Prof. Paul began by laying out the theoretical framework for understanding enduring conflicts in the world. These were military disputes that had lasted over a twenty year period at least. The other term to describe such conflicts was “protracted conflict” but the latter also covered intra-state and societal conflicts, whereas enduring conflicts took on the meaning of exclusively-inter-state conflicts.

South Asia has always been considered an area of enduring conflict between India and Pakistan. However, it has never been systematically studied. Developing the concept of “truncated symmetry”, Prof. Paul noted that the conflict between the two South Asian countries, while an enduring one, differs from other such conflicts because it was also one between unequal powers and asymmetric in nature. One of the reasons why this asymmetric conflict has endured is because the big powers – the United States and China – have propped up the weaker Pakistani state, in terms of financial and military aid or nuclear weapons technology.  India has been unable to integrate Kashmir into the national mainstream, allowing Pakistan to follow a policy of irredentism in its approach towards Kashmir. The speaker felt that the India-China dispute could be solved more easily than the Kashmir dispute, since there were no elements of irredentism involved. 

In a short war, the weaker party, in this case, Pakistan has some advantages. Kashmir’s terrain requires India to achieve over 20 to 1 superiority in places to hold its ground. In a longer war, India would definitely prevail, but wars in the subcontinent have always been of short duration as the big powers have stepped in. Both the United States and China have used Pakistan in their geopolitical calculations. This has made India and Pakistan “co-equals”, allowing Pakistan to maintain parity with India, which has also allowed Pakistan to pursue a strategy in which crisis begets crisis. Each time it loses a conflict it comes back and tries harder to win.

What were the reasons for the peace initiatives between India and Pakistan? Prof. Paul took a long term view. He began with the idea that political shocks such as the end of the Cold War had a role to play and the events since 9/11 have had an impact in the case of the peace talks. There has been a change in the American perceptions’ issue of India and Pakistan as “co-equals”. China too has altered its policies to allay its anxieties about a closer relationship between India and the US.

Neither nation has been able to achieve a decisive victory in their conflict. In addition, the two countries have been “exhausted” by the enduring conflict. India’s potential has been checked by its conflict with Pakistan But economic changes have occurred over the recent years allowing the Indian economy to grow still faster than the Pakistani economy.

The prospects for enduring peace depend on whether Gen. Musharraf continues to remain in power and whether there are enough stakeholders in Pakistan and India to promote in a relationship geared towards peace. The Kashmir problem would continue to defy solution unless substantial creative thinking is employed.

Discussion

• Though India has successfully overcome some constraints, Pakistan remains an irritant for India.

• Theory of enduring peace is not a mega theory but is meant to create some amount of understanding in terms of permanent values.

• War as a continuation of policy is a redundant theory. The core issue in Pakistan now is the economy. Great hope is pinned on the SAFTA.

• Wars are not out. Countries like the United States and Australia are spending a lot on defence.

• Civil societies are going to dominate nations. People to people contacts will lead towards enduring peace.

• There are asymmetric relations rife between India and Pakistan.

• Several imponderable factors exist within Indo-Pakistan relations. First, the future of Musharraf is uncertain. Second, what is going to happen after the elections in India? Third, apart from proliferating nuclear technology, what else has Pakistan exported to the international community? Finally, enduring peace is essential to implement CBMs. Do India and Pakistan trust each other enough to proceed on this path?

• Enduring peace has variable factors. In Pakistan, there are variables that are non-variable i.e. factors that will not change. What are the prospects then of enduring peace?

• Pakistan does not exist on the strategic frontiers of the United States. Pakistan is only a tactical requirement for the United States.

• International situation has changed after 9/11. The most important external change is the difference in the perceptions of US and China towards Pakistan. There has been a distinct shift in their earlier sympathetic attitude, which is a major change.

• The situation in South Asia is different. Today we have a confident India able to play a larger role internationally. This will generate new and more potential pathways for stabilizing relations between India and Pakistan.