Abstract

The history of Indo-Pakistan relations is miserable and complex. The Pakistan-India relations are the actual problem in emerging a shared South Asian outlook and sense of regional community. The Kashmir Issue still is the basis root and sign of mutual hostility and inflexibility. The period of peace and harmony has mostly been affected by Indian threats, pressures and secret activities towards Pakistan. Three wars on different issues including the issue of Kashmir have already been fought between the South Asian states Pakistan and India but they could not start the happy relationship. The study will consist of a qualitative mode to describe and discuss the nature and history of Indo-Pak relations, from the first day of independence of Pakistan and narrate the Pak-India relations in the context of Peace and security dimensions.

Key Words

Pakistan, India, Relations, Security, Kashmir Issue

Introduction

The partition of United India in August 1947, as the two new states came into existence, is characterized by historical antagonism, distrust and differences rooted back in the centuries-old rivalry on ideological differences between the Hindus and Muslims. The freedom struggle of the All India Muslim League was under the leadership of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, after his announcement of the two-nation theory that since Hindu and Muslim are two different entities, two separate homelands are required (Ahmed, 1996).

Despite the co-existence of Hindus and Muslims together, in the sub-continent for centuries both the nations could not harmonize. Even after partition, both states couldn't exist together peacefully as two sovereign countries (Basrur, 2008) The enmity between Pakistan and India remains one of the most permanent and under-solved clashes of our times right from the creation of Pakistan in 1947, and it has sustained and continued ever since, with the episodic renewal of conflict, crises and wars. The crises have affected each aspect of regional and social relations between the two states Pakistan and India. Despite all peace initiatives, show no signs of abating, and future cooperation (Bose, 2003)

India and Pakistan are considered the nuclear powers of South Asia. Since their nuclear arsenals were tested in 1998 the Kashmir issue and tense relations between the two states have raised international and regional concerns in terms of the nuclear arms race and the possibility of future nuclear confrontation as well as inadvertent nuclear war (Burki, 1999) This is one of the reasons that the Kashmir issue is not only the impediment in the relations between Pakistan and India, but it is also one of the greatest challenges to peace and stability in South Asia (Collins, 2016)

India has constantly shown a hegemonic mentality towards Pakistan and smaller neighbouring states all in all. Pakistan is just a powerful atomic state which has the capacity to address Indian animosity and hostile demeanour. This Indian conduct has put security danger to Pakistan and the whole of South Asia. The examination close by is purposed to be paged upon the assumptions that the Indian hostility strategy has brought security dangers and difficulties to Pakistan and South Asia. South Asian states are under the shadow of dread from the extension plan of India (Davis, 2011) the objectives of the study are to discover the main issues and problems between the two South Asian rivalries, which delayed the peace process between India and Pakistan. To analyze the regional security structure of South Asia with the help of domestic issues between the two states.




The Kashmir

The year 1948 May, saw the principal and main "undeclared war" between; two major states India and Pakistan over the tussle of Kashmir. "Indian forces reached Kashmir within 12 hours of the decision of accession. Our forces resisted the invaders, and the war started in Nov. 1947 and it continued for a year and a half. Round about December we came to know that we were up against the regular forces of the Pakistan army and felt that matter was much bigger than we had imagined that it might very well lead us to a full-scale war with Pakistan (Dixit, 2002) The Kashmir dispute developed from rival nationalist claims at a time when India and Pakistan were asserting their national identity. Suspicion, an escalation in the arms race between the two powers, and the legacy of casualties from each of the three conflicts, in 1947 to 1971 (as well as the more serious border skirmishes), make a solution to the conflict elusive (Yaseen, Jathol & Muzaffar, 2016).

