The India-Pakistan war jingoism is not new. It has existed between the two states since their independence, when both nations were carved out based on anti-colonialism. While Pakistan supported the Two-Nation Theory, it is itself battling against the rising tide of religious extremism.
Here, I would like to quote Montesquieu: “History is full of wars of religion; but on this point we must be cautious; it is not the multiplicity of religions that produced these wars, but the spirit of intolerance animating the religion that believed itself to be dominant.”
It is this same with intolerance — and the constant pursuit of political mileage — that has led both India and Pakistan to fight four wars. The causes and effects of these wars remain debatable because the issue lies in how both countries treat history: rather than maintaining objectivity, they turn history into a subjective, politicized narrative.
In 2019, the Pulwama attack paved the way for another aerial standoff, highlighted by the capture of Wing Commander Abhinandan in Pakistani territory
In 2019, the Pulwama attack paved the way for another aerial standoff, highlighted by the capture of Wing Commander Abhinandan in Pakistani territory. Once again, luck appeared to be on Pakistan’s side. To pacify public sentiment, the Pakistani media introduced a new narrative: “Fantastic Tea.”
Now again, in the wake of the Pahalgam attack, the speech of COAS Asim Munir, where he referred to Kashmir as the “jugular vein of Pakistan”, was used to justify its narrative and present it as evidence of Pakistan’s culpability.
The Anantnag district (where Pahalgam is located) itself has a dark history of violence
The Anantnag district (where Pahalgam is located) itself has a dark history of violence. In 1995, six tourists were abducted by Al-Faran. In 2000, on the eve of President Bill Clinton’s visit, an attack was carried out on pilgrims during the Amarnath Yatra. Attacks followed again in 2001 and 2017. Now, in 2024, another brutal incident has taken place in Pahalgam, where 26 tourists were killed. The Resistance Front (TRF) has claimed responsibility for the attack, which occurred during the visit of U.S. Senator JD Vance. Given the area’s track record, isn’t it also an intelligence failure on India’s part? Despite the well-documented history of attacks, adequate security was not provided for the tourists.
As of now, both states have again locked horns:
- Modi vows to pursue attackers to the “ends of the Earth.”
- India suspends the Pakistani government’s X (Twitter) account in its territory.
- Kashmiri students report harassment and attacks across India.
- Pakistani leaders rebuke the allegations, terming it a “false flag operation,” and declare India’s threats to divert water an “act of war.”
- Pakistan shuts down the Wagah Border and suspends all trade and bilateral accords with India.
- Islamabad closes its airspace to all Indian-owned or Indian-operated airlines.
- India suspends the Indus Waters Treaty and downgrades diplomatic ties, reducing its diplomatic staff in Pakistan to 30.
However, India cannot unilaterally suspend the Indus Waters Treaty under Article 12. Meanwhile, Pakistan itself is facing backlash from the people of Sindh over the controversial canal projects on the Indus River.
Theoretically, if both nuclear states go to war, the consequences would be catastrophic: Using just 100 nuclear warheads could result in 50 to 125 million deaths in the first week. Around 30 to 40 major cities would be destroyed. Five million tons of smoke would block sunlight, leading to a 1.5–3°C drop in global temperatures. Over 2 billion people would face the threat of hunger. The road to recovery could take more than 30 years.
Currently, Pakistan is in no position to engage in any kind of war. The western front is witnessing a resurgence of terrorism from Afghanistan. Internally, the Balochistan issue remains unresolved. Economically, Pakistan is also struggling — the World Bank has lowered its growth forecast to 2.7% from the earlier 2.8%.
It is highly unlikely that Pakistan would have orchestrated this attack, considering its internal and external challenges
Instead of being pulled into another narrative war, Pakistan should push for international arbitration. If found responsible for the attack, Pakistan could face strict sanctions from the U.S., especially given that it remains at the IMF’s doorstep. However, it is highly unlikely that Pakistan would have orchestrated this attack, considering its internal and external challenges.
Pakistan would benefit from access to cheaper Indian goods, while India would gain market access and enhanced regional connectivity
For over 70 years, both nations have been trapped in this blame game. But theoretically, if India and Pakistan were to resume trade and resolve their tensions, bilateral trade could surge from under $1 billion to $10–20 billion annually. Pakistan would benefit from access to cheaper Indian goods, while India would gain market access and enhanced regional connectivity. Informal trade — currently worth $3–4 billion — could be formalized, reducing costs by 30%. Trade times could drop from 30 days to just 3–4 days. Peace would reduce military expenditure and fuel regional growth. But deep-seated political issues continue to block the path forward.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
