it must get its act together in adequately funding defense, ensuring those tax dollars are wisely spent, and when it deploys our military, it is given missions that are achievable and are squarely in America’s interests.”

Air Force trainees are shown at graduation. (U.S. Air Force)

Those problems have extended to U.S. nuclear power, the report notes, which came in with an overall rating of marginal thanks to low marks in multiple categories.

“Our nuclear arsenal is rotting in place, and we are not moving with a sense of urgency to replace/modernize it,” Robert Peters, a research fellow for nuclear deterrence and missile defense at Heritage’s Allison Center for National Security, told Fox News Digital.

Advertisement

U.S. military nuclear power was rated as “marginal,” according to the Heritage Foundation. (Heritage Foundation)

The military’s weak rating comes at possibly the worst time in recent memory, with the U.S. facing multiple crises across the globe, including Russia’s continued war against Ukraine, the fight against global terrorism, and increasingly hostile postures by Iran, North Korea and China.

According to the report, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and non-state actors such as terrorist organizations all pose a high threat to vital U.S. interests. The report rates China and Iran as aggressive threats, and Russia comes in at the highest rank of hostile. Meanwhile, both Russia and China are assessed as having “formidable” capabilities.

HOUTHIS STILL CONDUCTING ATTACKS BUT NEED TO ASK HOW MUCH OF CAPABILITY DO THEY WANT ‘DEGRADED’: PENTAGON

That threat is especially true when it comes to China’s nuclear power, Peters said, telling Fox News Digital that the country is the “fastest growing nuclear power on the planet.”

Advertisement

China and Russia both represent “formidable” threats to U.S. interests, according to the Heritage Foundation. (Heritage Foundation)

“We are now on year 14 of the U.S. nuclear modernization program. In that time we have built zero nuclear weapons,” Peters said. “According to the Government Accountability Office, we won’t be able to produce plutonium pits en masse before 2030. The newest nuclear weapon in the U.S. arsenal is 30 years old — some running on vacuum tubes and floppy disks.”

That sentiment was echoed by Jeff M. Smith, the director of the Heritage Foundation’s Asian Studies Center, who told Fox News Digital that China is the top threat to American interests.

New recruits of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army attend a send-off ceremony in Ganzhou on March 16, 2023. (China Daily via Reuters )

“China presents the United States with its most comprehensive and daunting national security challenge … [Beijing] is challenging the U.S. and its allies at sea, in the air and in cyberspace,” Smith said.

Advertisement

The new Heritage report, meanwhile, shows the U.S. may not be ready to meet that challenge.

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“Unfortunately, the index also makes it clear that our military is woefully unprepared to tackle the growing threat from China and win the new Cold War. Major changes are needed, and they are needed now,” Smith said.

Reached for comment by Fox News Digital, a Pentagon spokesperson argued that the “U.S. military is the strongest fighting force the world has ever known.”

“We have not reviewed the report and do not have a comment to provide on the index,” the spokesperson said. “Every day around the globe, the men and women of our Armed Forces safeguard vital U.S. national interests by backstopping diplomacy, confronting aggression, deterring conflict, projecting strength, and protecting the American people.”

Advertisement

Meanwhile, an administration official took aim at the Heritage Foundation, arguing that the organization was at least partly responsible for holding up officer promotions amid multiple unfolding crises. 

World

Video: Pakistan Launches Airstrikes on Afghanistan

Published

on

Video: Pakistan Launches Airstrikes on Afghanistan

new video loaded: Pakistan Launches Airstrikes on Afghanistan

Tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan escalated on Friday as the two countries clashed.
Advertisement

By Monika Cvorak

February 27, 2026

    Denmark’s Prime Minister Calls For a Snap Parliamentary Election

    1:36

    Marco Rubio Says U.S. Is Probing Deadly Cuban Shooting

    0:45

    Amid Chaos in Mexico, False Images Stoked Fears

    2:45

    Advertisement
    Violence in Mexico After Cartel Boss Is Killed

    1:40

    Violence Erupts Across Mexico After Cartel Boss Killed

    0:58

    The Japanese Airport That Doesn’t Lose Bags

    2:59

Video ›

Today’s Videos

Advertisement

U.S.

