Her image and her on the brink of war is at the same time alarming but also familiar. However, the last two weeks have shown that the relations between the two nuclear forces, which have been involved three times since their independence in 1947, are becoming increasingly unstable and dangerous.
Fire exchanges along the de facto control line are increasing and causing victims between civilians – claimed by the two countries, but also in Tzamos, which belongs to the same administrative district as Indian cashmere and the neighboring Indian state of Punjab.
Weakened Pakistan
According to military analysts, Pakistan could not withstand a complete war clash today because it is in a “decline”, as the Economist comments. In general, in recent years, Pakistan has been facing the worst security crisis for decades, with an increase in Islamic terrorism on the border with Afghanistan and secessionist uprisings in the southwestern province of Baluchistan.
In crisis the government
Pakistan is also in a deep economic crisis, with the government of Coalition of Prime Minister Sebaz Sariff to be widely weak and unprofessional, resulting in manipulated by the army, led by General Asim Munir, a rigorous religious officer. In addition, Pakistan allows or tolerates terrorist organizations within its borders, such as Laskar-I-Taiba, which is considered to be responsible for the attack on Indian Kashmir on April 22 during which 26 Indian tourists were killed, sparking the present crisis between the two countries.
In the rise the India
India, on the other hand, flourishes: its GDP is now ten times larger than neighboring Pakistan. In addition, it has a military advantage with more and more modern military equipment, while Pakistan has a smaller and more flexible military force that mainly focuses on defense.
The historical precedent of the two countries, in terms of their long -standing controversy over Kashmir, is also considered to play a role. The three previous wars (1947, 1965 and 1999) were tragically bloody, with the latter costing life in more than a thousand Pakistani soldiers. Since then, rebel groups have continued violence against Indian forces in Indian cashmere, with tens of thousands of victims, while in 2019 India launched air strikes against Pakistan, accusing him of a trapped car. However, none of these conflicts evolved into a total war.
The role of General Munir
But there are a few indications that the present tension is likely to have a more tragic outcome. In Pakistan, where the army is increasingly a central role in politics, General Munir states that Islamabad will pay back any Indian challenge with even greater power, even describing Indian attacks as a “act of war”. With the Sharif government weakened, the decision to respond to the Indian missile blows on Wednesday (7/5) – in nine Pakistani sites, which Delhi considers to be related to the April 22 terrorist attack on Kashmir – is in the hands of Munis, who is essentially in his hands and is in his hands. Kashmir.
“The problem is that General Munir is not a strategic thinker. It is impulsive, reckless and deeply nationalist, “political scientist Ayssa Sidika told the Guardian.
It is noted that the Pakistani Armed Forces consider Indian missile bumps last Wednesday at at least three targets in the Puudzab Pakistani province as an immediate challenge, as it is the political base of the Sarif family and the military center of Pakistan.
In India, the military operation against Pakistan has widely supported political support, including the opposition Congress party. Narendra Monty’s government has been weakened by the 2024 elections and its aggressive stance is considered by many analysts an effort to strengthen the prime minister’s popularity through the Hindu -patriotic narrative.
The absence of the US
The biggest concern is the absence of the US as a neutral mediator. In the past, Washington played a crucial role in preventing large -scale conflict between the two countries. “The crisis between India and Pakistan is precisely the kind of international emergency that would have once caused a complete diplomatic mobilization of the US, with the aim of calming the spirits and preventing a wider war,” CNN noted.
However, President Donald Trump initially reacted passively to the conflict, commenting that he is “a shame”. He then went a little further, offering his mediation, but without much enthusiasm to actually get involved: “I’m doing well with both, I know them very well and I want to solve it,” he said. “I just hope they stop. If I can help in some way, I’ll be there. ” So far, however, there is no indication of an immediate American effort to coordinate some kind of international mediation or crisis management. “Perhaps for the first time the two countries will find themselves in this crisis,” the Guardian commented.
At the same time, today’s global geopolitical conditions favor the unpredictable tensions. “In the last three years, the idea that countries are not driven to war has
disappeared. It is now a daily reality and this has expanded the horizons of aggressive strategic designers to sensitive places around the world, ”wrote Dr. Samir Pouri from London’s think tank Chatham House.
