By Ranjan Solomon
In the aftermath of the Pahalgam attack, the BJP resorted to the tactic of turning on the screws on Pakistan. Not just within the country, but around the world.
In divergence with Pakistan’s call for a credible and independent investigation of what happened in Pahalgam, India stubbornly dismissed the proposal claiming they had accumulated tangible evidence of their own. The world seems to differ with the Indian retaliation of the attack on innocent civilian tourists, the sabre-rattling of the military and the government’s diplomatic onslaught for want of public evidence.
It is ambiguous as to who brought an end to the war. There are queries and doubts in the minds of the people as well as in the political opposition in Parliament. They want explanations to the multiple doubts that have. But the government is holding off a parliamentary debate. This runs counter to the essentials of parliamentary practices. It remains the one and only political space where the government can be interrogated and facts must be revealed. The hesitation of the government will only add doubts in the minds of the people as to the hasty commencement of the battle. And, its equally hurried conclusion.
Subramaniam Swamy, the nonconformist politician, quite confidently declared that India had lost five aircraft. He would not bluff. He gave the government no credit for its handling of the war. There are no verified details about lives lost in combat and of innocents in the areas where the fighting took place. China stepped in and provided Pakistan with highly sophisticated aircrafts and qualified pilots. Some reports that the Rafael’s performance was so poor that they could easily be brought down by Pakistan. Reports that IAF pilots refused to make combat incursions into Pakistan are rife. Indo-French ties have hit a low because their fighter crafts have not fulfilled the requirements of the war. These details are what the Opposition is asking for. The people too. For the first time, even Arnab Goswami can be quoted: “The nation wants to know”!
At the end of the day, the multiple delegations that travelled to 4-5 countries each did not get too much traction in the countries they travelled to either. At best they got to dialogue with not-so-senior officials whose capacity to influence policy was not much to write home about. The results turned out to be a diplomatic blank, regardless how the Godi media may choose to project it. The lack of enthusiasm from the international community to India’s delegation that went overseas to establish as the perpetrator of terror has been generally met with a question mark. This must rush Foreign Ministry officials back to the drawing table to reset Indo-Pak relations.
The conflict over Kashmir has roots that date back to 1947 when India and Pakistan gained independence, and the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was divided between them. Since then, there have been multiple wars and skirmishes, including the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947. Various attempts at mediation have been made, including the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), but no lasting resolution has been achieved. The Dixon plan, proposed in 1950, suggested a limited plebiscite in the Kashmir Valley, but it was rejected by India. Today, the situation remains tense, with both countries maintaining their claims over the region. The question the world is asking is ‘Why’ after 77 years has neither country found a resolution to a conflict which is bleeding people and the economies of both countries.
Indian designs to get Pakistan designated as ‘terror-state” has suffered a setback as the net result. And, with Pakistan as current Chair of the UN Security Council, there is almost nil possibility for this to happen. To make things worse, India has not been invited to the G-7 meeting to be held in Canada which they would have wanted to use to build their case. Canada is already battling tensions with India over alleged attacks on Canadian territory by Indian agents against suspected Khalistani militants. So, the terror talk is gathering no real momentum. Plus, India has internationalized Kashmir contradicting a long-held principle that it was a bilateral issue and no second country would be allowed any say in the resolution of tensions.
In the recent war following the Pahalgama attacks on civilian tourists, both India and Pakistan are claiming victory. There are those who assert poor tactics may have lost India the war. Or, at the least, an emphatic victory. The quick cease-fire leaves the clouds of misgiving.
India also lost the diplomatic onslaught. It’s hard to imagine that anyone can win a military conflagration especially between two nuclear adversaries without a global catastrophe. Equally hard to imagine that a diplomatic offensive can bring the global community to come to a verdict based on small delegations most of whom did not count as heavy weights in national or international politics. BJP-led States have briefed their CMs to convey to people that the fighting was withdrawn only because Pakistan begged for mercy. The more the BJP at the Centre says about the war, the more people wonder what really happened during the war and what/who stopped it. Trump claims to be the peacemaker. The Foreign Minister admits there were conversations between the top political leaders in the USA with Pakistan and India. They stop short at telling the people of India what exactly happened during these talks. They will claim that these are matters of national security and are secrets that cannot be out in the public arena. The people are not asking for military details. They claim knowledge facts about why the war was declared in an instant and withdrawn in much the same fashion. People are wondering if the political decisions were right.
The futile cycle of war between Indians and Pakistanis last month is a stark reminder of the devastating consequences of unchecked nationalism and militarism. For decades, both nations have been embroiled in a bitter rivalry, with tensions simmering just below the surface. The endless quest for dominance has only led to bloodshed, displacement, and economic stagnation. Meanwhile, millions of citizens on both sides of the border struggle to access basic necessities like food, clean water, and healthcare. It’s nothing short of tragic that the resources devoted to military build-ups and cross-border skirmishes could instead be channelled towards creating jobs, stimulating economic growth, and lifting people out of poverty. By replacing guns with industrial production and services, socially useful products, jobs, and development, Indian and Pakistani leaders can forge a new path, one that prioritizes the well-being and dignity of their citizens, and paves the way for a brighter, more prosperous future for generations to come.
