India and Pakistan don't fight wars like other countries. Here's why
India and Pakistan have fought three full-scale wars since they gained independence from Britain in 1947. They've also had dozens of skirmishes and conflicts, including one atop a glacier dubbed the coldest and highest-altitude battlefield in the world.
The latest escalation follows a deadly gun attack on tourists that India blames Pakistan for — Islamabad denies any connection. But they don't fight wars like other countries.
The dominant factor is their nuclear weapons arsenal, a distinct way of deterring major attacks and a guarantee that fighting doesn't get out of hand, even when the situation is spiraling.
Here's how — and why — India and Pakistan fight the way they do:
Their nuclear arsenals can destroy each other
"Pakistan and India have enough nuclear weapons to wipe the other side out several times over," says security analyst Syed Mohammed Ali, who is based in Islamabad, the Pakistani capital. "Their nuclear weapons create a scenario for mutually assured destruction."
Both countries have "deliberately developed" the size and range of their stockpile to remind the other about the guarantee of mutually assured destruction, he adds.
Neither country discloses their nuclear capabilities but each is thought to have between 170 and 180 warheads that are short-, long- and medium-range. Both countries have different delivery systems — ways of launching and propelling these weapons to their targets.
The arsenals are a defensive move to prevent and deter further fighting, because "neither side can afford to initiate such a war or hope to achieve anything from it," Ali says.
It might not look this way to the outsider, but nuclear weapons are a reminder to the other side that they can't take things too far.
But the secrecy around their arsenals means that it's unclear if Pakistan or India can survive a first nuclear strike and retaliate, something called "second-strike capability."
This capacity stops an opponent from attempting to win a nuclear war through a first strike by preventing aggression that could lead to nuclear escalation.
Without this capability, there is, in theory, nothing to stop one side from launching a warhead at the other.
Kashmir at the crux of the dispute
India and Pakistan have each laid claim to Kashmir since 1947, when both gained independence, and border skirmishes have created instability in the region for decades. Each country controls a part of Kashmir, which is divided by a heavily militarized border.
The two archrivals have also fought two of their three wars over Kashmir — a disputed Himalayan region divided between the them where armed insurgents resist Indian rule. Many Muslim Kashmiris support the rebels' goal of uniting the territory, either under Pakistani rule or as an independent country.
Border flare-ups and militant attacks in India-controlled Kashmir have prompted New Delhi to take an increasingly tough position on Islamabad, accusing it of "terrorism."
In the latest conflict, India punished Pakistan by hitting what it said were sites used by Pakistan-backed militants linked to a gun massacre last month.
A conventional military imbalance
India is one of the biggest defense spenders in the world, with $74.4 billion in 2025, according to the Military Balance report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies. It's also one of the world's largest arms importers.
Pakistan is no slouch, spending $10 billion last year, but it can never match India's deep pockets. India also has more than double the number of active armed forces personnel than Pakistan does.
While India's armed forces are traditionally focused on Pakistan, it has another nuclear neighbor to contend with, China, and it is increasingly concerned with maritime security in the Indian Ocean. Those are two factors that Pakistan doesn't have to consider in its security paradigm.
Pakistan's long and narrow shape, together with the outsized role of the military in foreign policy, makes it easier to move the armed forces around and prioritize defense.
A pattern of escalation and defusing
Neither Pakistan or India are in a hurry to announce their military moves against the other and, as seen in the current flare-up of hostilities, it can take a while for confirmation of strikes and retaliation to surface.
But both launch operations into territories and airspace controlled by the other. Sometimes these are intended to damage checkpoints, installations, or sites allegedly used by militants.
They are also aimed at embarrassing or provoking — forcing leaders to bow to public pressure and respond, with the potential for miscalculation.
Many of these activities originate along the Line of Control, which divides Kashmir between India and Pakistan. It's largely inaccessible to the media and public, making it hard to independently verify claims of an attack or retaliation.
Such incidents raise international alarm, because both countries have nuclear capabilities, forcing attention back to India and Pakistan and, eventually, their competing claims over Kashmir.
The fear of nuclear war has put the two countries at the top of the agenda, competing with the papal conclave, U.S. President Donald Trump's policies, and the Sean "Diddy" Combs trial in the news cycle.
