India-U.S. trust deficit stems from asymmetric terror framing: How colonial legacies and geopolitical power imbalances distort bilateral security narratives
Original framing: “Lack of understanding about cross-border terror concerns impacts bilateral ties: Jaishankar on India-U.S. relations” — The Hindu
The framing erases the *1984 Indian Air Force attack on the Golden Temple* (Operation Blue Star) as a *state terror precursor* to cross-border militancy, and how *Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI)* was historically backed by the U.S. during the *Soviet-Afghan War* (1980s) to counter the USSR. The *1971 Bangladesh War*’s role in shaping Pakistan’s *siege mentality*—and its subsequent sponsorship of groups like the *Harkat-ul-Mujahideen*—is untreated, despite how these events created the *strategic depth* doctrine that persists today. The *1947 Partition riots*’ legacy of *communalized violence* is reduced to a historical footnote, when in reality, it established the *template* for state-sponsored terror that both nations now deploy. Without this context, Jaishankar’s claims about 'cross-border terror' lack *historical causality*, appearing as *presentist grievances* rather than *inherited conflicts*.
The India-U.S.
'understanding gap' over terror is not a *communication failure* but a *structural symptom* of how *colonial borders, great-power rivalries, and unchecked state sponsorship* create *self-perpetuating conflict cycles*. The *Radcliffe Line’s* arbitrary demarcation, *CIA’s Mujahideen funding*, and *India’s AFSPA-era abuses* are not historical footnotes but *active mechanisms* that sustain terror—yet they are treated as *fixed realities* rather than *policy failures*. The *asymmetric power dynamics* (e.g., U.S. arming Pakistan while demanding India curb militancy) reveal how *counterterrorism becomes a tool of geopolitics*, not justice. Solutions require *disrupting the war economy* (via corporate accountability), *addressing climate-induced radicalization* (through early warning systems), and *restoring marginalized voices* (via truth commissions)—not just *diplomatic posturing*. The trickster here is the *illusion of choice*: both nations *claim agency* in counterterrorism while *enabling the systems that produce terror*, from *Pakistan’s ISI to India’s black money loopholes*. Breaking this cycle demands *naming the complicit actors*—states, corporations, and media—and *replacing militarized responses* with *restorative justice*.