Prof. Mohammad Ayoob of Michigan State University looks at the tit for tat military responses of India and Pakistan and tries to interpret the mixed signals of the Pakistan military and civilian president Imran Khan. He says Imran Khan had the difficult task of being in line with the top generals of the Pakistan military and at the same time responding to international pressures to de-escalate the crisis. Imran Khan asked India not to take the confrontation further or Pakistan would have to retaliate, and at the same time emphasized de-escalation as the goal with pressure from Saudi Arabia, the U.S. and China. The nuclear doctrines of the two countries which differ from the manner in which the U.S. and Soviets operated during the Cold War, also make escalation dangerous. Prof. Mohammad points out that the military in Pakistan plays a different role in the state since it was created in 1947. With military control of nuclear weapons any danger of losing control of the state and its position in the state since 1947 could lead to reckless strategies, says Prof. Mohammad. Mr. Imran Khan had to speak in different terms to different audiences in a kind of double speak in this situation. Mr. Khan spoke in terms of development and the need for Pakistan to fund the needed infrastructure always at the back of the mind in the current situation at the outset of the crisis. Much of this was lost in the ensuing hours of the crisis. Yet this remains the dominant need in South Asia as Mr. Imran Khan faces the challenge of meeting his promises for development as much as Mr. Modi faces the challenges of development to catchup with Asian neighbors South Korea and China who have shown how this can be done. A longer memory does show China and South Korea falling behind in the fifties and sixties before making great progress in the last 3 decades by pursuing peaceful cooperation with earlier adversary Japan, and in the case of China the U.S. Anyone familiar with the role played by the U.S. in China's civil war, and the Japanese invasions of Korea and China, during four decades of conflict, followed by the cooperation offered by Japan and the U.S. to first South Korea and then China can see that progress is possible and lays the foundation for development. A recent article in The Guardian reports that China now lays more concrete every 2 years than the U.S. did for the entire twentieth century. None of this would be possible had Chinese leaders in their wisdom and passion for development not pursued development first and foremost, setting aside historic wounds. ...
Original article 4 minutes, gist 2 minutes