Why Pakistan Fears Ajit Doval: Insights from Christine Fair’s Landmark Speech
In a resurfaced speech that has gained renewed attention in 2025, American security expert Christine Fair delivered a candid and unflinching assessment of Pakistan’s strategic behavior, its military establishment, and the shifting power dynamics in South Asia. Speaking at a World Affairs Council event in San Francisco around 2014–2015, Fair, a professor at Georgetown University’s Security Studies Program, offered a critique that remains strikingly relevant today. The speech, recently re-uploaded by Indian news outlet Mint, highlights one figure in particular who, according to Fair, has fundamentally altered Pakistan’s calculus: India’s National Security Advisor, Ajit Doval.
Fair begins with a historical overview of Pakistan’s security policy since its founding in 1947. She argues that the Pakistani military and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) have consistently relied on jihadist proxy groups as instruments of state policy. From the tribal invasion of Kashmir in 1947 to the support for the Taliban in Afghanistan and militant organizations such as Lashkar-e-Taiba, Fair contends that this strategy has been central to Pakistan’s approach toward both India and Afghanistan.
She describes Pakistan as a state that has pursued “asymmetric warfare under a nuclear umbrella,” using non-state actors to bleed India through low-intensity conflict while deterring conventional retaliation with the threat of nuclear escalation. This doctrine, Fair asserts, has allowed Pakistan to engage in aggression with relative impunity for decades.
A significant portion of the speech is devoted to criticizing U.S. policy toward Pakistan. Fair accuses successive American administrations of enabling Islamabad’s behavior through billions of dollars in military and economic aid, despite clear evidence of Pakistan’s duplicity—particularly its sheltering of terrorist leaders and proliferation of nuclear technology. She warns that continued IMF bailouts and international financial support effectively reward Pakistan’s dysfunctional governance and military dominance over civilian institutions.
Yet the tone shifts markedly when Fair turns to India’s response under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval. She praises Doval, a veteran intelligence officer with decades of operational experience, as one of the most effective strategic thinkers in the region. According to Fair, Doval’s doctrine of “offensive defense” and willingness to impose costs on Pakistan for cross-border terrorism have introduced a new deterrent dynamic.
Fair claims that Doval’s approach—combining covert capabilities, rapid military responsiveness, and a clear signaling of resolve—has made Pakistan’s military leadership genuinely apprehensive. For the first time, she argues, Islamabad faces the prospect of meaningful retaliation that could bypass Pakistan’s nuclear threshold and target the sources of instability directly. This shift, in her view, has forced Pakistan’s generals to recalibrate their risk assessments.
On the Kashmir issue, Fair is unequivocal: she rejects Pakistan’s historical and legal claims, describing them as baseless. She frames Kashmir as an internal Indian matter and criticizes the international community for perpetuating a false equivalence between the two nations’ positions.
Fair also touches on Pakistan’s domestic political turmoil, referencing the rivalry between figures like Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif, which she attributes in part to military manipulation. She argues that without sustained external pressure—particularly the withdrawal of unconditional financial support—Pakistan’s powerful army has little incentive to reform or relinquish control.
The speech concludes with a sobering message: Pakistan’s obsession with India, fueled by its military and intelligence apparatus, continues to undermine regional stability and its own development. Until the international community, especially the United States, stops subsidizing this behavior, meaningful change is unlikely.
More than a decade after it was originally delivered, Christine Fair’s analysis resonates strongly with contemporary audiences, particularly in India. Her endorsement of Ajit Doval’s strategic doctrine and her blunt assessment of Pakistan’s policies have contributed to the speech’s viral resurgence. For many observers, it serves as validation that India’s firmer security posture under Doval and Modi has successfully altered the longstanding South Asian security imbalance—one that previously favored Pakistan’s use of terrorism as statecraft.
About The Author
