India and Pakistan once again at war but will it go nuclear?
AS IF life were not difficult enough for people of the Indian subcontinent that its two nuclear powers should be again at war with each other.
After terrorists killed 26 Indian tourists in a picturesque little resort town in Kashmir last month, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi threatened to hunt the 'terrorists and their backers … to the ends of the earth'. He then moved to 'suspend' the Indus Water Treaty, that has stood since 1960 and sets out how water from the Indus River system can be used by both India and Pakistan. It was brokered by the World Bank and has survived three Indo-Pakistan wars.
The suspension sparked a fierce reaction from Islamabad. Pakistan is downstream in the river system but the water accounts for no less than 80 per cent of the country's farm irrigation water and for its hydroelectric dams. Pakistan has often accused India of diverting water upstream by building weirs and dams. India has always denied doing any such thing.
This time Islamabad duly proclaimed that any move to stop the flow of water would constitute an 'act of war'. A Pakistani minister then warned: If they (India) stop water, they should be ready for war. Ghori, Shaheen and Ghaznavi (Pakistan's missile systems) are not for display. We have kept them for India. We have not kept 130 atomic weapons for a showpiece.'
The water treaty has provisions for dispute resolution and sets forth distinct procedures to handle issues which may arise: 'Questions' are handled by the commission in which both sides are represented. 'Differences' are to be resolved by a neutral expert; and 'Disputes' are to be referred to an ad hoc arbitral tribunal called the 'Court of Arbitration'. Modi seems to have put this framework in abeyance.
On Wednesday (May 7), Delhi ordered air and missile strikes and Pakistan responded with artillery fire. Indian state authorities have been told to prepare for war. The last time India conducted such a nationwide exercise was during the 1971 India-Pakistan war, which led to the birth of Bangladesh. But that was before both sides acquired nuclear weapons.
So, will this particular round of chest thumping and military action lead to a nuclear war? Nuclear weapons theorists opined at the time when the two sides tested their weapons in 1998 that nuclear weapons could, counter-intuitively, prove to be a check on full-scale wars.
Kashmir will always be an intractable problem. Delhi and Islamabad both claim Kashmir in its entirety. Neither side can give up its claim to the whole state even if the reality is that each controls only a portion – places recognised internationally as either 'Indian-administered Kashmir' or 'Pakistan-administered Kashmir'. Both Pakistan and India fear that any concession will trigger a cascade of other regions wanting to go their own way. This idea of having no good options while being compelled to act is something that has haunted decision-makers since independence.
At the same time, both sides are pandering to their domestic constituencies and cannot be seen to be backing down in the face of threats and attacks from the other side. Escalation, both in rhetoric and in military skirmishes, can take on a momentum of its own. Ask any historian of World War I. One-upmanship on both sides has locked them into their current trajectory. The world can only hope that those nuclear weapons theorists are right.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
5 hours ago
- Straits Times
Restive Indian state Manipur orders curfew after fresh violence
The latest violence was triggered on June 7 after reports of the arrest of five members of Arambai Tenggol, a radical Meitei group. PHOTO: AFP Imphal, India - An Indian state riven by ethnic tensions imposed an internet shutdown and curfew after protesters clashed with security forces over the arrest of some members of a radical group, police said on June 8. Manipur in India's north-east has been rocked by periodic clashes for more than two years between the predominantly Hindu Meitei majority and the mainly Christian Kuki community that have killed more than 250 people. The latest violence was triggered on June 7 after reports of the arrest of five members, including a commander, of Arambai Tenggol, a radical Meitei group. Incensed mobs demanding their release stormed a police post, set fire to a bus and blocked roads in parts of the state capital Imphal. Manipur police announced a curfew in five districts, including Imphal West and Bishnupur, due to the 'developing law and order situation'. 'Prohibitory orders have been issued by District Magistrates. Citizens are requested to cooperate with the orders,' the police said in a statement. Arambai Tenggol, which is alleged to have orchestrated the violence against the Kuki community, has also announced a 10-day shutdown in the valley districts. The state's home ministry has ordered all internet and mobile data services in volatile districts to be shut off for five days in order to bring the latest unrest under control. Internet services were shut down for months in Manipur during the initial outbreak of violence in 2023, which displaced around 60,000 people from their homes according to government figures. Thousands of the state's residents are still unable to return home owing to ongoing tensions. Long-standing tensions between the Meitei and Kuki communities revolve around competition for land and public jobs. Rights activists have accused local leaders of exacerbating ethnic divisions for political gain. AFP Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