Politics

Immigration

NY Region

Science

Advertisement

Business

Culture

Books

Wellness

World

Advertisement

Africa

Americas

Asia

South Asia

Donald Trump

Advertisement

Middle East Crisis

Russia-Ukraine Crisis

Visual Investigations

Opinion Video

Advertisement

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Continue Reading

World

State Dept authorizes non-essential US Embassy personnel in Jerusalem to depart ahead of possible Iran strikes

Published

on

State Dept authorizes non-essential US Embassy personnel in Jerusalem to depart ahead of possible Iran strikes

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The State Department is allowing non-essential personnel working at the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem to leave Israel ahead of possible strikes on Iran. The embassy announced the decision early Friday morning and said that “in response to security incidents and without advance notice” it could place further restrictions on where U.S. government employees can travel within Israel.

Advertisement

The decision came after meetings and phone calls through the night Thursday into Friday, according to The New York Times, which reviewed a copy of an email that U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee sent to embassy workers.

The Times reported that the ambassador said in his email that the move was a result of “an abundance of caution” and that those wishing to leave “should do so TODAY.” He reportedly urged them to look for flights out of Ben Gurion Airport to any destination, cautioning that the embassy’s move “will likely result in high demand for airline seats today.”

The U.S. has authorized non-essential embassy personnel to leave Israel amid escalating tensions with Iran. (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Iranian Leader Press Office/Anadolu via Getty Images)

In the email, Huckabee also said that there was “no need to panic,” but he underscored that those looking to leave should “make plans to depart sooner rather than later,” the Times reported.

“Focus on getting a seat to anyplace from which you can then continue travel to D.C., but the first priority will be getting expeditiously out of country,” Huckabee said in the email, according to the Times.

Advertisement

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, U.S. President Donald Trump’s nominee to be ambassador to Israel, arrives to testify during his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Mar. 25, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

TRUMP MEETS NETANYAHU, SAYS HE WANTS IRAN DEAL BUT REMINDS TEHRAN OF ‘MIDNIGHT HAMMER’ OPERATION

The embassy reiterated the State Department’s advisory for U.S. citizens to reconsider traveling to Israel and the West Bank “due to terrorism and civil unrest.” Additionally, the department advised that U.S. citizens not travel to Gaza because of terrorism and armed conflict, as well as northern Israel, particularly within 2.5 miles of the Lebanese and Syrian borders because of “continued military presence and activity.” 

It also recommended that U.S. citizens not travel within 1.5 miles of the Egyptian border, with the exception of the Taba crossing, which remains open.

“Terrorist groups, lone-actor terrorists and other violent extremists continue plotting possible attacks in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. Terrorists and violent extremists may attack with little or no warning, targeting tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets/shopping malls, and local government facilities,” the embassy said in its warning. “The security environment is complex and can change quickly, and violence can occur in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza without warning.”

Advertisement

Israeli and U.S. flags are placed on the road leading to the U.S. consulate in the Jewish neighborhood of Arnona, on the East-West Jerusalem line in Jerusalem, May 9, 2018. (Corinna Kern/picture alliance via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

While the embassy did not specifically mention Iran in its warning, it referenced “increased regional tensions” that could “cause airlines to cancel and/or curtail flights into and out of Israel.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department and the White House for comment on this matter.

Advertisement

Related Article

Iran’s shadowy chemical weapons program draws scrutiny as reports allege use against protesters
Continue Reading

World

Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban?

Published

on

Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban?

Pakistan has accused Afghanistan’s Taliban of serving as a “proxy” for India, amid escalating hostilities between Islamabad and Kabul.

Just hours after Pakistan bombed locations in Kabul early on Friday, Pakistan’s Minister of Defence Khawaja Asif wrote on X that after NATO forces withdrew from Afghanistan in July 2021, “it was expected that peace would prevail in Afghanistan and that the Taliban would focus on the interests of the Afghan people and regional stability”.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“However, the Taliban turned Afghanistan into a colony of India,” he wrote and accused the Taliban of “exporting terrorism”.

“Pakistan made every effort, both directly and through friendly countries, to keep the situation stable. It carried out extensive diplomacy. However, the Taliban became a proxy of India,” he alleged as he declared an “open war” with Afghanistan.

This is not the first time that Asif has brought India into tensions with Afghanistan.

Advertisement

Last October, he alleged: “India wants to engage in a low-intensity war with Pakistan. To achieve this, they are using Kabul.”

So far, Asif has presented no evidence to back his claims and the Taliban has rejected accusations that it is being influenced by India.

But India has condemned the Pakistani military’s recent actions in Afghanistan, adding to Islamabad’s growing discernment that its nuclear rival and the Taliban are edging closer.

