Subcontinent on the Boil

[jawaad]

India and Pakistan are displaying a frustratingly childish inability to sort out the Kashmir debate through discussion and agreement. The thing is, these rugrats have got nuclear warheads for playthings. With no less than a million troops lined up face to face on the Indian/Pakistani borders of Kashmir, war seems inevitable. And what's more, the fact that Pakistan has a population of 150 million compared to India's one billion makes it pretty much impossible for them to win...unless they resort to the use of nuclear weaponry. It would cause a level of destruction beside which Hiroshima/Nagasaki pale into insignificance.

So what is the role of the international community - particularly the UN? I think a very dangerous, destabilising precedent would be set if nuclear warfare broke out in the subcontinent, and no doubt Russia would jump in to help their allies India, as would China for their allies Pakistan. The situation has all the makings of a trigger for world war, and needs to be addressed, with the use of sanctions if necessary...or am I just paranoid?

[Flamin'RedJJ]

You're absolutely right- this conflict has all the hallmark traits of the run-up to the First World War, in which a seemingly 'local' conflict in the Balkans sucked in the other major powers across the globe.

However, I am optimistic that, as the stakes are so high, the international community will be more active in trying to resolve this conflict by peaceful means.
I also hope that the Pakistanis would have the sense to realise that they could never 'win' in a doomsday nuclear scenario, having less cities than the Indians, rendering the use of their weapons futile.

What role does Britain, as the subcontinent's former imperial master, have to play in the negotiations?
Can it be seen as helpfully neutral, or is it too much of a Dr Frankenstein equally loathed by the two monsters it has created?

[macca]

another reason why Pakistan can't 'win' is that their nuclear missiles don't reach even half of India (like as a whole, it's from a map in a paper late last year).

[redjames]

India and Pakistan are displaying a frustratingly childish inability to sort out the Kashmir debate through discussion and agreement

Childish to the extent that any kind of nationalism/patriotism is...

...if you don't realise the historical and cultural significance to the Kashmir problem you haven't read enough about it.

So what is the role of the international community - particularly the UN? I think a very dangerous, destabilising precedent would be set if nuclear warfare broke out in the subcontinent

"The West" doesn't care two hoots about two brown countries killing off a few more million men each, and its doubtful that either side would use nuclear weapons.

Except for the fact that it will decrease those countries economic competetiveness and allow some more billion pounds worth of arms sales. Witness as Britain sells India yet more warplanes...

The only intervention would be if the US thought that Musarrif would be destabilised, since they've put so much effort into propping him up.

Don't worry yourself.

[Flamin'RedJJ]

Those 'warplanes' are just trainer jets and won't be ready for a few years yet.

However, I agree with you entirely that it is wrong for any supposedly 'civilised' country to be selling weapons for profit to less economically developed nations who are liable to use it in a major war.
Unfortunately, there will always be somebody willing to sell as long as the demand exists.
I still feel that a permanent embargo should be placed on the arms trade between more developed nations and dangerzones for potential conflict in order to at the very least set an example to the rest of the world as to how nations should feel morally responsible for wars abroad that they have facilitated, if not directly encouraged.