9 hours ago
- Straits Times
Why Washington's call for Asia to buy more American arms falls flat
A US Air Force F-35 fifth-generation jet fighter flies over Leeuwarden Air Base on April 8. The US hopes to sell more of this military equipment to Asia. PHOTO: AFP SINGAPORE/TOKYO/JAKARTA - US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth's rousing call in Singapore recently for Indo-Pacific countries to ramp up their defence spending and, if one reads his lips correctly, buy more American weapons, is likely to fall on deaf ears across much of Asia. While US allies such as Japan and Australia are natural candidates to heed the call, they have been coy so far in their responses, emphasising instead that defence spending decisions should be based on their own needs assessment. Most South-east Asia countries are unlikely to be spooked into action by Mr Hegseth's assertion on May 31 at the security forum the Shangri-La Dialogue that a security threat from 'Communist China' is imminent. This is not least because their spending priority continues to be butter, not guns. The United States is by far the largest global supplier of arms, exporting almost as much as the next eight largest exporters combined. Data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) shows that its share of total global arms exports was 43 per cent in the period of 2020 to 2024, up from 35 per cent in the previous five years. This rise was largely fuelled by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which resulted in a spike in US sales or transfers of arms to Ukraine and other European countries. The US's largest customer in the Asia-Pacific region is Japan. Tokyo relies on the US, its sole security ally, for 97 per cent of its arms imports, such as F-15 and F-35 fighter jets and Tomahawk guided cruise missiles. A close second-largest buyer of US arms in the Indo-Pacific is Australia, which buys 87 per cent of its arms imports from the US, including a deal to buy nuclear-powered submarines. Although Taiwan is similarly reliant on the US for arms, with 98 per cent of its arms imports coming from the US, its absolute volume of arms imports is only about one-sixth of Japan's and Australia's. Self-ruled Taiwan's primary security threat stems from China's refusal to rule out the use of force to bring the island under its control. Elsewhere in the region, the picture is more mixed. The share of US weapons in Asian countries' arms imports ranges from 86 per cent in South Korea, to 32 per cent in Singapore, to zero in Myanmar. So why aren't Asian countries buying more US arms? One reason that Asian countries are cool to Mr Hegseth's sales pitch is that spending on defence simply isn't a top priority. In 2024, South-east Asian countries on average spent around 1.5 per cent of their gross domestic product (GDP) on defence, a level that has been consistent over the last decade, according to a recent survey by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). The global average is 2.5 per cent. Mr Hegseth at the Shangri-La Dialogue urged countries in the region to take a leaf from the Europeans and pledge defence budgets of 5 per cent of GDP. 'His suggestion is tone deaf and not in line with the realities on the ground,' Dr Collin Koh, a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) in Singapore, told The Straits Times. Emerging economies in South-east Asia are already stretching their limited fiscal resources to meet urgent needs in infrastructure, healthcare and education. Most do not feel they have the luxury to splurge on defence, he noted. 'Most countries in the region would rather spend on socio-economic priorities, because that's what wins votes,' said Dr Koh. Another reason South-east Asian countries are not motivated to significantly boost defence spending is that, unlike in Europe where the Ukraine war rages on, Asia is largely peaceful, except for skirmishes between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea, and the occasional border clashes between Cambodia and Thailand and Cambodia and Vietnam. Faced with growing tensions with China, the Philippines has in recent years shifted its defence focus from internal to external security. It was keen to buy F-16 fighter jets from the US. However, because its Air Force has not operated jet fighters since the 1990s, it has instead purchased lightweight jet fighters from South Korea, which are cheaper, to ease its transition to more advanced US weapon systems. Mr Hegseth might have tried to create a sense of urgency to buy arms by saying a China attack on Taiwan is imminent. But most countries in the region that are not US allies don't expect to be dragged into a hot war over Taiwan. 'The argument is not valid because practically all the countries in the region have cooperation and relatively open communication with China,' Jakarta-based military analyst Mufti Makarim told ST. 