The media, wherever controlled by corporate interests, has turned propagandist leaving little or no space for people to think about an end to war and an era of peace. In point of fact, they continually sow seeds of hate. They simply cannot see that we are part of a common humanity on both sides and where people deserve to live without disruption to normal lives. In fact, post-Pahalgam, one wonders if the children of these anchors, or senior political leaders would join the ‘Agniveers’ and go to the frontlines to fight. Pakistan’s successful diplomatic energies have yielded significant gains, including substantial aid announcements and relaxed visa regimes. Conversely, India’s objective of isolating Pakistan as a sponsor of terror has not been achieved.
Moreover, the Military-Industrial-Complex everywhere in the world has its interests. These merchants of misery prompt and spread hate and create conflict through agents of treachery. Independent-minded citizens, and Peoples Movements must find ways to combat the evil of armaments industry and rein them in. The day war ceases to be projected as a heroic thing, the peace industry would evolve as a dominant influence in social and political life, discarding the greed and cruelty with which horrid profits made by the arms manufacturers. The end-goal must always remain to win the peace and plough the agricultural fields with tractors and viable equipment. Our production capacities must be put to use in a way that peoples essential needs are met.
Following the war, Pakistan has sent out a delegation to enlighten the world about the facts and politics of India’s decision to hold in abeyance the Indus Water treaties. Their teams are explaining to the world the drastic consequences such a move will have millions of farmers and people dependent on those waters. China’s implicit threat to link the Indus Water Treaty with the Brahmaputra waters adds a new layer of complexity to India’s already delicate relationship with China.
Pakistan has also been successful in building alliances and securing support from key nations, including China, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. By contrast, despite its growing economic stature, India’s global influence remains limited, making it challenging to sway international opinion against Pakistan. Pakistan’s participation in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its strategic partnerships with other nations have enhanced its economic importance, making it harder for India to isolate it diplomatically.
Russia’s significant aid commitment of 2.6 billion dollars to Pakistan will likely bolster Pakistan’s economy and enhance its international influence. The involvement of IMF and World Bank support indicates a growing international confidence in Pakistan’s economic prospects. It is also a huge blow to India because India is a big part of the BRICS group of nations. The US has expressed its unhappiness at the BRICS intentions which include de-dollarization. Prime Minister has rationalized this by assuring Trump that the day when de-dollarization happens is a long way off. It leaves India neither her nor there. The US needs India but can afford to spill India if they don’t get exactly what they wish to extract from it.
These developments suggest that India’s diplomatic efforts are facing significant headwinds. The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on May 9 decided to allow for “an immediate disbursement” of $1 billion (around Rs 8,500 crore) to Pakistan. Additionally, Pakistan has also received funding from other multilateral institutions including the World Bank and the IMF. And, these are not pennies. Pakistan’s request from the World Bank was 20 billion. The World Bank is set to provide Pakistan with a $20 billion aid package, a 10-year program focused on various development goals, including addressing climate resilience, child stunting, and learning poverty. This package, approved by the World Bank, is part of a broader strategy to support Pakistan’s economic recovery and public sector reforms. While the US has historically been a major donor to Pakistan, the current situation suggests a shift towards multilateral funding agencies like the World Bank. The World Bank is set to provide Pakistan with a $40 billion aid package, a 10-year program focused on various development goals, including addressing climate resilience, child stunting, and learning poverty. This package, approved by the World Bank, is part of a broader strategy to support Pakistan’s economic recovery and public sector reforms. While the US has historically been a major donor to Pakistan, the current situation suggests a shift towards multilateral funding agencies like the World Bank.
India claims to have ascended into arriving at fourth place among the rich nations. This is a misnomer. India is one of the fastest growing economies in the world but also one of the most unequal countries. The richest 1% of Indians control over 40% of the total wealth, while the bottom 50% own only 3%. Poverty and income inequality are significant challenges in Pakistan, with a considerable portion of the population living below the poverty line and a wide gap between the rich and the poor. In 2023-24, the World Bank reported 39.4% of Pakistan’s population living below the lower middle-income poverty line, which is a daily income of US$3.65. The government also stated that 22% of the population lives below the national poverty line.
Poverty remains a significant challenge in Pakistan, with a substantial portion of the population living below the poverty line. Recent data indicates that approximately 40% of the population in Pakistan lives in poverty. Several factors contribute to this situation, including economic instability, high inflation, and the impact of natural disasters like the 2022 floods. High income inequality has created social unrest, conflict, and instability. Poverty rates vary significantly across different provinces and districts, with Balochistan experiencing particularly high rates.
The governments of both India and Pakistan cannot barely afford to invest in the prohibitive financial and human costs of war. The competition to assert superiority must settle. Achieving a lasting peace between India and Pakistan requires a multifaceted approach, focusing on confidence-building measures, diplomatic engagement, and addressing underlying issues. This includes restarting diplomatic channels, exploring areas of cooperation like trade and technology, and working towards a just and peaceful resolution to the Kashmir dispute.
This is a message to those who frame foreign and defence policy in India and Pakistan. With the guns gone silent, a new dawn could break over the Indus, illuminating a future where the shared heritage and resilience of the Indian subcontinent unite two nations in a lasting embrace of peace. With the cessation of hostilities, India and Pakistan could embark on a journey of rediscovery, forging a path paved with mutual understanding, respect, and peace. As the echoes of conflict fade, the timeless spirit of the region awakens, guiding two nations toward a harmonious tomorrow. In a historic turning point, India and Pakistan choose the path of reconciliation, unlocking a brighter future for generations to come. As the silence of peace settles over the region, embracing a future filled with hope, cooperation, and lasting peace.
Ranjan Solomon is a peace activist, human rights defender, and writer
4 Jun 2025
Source: countercurrents.org