By Naeem Khan
In the aftermath of the recent Pahalgam attack, growing tensions between India and Pakistan have once again stirred fears of a possible war over Kashmir. Yet, history and patterns suggest that a large-scale conflict between these two nuclear-armed neighbors remains unlikely. Instead, what unfolds may be more about political theatre than real warfare.
India and Pakistan, despite their bitter rivalry and decades of unresolved issues in Kashmir, have consistently avoided full-scale wars along their international borders. Instead, they engage in what many observers see as a well-rehearsed script — short-lived skirmishes along the Line of Control (LoC), accompanied by aggressive rhetoric, media coverage, and high public emotions. These patterns serve more than military strategy; they often act as political tools.
“Both governments,” as one political observer remarked, “have mastered the art of using Kashmir as a stage to divert the public’s attention from domestic problems.” This scientific and systematic method of stirring national sentiment not only helps justify their respective control over divided Kashmir but also cleverly shields their leadership from facing the more pressing economic, political, and social crises at home.
At present, Pakistan’s government and military establishment are under immense pressure over controversial national elections and allegations of manipulation. In such a fragile environment, triggering tensions with India could be seen as a distraction or even a unifying cause. On the other hand, the Indian government under Prime Minister Narendra Modi has repeatedly used border incidents with both Pakistan and China during election seasons, stirring nationalist emotions to gather political momentum.
The cycle of tension followed by calm has become a predictable feature. Border villages suffer while governments score political points. “The war-like situation adds to the misery of the people,” a local resident near the LoC was quoted saying. “We are the ones who pay the price, not the politicians sitting in capital cities.”
Both nations, critics argue, seem to support — whether openly or secretly — the creation of these crisis moments. Extremist groups with suspected links to state institutions thrive in such an atmosphere, spreading hate and division. Meanwhile, democratic institutions such as the judiciary, media, and election commissions struggle under political pressure.
The fundamental truth remains unchanged: Kashmir is a political problem and needs a political solution. Only through honest dialogue, constitutional justice, and independent democratic systems can lasting peace be achieved. Without that, the region remains a dangerous nuclear flashpoint — one that could spiral beyond control if left unchecked.
The world watches, hoping that sanity prevails over political games.
