Can nuclear-armed Pakistan and India step back from the brink?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Nuclear-armed rivals Pakistan and India are locked in the worst crisis in years over the disputed region of Kashmir, and the capture of an Indian fighter pilot could mean the confrontation will only get worse, former diplomats and regional analysts say.
The pilot, wing commander Abhinandan Varthaman, was in Pakistani military custody after his MiG 21 was shot down on Wednesday along the disputed border between the two countries.
India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi now faces a crucial crossroads, experts said, to either hold back and seek to settle the dispute or to take further military action. With elections in less than three months in India, hitting back at Pakistan could play well to nationalist sentiment — but it could also risk a full-blown war.
"New Delhi is in a really tough spot now," said Michael Kugelman of the Wilson Center think tank. "Domestic political considerations make it very unlikely that India would want to de-escalate right now."
In any talks with Pakistan, which India has so far rebuffed, the captured pilot would give Islamabad valuable leverage, and make it difficult for New Delhi to drive a hard bargain, Kugelman said.
The hostilities began with a suicide car bomb attack this month that left 40 Indian paramilitary police dead in the Indian-controlled side of Kashmir, one of the worst attacks in years against India. New Delhi responded with an air strike on Tuesday, but this time India chose to strike inside Pakistani territory. The operation targeted what India said was a terrorist training camp for Jaish-e-Mohammad, the militant group that claimed responsibility for the Feb. 14 attack.
On Wednesday, Pakistan retaliated by shooting down at least one Indian fighter jet while trying to attack Indian military sites along the de facto border.
Pakistan aired footage of the purported Indian pilot, blindfolded at one point and then thanking his captors for rescuing him from a mob after his plane was downed. India expressed outrage over what it called "Pakistan's vulgar display," accusing it of violating the Geneva Conventions and warning it not to harm the pilot.
Summoning Pakistan's envoy in New Delhi, India said that it "reserves the right to take firm and decisive action to protect its national security, sovereignty and territorial integrity against any act of aggression or cross-border terrorism."
With an outpouring of nationalist sentiment in both countries and an election looming in India, political pressures will make it difficult for both governments to find a face-saving way to defuse the tension, said Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's former ambassador to the U.S. and now a fellow at the Hudson Institute.
"What we have actually is a confluence of domestic political factors that make a sensible outcome difficult," Haqqani told NBC News. "There are calls in India to teach Pakistan a lesson over its support for terrorism. And there are calls in Pakistan to teach India a lesson about how it cannot dictate to Pakistan."
Pakistani protesters attend an anti-Indian rally in Peshawar, Pakistan on Feb. 26, 2019. Muhammad Sajjad / AP Social media was also ratcheting up nationalist anger in both countries, he said. "Right now it's not just nuclear weapons that we have to worry about, but social media which feeds hyper nationalist frenzy on both sides," Haqqani said. "That frenzy makes reasonable diplomacy very difficult."
In its response to the suicide bombing in Kashmir, India's government seemed to signal a tougher approach by choosing to hit back inside Pakistani territory.
"Certainly, by undertaking a version of 'hot pursuit,' India sought to establish new rules," said Rafiq Dossani of the RAND Corp. think tank.
The capture of the Indian military pilot "has increased Modi's vulnerability and, in my opinion, greatly raised the risk of escalation," Dossani said.
The U.S. and China have helped tamp down tensions between Islamabad and New Delhi in previous crises, but it was unclear if Washington and Beijing would be able to exert similar influence this time. The Trump administration only recently named a nominee for the top State Department position overseeing diplomacy in South Asia, and it has not appointed an ambassador to Pakistan.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called for restraint in phone calls Tuesday with his Indian and Pakistani counterparts, warning both governments "to avoid escalation at any cost."
But Pompeo echoed concerns from India and European governments, stressing the "urgency of Pakistan taking meaningful action against terrorist groups operating on its soil."
Pakistan has long rejected accusations it is harboring militants who stage attacks against India. And Pakistan's prime minister, Imran Khan, who won election last year with the support of the country's powerful military, cannot afford to alienate the top brass or hardline nationalists, experts said.
Although Pakistan's armed forces clashed with India along the border in recent days, Khan, the cricket star-turned-politician, struck a conciliatory tone on Wednesday, calling for calm and for dialogue. "We should sit down and talk," Khan said.
But Khan lacks the political capital to tackle the problem posed by Islamist militants, in a country where there is considerable sympathy for the militants' viewpoint, experts said.
"The new prime minister simply can't say anything that the military doesn't want him to say. He wants to sound reasonable, but he is unable to acknowledge terrorist safe havens in Pakistan are a problem," Haqqani said.
The current crisis is all the more worrying given a major arms buildup on both sides over the past 20 years. Reinforced by its growing economic might, India has invested heavily in its conventional forces and recently deployed its first nuclear-powered submarine armed with nuclear missiles.
