Undoubtedly, Pakistan’s soft stand in response to Indian aggression has cooled the week-long tensions between two neighbouring countries, but their nuclear arsenals mean unthinkable consequences are always possible.
According to New York Times, the tensions have reduced between India and Pakistan after serious engagement of forces at the border, but without international pressure, a long-term solution is unlikely, and the threat of nuclear war remains.
The Newspaper in its editorial says that the situation could have easily escalated, but Prime Minister Imran Khan returned the pilot to India, in what was seen as a good-will gesture, called for talks and promised an investigation into the bombing.
It added that India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, is waging a tough re-election campaign in which he has used anti-Pakistan talk to fuel Hindu nationalism.
It was also mentioned that the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations aggressively worked to ensure that India-Pakistan confrontations in 1999, 2002 and 2008 did not spiral out of control, the Trump administration has done little but issue a few statements urging restraint, the newspaper reported, adding that it’s hard to see a role as a mediator for Trump, who has shifted the United States more firmly against Pakistan and toward India, where he has pursued business interests.
While citing the United Nations and other groups, it was reported that in the widespread human rights abuses in Indian occupied Kashmir simply spawn more aggressive elements, adding that it’s good when India and Pakistan decide to walk back from the brink, as they seem to be doing now, the United States should be ready to assist if they cannot.
A solution to a conflict that touches so many religious and nationalist nerves must ultimately come from within, through talks among India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir.
The report says that the two countries have crossed into dangerous territory, with India attacking Pakistan and engaging in aerial duels. The next confrontation, or the one after that, could be far more unthinkable.