In India, cricket is not merely a game played between two teams on a green field; it is a mass movement, an all-consuming emotion, and a cultural force that transcends boundaries of language, class, caste, and even logic. It is one of the few things in this vast and diverse country that can unite people in silence and uproar alike. When the national team plays, especially against arch-rival Pakistan, time seems to pause, life rearranges its priorities, and a billion hearts beat in sync. Streets empty, prayers intensify, and televisions glow in every home, dhaba, and office. Cricket, in India, is not watched – it is experienced with fervour, faith, and nationalistic pride.

Yet, as powerful as this game is in uniting people, it is also increasingly becoming a pawn on the chessboard of geopolitics, particularly in the context of Indo-Pak relations. What was once a pure contest of bat and ball is now frequently a diplomatic instrument, a symbolic gesture of approval or protest, a mirror reflecting the state of political affairs. This evolving role of cricket compels us to ask a difficult but necessary question: should cricket be used as a diplomatic weapon? The relationship between India and Pakistan has always been anything but simple.

Advertisement

It is a tale of shared ancestry divided by trauma, wars shadowed by peace talks, and moments of hope dimmed by acts of terror. In such a historically charged context, cricket has often functioned as a proxy for statecraft. When India refuses to participate in a bilateral series with Pakistan, it is rarely about scheduling or logistics. It is a loud, calculated message. When Pakistan invites India to play, it is often interpreted as a political overture. The cricket field, thus, becomes an extension of the negotiating table – except that here, diplomacy is played out in front of millions, not behind closed doors. This is........

© The Statesman