Government and Politics of Pakistan

Marwa Abbasi
BSS 6 IR
01-155182-012

THE DETERRENCE THEORY AND BALANCE OF POWER

INDIA AND PAKISTAN

Introduction

Ever since the conception of the new world order, there has been a delicate balance of power
between various states of the world. The occurrence of world wars in the twentieth century has
established that the rival statemen will go to unforeseeable lengths to further the goals and
interests of their country. But these wars, the introduction of high-grade weaponry, and the
movement of the war methods from rather conventional approaches to a more abrupt approach
have also put the world in a constant state of a stand-off.
The term deterrence translates to as follows:
"The discouragement of a behavior, act, or an anticipated response of an entity, by showing the
subject entity, the consequences of such actions. The consequences are more than often carrying
a denotative undertone to them."

The theory of deterrence found ample application to explain the situation between India and
Pakistan. The two neighboring countries have had strenuous and tense relationships ever since
their conception in 1947. The main bone of contention between the two countries can be
explained by theorizing their stances against one another as follows:

The Stance of Pakistan:

The Deterrence Strategy adopted by Pakistan is based upon the following
reservations:
• India must be compelled to remove the severe problem of status quo, caste, and creed
system from its ranks. Not only is it dehumanizing, but also offensive to the Muslim
communities residing in India. Pakistan has adopted this stance on a humanitarian and religious
basis.
• Pakistan's efforts at deterrence are also based on the protection of its sovereignty and
national borders against India's encroachment upon its borders, following the conventional
attacks of its army.
• Pakistan is a supporter of denuclearization in the subcontinent. And the act of pursuit of a
nuclear arms race is to stop India from creating an imbalance of power.
• Moreover, an important factor in Pakistan's deterrence policy through nuclear weapons is
to keep India from exploiting the Indus water treaty between the two states.

The Stance of India:

The Deterrence Strategy adopted by India is due to the following reservations:
• India is determined to protect its sovereignty and border integrity against various sub-
conventional and military tactics employed by Pakistan, especially in the pursuit of a change of
status quo in Kashmir.
• India has been spearheading its nuclear program because of reservations that Pakistan
will prove to be trigger nervous in the case of conventional war between the two countries.
• India is a firm believer that Pakistan shelters terrorist outfits in its midst. To refrain these
terrorist groups from organizing their militant groups against India or its interests all around,
India is developing nuclear weapons to deter the Pakistani government from supporting these
terror groups.

Moreover, India also wants Pakistan to submit its right of accession to Kashmir, accept the status
quo set in Kashmir by the Indian authorities, and stop helping the Kashmiri people in their
struggle against freedom.

India and Pakistan, and the justification for Nuclear Deterrence:

The points mentioned above put the situation between Pakistan and India into perspective. Both
countrymen have also stated on numerous occasions that the deterrence strategy is based on the
presence of nuclear weapons in both states. Nuclear weapons, as it happens, are the main agents
of deterrence between the two countries.

The Global Political Landscape and the Nuclear Capabilities of India and
Pakistan:
Pakistan and India are very much protective of their nuclear arsenals and right to nuclear
weapons, as they rightfully should be. Both countries have hidden their nuclear programs quite
well from international powers. Despite the international power, both the countries refused to
partake in the resolution 1172 of the UN, which underwent specifically to stop the two countries
from participating in future nuclear experimentations of any sort. Pakistan, however, has been
more open to denuclearization up to a certain limit than India. A limited nuclear de-
weaponization was proposed by the authorities in Islamabad, which still leaves space for
deterrence of the minimum level between the two countries. This proposal was aptly rejected by
the Indian authorities in Delhi.

The Balance of Power:

The subcontinental balance of power hangs by a thin thread of nuclear weapons as of now. India
has been far more successful when it comes to the development of nuclear weapons. India's
advances have been well received by the international community due to the geological and
economic importance of India on a global scale. However, the Chinese military muscle has been
presented to help Pakistan jumpstart its nuclear program as well, to maintain the strategic
balance of power between the two states. Moreover, in the case of the two neighbors, nuclear
weapons help to maintain peace between them, in a bid of the balance of power, that is based on
the deterrence theory which reminds both the states of the immense destruction, which will occur
if they escalate the war beyond a certain. A point of no return, where the usage of nuclear
weapons will send the entire world hurling into destruction.

The Intricacies of the Balance of Power; Policymaking in India and Pakistan:

The balance of power in the subcontinent subsequently depends on the policymaking of both
countries. In order to understand the impact of these policies, it is necessary to get an overview
of the stances adopted by both nations regarding their nuclear programs.

India’s stance:
India's plans regarding the balance of power over the years have been no secret. India, in contrast
to Pakistan, has bigger purposes of pursuing nuclear superiority in the region. With a massive
GDP growth and the good graces of many other players on the board, India's pursuit of nuclear
superiority has been widely in the direction of trying to emerge as a superpower in the world.
India wishes to be a permanent member of the security council in order to shift the balance of
power in the world in its favor. India has been seen and accused of spending humongous
amounts of its total GDP on its nuclear deterrence capabilities. Moreover, India has also been
seen to expand its naval capability by bringing various new and advanced defense modules such
as aircraft carriers and a Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system that is sure to tip the scales in
India's favor regarding nuclear capabilities. Moreover, India spent 51 billion dollars USD, 2.25
% of its total GDP in 2016, and this has only skyrocketed in the coming years.

Pakistan’s stance:
Pakistan, on the other hand, has had no plans of emerging as a world superpower so far. The
primary concern of Pakistan so far has been to maintain and upkeep the delicate balance of
power in the subcontinent. Pakistan, in order to keep pace with India, has also had to
compromise on certain areas of its budget and spend it on its deterrence capability itself. Pakistan
and India both spend 2.6% of their GDP on their defense capabilities. Understandably though,
the amount spent by Pakistan is much smaller than that of India, and therefore there is a
fundamental imbalance of defense capabilities.
However, credit where it's due, Pakistan has been smart in its approach to the problem. With the
conception of nuclear missiles such as NASR (range of 60 Km) to SHAHEEN 3 (range of 2750
KM), Pakistan has found that by investing in decent nuclear capabilities and by diversifying the
nuclear defense systems, the threat of any conventional and unconventional encroachment can be
averted.
This invariably allows Pakistan to work on its policy of national sovereignty and meet India's
advances to becoming a regional superpower based on its nuclear capability, halfway, and that
too by spending much less on the defense budget as compared to India. This type of approach
has allowed Pakistan to keep India in check by developing a smart and modest nuclear program.

The Problem of Underlying Tensions:

In theory, the development of nuclear weaponry should allow both countries to cancel out the
dangers of advancements on both sides. It should have put the region on the road to a permanent
stand-off in which everybody refrains from being irrational by keeping in view the disastrous
consequences that could occur. However, it can have the exact opposite repercussions as well.
Both states can plunge into all-out nuclear war if the underlying issues, as discussed above, are
not properly addressed.
The solution will be both unilateral, as well as bilateral in nature. Unilaterally, Pakistan and India
can focus inwards on the pressure groups that are present and seem an issue to national security.
Moreover, working on infrastructure, education, and other sectors can maybe reform the
ideology of society and allow both countries to move towards a better future.
Bilaterally speaking, the sitting together of both sides and meeting halfway on the issues faced
by them can go a long way.

Conclusion:
The theory of deterrence has been the most important one in our current world and its politics.
The world superpowers have developed nuclear weapons capable of mass destruction, that if
employed, will spell the end for humanity. Therefore, certain methods are employed to deter
rival countries and discourage even conventional war tactics. The world is stuck in a perpetual
stand-off, but it had brought us a long spell of peace, as we know that the next war will have no
winners at all. This theory of deterrence has also set up a certain balance of power in the world if
it is either between superpowers like the USA and Russia or even neighboring rivals like
Pakistan and India. Deterrence has kept the world at a very steady pace, and it has allowed
several enemy states to decide their affairs through mutual talks and collaboration.