'If Indonesia were a proxy country of the US, Indonesia would automatically follow the US' lead, but Indonesia is not,' he said. Even close allies Japan and Australia are not near the 5 per cent mark. Japan's defence spending will hit 1.8 per cent of its GDP in the fiscal year ending March 2026, according to budget estimates. This is already a hike from the 1 per cent cap in spending that was in effect between 1976 and 2022. There is , however, debate about whether Japan should pledge to buy more US arms as a bargaining chip for lower tariffs for its exports to the US. Washington in April imposed tariffs of 10 per cent to 50 per cent on trading partners, later suspended for 90 days. Japan faces a 24 per cent tariff rate starting in July unless it can negotiate a deal with the US. It also hopes Washington can exempt its automakers from a 25 per cent tariff on automobiles, Japan's biggest industry. Still, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and Defence Minister Gen Nakatani have both rejected the idea of setting defence spending targets at the behest of another country, reiterating that Japan will determine its own budget independently. But Japan's chief tariff negotiator, Mr Ryosei Akazawa, who was in Washington on June 5-8 for a fifth round of talks, have suggested leaving that option open. Amid perceptions that the US commitment to its security alliance with Japan was wavering, senior fellow Ippeita Nishida of the Tokyo-based Sasakawa Peace Foundation think-tank told ST that Japan would likely raise its defence spending beyond 2 per cent. This was a figure that Mr Ishiba himself has previously said might not be enough to defend the country. In the case of Australia, when Mr Hegseth met his Australian counterpart on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue, he told the Pacific nation to boost its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of its GDP 'as soon as possible'. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese responded by saying his country would spend based on its defence needs. His government has previously set a defence budget goal of 2.3 per cent of GDP by 2033-2034. Mr Albanese had won a general election in May, in which the message of standing up for Australia against America proved popular among voters. Mr Hegseth's sales pitch for Asian nations to spend more on US arms may sound compelling to the hawks in Washington. But in the diverse political and economic landscape of the Indo-Pacific, his message risks being dismissed as out of touch. National interests here are shaped less by ideological rivalry and more by domestic imperatives and long-term pragmatism. For many countries in the region, development still trumps deterrence. Yew Lun Tian is a senior foreign correspondent who covers China for The Straits Times. Walter Sim is Japan correspondent at The Straits Times. Based in Tokyo, he writes about political, economic and socio-cultural issues. Wahyudi Soeriaatmadja has been Indonesia correspondent at The Straits Times since 2008, and is based in Jakarta. Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.
Straits Times
20 hours ago
- Straits Times
UK and India discuss ‘counter-terrorism' cooperation after Pakistan ceasefire
British Foreign Secretary David Lammy speaking during an interview with Reuters in New Delhi, India, on June 7. PHOTO: REUTERS NEW DELHI - Britain and India on June 7 discussed expanding their "counter-terrorism" collaboration following recent fighting between India and Pakistan, Britain's foreign minister told Reuters after meeting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. British foreign minister David Lammy is the highest-profile Western official to have visited both New Delhi and Islamabad since the South Asian neighbours agreed to a ceasefire in May after their worst fighting in nearly three decades. The latest tensions began in April after the killing of 26 men in Indian Kashmir that New Delhi blamed on "terrorists" backed by Pakistan, a charge Islamabad denied. India then attacked what it called "terrorist infrastructure" in Pakistan, leading to escalation from both sides until a May 10 ceasefire. 'We want the situation to be maintained, but of course we recognise fragility, particularly in the backdrop of terrorism, terrorism designed to destabilise India,' Mr Lammy said, in an interview at the residence of the British High Commissioner in New Delhi. "We are keen to continue to work with our Indian partners on counter-terrorism measures." He said he discussed the next steps with both Mr Modi and Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar, but gave no specifics. In 2024, India and Britain discussed combating the financing of terrorism, cooperation between law enforcement and judicial bodies and information sharing. Mr Lammy said he also discussed boosting trade between the world's fifth and sixth largest economies. The countries concluded talks for a free trade deal early in May. 'I know that Prime Minister Keir Starmer is very much looking forward to coming to India very soon to sign the free trade agreement,' Mr Lammy said. 'There is so much that our two nations can continue to do together.' REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
