



Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
An in-depth analysis of the historical background and conflicts between Pakistan and India, with a particular focus on the unresolved issues of Kashmir and water. the causes and consequences of three major wars, as well as the impact of nuclear tests on the region. It also discusses the role of third-party mediation in resolving disputes and the importance of peaceful negotiations for regional stability.
Typology: High school final essays
1 / 5
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!




Pakistan and India are two immediate neighbours having common history and culture; in this way, they should have the warmest ties, but their relationships have remained hostile all the time. Kashmir is very important between the two states, over which three main wars have been fought between them. Despite some important and effective peace initiatives, the main problems in maintaining the bitter taste in bilateral relations remain unresolved. Pakistan has always been pleased to suggest mitigating measures, but India’s response is generally not so good. Today, more than 70 years after independence, both Pakistan and India are not concerned for solving long lasting issues like the Kashmir issue, and water issue. Peace process and stability in South Asia lies between the two major countries. So, South Asian regional security structure is affected by the two main players of this region because they cannot find a peaceful solution of lingering issues.
Historical Background of Pakistan India Relations
After gaining the liberation of Pakistan, Quaid-e-Azam in a meeting convened in the Chamber of Commerce Bombay said that “We will live in Pakistan and you will live in India. In this way, we will be the neighbors. We want to live in a friendly way, friends in trade and commerce as two brothers” (Hilali, 2005). India and Pakistan were birthed out of bloody partition that heartened each to define herself in hostility towards the other, and they have waged four wars since partition. India has a hegemonic design and never maintains good relations with other small neighbouring countries in South Asia.
Pakistan and India have negotiated at various issues between 1984 and 1997, including the disputes over Siachen, sir creek and Tulbul or Wular, with little achievement. The representatives met, debated and prepared contracts, but final approval of management was lacking due to years of mistrust, hate and hostility between the two nations. Neither India nor Pakistan was willing to take the step by changing the positions previously mentioned and finding a compromise or another position. Firearms continued to explode, security forces continued to fight, exhaustion and terrorism continued to kill thousands, and negotiators met on a regular basis, but no positive conversion took place at that time.
The Kashmir conflict, the unfinished agenda of partition further plagued their ties with hostility and suspicion. Pakistan has faced three major wars; 1948, 1965 and 1971, and later on, the Kargil conflict and many other serious clashes. Pakistan and India have faced many security risks from the first day of the partition of the sub-continent due to the hostile relationship which was the major challenge for Pakistan in the past. As a matter of fact, traditional Indian capabilities were a major threat to Pakistan, but the atmosphere changed between the two states after a nuclear explosion in 1998. After nuclear tests in May 1998, the head of state and government of India showed typical pragmatism in the fight against long-standing uprisings in Kashmir. India considered this a better force than Pakistan. In the
face of this threat, Pakistan conducted its own nuclear test and made a political decision to ignore all global pressure. Government decisions received general support at the national level, which allowed leaders to cope with national restrictions associated with nuclear explosions. The interplay of nuclear and traditional threats is a new dimension in Pakistan- India relations. Nuclear tests created some equilibrium of power in the region which forced a settlement of the Kargil crisis of 1999
First War on Kashmir Soon after partition
India and Pakistan have fought many wars and the main motive behind the wars has been Kashmir. If we look at this point according to the partition plan it is clear that Kashmir is part of Pakistan Pakistan and India clashed over Kashmir. It was a Muslim majority state ruled by a Hindu king called the Maharaja Hari Singh. Ignoring the sentiments of the majority of people and guidelines for the accession of states decided on October 26, 1947, the Maharaja announced to join India. It resulted in an uprising. The local Kashmiris were joined by the Pakistani tribesmen who launched an armed struggle to liberate Kashmir from India. India sent its regular army to control the situation. As the unrest increased, Pakistan’s government came under pressure to intervene and finally sent its troops in May 1948. It resulted in the first war between Pakistan and India over Kashmir. The war-like situation was averted after the UN intervened. The UN passed a resolution to decide the final status of Kashmir through a plebiscite and both countries agreed to it. However, India refused to hold the plebiscite after Pakistan and the US signed a defence deal in May 1956
Second War on Kashmir
The second war over Kashmir was fought in September 1965. Compared with the first war, it had a slightly different context. India was defeated by China in 1962. Pakistan, after receiving western military hardware, had improved its defence and also gained the upper hand over India in the Rann of Kutch clash in 1965. Meanwhile, the unrest in Kashmir was increasing due to various factors. India’s founding leader, Jawaharlal Nehru’s death in 1964, had left a power vacuum in the political arena of the country. These factors prompted the Pakistani policymakers to play a final round in Kashmir. Code-named as Operation Gibraltar, a plan was prepared to provide aid to initiate a rebellion against India in Kashmir. It was based on the assessment that the situation in Kashmir was ripe for change and India will not be able to launch any major offensive against Pakistan. The plan did not achieve success and, soon, the two countries were engaged in a major conflict after the Indian forces crossed the international border on September 6, 1965. For Pakistan, the situation was saved by its brave troops and timely intervention of the international community to arrange a ceasefire.
