What caused the Indo-Pakistan protracted conflict / what were the consequences of the Indo-Pakistan conflict?

Nuclearisation of conflict is one of the factors that sustained the Indo-pakistan conflict as it raised tensions and created deep hostility between Pakistan and India. Following Pakistan’s defeat to India in the Bangladeshi War of 1971, Pakistan was determined to establish its own nuclear weapons programme due to its strategic vulnerability and long-held animosities towards India and this was accelerated when India conducted its first nuclear detonation in 1974. Although India later declared a moratorium on nuclear testing after the first nuclear testing that lasted for 24 years, it was broken in 1998 with the rise of Hindu hardliners party, Bharatiya Janata (BJP). Casting the Pakistani-supported insurgencies in Kashmir as a crisis of national security, military expenditure was increased with the resumption of nuclear weapon testing such as Pokhran-ll and Kirana-l. Provocative statements such as India adopting a “pro-active” policy in Kashmir to crush insurgencies were also directed at Pakistan as a warning to stop its military campaign against India. In retaliation to India’s moves, Pakistan was convinced that India would launch a preemptive strike to capture Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir and hence directed its resources to nuclear testing of Chagai-l and ll despite the threat of sanctions from the international community. The prospect of a nuclear exchange was then escalated onto a new level as seen in Kargil conflict of 1999 where Pakistan believed that the only way to claim back Kashmir was through force. Hence, nuclearisation of the conflict had escalated tensions and fear between both countries since nuclear weapons have potentially large-scale destructive effects, and the unwillingness of both parties to back down or compromise protracted and intensified the conflict through mutual aggressiveness in the nuclear arms race.

The rise of Kashmiri’s Nationalism prolonged the conflict as it led to greater disagreements and dissent between India and Pakistan as Pakistan supported the Kashmiri secessionist movements. Over the years, the India government had tried to integrate Pan-Indianism into Kashmir despite the fact that Kashmiris had their own unique Kashmiriyat identity, which eroded the special status assured to the Kashmiris under article 370 of the Indian constitution. This was coupled with widening economic gaps between the Kashmiri Hindus and Muslims such that 90% of the jobs in lucrative sectors like banking, insurance and telecommunications were given to the Hindu minority while the few Muslims employed by the government suffered blatant discrimination. Thus, it resulted in massive discontentment towards the Indian government and these feelings of alienation were felt especially by the educated Kashmiri youth. The secession movements finally emerged when the Congress Party- National Conference Alliance blatantly rigged the election to deny the Muslim United Front from an expected victory, causing deeper disillusionment among the Kashmir Muslims that Kashmir would never have a place in Hindu-dominated India. These movements by Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front and Hibzul-Mujahideen were supported by Pakistani military’s inter services intelligence who provided covert military trainings and weapons due to their belief that it was a part of a greater Jihad against India, which resulted in worsening of relations between India and Pakistan as India blames Pakistan aiding in Kashmiri secession movements to threaten India’s sovereignty hence the protracted conflict as tensions rose.

Cross border terrorism prolonged the conflict as it created instability in India who blamed Pakistan for it. By 1992, after the emergence of strong pro-Pakistan secessionist groups such as the Hizbul Mujahideen, Pakistan further supported Kashmiri insurgents and veteran guerrillas of the Afghan war with large quantities of sophisticated weapons, such as Stinger antiaircraft missiles and automatic rifles which US had left behind to infiltrate into Kashmir and carry out the jihad against India with the aid of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence. This was seen by the rise of insurgencies in India such as insurgents attacks on Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly in 2001, Sangrampora massacre in 1997 and Wandhama massacre in 1998 in which data had revealed that Pakistan was the main culprit for the terror attacks. This had resulted in insecurity in India due to frequent terrorist attacks which mostly came from the 70 militant camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, hence prolonging the conflict as India condemned these attacks and thus would not be open for diplomatic talks if Pakistan continued support for these insurgencies which threatened India’s sovereignty.

The protracted nature of Indo-Pakistan conflict is due to the impact of fundamentalist militancy such as the succession of JKLF ( Kashmir Liberation Front) , Hiz-bul-Mujahideen and rise of Hindu hardliners. These fundamentalist militancy had resulted in extreme views and actions taken by both parties such that there was no room for compromising or negotiation, resulting in escalating tensions that prolonged the conflict. In India, the rise of Hindu hardliners, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had emphasized that the Pakistan supported insurgency in Kashmir was a crisis of national security, hence developing a “pro-active” stance in dealing with insurgencies. Hindu nationalist ideology was also promoted through reshaping of school curriculum with the assertion by right wing fundamentalist groups that those not loyal to India should leave Kashmir. Hindu militants also destroyed the Babri Masjrd Mosque in 1992. All these highlighted the hard stance of the fundamentalist militancy in India. Whereas in Kashmir, the JKLF had wanted a sovereign, democratic Kashmir with elements of Islam culture while the Hiz-bul-Mujahideen and the All Party Hurriyat Conference pointed that Kashmir should be muslim-controlled. Hence, secessionist movements took place by infiltrating the line of control against the India-occupied-Kashmir with the help of fundamentalists from Pakistan. Therefore, the impact of fundamentalist militancy had resulted in mutual hostility and increased tensions without room for compromise, prolonging the confict.
Pakistan’s irredentism versus India’s anti-irredentism
The conflicting views over legal agreements has contributed to the protracted conflict as both India and Pakistan are unable to come to terms over issues such as Kashmir, which intensified the situation and made relations worse. Over the years, India and Pakistan had conflicting views over legal agreements. India opposed the Security Council resolutions to have plebiscite in Kashmir because it argued that the Instrument of Accession was a legally binding document, that Kashmir had already given consent to their accession to India by participating in state and national elections. As for Pakistan, it opposed the Instrument of Accession as it claimed that the document was fraudulent, that the Maharaja signed the instrument under duress and it did not represent the will of the Kashmiris. Pakistan also opposed to the 1972 Simla Agreement because it was argued that it was signed in the wake of Pakistan’s military defeat and political turmoil while it does not supersede the UN resolutions and UN responsibility. Similarly, Pakistani military opposed the Lahore Declaration because it referred to fulfillment of the Simla agreement, which Pakistanis greatly opposed to cooperate with India through diplomacy. As such, both parties are unable to reach mutually agreeable terms as both had interpreted events to safeguard their own interests, hence prolonging the Indo-Pakistan conflict.