The Erosion of Cricket Diplomacy: How India-Pakistan Matches Became Political Battlegrounds
There was a time when cricket between India and Pakistan served as a powerful bridge between people, transcending political hostilities and fostering moments of shared humanity. Today, that bridge has been replaced by a battlefield of jingoism, where the sport has become deeply entangled with nationalist rhetoric and geopolitical tensions.
A Historical Partnership That Changed Global Cricket
India's historic Prudential Cup victory in 1983 did more than just crown a new world champion. It heralded a seismic shift in the control of cricket's global administration. While the West Indies dominated on the field, England and Australia traditionally held the reins of power in cricket's corridors. Players from the Caribbean, India, and Pakistan had already demonstrated they didn't need to bat, bowl, or field according to "White Man's ways," but cricket administration awaited its decolonization moment.
It was during this period that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and the Pakistani Cricket Board joined forces to challenge historical privilege. Together, they successfully brought the World Cup to the Subcontinent in 1987. The Indian Board was led by politician N K P Salve, while his Pakistani counterpart, Air Marshal Nur Khan, represented military leadership. Their cooperation formed a refreshing counterpoint to the political hostility between their nations.
Modern cricket as mass entertainment owes much to these administrators who found common purpose in liberating the game from its colonial moorings, even as their countries stood on the brink of armed confrontation.
The Descent into Political Theater
Recounting this nearly forgotten chapter feels like nostalgia today, when cricket has ceased to function as a diplomatic tool for bridging differences. The recent handshake controversy at the Asia Cup served as a clear signal that political bitterness has spilled directly onto the playing field. Now, the ongoing sordidness surrounding the T20 World Cup—highlighted by Pakistan's announcement that their team won't play India—bodes ill for the health of the sport itself.
Hypernationalism has always been a leitmotif of India-Pakistan contests. During the 1996 World Cup co-hosted by India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, when Bangalore's Chinnaswamy Stadium crowd jeered Pakistani great Javed Miandad during his final innings, they seemed to enact what philosopher Umberto Eco described in his critique of spectator sports. For Eco, what happens on the field is only nominally a contest between players; it's fundamentally a competition between supporters that reflects the relations between their societies and polities.
Glimmers of Sportsmanship Amidst Tensions
Yet India-Pakistan cricket has often provided evidence that Eco's analysis captures only sport's darker aspects. Just three years after Miandad's unfortunate send-off, spectators in Chennai gave a standing ovation to the Pakistani team after they defied a monumental Sachin Tendulkar innings to secure a famous victory. Even today, the internet brims with heartwarming stories of friendship between players from both countries, some dating back just two or three years.
Rivalry on the field could coexist with diplomatic tensions without always fusing with state rhetoric. When fans witnessed players showing mutual respect—tying each other's shoe laces or exchanging jokes during tense phases of play—they could appreciate cricket for what it truly was: just a game.
The Television Transformation
That era has faded. In the last fifteen years, encounters have largely been confined to ICC tournaments. Television coverage now frames matches in militaristic language, employing terms like "revenge," "war," and "battles." If the Asia Cup incident serves as any indication, a new generation of players now embodies the political tensions between India and Pakistan.
N K P Salve, Nur Khan, and their successors leveraged the power of television audiences and Subcontinental revenues to dismantle cricket's traditional power structure. Ironically, television has today transformed broader India-Pakistan tensions into a spectacle resembling a sporting contest. News channels amplify tensions and orchestrate debates that play directly to audience emotions.
Geopolitical Anxieties Infiltrate Everyday Life
In his magisterial history The Age of Extremes, historian Eric Hobsbawm wrote of times when war was fought between the armed forces of nations or enemy blocs. Today, geopolitical conflicts in the Subcontinent have assumed a completely different character. Navigating these anxieties is no longer confined to governments, political parties, and experts; they have infiltrated everyday social life to the point where many ordinary Indians perceive ordinary Pakistanis as enemies.
Following its recent turmoil, Bangladesh has also become embroiled in this ecosystem. Groups threatening to disrupt cricket matches or dig up fields in India date back at least two decades. Previously, a firm hand from administrators, including cricket authorities, kept such mischief-makers at bay.
From Fringe Threats to Mainstream Narratives
Today, such threats are no longer the exclusive domain of fringe groups. The uproar—from political leaders across the spectrum, social media trolls, and television commentators—that pressured the BCCI to virtually force Kolkata Knight Riders to annul their decision to select Bangladeshi player Mustafizur Rahman illustrates this shift perfectly.
Unlike during Salve and Nur Khan's era, cricket boards themselves have become participants in narratives that frame players as adversaries rather than mere rivals on the field. Decisions involving cricket between India, Pakistan, and increasingly Bangladesh are no longer just about cricket.
The sport that once brought people together across borders now reflects their divisions. Cricket deserves better than to be reduced to a tool for nationalist posturing. The game's true spirit—of competition, respect, and shared passion—has been overshadowed by political theater, threatening the very essence of what makes cricket meaningful to millions across the Subcontinent.