The legacies of conflict are also powerful and symbolic: both sides claim sovereignty over Kashmir either on the basis of the instrument of accession or the majority population (Ganguly, 2001)  To both, it is an issue of national self-determination and resistance to an aggressor (Hamid, 1986) Foreign pressure has not always proved effective. Other than the confrontations between state governments, there are four areas that have the potential to create conflict in South Asia: ethnic, national and sub-national identities; identities reinforced by religion; ideological convictions; and economic-political disputes. These factors have been the source of conflict since 1947 in a number of flashpoints across the region. India and Pakistan have always been on a rough patch since independence (Gupta, 1986)

At the start of 1989, the areas of the majority of Muslims in J&K grew frequently irritated, mainly as an effect of long-lasting native grumbles. In resulting insurgency appealed for help from the armed forces of Pakistan and intellect services. The First of these battles and wars engaged toward a division of the ancient large state that has stayed separated. The LOC distributing Kashmir became the resistance between two major players, signed by repetitive relations of artillery, pistols and minor fire weapons, this the access of objectors through the gap with Pakistani help, the trying of atomic ability by the two countries in 1998, the self-contradictory possessions of aggravating pressures over Kashmir issue and creating creativities to control relations (Das, 2001)

Indo Pak War-1965

The Indus River water dispute has shown its importance with time. In March 1948 India cut off the water supply to Punjab for a few months in order to sustain its own development. The Indus River System is the single major water resource of Pakistan. Punjab's large area was irrigated through the Indus River water that had been affected due to the Indian strategy. "Depending heavily on seasonal rainfall and glacier melt for its average flow, the Indus Basin system is the backbone of the agrarian economy of Pakistan (Husain, 1972)

Indo Pak War-1971

The 1971 war is perhaps the most important and vital war between the two states as a result of this conflict, Pakistan has decayed and East Pakistan emerged as a new state, Bangladesh. Unrest began in East Pakistan following the political, economic and social relations between the two wings of the state. This led slowly to the unrest in the east of Pakistan. The masses in the wing were not satisfied with the policy of the central government and they felt an equal share of the profits and national advantages. General Marshall and General Ayub Khan tried to solve the problem by introducing economic and political measures. The industries have moved in the region and the people in this army have been transferred to civilian and military institutions, but the policy has not succeeded and continued to raise turmoil (Hilali, 2017)

Kargil War-1998

Though both the states of South Asia were not involved in through war for the coming three decades the problem of the atomic issue continued the cause of faith deficit. Atomic competence once more ascended to the top level in 1998, when both states Pakistan and India experienced their nuclear weapons and converted into nuclear states (Wirsing, 1998) This has ready for war additional deadly and critical. Now this time the basic environment of Conflict has reformed between the states and boundary clashes, complete wars stayed and not fought slightly incidental assaults, aggressiveness was in form episodes like, attacks on Parliament, Samjhota Express Blasts in 2006, Mumbai Attacks and Balochistan Insurgency in after 2005, emerged as the new clash points between both states (Zain, 2006)

Discussion

In 1997, an unprecedented personal relationship between Prime Minister I. K. Gujral of India and Nawaz Sharif was established in Pakistan. For the first time a direct line between the prime ministers of the two countries was created after the men's summit in 1997 and the proposal was approved for the bus service between Lahore and New Delhi. However, the Gujral minority government could not survive long and BJP chief Vajpayee was replaced. In May 1998, the Vajpayee government's nuclear tests, which had a negative impact on bilateral relations, led. In a tit-for-tat reaction, Nawaz Sharif gave the orders for nuclear tests to be performed a few days later. This was the first defection was mutual share with a share off (Javaid, 2012)

General Pervez Musharraf -Vajpayee Agra summit in July 2001 failed to break the ice and the situation worsened after the terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament on 13 December 2001. In April-May 2003, there was a thaw in relations followed by a new peace initiative in October 2003 from Vajpayee in the shape of an offer of 12 CBMs. Since then, the peace process has continued, despite being derailed twice for some duration because of the terrorist attacks in 2006 and 2008. After the rounds of tit-for-tat responses adopted by the leadership of India and Pakistan, there is now a growing realization on both sides that "the other" will respond in kind and that they cannot get away with even a minor defection". The military operation in Pakistan Army conducted. India caused this internal turmoil in Pakistan and began to disrupt militant and terrorist elements and played an important role in the increase of the civil war in Pakistan (Khalid, 2012)




