The Regional Stabilizer: The Protests of Institutional Resilience and Fragmentation in South Asia

The Arab Spring of 2010-2011 sparked a worldwide debate on whether or not a wave of political contagion could sweep through other parts of the world, especially where there are similar socio-economic and political vulnerabilities. South Asia, with its common problems of corruption, youth unemployment, and political instability are compelling reasons for such a comparative analysis. This paper deals with a crucial question of research or enquiry: Why is there no uniform, region-wide "Spring" in South Asia even though we have the same grievances? What has been the role of institutional resilience and leading power of India in determining these outcomes? Employing a comparative case study methodology, spanning the countries of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal, and based on a Realist theoretical framework (Waltz 1979, pp. 88-112; Gilpin 2001, pp. 45-69), this analysis goes beyond descriptive analyses to argue that despite the fact that there are many similarities between South Asia and the Arab Spring in terms of the drivers of change, the analogy is fundamentally complicated by the power structure of the region. The findings suggest that India's institutional durability is a powerful counter-force that blocks systemic collapse, However, its stabilizing role is contested. India’s security-driven behavior towards its smaller neighbours gives rise to a ‘Perception Dilemma’, meaning its actions are often interpreted as hegemonic, reducing its influence in the subcontinent and creating opportunities for competitors such as China. The key contribution of the study is a nuanced comparative perspective that bridges the gap between area studies and international relations theory, and thus addresses a significant gap in the academic literature on South Asian politics.