|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Will Kashmir Spark an Indo-Pakistani Nuclear War?
|
Dr. Tahir Amin
Professor – Quaid-I-Azam University (Pakistan)
|
06/07/2002
|
 |
|
Indian soldier overlooking the Line of Control |
India
and Pakistan came dangerously close to the brink of another war
between late May and early June 2002 over the unresolved dispute of
Kashmir. India and Pakistan have fought three wars over Kashmir, one
in 1947-48, a second in 1965, and a third during the Kargil crisis
of 1999. However, the fear of nuclear war was greatly heightened
this time as the leaders of India and Pakistan freely engaged in the
rhetoric of possible nuclear exchange at the peak of tensions
between the two countries.
Strategic
analysts feared that the outbreak of even a limited war could
quickly spill over into a nuclear war, leading to catastrophic
consequences for the south Asian sub-continent. It would have meant
the loss of millions of lives, the destruction of major cities, and
the awesome consequences of the effects of radiation over the long
run. The saber-rattling between the two countries became so intense
that the U.S. and other Western countries, expecting an imminent
war, hastily evacuated their thousands of nationals from India and
Pakistan. Although the war has temporarily been averted due to
intense international pressure, tensions remain high along the
India-Pakistan border, where the forces of the two countries remain
deployed, and the exchange of fire along the Line of Control (LoC)
continues to take place daily. It has yet to be seen whether this
period is a pause in the continuing Indo-Pakistani tensions or the
beginning of a serious mediation process by the U.S. and Western
powers over the perennial issue of Kashmir. If they continue to
overlook the necessity of resolving the Kashmir dispute, then there
is a strong likelihood that India and Pakistan could stumble into a
nuclear war.
There
appears to be a strong parallel between the Kashmir and Palestinian
disputes, as in both cases the Western powers are flouting the norms
of justice and impartiality, favoring the aggressors, irrespective
of the merits of the cases and without any regard to U.N.
resolutions.
 |
|
Indian nuclear-capable Agni missile |
The
events leading up to this situation in the sub-continent have to be
understood in the context of the evolving international situation,
in the wake of September 11 and the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan;
twin tragedies which rocked the world with serious long-term
ramifications. When Pakistan sided with the United States in its
campaign against Afghanistan, India was greatly upset and
frustrated, and sought to undermine that relationship. As the U.S.
campaign began to wind down, India began to allege that Pakistan was
involved in “cross-border terrorism” in Kashmir. The fact is
that the Kashmiris have been struggling for their right of
self-determination since 1947, when India and Pakistan became
independent. The case of Kashmir’s self-determination has been
pending before the U.N. ever since. Since the eruption of the recent
Kashmiri intifada in 1989, in Indian-occupied Kashmir, more than
70,000 people have been martyred.
More
than half a million Indian troops have been stationed in Indian-held
Kashmir, which, according to both international and Indian human
right groups, have been engaged in gruesome human-rights violations.
Apparently, the Kashmiri freedom fighters conducted a military
attack on the Indian Parliament on December 12 2001, which India
blamed on Pakistan. India then began to deploy its troops along the
Pakistani border. The Indian leadership apparently calculated that
it could take advantage of the situation by portraying the
self-determination movement as a terrorist organization and blaming
Pakistan as the main sponsor of “cross-border” terrorism. They
thought that it was an opportune time to crush the Kashmiri
resistance through renewed military pressure, both in Kashmir and
against Pakistan, under the cover of “the war against
terrorism.”
