Lawrence Pintak

  • US Islam Policy
  • Arab Uprising
  • News & Opinion
    • Arab Media
    • Al Jazeera
    • Pakistan
    • Trump presidency
    • Indonesia
    • US Media
    • Africa
    • Russia
    • Interet Advertising
    • Terrorism
    • US Society
    • Buddhism & Eastern Religion
  • US Middle East Policy
    • Lebanon
    • Egypt
    • Iraq
    • Iran
    • Beirut Hostage Crisis
    • Palestine
    • Presidential politics
    • Public Diplomacy
    • Saudi Arabia
    • Syria
    • War on Terror
  • Media Appearances
    • Bio
      • Geneaology
    • Television Interviews
    • Al Jazeera
    • Radio Interviews
    • NPR
    • NPR’s On the Media
    • Quoted in Print (Arab Spring)
    • MSNBC.com Transcript
  • Research Articles
  • Books
    • America & Islam: Soundbites, Suicide Bombs, and the Road to Donald Trump
    • Islam for Journalists (and Everyone Else)
    • Reflections in a Bloodshot Lens
    • The New Arab Journalist
    • Seeds of Hate
  • GSMC Day One
You are here: Home / Uncategorized / New Delhi and Islamabad Don’t Want Fire and Fury (Foreignpolicy.com)

New Delhi and Islamabad Don’t Want Fire and Fury (Foreignpolicy.com)

February 28, 2019 by Lawrence Pintak

As hostilities between India and Pakistan escalate, leaders in both countries are very aware of the risks of a nuclear catastrophe.

BY LAWRENCE PINTAK

 | FEBRUARY 27, 2019, 5:04 PM

 

Pakistan reported on Wednesday that it had downed two Indian jet fighters and captured one of the pilots, whom it paraded before TV cameras. India claims it shot down a Pakistani jet and says only one of its planes was downed. Whatever the truth, the bottom line is that two countries with nuclear weapons have come to blows. The air battles were the latest escalation in a tit-for-tat confrontation that has been brewing since a suicide bomber killed at least 42 Indian troops in the disputed territory of Kashmir on Feb. 14. India blamed Kashmiri militants based in—and, it claims, supported by—Pakistan.

Wednesday marked the second day in a row that Indian jets had crossed the Line of Control, which divides Indian- and Pakistani-controlled Kashmir. They had not done that in a half-century. It all comes against the backdrop of the Indian election campaign. An external threat is usually good for the incumbent, in this case Prime Minister Narendra Modi, assuming he flexes the appropriate muscles.

That’s the bad news. The good news is that the leaders of the two countries—civilian and military—seem to be keeping level heads. So far.

“We should sit and settle this with talks,” Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan said in a nationwide address a few hours after the military announced it had downed the Indian jets and had carried out its own incursion into Indian airspace. “All wars are miscalculated, and no one knows where they lead to. … In the case of nations that have nuclear weapons, the endgame is unthinkable.”

For those wondering why the use of nuclear weapons would even be on the table, a little context is valuable. Pakistan’s population is less than 200 million; India’s is 1.3 billion. India’s military is almost four times as large as that of Pakistan. So the odds of Pakistan holding off a full-scale Indian invasion without the use of tactical nuclear weapons are slim to none.

“I ask India,” Khan continued, with “the weapons they have, and we have, can we afford a miscalculation? If this escalates, it won’t be in my control or in Modi’s.”

There was no immediate response from Modi, but in the days after the suicide bombing of the Indian troops, both he and Khan talked about focusing on how much the two countries have in common. Even Pakistan’s powerful military was taking a conciliatory tone. A Pakistan Army spokesman said its bombing of Indian-controlled territory was designed to avoid military or civilian casualties: “The in-built message was that despite our capability, we look towards peace.”

“Sole purpose of this action was to demonstrate our right, will and capability for self defence. We do not wish to escalate but are fully prepared if forced into that paradigm,” a Pakistani Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman confirmed in his own tweet.

The tightly controlled Pakistani media was under instructions to toe the same line. “Keep cool,” was the message one top editor told me they had received. Across the border, jingoism dominated some newsrooms. “‘Fakistan’ stages farce,” blared a banner on India’s Times Now web stream. The bombastic anchor shouted, “If this is going to be kill for kill, then here are the repercussions. We don’t lie. Pakistan lies, viewers.”