Border issues

The border issues between India and Pakistan are always a negotiable extent. The procedure of realizing the borderline is frequently based on a sequence of temporary activities rather than a sudden breaking. The talks about the border differentiation turned around whatever top terms could be safeguarded for both states with it in place, rather than a contestation of in what way the rewards were made in the first phase. Even assuming the many issues by the boundary, as well as the discouraging complications in really striking it, the results made by both countries were to continue with this borderline in some places, purely in practice, but in other places, with forbidding accuracy. The procedure of applying borderline mandatory was certain kinds of agreements with two new governments. Bilateral talks on the physical differentiation of the boundary disclose particular parts of ferocious contestation concluded the safeguarding as far as possible, much, in fact, attention to the range to which the border could really be forced between the numerous border provinces of India and Pakistan. This titled a diversity of attitudes, yet it was steadily decided by the two sides that a bilateral contrivance was compulsory to originate relations. Often 'invisible' borderline could be interpreted in the division and responsibilities. Such collaboration was essential to sustain the de facto concepts of sovereignty (Johnson, 2002)




UN role in South Asia

The conflict in Kashmir has been waiting for a burning issue to be resolved for more than seventy years and is also a serious problem for international forces working for global peace and security (Ashraf, Begum & Jathol, 2016). The United States, meanwhile, has played a unified role within and outside the United Nations to combat a peaceful and just resolution of the conflict in line with the efforts of Kashmir. The United States has always thought of Kashmir as the cause of all the problems in South Asia that never appear to appear as a zone of peace. The role of the United States in resolving this dispute requires a thorough investigation. By being vital to South Asia, the United States would be forced to play an important role in resolving the Kashmir conflict. This happened in the past could help to understand the future role of the United States (Mehta, 2012)

The UN Security Council passed a resolution, a plebiscite held in Jammu and Kashmir to solve this problem in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiris. But India has not held a referendum for decades on this problem. Although Pakistan and India, had two major wars fought in the years 1965 and 1971 to resolve the conflict, and in 1999, during the war of Kargil, the two countries were reported in terms of the use of nuclear weapons against each other, but with The USA, tensions are made harmless. The problem of Kashmir is not solved (Rizvi, 2015)

The US interest is backed by the India-Pakistan rivalry, the hostile relationship provides the opportunity for the global powers to intervene in the region. India aspires to conflict management rather than resolution, she emphasizes trade, business, culture, and scientific exchange, whereas Pakistan is more tilted towards the Kashmir resolution according to the UN, rather than conflict management.  Therefore, due to the basic difference, the CBMs in the subcontinent were not that impressive and practical nor did they support the peace structure in the region (Pervez, 2012)




South Asia

Pakistan and India are two noteworthy forces of this area and issues with respect to peace and security rely upon the relationship of the two nations. Pakistan lives in a situation in which is confronting inward and outside difficulties (Jathol & Rehman, 2019). At the exhibit, she is going through fluctuating critical issues like political, financial, vitality emergencies, security, ramble assaults, suicide shelling and diverse different difficulties. Even Mosques and Imambargah and additionally target executing of religious pioneers of either faction are not sheltered. Psychological oppression has represented a genuine danger to the "peace, security and soundness" of this locale and whatever remains of the universal group. South Asian nations acquired a feeble, in reverse and conventional financial foundation from their pioneer aces or the indigenous dictator rulers. But in Sri Lanka and India where some sort of infra-basic advancement had occurred amid the frontier government; alternate nations needed even the fundamental monetary foundation (Malik, 2002)

These relations are shifted because of the activities, responses and estimations of the states towards a strategy or choice of some other state. It is a troublesome undertaking to manage the brain research of the countries, including thoughts of their experience and culture, dialect et cetera. These are the result of many elements, i.e., recorded, social, ideological, monetary or geo-political. Now and then these relations can be basic or might be confused and it is the general consequence of its imagined objectives and interests into a particular game plan so as to accomplish its coveted outcomes. It is the unquestionable reality that prompt risk to any nation emerges from its neighbours so for support of peace, soundness and kinship with neighbouring states are the managing standards of any country's remote approach (Mazari, 2001)




