India and Pakistan Must Be Stopped From Going to Nuclear War, But How?

LONDON- A nuclear war creeps up on the world by an unmarked path. As India and Pakistan confront each other daily over “the line of control” that marks the temporary division over their rival claims for the state of Kashmir the chance of their conflict spiralling out of control can no longer be dismissed. And if that happens the nuclear weapons that both sides exhibited to the world for the first time last year are within a hairtrigger of being used.

“The first false alert could be last”, said one seasoned observer not very long ago. We should think of Kashmir as a permanent Cuban missile crisis, when in nose to nose nuclear brinkmanship the risk of inadvertent nuclear war is unacceptably high. With only 4 or 5 minutes warning time before a nuclear weapon fired from one country would detonate in the other there is no time for second thoughts before making a decision on retaliation. In fact India’s Prithvis missiles stored at Jullunder and Pakistan’s M11s stored at Sargodha lie within range of each other. It is difficult to imagine a more unstable arrangement.

India and Pakistan are living far more dangerously than the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. did during all the dark days of the Cold War, the Cuban crisis excepted. Moscow and Washington at least had half an hour’s warning to think what to do before the other side’s rockets would arrive and, despite the many proxy and semi-proxy wars they made sure they never once themselves fired a shot in anger at the other side. Perhaps most important psychologically, in their long histories the two countries have never been to war.

But are India and Pakistan really heading for all out war? There still seems to be an air of slow motion unreality about it. The non-official Muslim militants of Pakistan together with regular Pakistani troops clash with Indian elite troops high up on near impenetrable Himalyan peaks, engaged in heroics of combat and mountain climbing. It is a scene from some rather old-fashioned melodramatic war movie that surely is too remote from down to earth reality to be the powder trail to modern day nuclear war.

Politically, the “play acting” of the principles is for now equally rarified. They talk as if war is imminent, but then that is invariably the language of Kashmir even in less fraught times. Both India and Pakistan temperamentally have a capacity for exaggeration. Moreover, neither government has its feet firmly on the ground. The Indian government led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee no longer commands a parliamentary majority and has to go to the polls in September. The Pakistan government led by Nawaz Sharif, despite its comfortable majority, in the opinion of many informed observers is not actually directing this particular drama. It is the army and its irregular acolytes who are setting the pace. Indeed some of the best informed argue that they see the civilian finger on the nuclear trigger as only one among two or even three others.

By comparison, Moscow and Washington not only had sophisticated command and control systems (but even so accidental use of nuclear weapons nearly occurred three or four times), but the lines of political authority were very clear and even in the worst of times they always knew who to phone. The idea that the decision to go to war or not to, to pull the nuclear trigger or to abstain, lies with shadowy figures neither elected nor in public political office is the most disturbing of all the elements in this latest confrontation.

I have been a friend of Sartaj Aziz, the foreign minister of Pakistan, for a good thirty years. I think I know him as well as any outsider. He is a highly educated, highly principled man. But if I tell you that I believe he’d never be party to nuclear war, and probably not even to another conventional war, my observation, I’m afraid, means very little. I do not believe his hand is on the tiller.

If normal channels of authority, normal chains of command and the normal disciplines of nuclear actors are no longer germane in this highly charged situation what can the rest of the world do? Can it sit back and trust India and Pakistan simply to sober up? That is to take an enormous gamble.

India has always insisted it would brook no “internationalising” of its quarrel over Kashmir.But when nuclear war is a real possibility is this a viable posture? The question should answer itself. The world has no choice but to get involved, as it did with the UN resolutions on Kashmir in 1948 and 1949 and again in 1966 with the successful mediation efforts of Soviet premier Alexei Kosygin.

Fifty years ago the UN mediated an agreement to a four part sequence–a cease-fire in Kashmir, followed by the withdrawal of Pakistan’s forces from all occupied areas, the thinning of India’s military presence and, when that was all completed, a plebiscite to ascertain to which country the people of Kashmir wished to belong. Only the first two and a half of the four steps were taken.

These steps look uncannily right for today’s situation (especially when there is an agreed line of control to withdraw behind). The world cannot abolish or even diminish Pakistan and India’s stock of nuclear weapons. But it should work to remove the one, and probably only, issue that could precipitate a war between them.

The world, however, has little influence. The use of economic sanctions has been spent on a foolish attempt to punish the two countries for going nuclear. (The Western powers should punish themselves first for setting such a bad example–look at what little progress they have made on dismantling their nuclear armouries since the end of the Cold War.) The fact is the people most hurt by sanctions are the poor who then become prey to even more nationalistic impulses.

Ideally the Security Council should intervene en bloc, beseiging the two errant countries with its authority. Yet after Bill Clinton, Tony Blair et al decided to ignore the strictures of the UN Charter when they decided to bomb Serbia the standing of that body is now much reduced.

