Beyond Cricket: How Political Tensions Influence Sports Diplomacy Between India & Pakistan
Cricket between India and Pakistan has always been more than a sporting contest. On the field the rivalry draws vast television audiences; off it, matches have functioned as gestures of détente, national pride and, sometimes, political theatre. In 2025, as diplomatic and military tensions between the two countries rose, even routine cricketing rituals — a handshake at the toss, a joint presentation ceremony — became loaded with symbolism. Understanding how politics shapes sports diplomacy between India and Pakistan explains why a cricket match can matter to policymakers, media and millions of fans across South Asia.
Recent flashpoint: Asia Cup 2025 and the “no-handshake” moment
The Asia Cup match in September 2025 between India and Pakistan played out against an unusually charged political backdrop. It was the teams’ first major meeting since a brief armed conflict in May 2025 that followed a deadly attack in Pahalgam, Jammu & Kashmir. India’s decisive seven-wicket win was widely reported — but the match’s lasting image was not the scorecard: it was the absence of customary handshakes and the skipped post-match interactions. Pakistan’s coach voiced disappointment; Pakistan’s board lodged a formal protest with cricket authorities after India’s players did not exchange the usual courtesies. Indian players and officials said their actions aligned with directives from their board and government, framed as a gesture of solidarity with victims of the earlier attack.
That incident shows how nationalist sentiment and recent events can transform ordinary sporting protocol into a diplomatic statement. The optics mattered to both domestic political audiences and international observers: small gestures became proxies for larger bilateral grievances.
Sports diplomacy: a long, stop-start history
Cricket has a long history as a diplomatic instrument between India and Pakistan. Since the late 1980s and through the 2000s, cricket tours and joint sporting events were often used to test the waters of détente and to signal willingness to re-engage. Examples include India’s 2004 tour of Pakistan and other high-profile matches that coincided with thawing political ties. But ties have repeatedly been interrupted by cross-border incidents, terror attacks and political standoffs. Academic and journalistic studies note that cricket diplomacy is effective as a confidence-building measure only in a sustained political thaw — a fragile, episodic influence rather than a permanent peace mechanism.
Why sports gestures matter — and why they sometimes fail
Several factors make sports a significant diplomatic tool — and also limit its power:
- Mass visibility and emotional resonance. India–Pakistan matches are among the world’s most watched sporting events. A handshake or its refusal becomes instantly visible to millions, amplifying emotional reactions and political narratives.
- Low-cost signalling. Sporting ties allow governments to send messages without formal diplomacy — invitations to tours, participation in multi-nation events, or televised public ges
- Domestic politics and nationalist pressure. Leaders and boards face pressure at home to appear tough or principled; sporting gestures are often judged against current national sentiment. When an attack or diplomatic rupture occurs, sporting contact can be seen as premature or insensitive. The Asia Cup handshake controversy is a recent example
- Institutional constraints. Cricket boards (BCCI, PCB) and international bodies (ICC, ACC) operate under their own rules and commercial interests; they can neither fully insulate sport from politics nor force reconciliation when governments harden positions.
Sports diplomacy in an era of wider strategic tensions
The role of cricket as a thawing mechanism is further weakened when diplomatic tensions reach strategic levels. In 2025, several developments — including armed skirmishes, the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty and trade restrictions — show that bilateral relations are strained across multiple domains. These broader disputes reduce the space for symbolic gestures to produce lasting political dividends. As Reuters and other outlets have reported, suspension of long-standing treaties or open military clashes create structural problems that a cricket match cannot fix on its own.
The media, public opinion and sport: a volatile mix
Media narratives intensify the diplomatic significance of sporting gestures. Coverage that frames a handshake as “diplomacy” or a snub as an “insult” polarizes audiences and often pushes officials into defensive postures. Social media amplifies calls for boycotts or praise, pressuring teams and boards. During the Asia Cup episode, sections of the Indian public and some commentators called for boycotting the Pakistan match — a dynamic the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) had to manage while balancing rules of multi-national tournaments and international sports governance.
What this means for future India–Pakistan sporting ties
- Sport will remain a symbolic battleground. Even if bilateral ties slowly normalise, sport will reflect broader political moods. Handshakes, shared podiums and tours will continue to be scrutinised as political signals.rs more than episodic gestures. Historical evidence suggests that while cricket can open doors, long-term reconciliation requires political will, incremental confidence-building measures and institutional mechanisms beyond single matches.
- Institutional steadiness is key. Cricket boards and multilateral sports bodies can help preserve sporting interactions by creating neutral venues, clear protocols for player conduct, and contingency plans that prioritise the safety and dignity of athletes while reducing political manipulation.
A balanced, evergreen takeaway
The India–Pakistan cricket rivalry will likely remain one of sport’s most potent diplomatic tools — but its capacity to mend deep political rifts is limited. Moments of sportsmanship still matter because they shape narratives, soften discourse and offer channels of informal communication. Yet when relations are strained by strategic disputes — whether over water treaties, border incidents or military engagements — single matches or gestures cannot substitute for formal dialogue and long-term policy solutions. For journalists, policymakers and readers, the lesson is clear: treat sports diplomacy as a powerful symbolic instrument that works best when supported by sustained, institutionalised political engagement.
Also read;Mirai and the Global Audience: Can Indian Myth Meets Fantasy Appeal Outside India?
Last Updated on: Monday, September 15, 2025 3:26 pm by Indian News Bulletin Team | Published by: Indian News Bulletin Team on Monday, September 15, 2025 3:25 pm | News Categories: Politics
About The Author