Relation in Regional Context

The crises have affected each aspect of regional and social relations between the two states Pakistan and India. Despite all peace initiatives, show no signs of abating, and future cooperation. The continuation of the foreign policy of both countries was to ensure stable stability of their own country and, if possible, a stable society (Muzaffar, Jathol & Yaseen, 2017) Two-way relations have created both sides of the protected areas: India and Pakistan are known to keep their independence. It took many complex ways in their bilateral relations on different subjects, but the need for relationships and negotiations is ongoing and constant in the history of relations. How will the defence be no evidence of extremism between India and Pakistan is the fact that both correspond to their personal interests (Tucker, 2004)

Conclusion

The Kashmir dispute is seen as a dispute based on security and religious matters. One popular perspective squarely regards the dispute as a conflict between Hindus and Muslims: Pakistan is a Muslim state, India is a predominately Hindu state, and these two states fight about Kashmir. Similarly, the insurgency within Indian-administered Kashmir is regarded as an uprising of Muslims against Hindu domination. According to another, more sophisticated view, the Kashmir dispute is a conflict between religion and secularism, embodied in Pakistan and India, respectively.

The Kashmir dispute is seen as a dispute based on security and religious matters. One popular perspective squarely regards the dispute as a conflict between Hindus and Muslims: Pakistan is a Muslim state, India is a predominately Hindu state, and these two states fight about Kashmir. Similarly, the insurgency within Indian-administered Kashmir is regarded as an uprising of Muslims against Hindu domination. According to another, more sophisticated view, the Kashmir dispute is a conflict between religion and secularism, embodied in Pakistan and India, respectively (Javaid & Jathol, 2015)

All the South Asian nations started with the procedure of modernization and advancement in the fifties. There have been various issues and difficulties which have influenced the South Asian economies. Pakistan then again has been confronting the difficulties of vote vote-based system and security for over 67 years of its reality. Pakistan likewise started with a popularity-based arrangement of administration however couldn't support it. It is with regard to the complete way to deal with security that local clashes turn into a noteworthy test of security. Most of the realist thinkers viewed that states are more concerned about their security. In the state's interaction with one another, mostly force is applied by the governments in order to preserve their unity. The management and prevention of security depend on the reduction of threats to security. To sum up, strengthening regional cooperation is the key to strengthening comprehensive security in South Asia. This can be achieved through a variety of mechanisms and institutions. For each of these (mechanisms and institutions) to be effective, it will not only require close cooperation between the states and civil society in each country but also on a regional basis. The demonstrate region's commitment to strengthening comprehensive security; it is necessary to endorse specific goals and targets, which, in turn, should be closely monitored in a credible and effective way.

Peace and harmony in South Asia

The period of peace and harmony has mostly been affected by Indian threats, pressures and secret activities towards Pakistan. Three futile wars on the issue of Kashmir have already been fought between the South Asian states Pakistan and India. Despite the co-existence of Hindus and Muslims together, in the sub-continent for centuries both nations could not harmonize Efforts had been made for cooperation but became futile resulting in the partition of the subcontinent. Even after partition, both the states couldn’t exist together peacefully as two sovereign countries. The enmity between Pakistan and India remains one of the most permanent and under-solved clashes of our times right from the creation of Pakistan in 1947, and it has sustained and continued ever since, with the episodic renewal of conflict, crises and wars (Victoria, 2003)

Recommendations

• Both countries should mutually develop trust in each other. At the moment, the situation on the ground is not ideal to resume the Composite Dialogue. To prepare the ground and to ease the simmering tensions, both countries have to take a number of measures urgently. Both should build trust in a step-by-step.

• Major powers can play a role in resolving the issues, water issues and Kashmir issues. They can play the role of sustaining peace and harmony in this region.

• The Kashmir conflict between India and Pakistan with special focus on its implications for security in the South Asian region. The Kashmir issue represents a threat to the security of the South Asian region and a key factor behind tense relations between India and Pakistan.

