Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Conflicts between India and Pakistan over cultural differences
Political effects of the cold war
Positive impacts of the Cold War on international relations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Cases that the article focuses on.
The article by Jarrod Hayes focused mainly on security and international relations between the US and India. The core argument is based on the 1971 Pakistan crisis. In this case, Pakistan experienced internal unrest following their first ever democratic polls. India, their neighbor, received millions of refugees because of the turmoil. The Indian Prime Minister condemned the actions of the Pakistani president; however, the US top leadership machinery tolerated these activities. In fact, it projected India a threat to its interests in the region.
As a result, there was a shift in the international relationship between the US, India, and Pakistan. The US, through President Nixon, supported Pakistan. In explaining
…show more content…
First, the ideologies emanating from the cold war had set the two nations on two separate extremes ideologically on the world stage. India 's socialist economic approach and nonalignment policy during this period contrasted that of the US, a superpower that adopted capitalism. The balance-of-power also played a role. Before the Pakistan crisis, India had signed a friendship agreement with its fellow socialist nation, Russia. This seemed to worsen the role of India in the crisis. The American leadership, especially Kissinger, referred Indian involvement in the Pakistan issue as rape. Pakistan was a young nation that Indian was meddling with. The period at which the crisis took place, 1971, is a critical aspect in this case selection. It is around this time that the start of democratic peace research began. Therefore, analyzing the events of 1971 will presumably be done without prior information done on the subject. This enables individual aspects under consideration to be assessed …show more content…
India and America are characterized by distinct social identities that play key roles in defining opinions. For instance, in 2003, the US President George W. Bush invaded Iraq because it was a perceived to be a security threat to America. It also stood in opposition to the US ' interests, and it was building up the capability of using nuclear power in their possession or starting a nuclear war. The American public was supportive of the president 's stance. Therefore, the decision to invade Iraq had widespread public approval at the time.
Analysis of the evidence/methods the author uses to explore the case.
The author utilized remarks by Kissinger about the British colonial period in India. In his remarks, Kissinger reported that the British had a successful rule by being bold, and not soft. He implied that the US ought to be tough on matters relating the crisis. It is in light of this that Nixon sent the Enterprise to counter India 's measures during the Pakistan crisis. This bold move partly stemmed from the fact that the top American leadership mistrusted the Indians to stop the
A war does not necessarily require physical weapons to fight. From 1947 to 1991, military tension and ideological conflicts held place. Cold War is defined as a state of political hostility existing between countries, characterized by threats, violent propaganda, subversive activities, and other measures short of open warfare, in particular. The causes of the Cold War between United States and the Soviet Union were the mutual distrust that had taken place in World War II, intense rivalry between the two super powers, and conflicting ideologies. The two superpowers differed in views of political and economic principles and were eager to spread their ideologies to other countries. The United States were in favor of democracy and capitalism while the Soviet Union sought for the chances of influencing communism. Cold War did not involve the use of physical arms but was intensely fought. Propaganda, economic aids, Arms Race, and the creation of alliances were the main methods to fight the war. The use of propaganda played a crucial role in containment by criticizing the other power and raised the morale and spirit of their nation. The economic support for nations helped them recover from the desperate situation after World War II, which prevented the nations from falling under communism. Also, the Arms Race and forming alliances between the two main powers were important weapons for competition and rivalry in Cold War.
“Not again,” an article published by Arundhati Roy in the British newspaper, The Guardian, is a scathing denunciation of the United States and its current expansionism. Though Roy certainly is not representative of Indian public opinion on the United States war on Iraq—or on any subject for that matter—her article does manage to bring up several issues that are of importance to India as a developing country. Through her primary message of denouncing U.S. foreign policy, Roy also addresses two issues that are central to India today: the potential nuclear conflict with
Hestedt, G. (2004). U.S. indian policy. Encyclopedia of American foreign policy. Retrieved August 14, 2008, from Facts on File: American History Online database.
Edin, Peter. "1947 the Birth of India & Pakistan." New York Times Up Front. 30 Jan 2012: 16-
Nye, Jr., Joseph S. “Hard and Soft Power in American Foreign Policy.” In Paradox of American Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 4-17. Print.
The people of India and Pakistan hate each other with a burning passion that goes back thousands of years. Because of the constant border wars you had to be stealthy when talking to people. For example if we were both on India's land and were both Indians we could be buddies; on the flip side if you spoke Sindhi, a derived form of Hindi, and I spoke Hindi I can assume you were Pakistani and we would have to fight it out.
The most threatening conflict between Hindus and Muslims is the province of Kashmir. This is where the decision to divide India into India and Pakistan seems to have been a terrible mistake. Kashmir, which is the only Muslim majority city in India, lies between the divided India and Pakistan. After India’s independence in the 1940’s, Kashmir had to choose to either unite with India or Pakistan. The Prince of Kashmir chose India but Pakistan invaded the province soon after and have occupied part of Kashmir since then. Controversy still surrounds the province today because naturally, Muslims want to control it. While many Muslims relocated to Pakistan and the Hindus to India, half of the Muslim population was left in India and their relations did not improve after being partially separated.
During the Cold War, many regional conflicts occurred and were noted as the significant battles which later led to decolonization. One of the regional conflicts were India and Pakistan fighting for their independence. In 1947, India was released under Great Britain’s control and gained its independence. However, the country was divided between Muslims and Hindus, which share different religions. Muslims wanted church and state to become unified while Hindus wanted a separation of these two establishments. Since these two ethnic groups disagreed, it was difficult to create a new government. Therefore, India was divided into two nations: India for the Hindus and Pakistan for the Muslims. Hindus and Muslims were racing to the border in order to get to their nation state which led to killing 500,000 people due to rioting. Although, Mohandas Gandhi, an Indian National Congressman, wanted to obtain peace between these two religions. Pakistan refused the H...
The decision to grant independence to India was not the logical culmination of errors in policy, neither was it as a consequence of a mass revolution forcing the British out of India, but rather, the decision was undertaken voluntarily. Patrick French argues that: “The British left India because they lost control over crucial areas of the administration, and lacked the will and the financial or military ability to recover that control”.
The two groups were fighting for control over the province of Kasmir, which is a valley in the northern part of India and is part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. They both want this piece of land because, since Muslims and Hindus were split apart, they feel the need to be more powerful than each other and take control of this beautiful piece of land. In 1947 this state was considered an independent country and the Marahaja, who was the ruler of India, made it so that India and Pakistan remained neutral. While India stuck to this agreement Pakistan attacked Jammu and Kashmir because they wanted control of it, which forced the Marahaja to escape to India. The Marahaja asked the people of India to help get rid of the Pakistanis who were attacking them and, if they did, he would make Jammu and Kashmir a part of India. The people of India got rid of most of the Pakistani attackers, but a large area that was hard to reach was still controlled by them. Since India wanted to stop the fighting, they ended up leaving the Pakistanis to have a large area, but India had an even larger area. The fighting ended in 1949 and, since other powerful states didn’t ask Pakistan to withdraw it’s troops from a state that had became a part of India, India called the United Nations and told them that Pakistan had attacked a neutral state that had became a part of India, so they should withdraw their soldiers. The United Nations agreed with this and also wanted India to ask the people of Jammu and Kashmir if they wanted to be part of India or Pakistan. The Prime Minister of India asked the people if they wanted to be part of India or Pakistan through a process called referendum or plebiscite, which is basically a vote. A plebiscite couldn’t be made because Pakistan didn’t want to give up Jammu and Kasmir, and since many powerful countries didn’t force them to withdraw their troops
America became the sole superpower of the world. Communism is no more. Communism collapsed worldwide. The Cold War sketched the foreign policies for both the countries through the second half of the twentieth century as both countries fought for accomplices to uphold and widen their own realms of power around the world, but it did not escalate to an apocalyptic World War II. The decade- long standoff between American capitalists and Soviet communists ceased without causing any violence.
perceive the strategic threat posed by the East India Company. The British from the beginning followed a
“India and Pakistan: Tense Neighbours.” BBC. N.p., 16 Dec. 2001. Web. 15 May 2011. .
Kashmir — a beautiful mountain state with clear rivers, evergreen forests and one of the highest death rates in the world. It is at the center of an age-old dispute between Pakistan and India that has dragged on from the independence of both nations over fifty years ago to the present time, with no resolution in sight. The combined population of the two nation totals over a billion, so no conflict between them is of passing importance, especially when nuclear weapons are involved. Pakistan and India share a common heritage, language, and traditions, yet the subject of Kashmir can push them to the brink of annihilation. Fifty years of animosity have built up as a result. A proxy war still brews in Kashmir, claiming dozens of lives every day, running up a casualty total over time into the hundred thousands. Kashmiris have suffered untold horrors and Kashmir has the notorious reputation of being one of the world’s most dangerous flashpoints.
Nuclear bombs were status-enhancing: India could finally become a "global player". It was, as Ghosh writes, "a primal scream for self-assertion".Equally chilling is the difference in how the two countries perceive their nouveau nuclear status. While nuclear-bombs appear to be "harmless icons of empowerment" for many Indian experts, their Pakistani counterparts fear a nuclear conflagration.