No desire for conquest, influence or resources
Pakistan and India's battles and skirmishes are away from the public eye.
Strikes and retaliation are late at night or early in the morning and, with the exception of the drone attacks on Thursday, they mostly take place away from densely populated urban centers. It shows that neither country has the desire to significantly harm the other's population. Attacks are either described as surgical or limited.
Neither country is motivated by competition for resources. Pakistan has huge mineral wealth, but India isn't interested in these and, while there are stark ideological differences between Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan, they don't seek control or influence over the other.
Other than Kashmir, they have no interest in claiming the other's territory or exercising dominance.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Nahar Net
an hour ago
- Nahar Net
UN special coordinator says progress in port case 'necessary and long overdue'
by Naharnet Newsdesk 04 August 2025, 12:39 U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert on Monday said progress in the port blast case is 'both necessary and long overdue.' 'Five years have passed since the explosion at the Beirut Port shattered lives and neighborhoods and shocked the world. The United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, today expressed solidarity with all those affected by the blast, many of whom continue to bravely pursue justice,' her office said in a statement. Following a meeting with families of several victims last week, the Special Coordinator stressed that 'progress in judicial proceedings is both necessary and long overdue.' She stated, 'Five years on, tragedy and pain are compounded by the glaring absence of justice. Survivors and victims, and their families, deserve full accountability. And, they deserve it now.' Hennis-Plasschaert, while welcoming recent momentum in the investigation, alongside 'positive steps towards the strengthening of State institutions,' underscored the need for the Government to take all necessary action to expedite progress in judicial proceedings related to the explosion. She also congratulated the Lebanese Parliament on the recent adoption of the Judicial Independence Law, hailing it as 'an important contribution to the rebuilding of trust between the Lebanese people and the institutions built to serve them.'
Nahar Net
an hour ago
- Nahar Net
A father's grief and a nation's hope: Lebanon awaits justice 5 years after Beirut blast
by Naharnet Newsdesk 04 August 2025, 12:22 George Bezdjian remembers searching for his daughter, Jessica, after a massive explosion at Beirut's port five years ago. He found her at the St. Georges Hospital where she worked as a nurse. The hospital was in the path of the blast and was heavily damaged. He found his daughter lying on the floor as her colleagues tried to revive her. They weren't able to save her. She was one of four medical staff killed there. "I started telling God that living for 60 years is more than enough. If you're going to take someone from the family, take me and leave her alive," he told The Associated Press from his home in Bsalim, some 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) away from the port. He sat in a corner where he put up portraits of Jessica next to burning incense to honor her. "I begged him, but he didn't reply to me." The Aug. 4, 2020 blast in Beirut's port tore through the Lebanese capital after hundreds of tons of ammonium nitrate detonated in a warehouse. The gigantic explosion killed at least 218 people, according to an AP count, wounded more than 6,000 others and devastated large swathes of Beirut, causing billions of dollars in damages. It further angered the nation, already in economic free-fall after decades of corruption and financial crimes. Many family members of the victims pinned their hopes on Judge Tarek Bitar, who was tasked with investigating the explosion. The maverick judge shook the country's ruling elite, pursuing top officials, who for years obstructed his investigation. But five years after the blast, no official has been convicted as the probe stalled. And the widespread rage over the explosion and years of apparent negligence from a web of political, security and judicial officials has faded as Lebanon's economy further crumbled and conflict rocked the country. Judge Bitar had aimed to release the indictment last year but it was stalled by months of war between Israel and Hezbollah that decimated large swaths of southern and eastern Lebanon, killing some 4,000 people. In early 2025, Lebanon elected President Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and a Cabinet that came to power on reformist platforms. They vowed that completing the port probe and holding the perpetrators to account would be a priority. "There will be no settlement in the port case before there is accountability," Salam said Sunday. Bitar, apparently galvanized by these developments, summoned a handful of senior political and security officials in July, as well as three judges in a new push for the case, but was unable to release an indictment over the summer as had been widely expected. However, the judge has been working on an additional phase of his investigation — now some 1,200 pages in length — aiming for the indictment to be out by the end of the year, according to four judicial officials and two security officials. They all spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity in line with regulations. Before completing his own report, he is waiting to receive a fourth and final report from France, which has conducted its own probe into the blast given that several of those killed are citizens of the European country. Bitar since 2021 had received three technical reports, while the fourth will be the French investigation's conclusion, which also looks at the cause of the explosion, the officials added. Bitar is also looking to hear the testimonies of some 15 witnesses, and is reaching out to European and Arab countries for legal cooperation, the officials said. He hopes that some European suspects can be questioned about the shipment of ammonium nitrate and the vessel carrying them that ended up in the Beirut Port. Despite the malaise across much of the troubled country, Kayan Tlais, brother of port supervisor Mohammad Tlais who was killed in the blast, is hopeful that the indictment will see the light of day. He says he's encouraged by Bitar's tenacity and Lebanon's new leadership. "We do have judges with integrity," he said. "The president, prime minister, and all those who came and were voted in do give us hope … they are all the right people in the right place." The port and the surrounding Beirut neighborhoods that were leveled in the deadly blast appear functional again, but there are still scars. The most visible are what's left standing of the mammoth grain silos at the port, which withstood the force of the blast but later partly collapsed in 2022 after a series of fires. Culture Minister Ghassan Salameh Sunday classified them as historical monuments. There was no centralized effort by the cash-strapped Lebanese government to rebuild the surrounding neighborhoods. An initiative by the World Bank, Europe and United Nations to fund recovery projects was slow to kick off, while larger reconstruction projects were contingent on reforms that never came. Many family and business owners fixed their damaged property out of pocket or reached out to charities and grassroots initiatives. A 2022 survey by the Beirut Urban Lab, a research center at the American University of Beirut, found that 60% to 80% of apartments and businesses damaged in the blast had been repaired. "This was a reconstruction primarily driven by nonprofits and funded by diaspora streams," said Mona Harb, a professor of urban studies and politics at AUB and co-founder of the research center. But regardless of how much of the city is rebuilt and through what means, Aug. 4 will always be a "dark day of sadness," says Bezdjian. All that matters to him is the indictment and to find who the perpetrators are. He tries to stay calm, but struggles to control how he feels. "We will do to them what every mother and father would do if someone killed their child, and if they knew who killed their son or daughter," he said. "What do you think they would do?"
Nahar Net
an hour ago
- Nahar Net
Iran moves to remove zeros from plunging national currency
by Naharnet Newsdesk 04 August 2025, 11:52 The economic commission of Iran's parliament revived long-delayed plans on Sunday to cut four zeros from the country's plunging currency, as part of efforts to simplify financial transactions. "Today's meeting of the economic commission approved the name 'rial' as the national currency, as well as the removal of four zeros," said the parliament's website ICANA, quoting Shamseddin Hosseini, the commission's chairman. Under the proposed system, one rial would be equivalent to 10,000 at the current value and subdivided into 100 gherans, according to ICANA. The proposed redenomination was first mooted in 2019 but then shelved. The current bill will have to pass a parliamentary vote and gain the approval of the Guardian Council, a body empowered to vet legislation. It was not immediately clear when the parliamentary vote would take place. In May, Iran's Central Bank Governor Mohammad Reza Farzin said he would pursue the plan, noting that the Iranian rial "does not have a favorable image" in the global economy. The move comes as Iran faces deepening economic challenges, including runaway inflation, a sharply devalued currency, and the prolonged impact of international sanctions. As of Sunday, the rial was trading at around 920,000 to the U.S. dollar on the street market, according to local media and the Bonbast website that monitors unofficial exchange rates. In practice, Iranians have long abandoned the rial in everyday transactions, using the toman instead. One toman equals 10 rials. Iran's economy has long been under severe strain due to sweeping U.S. sanctions since Washington's 2018 withdrawal from a landmark nuclear deal during U.S. President Donald Trump's first term in office. Upon returning to office in January, Trump revived his "maximum pressure" sanctions campaign on Tehran. In June, Iranian lawmakers approved new economy minister Ali Madanizadeh after his predecessor, Abdolnaser Hemmati, was ousted in a no-confidence vote for failing to address the country's economic woes. The same month Israel launched an unprecedented attack on Iran's nuclear and military infrastructure, beginning a deadly 12-day war.