On
May 14, the Kashmiri freedom fighters launched an attack on the
Indian military camp in Kashmir, in which several civilians were
killed. India used this incident to create war hysteria against
Pakistan. The Indian Prime Minister, Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee,
declared on May 22 that the time had come for “a decisive
battle” with Pakistan. Indian strategic experts began to talk of
conducting “a limited war” against Pakistan that would include a
surgical strike on the so-called terrorist camps in the Azad Kashmir
(Pakistan administered Kashmir) and possibly the occupation of a
chunk of territory on the Pakistani side. Some Indian leaders even
openly talked of a nuclear war against Pakistan. Pakistani President
Pervez Musharraf declared that if India dared to cross the LoC, it
would be taught a lesson which it would never forget. Pakistan also
made it clear that it reserved the right to use its nuclear option
if it was attacked by India. Mr. Munir Akram, a Pakistani official
at the UN, declared that Pakistan might make use of its nuclear
weapons if India attempted to take advantage of its conventional
superiority. At the height of tensions, Pakistan also tested its
ballistic missiles- Ghauri, Abdali and Ghaznavi—to send a message
to India that it had the capability to deliver nuclear weapons.
Pakistan also demonstrated its will and capability by shooting down
an Israeli-manufactured Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), an Indian
reconnaissance plane, within Pakistani airspace, which also revealed
the extent of Indo-Israeli military cooperation against Pakistan. It
must be noted that Israel has been involved in assisting the Indian
government in crushing Kashmiri resistance.
 |
|
Pakistani troops on the Kashmir border |
The
U.S. and the Western powers exercised intense diplomatic pressure to
avert the war. Jack Straw, the British Foreign Secretary, Richard
Armitage, the U.S. deputy Secretary of State and Donald Rumsfield,
the U.S. Secretary of Defense visited India and Pakistan in their
bid to stop the war. The U.S. and Western powers see a number of
their interests at stake in the case of another India-Pakistan war.
The outbreak of war would detract from the current U.S. campaign
against Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. The U.S. and Western powers would
have to leave Afghanistan, abandoning their campaign before
completion with serious implications for the newly installed
pro-western Karzai regime. The U.S. would also have to quickly
evacuate its troops from Pakistan for fear of getting embroiled in
the Indo-Pakistani war. The U.S. war on terrorism would be put on
hold for an indefinite period in such an eventuality.
However,
the main thrust of the Western powers’ policy was to put pressure
on Pakistan, rather than India. President Bush, Prime Minster Tony
Blair, and President Putin, all made pointed statements appealing to
Pakistan to stop what India would call “cross-border terrorism”.
There was hardly any reference to the necessity of resolving the
Kashmir dispute on a permanent basis. Pakistan may have received
some behind–the-scenes assurance about possible mediation on the
Kashmir dispute, but there is no concrete hint on how that would be
done. It appears that as Pakistan’s significance fades away after
the accomplishment of U.S. strategic objectives in Afghanistan, the
pro-India tilt of U.S. policy in the region will become more
obvious. Some analysts suspect that there exists a joint
American-Indian–Israeli agenda for South Asia, which is going to
hurt Pakistan in the long run. They point out that the Israelis,
with American approval, recently installed an advanced electronic
radar system (“Green Pine”) in Kashmir, to monitor the LoC along
the India-Pakistan border. Israel has also sold the “Arrow”
anti-ballistic missile system to India.
 |
|
Indian soldier in Kashmir |
It
appears that the U.S. and other Western powers would merely like to
de-escalate the tensions between India and Pakistan, without making
any meaningful move towards the settlement of the Kashmir dispute.
They may also force Pakistan to accept some highly unjust solution,
such as the freezing of the border along the current LoC; a gross
injustice to the Kashmiri people who have been struggling so long.
Pakistan finds itself in a desperate situation politically. It badly
needs support from both China and the Muslim countries towards
seeking a permanent settlement of the dispute, keeping in view the
right of the Kashmiri people to self-determination. China made a
statement criticizing the Western countries’ policy of unilateral
pressure on Pakistan, but the silence from the Muslim world at this
critical hour has been deeply disturbing for Pakistan.
The
war has been temporarily averted, both because of the deterrence
relationship between the two countries, and the coercive diplomacy
exercised by the Western powers, but it appears to be a lull before
another storm in the absence of any positive move towards the
peaceful settlement of the long-standing dispute over Kashmir. There
remains the potential that the crisis in Kashmir may erupt, with or
without warning, leading India and Pakistan into another war, this
time with nuclear weapons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