References

• Ahmed, S. (1996). Foreign Policy of Pakistan. Comprehensive Book Service, Lahore, Pakistan.p.178
• Ashraf, M. I., Begum, S., & Jathol, I. (2016). Human security concerns of South Asia: Pakistan's perspective. Journal of Contemporary Studies, 5(1), 50-68. https://jcs.ndu.edu.pk/site/article/view/66/36
• Basrur, R. (2008). South Asia’s Cold War. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203928233
• Bose, S. (2003). “Kashmir, Roots of Conflict, Path to Peace”. Harvard University Press, London, UK.p.161
• Burki, S. J. (1999). Pakistan: Fifty Years of Nationhood. West View Press, Lahore, PK. p.67.
• Collins, A. (2016). Contemporary Security Studies. Oxford University Press, London, UK.
• Collins, A. (2016). Contemporary Security Studies. Oxford University Press, London, UK.
• Das, S. (2001). “Kashmir and Sindh: Nation-Building, Ethnicity and Regional Politics in South Asia”. Anthem Press, London, UK.p.231.
• Davis, Z. S. (2011) “ The India-Pakistan Military Standoff: Crisis and Escalation in South Asia”. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, US.p.166.
• Dixit, J. (2002). “India – Pakistan in war & Peace”. Rutledge, London, UK.p.201.
• Ganguly, S. (2001). Conflict Unending: India-Pakistan Tensions Since 1947”. Columbia University Press, New York, US.p.148.
• Gupta, B. S. (1986). “Regional Cooperation and Development in South Asia”. South Asian Publishers, New Delhi, India:p.134.
• Hamid, S. S. (1986). “Disastrous Twilight: A Personal Record of the Partition of India”. Secker & Warburg, London, UK.p117.
• Hilali, A. Z. (2017). US-Pakistan Relationship: Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan. Taylor & Francis, New York, US.p.p.11-30.
• Husain, A. (1972). Politics and People's Representation in Pakistan. Ferozsons, Lahore, PK.p.34.
• Jathol, I., & Rehman, S. U. (2019). From state to human security in South Asia. Journal of Politics and International Studies, 5(2), 173.
• Javaid, U. (2012). Peace Building in South Asia Limitations and Prospects. Centre for South Asian Studies, Lahore, PK.p.67.
• Javaid, U., & Jathol, I. (2015). Security Challenges to South Asia: Pakistan's Perspective. South Asian Studies (1026-678X), 30(2).
• Johnson, D. (2002). “India-Pakistan Relations: A 50-Year History”. Asia Society, Islamabad, PK.p.189.
• Khalid, I. (2012). Pakistan - India Relations. Peace Publications, Lahore.p.37
• Malik, I. (2002). Kashmir Ethnic Conflict International Dispute. Oxford University Press, Karachi, PK.p.91.
• Mazari, S. (2001). MBD and Its Impact on Pakistan. Strategic Studies, The Institute of Strategic Studies. Vol. 11, Islamabad, PK.p. 2.
• Mehta, M. P. (2012). Trade Relations between Pakistan and India. PILDAT. Islamabad, PK .p.55.
• Muzaffar, M., Jathol, I., & Yaseen, Z. (2017b). SAARC: AN EVALUATION OF ITS ACHIEVEMENTS, FAILURES, AND COMPULSION FOR COOPERATION. Global Political Review, 2(1), 36–45
• Pervez, S. (2012). Security Community in South Asia. Routledge, London.p.45
• Rizvi, D. (2015). Afghanistan: The United States and Pakistan's Foreign Policy.
• Tucker, S. (2004). Tanks: An Illustrated History of Their Impact. Oxford Publications, New York, US.p.54.
• Victoria, S. (2003). Kashmir in Conflict: India Pakistan and the Unending War. I. B. Tauris& Co. Ltd, London, UK.p.113.
• Wirsing, R. (1998). India, Pakistan, and the Kashmir Dispute: On Regional Conflict and its Resolution. Macmillan, London, UK.p.p.51-57.
• Zain, O. F. (2006). Siachen Glacier Conflict: Discordant in Pakistan-India Reconciliation . Pakistan Horizon, Karachi, 59(2), p.73-82.