Pakistan, meanwhile, has the fastest growing nuclear stockpile in the world, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative , with an increasingly sophisticated array of missiles.
In a worldwide threat assessment delivered to Congress earlier this month, the U.S. intelligence community warned that new types of nuclear weapons in Pakistan and India "will introduce new risks for escalation dynamics and security in the region."
Both countries have about 140-150 warheads each, but Pakistan lacks a clear doctrine governing the arsenal, and has never ruled out a first-strike, according to arms control experts. While India has long-range strategic nuclear weapons, Pakistan has placed a priority on tactical weapons, including rocket launchers with short ranges of about 45 miles, experts said.
With India holding a decisive advantage in conventional arms, Pakistan has long looked to its nuclear weapons as a way to deter a potential invasion by its much larger neighbor, said Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center and a former Pentagon official.
"The Pakistanis see early use of nuclear weapons as a way to prevent major conventional incursions whereas the Indians are all about operating below the nuclear threshold," Sokolski said. "That is a prescription for mischief."
Hans Kristensen, director of the nuclear information project at the Federation of American Scientists, said the divergent doctrines carry the risk of an unintended escalation, precisely at moments such as the current crisis. The fear is the "entanglement between conventional and nuclear forces," he said.
Indian fighter aircraft used in recent operations "came from one of the bases that we believe has a nuclear mission — Gwalior Air Force Base," Kristensen said. "The Pakistanis know that and if this continues to escalate, there could be confusion, particularly if the Indians start to take territory."
He added: "I don't want to say Pakistan is more trigger happy, but let's say they are more ready to use nuclear weapons."
Tags
Who is online
192 visitors
I want you all to read this from the article:
If you think that a nuclear war there, will not affect us, think again. That radioactive cloud will reach across the world. Think about that for a moment.
Something to think about Perrie,
I wanted to check my history to make sure I had this right before posting it but, this isn't the first time these two country's have gon at each other, it has been a century's long fight for both of them, mostly over religion but, also over territory.
I am aware of that Galen, but I did some reading, and this is the worst it has ever been. I could see Pakistan losing it. Their nuclear program is always at a stand by, even in good times.
Heck Perrie, I could see India losing it as well, remember, they have Nukes too but, what I'm getting at is that the region has been volatile for century's and, it will continue to be as long as both country's continue to put religion in charge of their democracy's or, governments.
The biggest problem is Pakistan can't seem to weed out the Terrorists who live in Pakistan. The Pakistan Government doesn't want a war with India but the Terrorist Groups who live in Pakistan do because they think any place that has Islamic People should be ruled by Islamic Law. The Pakistani Government is afraid of their own people and these Terrorist Groups. There are whole regions of Pakistan that are ruled by these Terrorist groups. We had the same problem with Pakistan during the Afghan War with Taliban fighting us while being sheltered in Pakistan and Pakistan didn't do a hell of a lot about it. We would basically attack the Taliban in Pakistan illegally and the Pakistani Government would pretend to be mad to appease their people. I wonder how much of this is going on between Pakistan and India where they might kind of allow India to attack these terrorist groups because they're afraid to do it themselves but they publicly denounce the attacks to appease their people.
All very true zuksam, which is another reason I worry. Also, they have a tendency to say one thing and do another. it's hard to know what they are actually thinking.
Forget about that radioactive cloud. If these get into a shooting match, some others will get involved, too, and then it will be all out nuclear war. That radioactive cloud over our heads will be of our own making.
Damn...we need a really tough negotiator right now to get these two to hug it out
See you get it Trout. It is not just about these two countries, but the powers that deal with them like Russia and China and Iran.
We're all in this together!
Quite so, whether we like it or not.
As of this morning Pakistan has offered to return the Indian pilot...
That will help, a little.
That is some good news.
Thank goodness Trump isn't one to start a war (democrat fear). He'd be a great negotiator on this, and might possibly get something for this Country too ! He doesn't mind, one bit, "Talking" with other countries Leaders....good and bad !
So far, I don't think that the US is part of this equation, although I might be wrong. And so far no one has been able to negotiate with them. Kind of like N. Korea.
Just wait. The "World" will want it....soon. We ARE the "Worlds" police after all. Unless the E.U. types decide they need to try and become the "Big Man" on campus !
Doubt it though !
"And so far no one has been able to negotiate with them. Kind of like N. Korea."
We only know as much about what is going on with N. Korea now, as is "Reported?" by the "Media". Now.....we both know how well they ….. "Report" ! Cohen was MORE Important !
Great negotiator?
I swear, people are determined to kill each other.
Yeah, it does seem that we are contestants in a suicidal race, (I'm stealing Sting's words)