India and Pakistan don't fight wars like other countries. Here's why
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 — 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.
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 three wars over Kashmir, where armed insurgents resist Indian rule. Many Muslim Kashmiris support the rebels' goal of uniting the territory, either under Pakistani governance 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 defence 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


New York Times
2 minutes ago
- New York Times
India Will Buy Russian Oil Despite Trump's Threats, Officials Say
Indian officials said on Saturday that they would keep purchasing cheap oil from Russia despite a threat of penalties from President Trump, the latest twist in an issue that New Delhi thought it had settled. Mr. Trump said last week that as part of his latest round of tariffs, he would impose an unspecified additional penalty on India if it did not cut off its imports of Russian crude oil. On Friday, he appeared to echo reports of a recent dip in the arrival of Russian oil to India. 'I understand that India is no longer going to be buying oil from Russia,' he told reporters. 'That's what I heard. I don't know if that's right or not. That is a good step. We will see what happens.' But on Saturday, two senior Indian officials said there had been no change in policy. One official said the government had 'not given any direction to oil companies' to cut back imports from Russia. Mr. Trump did not say what the penalty would be if India were to defy his call to cut off Russian oil imports. Some officials and analysts have said that Mr. Trump's focus on India's purchase of Russian oil could be a negotiating tactic as India and the United States try to conclude the early phases of a bilateral trade agreement. China and Turkey, two other major importers of Russian oil, have not faced similar penalties. India has drastically increased its purchases of Russian oil since the war in Ukraine began. Russia is now the source of more than one third of India's oil imports — up from less than one percent before the war. Bringing in more than two million barrels of crude oil a day, India is the second largest importer of Russian oil, after China. New Delhi faced strong pressure in the early months after the Russian invasion of Ukraine to cut down on its economic ties with Russia. That pressure continued as Indian oil imports spiked. But by the second year of the war, the tone began to shift on the imports of India, the world's most populous nation. It appeared that India had convinced its American and European allies that its expanded purchase of cheap Russian oil — at a price cap imposed by the European Union and Group of 7 — was good for keeping global oil prices in check. Early last year, senior officials at the U.S. Treasury Department visiting New Delhi said India was working within a formula that was proving effective: Keep Russian oil flowing into the global supply but at a cheap enough price that it would shrink Russia's revenue. 'They bought Russian oil because we wanted somebody to buy Russian oil at a price cap; that was not a violation,' Eric Garcetti, then the U.S. ambassador to New Delhi, said last year. 'It was the design of the policy.'


Hamilton Spectator
31 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
3 people die in overnight Ukrainian drone strikes on Russia
Ukrainian drone attacks overnight into Saturday killed three people, Russian officials said Saturday. Russia's Defense Ministry said air defenses intercepted or destroyed 112 drones across eight Russian regions and the Russian-occupied Crimean Peninsula. A drone attack on the Rostov region, on the border with Ukraine, killed one person, acting governor Yuri Slyusar said. Further from the front line, a woman was killed and two other people wounded in a drone strike on business premises in the Penza region, according to regional governor Oleg Melnichenko. In the Samara region, falling drone debris sparked a fire that killed an elderly resident, regional Gov. Vyacheslav Fedorishchev said. According to the Ukrainian air force, Russia launched 53 drones and decoys at Ukraine overnight into Saturday. It said that air defenses shot down or jammed 45 drones. Eleven people were wounded in an overnight drone strike on the Kharkiv region, Gov. Oleh Syniehubov said Saturday. The reciprocal drone strikes followed a day of mourning in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv on Friday, after a Russian drone and missile attack killed 31 people, including five children, and wounded over 150. The continued attacks come after U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday gave Russian President Vladimir Putin a shorter deadline — Aug. 8 — for peace efforts to make progress . Trump said Thursday that special envoy Steve Witkoff is heading to Russia to push Moscow to agree to a ceasefire in its war with Ukraine and has threatened new economic sanctions if progress is not made. ___ Follow AP's coverage of the war in Ukraine at Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Cambodia to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize for role in ending country's conflict with Thailand
Cambodia will nominate President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize after he helped the country reach a ceasefire agreement to end its border conflict with Thailand. Sun Chanthol, Cambodia's deputy prime minister, thanked Trump for bringing peace to the region while speaking to reporters earlier Friday in the country's capital of Phnom Penh. Chanthol said the American president deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, the highest-profile international award given to a person or organization for doing the most to "advance fellowship between nations." "We acknowledge his great efforts for peace," Chanthol said. THAILAND, CAMBODIA REACH CEASEFIRE DEAL TO END CONFLICT THAT DISPLACED 260k, TRUMP SAYS Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said last month he had nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize and Pakistani officials said in June they would recommend him for the award for his role in helping to end its conflict with India. Read On The Fox News App Trump urged a ceasefire last week when he spoke to the leaders of Cambodia and Thailand and threatened that the U.S. would not get back to the "trading table" with the Southeast Asian countries until the fighting stops. A ceasefire was negotiated in Malaysia on Monday, ending the heaviest conflict between the two countries in over a decade. "Numerous people were killed and I was dealing with two countries that we get along with very well, very different countries from certain standpoints. They've been fighting for 500 years intermittently. And, we solved that war ... we solved it through trade," Trump told reporters during his recent trip to Scotland. Trump Calls For Immediate Ceasefire Between Cambodia And Thailand Amid Escalating Violence Following news of the ceasefire, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote on X that Trump's direct involvement led to the truce. "President Trump made this happen. Give him the Nobel Peace Prize!," she said. The fighting began last week after a land mine explosion along the border wounded five Thai soldiers. Each side blamed the other for starting the clashes, which lasted five days. At least 43 people were killed and more than 300,000 people were displaced on both sides of the border. "I said, 'I don't want to trade with anybody that's killing each other,'" Trump continued while in Scotland. "So we just got that one solved. And I'm going to call the two prime ministers who I got along with very, very well and speak to them right after this meeting and congratulate them. But it was an honor to be involved in that. That was going to be a very nasty war. Those wars have been very, very nasty." Chanthol, who also serves as Cambodia's top trade negotiator, said his country was also grateful to Trump for a reduced tariff rate of 19%. The Trump administration had initially threatened a tariff of 49% before later reducing it to 36%, a level that would have decimated Cambodia's vital garment and footwear sector, Chanthol told Reuters. Reuters contributed to this article source: Cambodia to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize for role in ending country's conflict with Thailand Solve the daily Crossword