Washington has good reasons to direct more attention and resources toward China and the Indo-Pacific. But treating the campaign against ISIS as finished business would be a mistake. The group no longer controls cities or large stretches of territory, yet the conditions that helped it rise have not disappeared.

The immediate danger is not another ISIS army sweeping across Iraq or Syria. It is slower deterioration: local forces that remain dependent on outside support, detention facilities that cannot be secured indefinitely, and international attention moving elsewhere. Recent UN assessments continue to describe ISIS as resilient and adaptive. A future resurgence would probably begin at the margins, not with another dramatic march on Mosul.

India has spent years developing relationships with governments that frequently disagree over Middle Eastern security. It works closely with Israel on defense and intelligence, trades extensively with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and maintains a channel to Tehran through Chabahar. Its expanding European partnerships add another set of governments with an interest in what New Delhi does next. With shipping under threat at Hormuz and Bab el-Mandeb, India has reasons to pursue a larger role in maritime security and diplomacy. That role could extend to testing competing Gaza proposals, resisting campaigns to isolate Israel, and renegotiating the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor around financing and political commitments that actually exist.