At first glance, India and Pakistan today seem closer to peace than at any point in the past several decades. Yet the current détente process between India and Pakistan suffers from the same structural infirmities that led past peace initiatives to collapse.  peacemakers might do well to focus on the problems of the state’s peoples—thus building a base from which creative democratic solutions might eventually emerge.

Summary

  • Since December 2003, India and Pakistan have maintained a successful cease-fire along the militarily volatile Line of Control as part of a dialogue process that is addressing a wide range of disputes between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.
  • A key component of the dialogue centers on the disputed region of Jammu and Kashmir, of which both India and Pakistan control a part. (China holds a third part.) Both states claim sovereignty over the entire region.
  • The current round of India-Pakistan détente has led to some optimism that the dispute over Jammu and Kashmir, one of the bloodiest conflicts in the world, could be ripe for resolution.
  • Pakistan has recently advocated plans for what it believes is a workable final territorial solution to the problem—essentially, a partition of Jammu and Kashmir along ethnic-religious lines. India, however, has rejected these proposals, arguing that such a partition is repugnant to its secular values and could lead to a worsening of tensions elsewhere in South Asia.
  • This dissonance in perceptions points to a larger set of problems in the dialogue process, all of which could take several years, if not decades, to work through.
  • A second dialogue track, between India and secessionist politicians in Jammu and Kashmir, also appears to have reached stalemate.
  • Although Pakistan has helped bring about a significant reduction in terrorist violence within Jammu and Kashmir, much of the infrastructure of terrorism is still intact—and the possibility of crisis-inducing terrorist strikes remains.
  • Stalemate between the main actors has meant that the peoples of Jammu and Kashmir have yet to see any gains from the dialogue process and the India-Pakistan détente.
  • Rather than wait for a grand resolution of these complex issues, we need to find ways to deliver concrete gains to the peoples of Jammu and Kashmir—principally, though not exclusively, through a cessation of violence. Peacemaking may thus be better served by turning attention away from the “Kashmir problem” to the “problems of Kashmiris.

 

About the Report

At first glance, India and Pakistan today seem closer to peace than at any point in the past several decades. The cease-fire that went into place along the Line of Control in December 2003 has held; terrorist violence in Jammu and Kashmir has been in steady decline since the two nuclear-armed states almost went to war in 2002; and both countries have succeeded in sustaining a wide-ranging and high-level dialogue process. All this appears to suggest that conditions exist for resolution of one of the world’s most intractable and bloody conflicts, the India-Pakistan war over Jammu and Kashmir.

Yet the current détente process between India and Pakistan suffers from the same structural infirmities that led past peace initiatives to collapse. Instead of looking for a resolution of the grand historical conflict in Jammu and Kashmir, peacemakers might do well to focus on the problems of the state’s peoples—thus building a base from which creative democratic solutions might eventually emerge.

Praveen Swami is a Randolph Jennings Senior Fellow at the United States Institute of Peace. A journalist with Frontline, a major Indian magazine, Swami has covered the conflict in Jammu and Kashmir for more than a decade.

The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect views of the United States Institute of Peace, which does not advocate specific policy positions.

Related Publications

India-Pakistan Tensions Test China’s Relationships, Crisis Management Role

India-Pakistan Tensions Test China’s Relationships, Crisis Management Role

Thursday, March 7, 2019

By: Jacob Stokes; Jennifer Staats

The latest India-Pakistan crisis has put China in a difficult position, as it tries to balance its relationships with both countries, while helping to stave off a conflict and demonstrate its ability to manage and resolve crises. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi spoke to leaders in both Pakistan and India last week, urging them to practice restraint and find a way to deescalate the situation. Despite Pakistan’s request for China to play a more active role, competing priorities constrained the degree to which Beijing could lead—highlighting a chronic challenge for Chinese diplomacy in South Asia. China’s decision to keep a low profile is likely deliberate and in keeping with longstanding practice, but it is inconsistent with Beijing’s aspirations to lead in Asian crisis diplomacy.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

Amb. Richard Olson on the India-Pakistan Crisis

Amb. Richard Olson on the India-Pakistan Crisis

Wednesday, March 6, 2019

By: Richard Olson

Last week, tensions between India and Pakistan—sparked by a suicide attack claimed by a Pakistan-based terrorist group—put the world on notice. “The United States has reached a point where it believes that the militants operating out of Pakistan are … a threat, not just to India and to Afghanistan and our forces in Afghanistan, but … a threat to the long-term stability of the Pakistani state,” says Richard Olson, a former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

What Can be Done to Calm the India-Pakistan Crisis?

What Can be Done to Calm the India-Pakistan Crisis?

Wednesday, February 27, 2019

By: Moeed Yusuf

On February 14, in the disputed region of Kashmir, a suicide bomber rammed into a convoy of Indian paramilitary police, killing 44. The attack was claimed by the Pakistan-based Islamist group Jaish-e-Mohammad and was the deadliest bombing in Kashmir in three decades. Nearly two weeks after the attack, India launched a retaliatory airstrike. USIP’s Moeed Yusuf examines how the U.S. and international partners are key to preventing further escalation that could lead to nuclear war.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications