How India and Pakistan might move forward — and away from nuclear dangers

Boston Globe

14-05-2025

Fortunately, leaders on both sides understand that full-scale nuclear war would bring horrifying catastrophe to their countries. While both edged toward the brink, surely neither intended to step over.
Advertisement
But the many crises of the nuclear age make clear that unexpected events, not planned by either leader, can provoke further escalation. In the Cuban Missile Crisis, then-president John F. Kennedy interpreted the Soviet shootdown of an American U-2 over Cuba as a deliberate Soviet decision to escalate. In fact, Soviet troops shot down the plane against the Soviet leader's direct orders, and he didn't know it had happened until almost a day later.
Advertisement
Had the India-Pakistan exchange escalated to full-scale war, multiple paths could lead to the use of nuclear arms, from 'tactical' weapons used to stop a catastrophic military defeat (long Pakistan's stated plan) to 'use them or lose them' pressures if short-range nuclear weapons moved toward the front were about to be overrun. Any such use would carry immense dangers of escalating to all-out nuclear war, with its horrifying consequences.
The ceasefire ends those risks for the moment. But these countries and the world are still saddled with the tensions that caused the conflict. India and Pakistan are burdened with disputed borders, terrorist groups in both countries with incentives to provoke conflict, longstanding religious and political tensions, disagreements over management of crucial rivers that flow from India into Pakistan, ongoing arms buildups, lack of communication, and more. The potential for another spark in this tinderbox is ever-present.
Hence, as politically difficult as it may be for both prime minister Narendra Modi's right-wing Hindu nationalist government in New Delhi and the uneasy military-civil coalition in Islamabad, India and Pakistan need to use this conflict to break from the past and move toward a more peaceful path benefiting all the peoples of South Asia. Rubio announced that the sides had agreed to 'start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site.'
Advertisement
Continuing the confusing torrent of conflicting statements that has characterized this conflict, the Indian government quickly denied this, saying there was
Even if fundamental issues such as the status of Kashmir cannot be resolved, accords on nonmilitary issues such as water, the environment, people-to-people exchanges, and expanded trade should be possible. On the military side, accords to create rules of the road along the border (perhaps similar to the US-Russian 'Dangerous Military Activities' accord), to avoid incidents at sea, to beef up existing crisis communication channels, and to establish regular government-to-government and military-to-military communications could make a real difference.
The peoples of South Asia — and the world — deserve to live with less danger of conflicts and fear of the potential use of nuclear weapons.