The covert operations of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in India remain one of the least acknowledged chapters of modern geopolitics. Since the 1980s—a decade of turmoil in South Asia—the United States’ intelligence network has cast long shadows across the region.
It was during this period that Washington, working closely with Pakistan, nurtured a conflict stretching from Afghanistan to Kashmir. At the centre of this nexus stood Masood Azhar, a radical Pakistani cleric who mobilised Afghan youth to fight Soviet forces. His networks produced a generation of trained militants who later became pawns in larger geopolitical games. For the CIA, such figures were convenient instruments—ideology serving both as shield and sword.
But the CIA’s interest in India went beyond Afghanistan. Surveillance, infiltration, and intelligence-gathering became powerful tools to influence Indian politics and security. Often operating through covert local channels, the CIA sought not just to monitor, but to tilt the balance of power toward American interests.
Kashmir emerged as the most sensitive theatre. India’s Intelligence Bureau (IB), deeply suspicious of foreign meddling, repeatedly insisted that terrorism in the valley be handled domestically. Yet, despite India’s resistance, the CIA and its allies found indirect ways to involve themselves.
While the IB refused to give the CIA any role in Kashmir, Pakistan, the US, and Britain maintained collaborative networks to map India’s strategies and weaknesses. Into this mix, Western powers deliberately steered Masood Azhar into Kashmir, where his presence helped inflame unrest. In Shopiyan, clashes were provoked, destabilising an already fragile region.
The CIA’s strategy was subtle yet potent. Alongside overt surveillance and infiltration, it leveraged social issues, shaped narratives, and aligned with local contacts to destabilise select factions. This was as much a psychological game as a military one.
The 1990s marked a turning point. In 1995, the US and Britain reportedly helped establish a militant front, Al-Faran, designed to escalate militancy in Kashmir. Around this time, Western tourists became pawns in this covert chessboard. Kidnappings—linked to CIA-directed operatives—were carried out with chilling precision. Some hostages were killed, their deaths dismissed as “calculated risks” in pursuit of broader objectives.
These events exposed the ruthless pragmatism of intelligence operations: civilians sacrificed to serve foreign strategy.
The CIA’s footprint extended across India. It monitored political stability, economic trajectories, and regional alignments while collaborating with local agencies to avoid scrutiny. Military Intelligence tracked figures like Masood Azhar in real time, feeding into India’s own security grid. Yet, behind the scenes, the CIA’s hand shaped narratives, influenced debates, and collected sensitive data.
Technology further amplified this reach. Secret networks, digital surveillance, and infiltration of local ecosystems enabled covert operations that often remained hidden from the public eye. For fear of undermining public trust, Indian authorities themselves often suppressed knowledge of foreign interference.
The CIA’s role was never confined to India alone; it was part of a larger geopolitical design. American strategy aimed to monitor conflicts, manage alliances, and secure influence across South Asia. Plausible deniability was always in play—Washington denied links to terrorism even while CIA and British operatives coordinated closely, sometimes even at Pakistan’s expense.
The Kashmir valley, however, remained a constant arena of interest. For the US, it was both a laboratory for testing covert strategies and a lever to shape regional politics. The continued secrecy surrounding CIA activities underscores just how critical Kashmir has been in Washington’s South Asia calculus.
The story of CIA operations in India is not just about espionage. It is a reminder of how global powers entangle themselves in the destinies of sovereign nations. From the radicalisation campaigns of the 1980s to the kidnappings of the 1990s and the shadow wars in Kashmir, every episode reflects the fine line between influence and interference.
For India, the message is clear: sovereignty must be defended not only at its borders but also in the unseen realm of narratives, networks, and covert influence. In an age where perception can be weaponised as effectively as force, vigilance demands both strength and awareness.
