India vs Pakistan sporting ties: 5 big questions after new government policy

When the Asia Cup schedule was first announced, many were sceptical. Even with the fixtures out, people wondered whether the India-Pakistan match would actually go ahead, given the current geopolitical climate in the aftermath of the terror attack on Phalgam, Jammu and Kashmir. Then, when the Indian team for the Asia Cup was announced, doubts persisted—some believed it was still merely the BCCI’s decision and that the government might withhold approval.

But now, the picture is clear. Anyone who thought the India-Pakistan game in the Asia Cup would be called off due to public backlash has been proven wrong. This debate has been everywhere: on social media, in mainstream media, and even in Parliament, where questions were raised.

The government has now issued an official statement, all but confirming that the India-Pakistan match will go ahead in the Asia Cup. They have also provided their reasoning, which in turn raises several questions. Before considering those questions, it is important to understand what the government has said regarding the clash.

The first point is that, while India maintains no bilateral sporting ties with Pakistan, it will participate in international and multilateral tournaments involving Pakistan. This is consistent with India’s long-standing stance: there has been no bilateral cricket with Pakistan since 2013, and that status quo remains. However, the government has now explicitly stated that India will play Pakistan in international and multilateral tournaments, including the Asia Cup.

The government notification further states that Pakistani players and teams will be able to participate in such multilateral events hosted by India.

“With regard to international and multilateral events, in India or abroad, we are guided by the practices of international sports bodies and the interest of our own sportspersons. It is also relevant to take into account India’s emergence as a credible venue to host international sports events,” the Sports Ministry stated.

“Accordingly, Indian teams and individual players will take part in international events that also have teams or players from Pakistan. Similarly, Pakistani players and teams will be able to participate in such multilateral events hosted by India,” it added.

This is not just about India playing Pakistan in these tournaments. The government has made it clear that even if Pakistani players wish to come to India for multilateral tournaments—such as the Asia Cup in hockey—they will be granted visas and allowed to participate. Let me emphasise: this applies to all sports, not just cricket. This advisory comes in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack, which claimed 26 lives, and Operation Sindoor, India’s retaliatory action dismantling terror infrastructure across the border.

Several voices, including former cricketers, have urged the Indian men’s cricket team to boycott the Asia Cup match against Pakistan. These calls followed heightened tensions between the two nations. Yet, the government’s explanation highlights India’s aspiration to be recognised globally as a credible venue for international sporting events. Accordingly, they will allow Pakistani players to come here, permit the Pakistan team to compete, and ensure India participates in multilateral and international tournaments involving Pakistan.

The government’s official statement reads:

“To position India as a preferred destination for hosting international sporting events, the visa process for sportspersons, team officials, technical personnel, and office-bearers of International Sports Governing Bodies shall be simplified.

“In respect of office-bearers of International Sports Governing Bodies, a multi-entry visa shall be granted on a priority basis for the duration of their official tenure, subject to a maximum period of five years. This shall facilitate their smooth movement into and within the country, in accordance with international norms. Due protocol and courtesies, as per established practice, shall be extended to the Heads of International Sports Governing Bodies during their visits to India.”

From these decisions, five major questions now arise.

HOSTING INTERNATIONAL EVENTS BIGGER THAN NATIONAL INTEREST?

Question number one is, is hosting international events bigger than national interest? So the government is saying because listen, we want to be seen by the world as a credible venue for hosting international tournaments, so we will allow Pakistan players to come here and participate and we will also go and participate because we want to and you know there is a clear sort of an indication about the Olympics that India is now vying to host. It is about the Commonwealth Games that India wants to host as well.

But the question is, is any of this over national interest? You know you have said that national interest comes first, there are people on the border that have been fighting, there were people that were martyred in Pahalgam, is hosting an international event more important than the lives of Indian citizens? I think that's the first question that the government should ask themselves.

WHY THE ASIA CUP?

The next is, ICC tournaments can lead to isolation. So even if you say that you have to send your team, then maybe ICC, if it was an ICC tournament you say fine, you know if you don't send a team to ICC tournament then nobody would want to play cricket with us or maybe other sports as well, so we will be completely isolated.

But why the Asia Cup? Asia Cup is a tournament that in the past has also been delayed, venues have been changed, it gets postponed very often and even if India does not play the Asia Cup, there is no threat of isolation, those Asian countries will still continue to play bilateral cricket with India. So what was the need to allow India to participate in the Asia Cup? That comes again, as I repeat, in the aftermath of what happened in Pahalgam and Operation Sindoor. That's question number two.

AVOIDING ISOLATION AT WHAT COST?

Question number three, even if (boycotting matches in) ICC tournaments threaten isolation, is it above national interest? I go back to question one. Fine, ICC tournaments, I said that maybe that they can be isolation, so you know BCCI or the Indian government may want them to go and play, but even if you are threatened, even if you are said no, you cannot, you know you will be isolated if you don’t play an ICC tournament, does that come up above national interest as I mentioned, does that come over the lives of maybe soldiers that lost their lives fighting for the country or the people or the tourists that were martyred there in Pahalgam? So that is the other question.

INDIA HAVE TAKEN A STAND IN THE PAST

Remember, it's not that in the past, you know, Indian teams have not boycotted these big international events and that is the other question, if India could skip international events in the past and take a stand, why not now? In 1974, India reached the final of the Davis Cup, which is, you know, the number one team tournament in the world of tennis and you had to play South Africa, but because India had a stand that they will not engage with South Africa that was at that time engaging in apartheid, India said we will not play the final, so missed a golden opportunity to win the Davis Cup, that time India took a stand there, we have seen it in the past as well, 1986, the Asia Cup, the Indian team did not travel to Sri Lanka because there was a threat, there was a threat perception, they said fine, we will not play the Asia Cup.

Then, again going back to cricket, South Africa was continuously inviting teams like England, Australia, even West Indies would go on international tours and play with South Africa, the Indian team refused, they said no, we have no diplomatic relations with South Africa, we will not play cricket with them, they tried to isolate that and eventually, South Africa had to end apartheid and then in 1991, after that India started playing with South Africa, so India has a history of putting national interest first and boycotting international tournaments for the sake of national interest, what was the need then, now for the government to give a go ahead for the Asia Cup and that brings me to the fifth and final big question which is when no social or business connections, why sporting ties with Pakistan?

DOUBLE STANDARDS?

So social connections as you know, social media handles of Pakistan YouTubers or people on X and various other platforms were banned, any content that was being run on Indian television or on social media from Pakistan that was banned, so effectively you had said no social contact with them, no person to person contact with them, then business connections were ended.

Just to give you an idea, before what happened in Pahalgam and Operation Sindoor, the exports that were there between India and Pakistan, they were close to, so India were exporting close to $55 million worth of goods to Pakistan, that is how much India was gaining by exporting goods to Pakistan, right after that you have cut it down to just 5 million, so 90% of that export Indian government has stopped, so what about the people whose businesses have been lost because of that, I don't think they had a problem, probably for national interest those people that engage in the businesses or people that lost a lot of their business because remember 90% of the exports have been cost, if they had to stand up for the national interest, for India's interest.

For people who are consuming social media or other sort of content from Pakistan like Diljit Dosanjh, who even casted a Pakistani actress, they all had to fall into line.

Even for senior players, retired players who are going to play at World Championship of Legends game, the legends league game, even they pulled out of the Pakistan game, so for all of them, remember that was a multilateral tournament, so for all of them they sacrifice and they are expected to sacrifice, but when it comes to cricket, when it comes to the big draw India Pakistan, then you have different standards, if this is not double speak then I don't know what it is.