The recent provocative statements by Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, along with the bluster of some Indian officials, are a matter of grave concern for a region still grappling with the aftermath of the war that erupted on May 7 this year, threatening a nuclear holocaust in South Asia.
While addressing an event on October 2, Singh warned Pakistan that "a route to Karachi passes through Sir Creek" and claimed that Pakistan's recent military buildup in the area exposed the flaw in its intentions.
The Indian defence minister accused Pakistan of planning military actions, but many critics believe that it is India that might be mulling aggressive moves to avenge the humiliation it suffered during the May conflict.
They cite Singh's comments made during the same event, where he highlighted India’s heightened military preparedness along the border, arguing there could be no final winner in a war between two nuclear powers. Any such conflict, they fear, would result in total annihilation — not only of the two nations but also of their history, cultures and traditions.
It is not only the Indian defence minister who indulged in this dangerous game of sabre-rattling; his army chief also expressed a desire to plunge the region into an abyss of war and conflict. Top Indian General Upendra Dwivedi warned Islamabad on Friday against sponsoring terrorism, bluffing that India could transform Pakistan's history and geography.
Speaking at an event in Rajasthan, General Dwivedi said, "If Pakistan wants to maintain a place in world history and geography, it must stop state-sponsored terrorism. We will not show any restraint this time as we did during Operation Sindoor 1.0 and will go a step ahead if provoked again". He added that future action could be so forceful that Pakistan may have to "rethink whether it wants a place in history and geography or not".
The statements triggered a strong reaction from Pakistan. Defence Minister Khawaja Asif on Sunday warned India against any future military conflict, stating that a befitting response would be given in the event of hostilities.
He termed the recent statements by Indian military and political leaders a "failed attempt" to restore their lost credibility, which he said was the result of "pressure" after defeat in the May clashes.
Asif said, "The statements of the Indian military and political leadership are a failed attempt to restore their tarnished reputation. After such a decisive defeat with a score of 0-6, if they try again, the score, God willing, will be far better than before".
Political observers believe that India stands isolated globally on the diplomatic front. It has been locked in a trade war with the US over tariffs. The recent executive order by American President Donald Trump regarding certain visa categories is also aimed at India, which exports a large number of tech experts to the US and other parts of the world.
There is tremendous pressure on New Delhi from Washington regarding oil imports from Russia. The US has repeatedly made it clear that it will not allow the purchase of Russian energy products. Trump's administration is not only asking India but also EU members to stop buying Russian gas and oil.
India's ties with the sole superpower are not as cordial as they once were. Therefore, there is very little chance that Washington would extend any assistance to the world’s largest democracy in case of a conflict with Pakistan. New Delhi's joint ventures with American arms manufacturers might also be affected if the Modi-led government does not heed Trump’s demands to buy American oil and gas.
The US Department of the Interior estimates that there are technically recoverable resources of 29.4 billion barrels of oil and 391.6 trillion cubic feet of gas in the US. American shale gas is more expensive than Russian gas supplied via pipelines. Even then, Trump wants Europe and India to buy it.
While European countries are gradually reducing their reliance on Russian gas and making progress in this regard, India is hesitant to end its energy purchases from Moscow, its traditional ally since the Cold War. Though India sought cordial ties with the US and the West after embracing the neo-liberal agenda during the 1980s and 1990s, it also maintained close relations with Russia.
But now, America under Trump is sending a clear message to New Delhi that the Hindu-majority country cannot enjoy two rides on one ticket. Trump's Western allies would also be reluctant to come to India’s aid in case of any conflict with Pakistan.
They have already been appeasing Trump's administration by increasing their defence budgets and buying American weapons. Their reduction in Russian gas purchases is also meant to flatter Trump. For them, the threat of Russia is bigger than anything else. They know only the US can protect them from Russia, which has the largest number of nuclear weapons on earth.
India has recently attempted to engage with China in the hope of attracting American attention, but it appears that New Delhi's moves have not gone down well with Washington. The visa conditions mentioned above appear to be one of the responses Trump offered to India in response to its attempts to court China.
But even China would be extremely reluctant to go against Pakistan, with which it has enjoyed friendship for over seven decades. Although Beijing welcomed the Indian move to normalise ties, it would be cautious for some time to see if such overtures are genuine or merely transactional. Even if Beijing gets closer to India to counter the US, it would not risk its ties with Pakistan.
Russia, which always extended assistance to India during the Cold War, is embroiled in a bloody conflict in Ukraine. The war is so important for Moscow that it decided to sacrifice its interests in Syria, advising former Syrian president Assad to flee the country.
Russian President Putin is well aware that he is caught between a rock and a hard place. Trump may be hostile to Russia, but he is not as hostile as Biden or any other president could be. Therefore, Moscow would also not like to infuriate Trump by extending overt support to New Delhi.
Given all this, the provocative statements by India make little sense. No matter what the Indian leadership says about the last conflict between the two South Asian neighbours, there is a widely held perception that India’s position was weaker during the conflict.
Trump's statements over the conflict also lent credence to Pakistani claims that it responded in a befitting manner. Therefore, India must seek negotiations with Pakistan to discuss all intractable issues, including that of Kashmir, which has pushed the two countries to the brink of annihilation at least twice in the last three decades.
Critics argue that if India could get along with the UK — which was accused of killing more than 35 million Indians through its colonial policies besides plundering around 45 trillion dollars during colonial rule — then why can't it get along with Pakistan, which has not caused damage on such a colossal scale? Pakistan should also not respond provocatively. Any conflict between the two countries could trigger a nuclear winter, possibly decimating over two billion people. Therefore, it is time for talks, not threats.
Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed in this piece are the writer's own and don't necessarily reflect Geo.tv's editorial policy.
The writer is a freelance journalist who can be reached at: egalitarianism444gmail.com