Recent clashes with air raids, missiles and drones between India And Pakistan They are bringing attention to this area of the world, in a particularly complex context from a geopolitical point of view with already two warnings of war lit with the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The concern is that the current clashes can give rise to a third outbreak Potentially able to intervene in the already delicate world geopolitical balances, also in light of the fact that both countries have nuclear arsenals. To help us frame the crisis between India and Pakistan in the general picture and to understand what the actual risks of an escalation could be interviewed Matteo Miavaldi And Francesca Marinojournalists respectively for The manifesto And LIMES, Both geopolitics experts in India and Southern Asia.
How much is an escalation currently considered likely?
Matteo Miavaldi: The military establishment and the Pakistan political administration has moved promises of war saying that every drop of Pachistano blood paid will be avenged. But how it will be avenged, when it will be avenged and how much it is to be seen. At this point I believe that for Pakistan it has become a question of pride: the state and the Pachistano army feel compelled to demonstrate to their population that there is a government that protects them. The same is true for India, as the Indian attack took place after the terrorist attack of April 22 in Kashmir, so in some ways India has already shown to the Indian population that there is a strong government that defends it. Pakistan, on the other hand, has yet to do it.
In case of war how would geopolitical balance change?
Matteo Miavaldi: Question from one million dollars. A war like those we are witnessing in Ukraine does not seem to me a very likely scenario, because the difference in strength between the two countries is enormous. India has the second largest army in the world after the Chinese one, in the modernization phase but very very capable; Pakistan, on the other hand, has many economic difficulties that also fall on the war potential of the country. In all this the two great international players must be kept in the eye, i.e. the United States (who are trying to report India and Pakistan on the way of dialogue and to obtain a de-Escalation through the State Department), but above all the China as a regional opponent of India and ally strongly of Pakistan. The Asian giant invited India and Pakistan to a de-Escalation with a press release, but underlining that the sovereignty of Pakistan must be maintained integral. This could be interpreted as a message for India like “There is a red line that you do not have to overtake and if you overtake it, we are there”, and it could probably contain the level of escalation to which India can aspire to.
How does this conflict arise compared to the outbreaks already on in Ukraine and the Middle East?
Matteo Miavaldi: As for the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the similarities are rather scarne. As for the Middle East, however, in my opinion it is interesting to note a similarity regarding the method. India has basically fired a series of missiles and bombs very within the Pachistano territory (because objectives in Punjab have also been affected) on the basis of the accusation that India has made to Pakistan that they are responsible for the terrorist attack on April 22. The accusation was moved without the slightest test, so much so that Pakistan rejected it by proposing to open an independent commission of investigation. India instead is said to be sure of the responsibility by Pakistan and has bombed the objectives that India describes as terrorist, in the case training camps. But that Pakistan describes as civil objectives. Here there is a similarity with what Israel did by starting to bomb Gaza, claiming that the objectives of the attacks were places where the terrorists were hidden. This sort of “previous” could having made it believe to India that he could act similarly without fearing great repercussions by the international community.
The nuclear risk is concrete or can the arsenals of the two countries work as deterrent?
Francesca Marino: I don’t see the nuclear risk as a concrete scenario. But it is possible that the situation can degenerate. Nuclear arsenals can certainly act as deterrent, but it is not so much the concrete possibility of the use of nuclear devices: both the parties would know that nuclear could represent the end of both countries. To worry is above all the risk that the situation degenesi, for example if the Pachistani should attack stations in the Indian city: in that case the consequences could be important.