Perhaps we outsiders have no choice but to enter the thin air of the high mountains ourselves and see if nuclear deterrence really works. After all, they always said it did.

Foreign affairs columnist, film-maker and author

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

Peace is promoted by constructive proposals and dialogue Four preceding PressInfos have expressed concern over — and criticised — the ongoing, militarisation of the EU. Some will say: but there are no alternatives. We believe that there are always alternatives, that democracies are characterised by alternatives and choice, and that openly discussed alternatives will improve the quality and legitimacy of society’s decision–making. In addition, it is an intellectual and moral challenge to not only criticise but also be constructive. If we only tell people that we think they are wrong, they are not likely to listen. However, if we say: what are your views on this set of ideas and steps? — we may sometimes engage them in dialogue and sow a seed. Most people in power circles live their daily lives in in a time frame and a social space where certain ideas, viewpoints and concepts are just not...
Photos © TFF 2000 Read PressInfo 90 “Lift the Sanctions and Bring More Aid to Yugoslavia” See Pictures from Belgrade © TFF 2000 Please reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but please retain the source.
Av FRANK SØHOLM GREVIL 16 augusti 2004  Vi er nu nået til tredje akt i det absurde teaterstykke, der i analogi med de store skueprocesser i Moskva 1936-38 er blevet døbt ‘Grevil-sagen’. Første akt bestod i min anonyme fremlæggelse af egenhændigt nedklassificerede rapporter i Berlingske Tidende i februar og marts. Andet akt udgjordes af min fremtræden med navn og billede i Information i april samt den efterfølgende mediestorm, som uden min direkte medvirken kostede en forsvarsminister taburetten samt en sigtelse for brud på tavshedspligten. Tredje akt bliver en retssag, hvor jeg står tiltalt for at have overtrådt straffelovens bestemmelser om uberettiget videregivelse eller udnyttelse af fortrolige oplysninger. Statsanklageren har ovenikøbet valgt at påberåbe sig særligt skærpende omstændigheder. Da jeg aldrig har modtaget betaling for at stille rapporterne til rådighed eller lade mig interviewe, må det skærpende bestå i, at “videregivelsen eller udnyttelsen er sket under sådanne omstændigheder, at det påfører...

Recent Articles

Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.

TFF on Substack

Discover more from TFF Transnational Foundation & Jan Oberg.

Most Popular

Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Read More
Screenshot-2026-05-15-103534
Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Screenshot-2026-05-12-104023
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (2)
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (1)
Jan Oberg, TFF director April 28, 2026 In this third TFF Peace Pulse, I make the important distinction between the violence and the conflict that violence is a symptom of. If you want peace, focus on the underlying conflict because that is the key to resolution, peacemaking, and a better future for the parties. The West is obsessed with violence, just look around you – and 90+ per cent of the public debate is about military issues and other violence – totally wasted for peace. These Peace Pulses will only be published here a few times. You will also not find them on YouTube and Vimeo because both platforms have blocked TFF and me; you know, peace is dangerous these days. Most TFF’s videos since 2007 are now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551
In contrast to most, we’ll bring alternatives, solutions, hope and strategies for a better future. Times are dangerous, yes, but that only intensifies the need for constructive thinking and action! Jan Oberg, TFF director April 13, 2026 The new TFF Peace Pulse uses video messages in a new way: Max 3-5-minute-long comments, ideas or perhaps mini-lectures, all about peace – positive peace. We launch them today on April 13, 2026 with a carefully crafted visual aesthetic fitting the content. We hope to publish them regularly from now on. We launch Peace Pulse (PP) – for a number of reasons. The world is in chaos, and there are countless reasons to feel concerned, frustrated, even angry. The atmosphere is saturated with doom and gloom, with negative energy and rear‑mirror thinking, while vision, imagination, alternatives, strategies and genuine future‑mindedness remain in short supply. And without them, we simply can’t save the world. Looking at problems from a hundred angles will...
IMG_5165 (1)
PART II — Publishing Peace in a System That Prioritises Militarism Jan Oberg, TFF director April 10, 2026 How TFF Maintains a Daily Voice in a Digital World Built for Noise This article is part of the series “TFF at 40″ and it invites you to learn about Four Decades of Publishing Peace. It takes a look at how a small, people‑financed peace foundation has communicated across four generations of technology — from wax stencils and fax machines to mass email and Substack — and why TFF continues to publish every single day in a system that rewards noise, conflict, and militarism. ◆ What it means to publish peace every single day in a digital system built for 24/7 news and other noise, confrontation, and militarism. How TFF’s independence, continuity, and global readership defy algorithms, donor cycles, and Western media censorhip — and why the Majority World keeps listening. When the...