ISLAMABAD: In a candid interview with journalist Karan Thapar, former Indian National Security Adviser (NSA) Shivshankar Menon delivered a pointed critique of the Narendra Modi government’s foreign policy, security strategy, and media management, warning that India may be losing ground in a rapidly shifting global environment.
Speaking on comparisons between 2008 and 2025, Menon agreed that the world has “changed fundamentally” — but not in India’s favour. He noted that the current geopolitical climate, particularly under US President Donald Trump, has led to the “re-hyphenation” of India and Pakistan — a reversal of diplomatic efforts that India had previously fought hard to avoid.
Here is the text of the related section of the interview.
Indian journalist Karan Thapar: Point I am making is that the world may have changed to our disadvantage compared to 2008.
Former Indian NSA Shivshankar Menon: That is a very different situation. I agree.
Thapar: Pakistan got the IMF second or third tranche. It has got a further loan from the Asian Development Bank. The World Bank has given it 40 billion of loans over the next 10 years. President Trump and his attitude and comments has effectively re-hyphenated India and Pakistan, something we didn’t want, something that we struggled against happening, and the whole Kashmir issue has been internationalised once again. So, 2025 is no doubt different to 2008, but to our disadvantage.
Menon: I agree the world has changed fundamentally. And in fact, the world’s probably at a hinge moment right now, where many things have changed, and things have become much more difficult for us, not just in terms of dealing with Pakistan, because Pakistan makes herself useful to other larger powers, and has done so consistently, charging strategic rent.
Thapar: Are we less successful than we were in 2008?
Menon: That is hard to say, because you can’t compare apples and oranges. And secondly, frankly, we know too little, and we’re too close to Sindoor to come to that kind of sweeping judgement.
Thapar: Let’s come to the delegations that we sent abroad. There were seven of them. They went to, I believe, some 33 countries. They comprise some 50, 51, 52 MPs. Some were sent to countries like Liberia, Congo, Sierra Leone, Panama and Guyana. Was it pretty necessary? And in the case of America, Daniel Markey of the Simpson Centre told me last week he thought it was unnecessary to send a delegation to Washington or New York, because no one in America, he says, seriously questions the Indian stand or case. So how useful were these delegations, and was it necessary to go to Liberia, Congo, Sierra Leone, Panama and Guyana?
Menon: I think the choice of countries — I frankly assume that this is because of either the regional influence or their presence on the Security Council. There must have been criteria that have been applied in the choice. I was a bit surprised that they didn’t go in the immediate neighbourhood, in the rest of our immediate neighbourhood.
Thapar: If you had been National Security Adviser, would you have also sent delegations to our neighbouring countries — countries like Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangla, Burma?
Menon: I would have, I would have, I would have included them. That surprised me, as I said, that they weren’t included.
Thapar: So, what you are saying to me is when Rajnath Singh says any act of terror is now considered an act of war, this is rhetoric. Don’t take it literally?
Menon: I am not sure what he means by saying that, because he’s not saying what he’s going to do. By saying it’s an act of war, he suggests that we will go to war. But it’s an implication.
Thapar: Even if it’s only intended as defiant rhetoric, it is slightly misleading?
Menon: Because I wasn’t sure what it means. I’m not sure what it means, frankly.
Thapar: Okay, that’s perfectly clear. We are not sure what Rajnath Singh meant. Let’s come to the role China played in the four-day conflict. Do you share the view that Chinese J10-C planes and Chinese PL-15 missiles gave the Pakistan Air Force a significant advantage, leading to the shooting down of several Indian planes — that’s been admitted — perhaps three, maybe five. We don’t know the number, but did the use of Chinese planes and Chinese missiles give the Pakistan Air Force a significant advantage?
Menon: This is an area which is still grey when, frankly, nobody knows enough — at least nobody outside the system knows enough. And I don’t know enough. I’ve been outside, not just outside the system, but I was outside the country when it happened. So, I don’t know enough to say. But you’re absolutely right in pinpointing this fusion between Chinese doctrine and practice in the Pakistan Army. I think this is something that needs to be looked at very, very carefully. You know, for the last 10 years or more, the Chinese — the Pakistan Army — has been teaching Chinese doctrine and tactics at Quetta, in their schools, in their training, and they’ve applied it this time. And to what extent — the Chinese have always supplied the weaponry to Pakistan, that they’ve done consistently for many, many decades — but the actual use of it, and how, to what extent China was involved in the actual conduct of Pakistani operations, all that we don’t know. It’s a completely grey area. And you’re absolutely right — this is something very, very important and very significant.
Thapar: To what extent can the lessons, when they are known, be shared publicly? To what extent would that be inadvisable?
Menon: There will be some lessons. There are certainly some lessons that need to be shared, and there is some learning, which I think — you know, when the CDS said, for instance, that there will be losses in conflict. But we have to see how we respond to them, how we learn from them. I think that’s a lesson that the public needs to learn, and certainly the Indian media needs to learn, because I don’t think the Indian television media, at least, did us any favours during this conflict. I was sitting outside, and they actually made India look quite ridiculous.
Thapar: In other words, they lowered the image and standing of the country?
Menon: They also made us less credible as a country, sadly, because there was a time when they were credible.
Thapar: About claims on Indian television — that Lahore and Islamabad had surrendered and fallen, that the army chief had been toppled, that Karachi is under bombardment — all of that was just, you know…
Menon: None of them stood to reason, and there was no evidence produced. And it was sad. I mean, I really found it sad.
