In the kaleidoscopic world of South Asian geopolitics, where shifting allegiances, historical grievances, and ideological fervor often collide, few voices have cut through the noise with the clarity, depth, and moral courage of James M. Dorsey. A veteran journalist, academic, and one of the most respected geopolitical analysts of our time, Dorsey’s work is not just analysis—it is cartography for policymakers, scholars, and citizens trying to navigate a region that is both the cradle of civilization and the crucible of 21st-century conflict.
For over a decade, Dorsey has tirelessly chronicled the geopolitical undercurrents shaping South Asia. His body of work—spanning influential think tanks like the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore to global outlets such as The Times of Israel, Modern Diplomacy, and Middle East Eye—offers a blueprint for understanding how religious ultra-conservatism, economic instability, and great power competition intersect in this volatile region.
Diagnosing the Shift: From Middle East to South Asia
One of Dorsey’s most compelling theses emerged in his 2021 piece, “South Asia replaces Middle East as epicentre of Muslim ultra-conservatism.” Here, he argued that the ideological axis of political Islam has shifted eastward. The Taliban’s resurgence, coupled with Pakistan’s embrace of religious conservatism under Prime Minister Imran Khan, suggested a new epicenter of Islamic identity politics—less rooted in the Arab heartlands, more assertively South Asian.
This insight was not just prescient—it was prophetic. In placing Pakistan and Afghanistan at the forefront of ideological realignments, Dorsey illuminated a future in which traditional alliances (like the Pakistan-Saudi Arabia axis) would become more fragile, and new hybrid ideologies would emerge, blending political Islam with ethnonationalist aspirations.
Pakistan: Between Strategy and Ideology
Dorsey’s long-standing focus on Pakistan deserves special attention. His analysis regularly punctured the superficial narratives that dominate Western discourse. In “Pakistan and its Militants: Who is Mainstreaming Whom?” (RSIS, 2018), he posited a chilling but accurate question: is the Pakistani state taming militants, or are militants reshaping the state?
The answer, as Dorsey suggests through years of work, is not binary. Pakistan’s strategic embrace of militant proxies—a strategy once reserved for Afghanistan and Kashmir—has increasingly bled into domestic politics. Religious ultra-conservatives and sectarian movements have not only survived state scrutiny but have at times been courted for electoral gain.
The Economic Undercurrent
Dorsey also tracks how economic weakness shapes strategic choices. In “Pakistan’s financial crisis puts Belt and Road on the spot,” he dissected how Islamabad’s increasing indebtedness to China threatened to turn the Belt and Road Initiative into a geopolitical liability rather than a golden ticket to development. His writings expose a dangerous pattern: the region’s leaders often sacrifice long-term sovereignty for short-term liquidity, and this Faustian bargain rarely ends well.
In Bangladesh, his op-ed “Rolling back militancy: Bangladesh looks to Saudi in a twist of irony” exposed a different but related contradiction—secular South Asia seeking ideological support from theocratic Gulf states to combat extremism that those same states helped spread decades earlier.
A Panoramic Perspective
Perhaps what makes Dorsey’s work legendary is its breadth. He doesn’t view South Asia in isolation but as part of a broader Eurasian chessboard. His insights into India-Saudi Arabia ties (“Geopolitics, the black swan in Saudi-Indian relations”) and his critiques of shifting power balances within the Muslim world contextualize South Asia within global power trends. Few writers manage to bridge the analytical gap between Delhi and Doha, Kabul and Khartoum—Dorsey does so effortlessly.
A Legacy Beyond Analysis
James M. Dorsey’s contribution to South Asian current affairs isn’t merely academic; it is deeply human. He writes with the moral clarity of someone who recognizes that behind every policy failure in Islamabad or Kabul are millions who bear the consequences. His work does not cater to ideologues or serve state propaganda; it confronts, questions, and demands accountability.
In an era of hyper-partisan punditry and social media echo chambers, Dorsey’s rigor and independence are not just refreshing—they are essential. He remains a lighthouse for those seeking to understand South Asia not through the fog of nationalism or ideology, but through the lens of history, context, and lived reality.
If South Asia is the strategic crossroads of the 21st century, then James M. Dorsey is one of its most astute cartographers. His legend lies not in sensationalism, but in his relentless pursuit of truth—no matter how uncomfortable it may be.
South Asia Politics 