that dozens of soldiers and civilians have been killed on both sides of the LoC in these exchanges.It further eclipsed the chances of peace between the two sides.
Water Issue
In 1948 India cut off the supply of water to Pakistan and this fact alarmed the Pakistani population imagining a possible scenario where Jammu and Kashmir are under the complete dominion of India. This is shared not only by the outbreak of the conflict in Kashmir but also by the often intense conflicts over water resources and the distribution of conflicts, numerous border issues and allegations of ethnic minority movements. Much of the debate on the relationship between India and Pakistan is inconsistent and is often recorded in bitter language both within the government and in the media (Raghavan, 2013). The reason for starting this topic is that water is one of the most important provisions of the present timetable.
Future wars on water are due to the fact that this important resource with an increasing world population is almost over and energy demand is increasing. “For this very reason, several countries are in a state of maintaining their hegemony over different water reservoirs to secure it for their future needs. India being an upper and Pakistan a lower riparian state are in a constant turf over Indus basin and water distribution. India is violating the treaty by building dams on Pakistan’s due water share because of this the state of Pakistan is facing extreme problems like power shortage being the pivotal one. Pakistan has to ease down its political tensions and start-up with its hydroelectric power projects to meet their energy needs. Both the states should reach up to amicable solutions in relation to water especially because peace between India and Pakistan means tranquillity and peace in South Asia”
Conclusion Pak-India relations have been through many ups and downs since 1947. There have been wars and conflicts but the two countries showed the tendency to come to the negotiations after every holdup. But unfortunately, the two sides have failed to transform the desire for peaceful coexistence into lasting peace and cooperation. In this regard, third-party mediation is the most successful mode of conflict resolution between India and Pakistan. The above debate proves that third-party mediation has been the most successful model of peace- making between the two countries. Starting from the historic IWT to Rann of Kuch and the management of conflicts like the Kargil War and military standoff of 2002, the third party interventions have been more fruitful for peace. The role of the UN stands apart from the traditional third party mediations. The UN has been instrumental in ending the first Kashmir war in 1949 and the second war in 1965 but it has failed to deliver peace in Kashmir. Hence, its role so far has been limited as far as the resolution of the most serious issue between Pakistan and India is concerned. The main reason, though, is Indian refusal to let the UN have a decisive say on Kashmir but the world body cannot be absolved of failure as it seldom took
up a moral and legal view of the situation to play a pro-active role on Kashmir. However, the UNSC resolutions are still useful and can go a long way to address the Kashmir issue. There are some good examples of successful bilateral peace initiatives but they also have failed to address the contentious issues. The Composite Dialogue process was the most comprehensive peace effort ever made so far but it was not successful and failed to resolve any of the major issues discussed. It shows that the bilateral channel can help to pave the ground or help resolve minor issues but it has been ineffective in addressing the major problems. The main reason for the failure of bilateral efforts is the absence of any institutional framework to address tensions and conflicts. The second reason is the deep mistrust between the two countries. Failure of the UN and bilateral channel provide space for the exercise of other options. Since third party mediation has a track record of success, it should be used to address serious problems vis-à-vis Pak-India relations. In fact, in the prevailing atmosphere, we are left with third-party mediation as the only option, which not only has a history of success but also the potential to resolve Pak-India disputes, peacefully. Therefore, the international community should realise its role of a mediator and refocus its attention on South Asia, which is a potential nuclear flashpoint. India should also revisit stance and recognise the importance of third-party mediations. It should also let the UN use its good offices in helping to resolve the Kashmir dispute, which is vital for regional peace and good ties between Pakistan and India.