07-05-2025
Can nuclear powers India and Pakistan ease tensions?
You're reading the Prompt 2025 newsletter. Sign up to get it in your inbox.
On Wednesday morning, India launched strikes against Pakistan in retaliation for an earlier terrorist attack in India-administered Kashmir — an attack Pakistan denies it had anything to do with. The two nuclear powers have long fought over control of Kashmir, but these are the first skirmishes between them in six years. Can India and Pakistan quash tensions before more violence erupts? I'm joined by my Post colleagues Rana Ayyub and Max Boot to discuss.
💬 💬 💬
Damir Marusic So, we all knew India would eventually hit Pakistan after the terrorist attacks in Pahalgam. Now, they have. How worried are the two of you that this will spiral further?
Max Boot Only moderately worried. Leaders in both Islamabad and New Delhi are nationalistic, but they are not suicidal. Neither side wants to spark a nuclear war. Since 1945, nuclear weapons have been a force for strategic stability; that's a big reason why World War III never broke out between the United States and the U.S.S.R., and why India and Pakistan have not fought a major war since both countries acquired nuclear weapons. This crisis will certainly test the logic of deterrence, but I don't expect it to break down. 🤞
Rana Ayyub I see a predictable pattern here: provocation, retaliation, international concern, then de-escalation without any resolution. And both countries will play to their domestic constituencies. Unfortunately, we continue to be hostage to our history and the legacy of partition.
Story continues below advertisement
Advertisement
Damir Regarding domestic constituencies, that's what seems like the big unknown. The Pahalgam attacks fueled an astounding level of anti-Muslim sentiment on Indian social media. Do you think India's response has satisfied these passions?
Rana Any terror attack in India fuels anti-Muslim rhetoric and attacks, especially against Kashmiri students.
Max I am hopeful that India's strikes have satisfied Indian public opinion, and that the Pakistani response (there are claims of Indian jets being shot down, and France confirmed to CNN that at least one Rafale jet had been lost) will satisfy Pakistani opinion, so we can all move on.
Rana But we should not forget that the collateral damage in the fight between India and Pakistan has been the ordinary Kashmiri, whose voices often go unheard in this fog of war.
Damir The strikes that hit Punjab in Pakistan proper (not Pakistan-controlled Kashmir) were the first since the 1971 war. And though they were reportedly targeting the headquarters of Islamist terror groups, they demolished mosques. Alongside reports of several dead children, opinion in Pakistan is now likely to be also inflamed. Will authorities be able to contain it there?
Rana I have seen several conflicting statements from the Pakistani establishment. The prime minister has claimed that civilians were being targeted, which is partly true. But the chief of the Pakistani militant group Jaish has said that they have lost 12 members. So, India is citing that statement to say that it was precise, not civilian, targeting.
Max Public opinion is certainly important, but Pakistani policy is effectively determined by the army, not by elected politicians. The army wants to maintain its public standing as a defender of Pakistan, which justifies its de facto control of the state. Presumably, Gen. Asim Munir, the Pakistani army chief of staff, is less likely to cater to public opinion than Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. But who knows?
Story continues below advertisement
Advertisement
Rana Munir made several hawkish statements regarding Kashmir just before the Pahalgam attack, invoking the 'two-nation' theory. He was extremely unpopular in Pakistan and now will use this opportunity to redeem himself.
Damir Yes, I understand Munir's standing has only gone up since this crisis kicked off.
Max Which is what you would expect: In most nations, the army's standing goes up in wartime, at least initially. But I doubt Munir wants to be the one responsible for kicking off a nuclear conflict.
Damir Let me ask a different question: How would you rate the Trump administration's diplomatic efforts? It appears Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been working the phones. Given how far the United States has drifted away from Pakistan and toward India, just how much influence does the U.S. even have at this point?
Max I do worry that the administration is trying to do too many things at once. President Donald Trump is dealing with a million other subjects (including peacemaking with Russia and Ukraine, nuclear negotiations with Iran, and trade talks with the entire world). Even Rubio now has 4 different jobs (including serving as archivist of the United States!). This is the kind of crisis that rewards focused diplomacy on the part of the U.S., but I question how much focus the administration can bring to this crisis.
Rana Speaking of Trump, can someone please fact-check him about India-Pakistan history? He has been calling it a 1,500-year-old fight.
Max The good news is that the U.S. is far from the only country that has a stake in limiting this conflict. China and Saudi Arabia, among others, also have a useful role to play. And China has more leverage with Pakistan these days than Washington does.
Rana Yes, China has been explicit in its support of Pakistan. And Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been meeting leaders of the gulf countries and has managed to garner support.
Story continues below advertisement
Advertisement
Max This could be an opportunity for Beijing and Washington to work together to limit the risk of escalation in the India-Pakistan conflict. If so, that would represent a rare area of common ground in the midst of the trade war started by Trump.
Rana One aspect that troubled me: No questions asked of the Modi government post-Pahalgam attack over security lapses and intelligence failure in the most militarized zone in the world. I have reported long enough to see the Manmohan Singh government hauled over the coals for similar attacks.
Damir Very good point. Final question: Is there a path forward to a less dangerous dynamic between these nuclear powers?
Max It would be wonderful if this crisis, once the present passions cool a bit, would lead both India and Pakistan to think about how to de-escalate future conflicts and enhance communication between their two militaries. More ambitious would be if this crisis led to a diplomatic process to resolve the competing claims over Kashmir. (Can Trump add this to Steve Witkoff's ever-expanding portfolio?!?)
Rana Unfortunately, like I said in the beginning, this pattern of escalation and de-escalation is likely to continue. We can try our best to be global powers, but our unresolved history will keep getting in the way.