Earlier this week, after the Pakistani military carried out air raids inside Afghanistan on Sunday, India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement that New Delhi “strongly condemns Pakistan’s airstrikes on Afghan territory that have resulted in civilian casualties, including women and children, during the holy month of Ramadan”.

After Friday morning’s flare-up between Pakistan and Afghanistan, India’s foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal again said New Delhi “strongly” condemned Pakistan’s air strikes and also noted that they took place on a Friday during the holy month of Ramadan.

Advertisement

“It is another attempt by Pakistan to externalise its internal failures,” Jaiswal said in a statement on X.

Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban and what is India’s endgame with Afghanistan?

Here’s what we know:

How have relations between India and the Taliban evolved?

When the Taliban first rose to power in Afghanistan in 1996, India adopted a hostile policy towards the group and did not recognise its assumption of power. India also shunned all diplomatic relations with the Taliban.

At the time, New Delhi viewed the Taliban as a proxy for Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. Pakistan, together with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, were the only three countries to have also recognised the Taliban administration at that point.

Advertisement

Then, in 2001, India supported the US-led invasion of Afghanistan, which toppled the Taliban administration. India then reopened its embassy in Kabul and embraced the new government led by Hamid Karzai. The Taliban, in response, attacked Indian embassies and consulates in Afghanistan. In 2008, at least 58 people were killed when the Taliban bombed India’s embassy in Kabul.

In 2021, after the Taliban returned to power, India closed its embassy in Afghanistan once again and also did not officially recognise the Taliban as the government of the country.

But a year later, as relations between Pakistan and the Taliban deteriorated over armed groups which Pakistan accuses Afghanistan of harbouring, India began engaging with the Taliban.

In 2022, India sent a team of “technical experts” to run its mission in Kabul and officially reopened its embassy in the Afghan capital last October. New Delhi also allowed the Taliban to operate Afghanistan consulates in the Indian cities of Mumbai and Hyderabad.

Over the past two years, officials from New Delhi and Afghanistan have also held meetings abroad, in Kabul and in New Delhi.

Advertisement

In January last year, the Taliban administration’s Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi met India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates.

Then, in October 2025, he visited New Delhi and met Indian foreign minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar.

After this meeting, Muttaqi told journalists that Kabul “has always sought good relations with India” and, in a joint statement, Afghanistan and India pledged to have “close communication and continue regular engagement”.

Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi arrives at Darul Uloom Deoband, an Islamic seminary, in Deoband in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, India [File: Anushree Fadnavis/Reuters]

Besides beefing up diplomatic ties, India has also offered humanitarian support to Afghanistan under the Taliban’s rule.

After a magnitude 6.3 earthquake struck northern Afghanistan in November last year, India shipped food, medicine and vaccines, and Jaishankar was also among the first foreign ministers to call Muttaqi and offer his support. Since last December, India has also approved and implemented several healthcare infrastructure projects in Afghanistan, according to a December 2025 report by the country’s press information bureau.

Advertisement

Praveen Donthi, senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, told Al Jazeera that the costs of avoiding engagement with the Taliban in the past have compelled the Indian government to adopt strategic pragmatism towards the Afghan leadership this time.

“New Delhi does not want to disregard this relationship on ideological grounds or create strategic space for India’s main strategic rivals, Pakistan and China, in its neighbourhood,” he said.

Raghav Sharma, professor and director at the Centre for Afghanistan Studies at the OP Jindal Global University in India, added that the current engagement also stems from New Delhi’s pragmatic realisation that the Taliban is now in charge in Afghanistan and that there is no meaningful opposition.

“States engage in order to protect and further their interests. While there is little by way of ideological convergence, there are areas of strategic convergence, which is what has pushed India to engage with the Taliban, some of their unpalatable policies notwithstanding,” he said.

Is this a new stance towards Afghanistan?

No. India’s growing influence and engagement with Afghanistan began well before the Taliban returned to power in August 2021.

Advertisement

Between December 2001 and September 2014, during the US presence in Afghanistan, New Delhi was a strong supporter of the Karzai government, and then of his successor, Ashraf Ghani’s government, which was in power from September 2014 until August 2021, when the US withdrew from the country.

In October 2011, under Karzai, India and Afghanistan renewed ties by signing an agreement to form a strategic partnership. New Delhi also pledged to support Afghanistan in the face of foreign troops in the nation as a part of this agreement.

Under both Karzai and his successor, Ghani, India invested more than $3bn in humanitarian aid and reconstruction work in Afghanistan. This included reconstruction projects like schools and hospitals, and also a new National Assembly building in Kabul, which was inaugurated in December 2015 when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Afghanistan for the first time.