But the jingoists were not the only voices being heard. On social media, #SayNoToWar was trending in both countries. Dinakar Peri, a defense correspondent for India’s Hindu newspaper, tweeted, “Need de-escalation before things go down further.” The Herald in Goa voiced concern about Modi’s motive for launching the initial airstrike following the terrorist bombing: “We would like to believe that an election stunt it was not. Can it be kept that way?”

At the root of the confrontation lies Kashmir, a territory divided between India and Pakistan when British India was partitioned in 1947. The territory has been the flash point for three India-Pakistan wars, the most recent in 1999. In the years since, the dispute has languished, far from the agenda of the world’s big powers.

Here in Pakistan’s commercial capital of Karachi on Wednesday, flocks of the city’s ubiquitous black raptors swooped low over the traffic-clogged streets, but they were the only things moving in the polluted, gray skies. All commercial flights were grounded as the military closed Pakistani airspace. The country’s largest newspaper, Dawn, published a screengrab from a flight tracking service that showed the air cordon.

As I write this, the hotel where I am staying is testing its emergency PA system. “Hello, hello? Mic check.” Western executives who checked out at midday thinking they were leaving for Dubai or Doha sit glumly in the lobby, wondering what to do.

Right now, the confrontation is still at the level of a schoolyard tussle, with both sides demonstrating that they can’t be pushed around. The hope is neither will pick up a rock. The rocks available to them are very big indeed.

Lawrence Pintak is an award-winning journalist and scholar who was the founding dean of the Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University. A former CBS News Middle East correspondent, Pintak has covered dozens of wars, conflicts, coups, and revolutions on three continents. His latest book is America & Islam: Soundbites, Suicide Bombs and the Road to Donald Trump.

Twitter: @lpintak

Rate this:

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Filed Under: Uncategorized
« After Khashoggi’s death, Turkey sees a path to greater influence (Axios)
War Averted. What Now for Kashmir? (The New Arab) »
My Tweets


SHOP HERE

Free Download

Free Download

RSS Download the ten-part series

  • Why Can't We Talk about Healthcare? 6/25/17
  • Death of American Credibility 6/18/17
  • Terrorism Recruitment 6/11/17
  • The Fight Over Federal Lands 6/4/17
  • Muslim in Trump's America 5/28/17
  • Who Needs Immigrants? 5/21/17
  • How the Media Divided America 5/14/17
  • Revolt of the Blue States 5/7/17
  • Trump's Middle East 4/30/17
  • Report Card on the Opposition 4/23/17

The Murrow Interview

Lawrence Pintak interviews leading figures in international policy and journalism.

Radio Commentaries

author page

author page

Author Page

Muck Rack Profile

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

911 Adham Center for Journalism advertising Al Arabiya Al Jazeera Al Jazeera English Al Qaeda American journalism American journalists American Muslims Arab Arab journalism Arab journalists Arab media Arab Spring BBC Beirut Hostage Crisis Bloggers Buddhism Bush CNN Dalai Lama democracy Egypt ethics Habibie Hamas Hezbollah identity IMF indonesia Iran Iraq Islam Israel Jakarta Jihad journalism Journalism ethics journalism values journalists Lawrence Pintak Lebanon Malaysia Marines media Middle East Middle East policy Muslim Muslims Muslim world Obama Osama bin Laden Pakistan pakistan media Palestine Pintak Public Diplomacy qatar resign Rhodesia riots Saddam Hussein Satellite TV Saudi Arabia social media Suharto Syria terrorism Tibetan Buddhism trump Tunisia twitter U.S. Middle East policy Zimbabwe

Africa Al Jazeera American & Islam Arab Media Arab Uprising Beirut Hostage Crisis Buddhism & Eastern Religion Egypt Indonesia Interet Advertising Iran Iraq Islam Lebanon Media Appearances News & Opinion Pakistan Palestine Presidential politics Public Diplomacy Research Articles Saudi Arabia Syria Terrorism Trump presidency Uncategorized US Media US Middle East Policy US Society War on Terror

Return to top of page

Blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel
%d bloggers like this: