Former Foreign Secretary of India Kanwal Sibal has given a sharp reaction to the social media post of former Pakistan Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar. The matter started with the name of America’s Indo-Pacific Command, which has now sparked a new geopolitical debate. In fact, the administration of US President Donald Trump has decided to change the name of US Indo-Pacific Command to US Pacific Command. This decision reverses the decision taken in 2018, when it was named Indo-Pacific Command.

Hina Rabbani Khar reacted to this decision on social media platform X. He said that the importance and respect of any country should not be decided by what America names any of its military commands. According to him, if the pride of a country is affected just by changing the name, then it is a matter of concern. Hina Rabbani Khar said in her post that countries should decide their identity and importance by their own decisions and policies, and not by the narrative created by external forces. He also said that countries should avoid trying to prove their importance through fear or propaganda.

Also read: Explained: Sigh of relief in Iran, slogan of ‘deceit’ raised in Israel! What is the world saying about the US-Iran peace agreement?

Kanwal Sibal reacted to Hina Rabbani Khar’s statement.

Kanwal Sibal gave a strong reply to this statement of Hina. He termed his statement as devoid of understanding of geopolitics. Sibal said that Indo-Pacific is not just a name, but there is a big strategic and security related message behind it. According to Kanwal Sibal, the Indo-Pacific concept means linking the security of the Pacific Ocean and the Indian Ocean together. He said that China’s growing maritime influence in the Western Pacific and Japan’s security concerns strengthened this thinking. Whereas the Quad group gave it more structure.

Strategic issues should not be taken lightly – Kanwal Sibal

Kanwal Sibal said that in his first term, Trump had changed the name of US Pacific Command to US Indo-Pacific Command to give a strategic message. Its purpose was to show that America sees both the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean as a common security area. Now that the name has been changed back to US Pacific Command, it would not be correct to consider it as just a change of name.

Sibal said that it is important to understand the strategic thinking behind this decision because it can have an impact on the security and balance of power of the entire region. He also said that China has been opposing both the Indo-Pacific concept and the Quad from the beginning. In such a situation, countries like China, Japan and Australia will try to seriously understand the geopolitical impact of this change. Kanwal Sibal clearly said that such strategic issues should not be taken lightly. According to him, this is not just a matter of changing the name, but it is an important issue related to global politics, security and balance of power.

Also read: Iran-US Deal: Peace agreement between America and Iran, on which issues was agreed upon?

Trade deal has been announced between America and India. Donald Trump has also removed the 25 percent tariff imposed on India as a penalty for purchasing Russian oil. However, he has said that if India buys Russian oil directly or through any other channel, then this penalty will be imposed again. Experts are calling this attitude of Donald Trump as double standard.

Soft attitude towards PAK and China is a threat to India: Sibal

Former Foreign Secretary of India Kanwal Sibal described this development as Donald Trump’s double standard. He said that this is clearly an attempt to create pressure because our oil purchase from Russia has no connection with any bilateral trade deal with America. This is a political issue, which should be resolved at the political level and not through tariffs.

He posted on At the same time, China, which is importing large quantities of crude oil and gas from Russia, but America’s soft attitude towards it is also a matter of concern for India’s security and foreign policy, especially when China’s attitude has always been hostile towards India.

This is plain arm twisting.

Our oil purchases from Russia have nothing to do with a bilateral trade deal with the US.

This is a political issue, to be negotiated politically and not through tariffs.

Our purchases of Russian oil is not a threat to US security and foreign… https://t.co/CLeFD9KxJz

— Kanwal Sibal (@KanwalSibal) February 7, 2026

The former Foreign Secretary said, ‘Why is it that China’s purchase of oil and gas from Russia is not considered a threat to America’s security and foreign policy? America’s statement that if India again buys Russian oil directly or through a third country, it will be monitored and 25 percent tariff and other possible actions can be reimposed as punishment. This is an insult to India and shows that this relationship is not being seen as a relationship of equals.

Trump’s message is clear, India should buy oil only from US: Chellani

Strategic expert Dr. Brahma Chellani said, ‘The most important and sensitive aspect of Trump’s executive order regarding Russian oil is its monitoring system. Under this order, the US Commerce Secretary has been formally given the responsibility of monitoring India’s oil imports. Along with this, a clear provision has also been made that if it is found that India has resumed importing Russian oil, then the 25 percent tariff can be immediately reimposed.

The real sting in Trump’s executive order on Russian oil lies in its monitoring mandate. It formally tasks the commerce secretary with tracking Indian oil imports and creates a clear trigger: a finding that India has resumed “directly or indirectly” importing Russian oil could…

—Dr. Brahma Chellaney (@Chellaney) February 7, 2026

He said that the indirect use of the word in Trump’s executive order is particularly important and has a broad meaning. This could mean that if Washington believes that diesel, jet fuel or other refined petroleum products exported from India to Europe or the US are made from Russian crude, then action could be taken against them. He said that the message from Washington is very clear that India’s energy security should be linked to a supplier which is geographically far away and whose supplies are very expensive, i.e. America.

Also read: ‘India will not buy oil from Russia’, India’s reply to Donald Trump’s claim, know what he said?