India’s Border Road Organisation (BRO) also assisted Afghanistan in the development of infrastructure projects like the 218km Zaranj-Delaram highway in 2009 under Karzai’s government.

Under Ghani, New Delhi undertook building the Salma Dam project to help with irrigating Afghanistan. In June 2016, when Modi visited Afghanistan once again, he inaugurated this $290m dam project. In May 2016, Iran, India and Afghanistan also signed a trilateral trade and transit agreement on the Chabahar port.

Advertisement
Modi and Ghani
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi (L) and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani hold sweets as they inaugurate Afghanistan’s new parliament building in Kabul, Afghanistan [File: Stringer/Reuters]

During this period – 2001-2021 – Pakistan’s unease with New Delhi and Kabul’s new partnership grew.

In October 2011, after signing a strategic agreement with India, Karzai had assured Islamabad that while “India is a great friend, Pakistan is a twin brother”.

But Karzai was critical of Pakistan’s support for the Taliban. In his last speech as president of Afghanistan in Kabul in September 2014, he stated that he believed most of the Taliban leadership lived in Pakistan.

In a 2011 report by a Washington, DC-based think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Amer Latif, former director for South Asian affairs in the US Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, noted that Karzai was walking a “fine line between criticising Pakistan’s activities while also referring to Pakistan as Afghanistan’s ‘twin brother’.”

“It is in this context that Karzai appears to be looking to solidify long-term partnerships with countries that will aid his stabilisation efforts,” he said, referring to Karzai’s visit to India and his efforts to improve relations with the subcontinent.

When Ghani rose to power in September 2014, he tried to reset ties with Pakistan and also visited the country in November that year. But his efforts did not result in improved ties due to border disputes with Pakistan continuing until his administration was overthrown by the Taliban in August 2021.

Advertisement

So why has India maintained ties with Afghanistan under the Taliban?

Initially, when the Taliban returned to power in 2021 following the withdrawal of the US, political analysts largely expected Pakistan to lead the way in recognising the Taliban administration as the official government of Afghanistan, improving bilateral relations which had turned icy under Karzai and Ghani.

But relations turned hostile, with Pakistan repeatedly accusing the Taliban of allowing anti-Pakistan armed groups like the Pakistan Taliban (TTP) to operate from Afghan soil. The Taliban denies this.

Then, the deportation of tens of thousands of Afghan refugees by Pakistan in recent years further strained ties between the two neighbours.

India has ultimately taken a pragmatic approach to the Taliban in order to maintain the good relations it built with Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021, and has somewhat leveraged poor relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan to cement these.

“With Pakistan’s increasingly strained relations with Afghanistan, the logic of ‘enemy’s enemy’ is acting as a glue between Kabul and New Delhi,” International Crisis Group’s Donthi said.

Advertisement

He added that despite the fact that India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government opposes Islamist organisations, “the strategic necessity to counter Pakistan has led it to engage with the Taliban proactively”.

India and Pakistan are nuclear-armed rivals which engaged in a four-day conflict in May 2025 after armed rebels killed Indian tourists in Pahalgam, a popular tourist spot in Indian-administered Kashmir, last April. New Delhi accused Pakistan of supporting rebel fighters, a charge Pakistan strongly denied.

For its part, Afghanistan took the opportunity to strongly condemn the Pahalgam attack and the Indian Ministry of External Affairs expressed “deep appreciation” to the Taliban for its “strong condemnation of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam … as well as for the sincere condolences”.

India has also condemned Pakistani military action in Afghanistan and has provided aid to thousands of Afghan refugees displaced from Pakistan.

So what is India’s endgame in Afghanistan?

Sharma, the OP Jindal Global University professor, said India wants to ensure that Pakistan and China, whose influence has grown in South Asia in recent years, “do not have a free run”, as “there is a divergence of interest on Afghanistan” with both Pakistan and its ally, China.

Advertisement

“There are security interests New Delhi is keen to further and protect for which engagement [with the Taliban] is the only option,” he added.

Anil Trigunayat, a former Indian diplomat, noted that while Afghanistan and Pakistan relations have their own dynamic, currently the Taliban leadership, even if not a monolith, refuses to play to the tunes of the Pakistan military and its intelligence agency.

“Hence they [Pakistan] accuse Indian complicity in Taliban actions in Pakistan,” he said.

But the Taliban, he said, “understands and appreciates India’s intent, policies and [humanitarian] contributions”, making its leaders keen to continue collaboration with New Delhi.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending