59

It is important to understand the vast geopolitical differences between the two situations of India and Pakistan developing nuclear weapons and North Korea developing nuclear weapons. India/Pakistan Nuclear Development Following Indian defeat in the Sino-Indian War, India decided that it needed some unconventional arms - nukes - to counter China's stronger ...


55

why aren't more of the leading nations of the world stepping in to help make amends between these two countries and try to actively solve the recent Kashmir issue? Many of the “leading nations of the world” have stronger incentives to either not to get involved, or encourage the conflict further. Aside from India and Pakistan, there are several “leading ...


39

More nuclear powers mean less stability. There used to be two. Then five or possibly six. But France and the UK were closely allied with the US, so adding them to the mix didn't complicate things very much. The US and the USSR faced each other with vast intercontinental arsenals, the Brits tried to menace Moscow in case Washington got wobbly. These days, ...


23

History provides the answer, such as it is. You can read a lot about it at Wikipedia on Kashmir and Kashmir Conflict. There was no country called India when the colonialists arrived. The regions was a network of independent states. While the British ruled directly in some places, in other parts of India rulership was by local kings (Maharajas) under ...


18

I will try to touch on all aspects here. Historical: As you have rightly pointed out, Kashmir was ruled by a Hindu ruler during that time(Maharaja Hari Singh). Now, Hari Singh was a stupid ruler. The British had given the Princely states the choice between the two dominions at that time. Hari Singh intentionally delayed his decision. Obviously, the ...


16

There are plenty of reasons to be worried about all these countries having nuclear weapons. From a selfish position in Europe, it seems most likely that India and Pakistan would use their weapons against each other. North Korea threatens South Korea, Japan and the USA — I have more personal connections with those latter countries. Looking at the rhetoric, ...


15

While damming a river can provide a large population with a reliable source of drinking water and an environmentally friendly source of electricity, it often has several negative consequences for the population in the vicinity of the dam: The lake which will form on the upstream side of the dam might swallow privately owned lands, privately owned homes or ...


12

I heard a prominent university professor say on the radio the other day that we shouldn’t worry about North Korea going nuclear, because Pakistan and India both went nuclear peacefully - is this an accurate comparison? Not really. The professor on the radio ignored something pretty important: Pakistan may not have nuked India, but the problems with North ...


11

This is a burning issue recently. I will try to cover all bases here. TLDR: The region of Jammu & Kashmir is a Muslim-dominated state with a sizeable minority population. Its last Hindu king chose to join India in 1947 as the British left India. The newly created Pakistan wanted the region as it was Muslim dominated. Since then both nations have used ...


11

These countries basically all use the Westminster parliamentary system of government which is modelled after the UK parliamentary system. This parliamentary system is mainly used by former British Empire colonies upon gaining independence and Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh were all formerly ruled by the British. Both India and Pakistan gained independence ...


11

Much of this is speculation, but will try to backup opinions with links. Turkey - Iran Common ground vs Kurds. Despite the religious differences, both countries find common ground in fighting Kurdish independence. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-kurds-referendum-minis/turkey-iran-iraq-consider-counter-measures-over-kurdish-referendum-...


11

Trump is by nature a foreign policy Jacksonian. This is a school of thought in the US that the proper role of the United States is to not interfere in other countries unless they have actively attacked the US itself, and that things like treaties and alliances only weaken the US when it does need to act. Anything the US does internationally is best done ...


10

Well, let's start with population is is by and large friendly to USA and not actively hostile to it, like majority of people living in Pakistan are and were. Japanese and South Koreans fit, and thus their government doesn't have to choose between being friendly with USA and being thrown out. Second, be a easily-recognizable democracy (key word being ...


10

A fair bit of searching online did not turn up any mention of U.S. sanctions on Pakistan in 1965. However, the U.S. Department of State's website does include a discussion of U.S.-Pakistani relations during this period. According to the Dept. of State, the United States and Pakistan had enjoyed a consistently positive relationship in the decade or so ...


10

They are convinced that deterrence will hold and conventional warfare is possible under the nuclear umbrella, as long as no vital interests are touched. If you look at the history of the Cold War, there were plenty of proxy wars. They are convinced that defenses will defeat all but a few of the enemy nukes. Not likely between India and Pakistan, but it could ...


9

Is there any age limit to be the Prime Minister of Pakistan in their Constitution? According to Pakistan's constitution, the Prime Minister of Pakistan must be above 25 years of age. Reference: Constitution of Pakistan


9

Those investments are usually part of a trade deal, often including rights to extract natural resources from mines or oil/gas fields. There are plenty such projects in African countries. China is developing the infrastructure in those countries to more efficiently exploit the resources in that country and ship them to China. Note that this is not a bad deal ...


9

The President is intended to be the ceremonial head-of-state, and a figurehead, rather than a person wielding political power. The President is chosen by an electoral college consisting of parliament, the senate and the provinces. The Prime Minister holds political power. The Leader of the largest party in parliament becomes Prime Minister. The situation ...


8

I think this was part of a power play between then President Pervez Musharraf and chief justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry in 2007 over Musharraf's attempt to get an extraordinary prolonged mandate as his predecessors had also done, but as Chaudhry would not support. Here's an excerpt from the Aug 16th 2007 edition of The Economist: In 2002 General ...


8

I originally misread the question to refer to the president of Pakistan. The restrictions on the president and Prime Minister of Pakistan are set forth in the constitution of Pakistan. However, Wikipedia said (in error) The incumbent Prime Minister is eligible for re-election to that office, but cannot hold that office for more than two consecutive ...


8

Apparently, no, since they are not European States. Wikipedia: The process of joining the alliance is governed by Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which allows only for the invitation of "other European States," and by subsequent agreements. The North Atlantic Treaty: Article 10 The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other ...


8

Pakistan has been considered a U.S. ally since the cold war. They didn't face any repercussion from sheltering Bin Laden in order to maintain that status and avoid a lot of uncomfortable truths for both nations. The entire raid on Bin Laden's compound was done without notifying/getting permission from Pakistan, which could easily be construed as an act of ...


8

Two of the examples you linked led to military action, many casualties and nearly war. India did not seem to blame Pakistan for the other two, however, and is likely why little action was taken. 2001 Parliament Attack: India blamed the attack on two Pakistan-based terrorist groups, and their response to this attack was the largest mobilization of their ...


7

The main criticism come from the government and some journalists doubting about Hersh's sources. From the White House, they're saying Hersh's stories are more fiction than reality. Former NAVY SEALS soldiers doubted about the content saying that have with full of lies. For example, about the ISI intelligence officer who was at the operation with the SEAL ...


7

There are many reasons: Pakistan has 189 million people while Israel has 8 million people (including, for example, the West Bank and Gaza Strip) (about 22 times as large). Pakistan has 307,374 square miles of territory while Israel has 8,019 square miles of territory (for the same definition of Israel) (almost 38 times as large). Pakistan's "tribal areas" ...


7

There are very few laws that are seen as being binding on all people. Those that do exist (such as "crimes against humanity" or "crimes against peace") are not part of a conventional legal system. There are no universal laws on religious defamation. The short answer to your question is "No, there are no provisions in the law of all countries to accept ...


7

Probably because The de facto border carved in 1949 worked to India’s territorial and political advantage. The [1949] ceasefire line left the Indians with the bulk of Jammu and Kashmir’s territory (139,000 of 223,000 square kilometres, approximately 63 per cent) and population. The Indians had gained the prize piece of real estate, the Kashmir ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible