Over the past several weeks, there has been a major buildup of tensions between India and Pakistan, beginning with Pakistani military skirmishes along the Line of Control. The conflict intensified after India conducted missile strikes into Pakistan and Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, amid ongoing disputes over the Kashmir region. Both countries have similar-sized nuclear arsenals, with India estimated at 172 nuclear warheads and Pakistan at 170. Of great concern is the recent massacre in Kashmir, which killed 26 civilians. People are understandably worried right now that a full-scale war could break out.
This violence is a continuation of decades of clashes between the two nations. They have been at war with India three times, most famously in 1947-48, 1965, 1971 and 1999. Each standoff generally focuses on the inflammatory topic of Kashmir. Yet both countries continue to lay strong claim to it as part of their territory. Recent events have ignited concerns about the outbreak of another major war. According to reports, overnight shelling in Pakistan by the Indian military killed at least 19 people, including a child.
The Immediate Triggers
The immediate trigger for the latest clashes seems to be India’s heavy-handed retaliation to the spate of civilian killings in Kashmir. India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi vowed to pursue “terrorists and their backers … to the ends of the earth,” signaling a firm stance against perceived threats from Pakistan. In response, Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif swaggered and announced that his forces had downed five Indian jets. He even claimed that they took Indian soldiers captive during the war.
As tensions mounted, Asif stated, “This has been initiated by India … If India backs down we will definitely wrap up this thing.” The Indian government contended that its strikes were “focused, measured and non-escalatory in nature,” arguing that no Pakistani military facilities were targeted. Both civilian and military casualties due to the violence have been mass. According to the reports, at least ten people have been killed as a result of retaliatory Pakistani shelling in Indian-administered Kashmir.
Pakistan’s response has been quick, strong and direct. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif condemned India’s actions on social media, describing them as a “cowardly attack on five locations within Pakistan.” He further declared that “this heinous act of aggression will not go unpunished,” emphasizing that Pakistan reserves the right to respond decisively.
Historical Context and Repercussions
Yet the recent bombing campaign is hardly an isolated incident. Beyond this specific act is a larger backdrop of escalations that occur with regularity every few years, typically sparked by terror attacks attributed to groups operating on Pakistan’s soil. Raji Pillai Rajagopalan noted, “Every few years there’s a terror attack inside India, which is almost always tied to a Pakistan-based terror group, there’s an escalation in tensions.” This cyclical violence isn’t helping the already tense relationship between our two nuclear-armed neighbors.
That’s not what happen when experts overwhelmingly plead about the awful consequences if this conflict spirals out of control. Derek Grossman remarked on the serious implications of the current situation: “This is a very serious escalation in India-Pakistan tensions that could, if taken to the extreme, result in nuclear war.” He pointed out the difficulty of restraint in light of civilian casualties: “When you have civilian casualties it becomes a bit difficult for anyone to not retaliate.”
Both countries are obviously want to strut their military stuff. Pakistan has dire economic problems that might keep it from pursuing a wide-ranging conventional military war. Yet, the country suffers from major economic challenges that might constrain its capacity to continue fighting in a protracted conflict.
Looking Ahead
As the crisis plays out, both countries are watchful and wary. The international community looks on with deep concern, knowing all too well the consequences if hostilities were to spread even more. Analysts such as Raji Pillai Rajagopalan caution that the success of the new rapprochement depends on how Pakistan reacts. If Pakistan follows through on its threats, the corresponding Pakistani retaliation would likely be severe and serve to further escalate tensions.
Both countries are nuclear powers. This leads to the interesting effect of placing a strict positive incentive on both parties to negotiate their responses to them. “It’s unclear how long this conflict will last,” said Rajagopalan, “but both sides have a clear incentive to ensure it does not get out of hand and to the nuclear level.”
