Css 2019

Log In

Q2. Evaluate the significance of conflict between India and Pakistan in global perspective of terrorism.

Answer Features:

  • Analyzes how India–Pakistan conflict shapes global counterterrorism discourse
  • Covers key flashpoints: Kashmir, Mumbai attacks (2008), Pulwama-Balakot (2019), FATF, TTP
  • Applies theories: Realism, Securitization Theory, Global Security Agenda
  • Discusses involvement of global institutions (FATF, UNSC) and major powers (US, China)
  • Provides comparative insight with other global terror-linked disputes
  • Concludes with actionable recommendations for conflict de-escalation

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Historical Overview of Indo-Pak Conflict and Terrorism
  3. Globalization of Terrorism and Indo-Pak Nexus
  4. Key Terrorism-Linked Flashpoints in Indo-Pak Context
    • a. 2001 Parliament Attack
    • b. 2008 Mumbai Attacks
    • c. 2016 Uri Attack
    • d. 2019 Pulwama-Balakot Standoff
  5. Theoretical Framework
    • a. Realism
    • b. Securitization Theory
    • c. Global Security Perspective
  6. International Response and Involvement
    • a. FATF
    • b. UNSC 1267 Sanctions
    • c. US, China, and Gulf Diplomacy
  7. Spillover Risks: Regional and Global
  8. Constraints to Cooperative Counterterrorism
  9. Recommendations for De-securitization
  10. Conclusion
  11. Table: Key Terror-Linked Indo-Pak Events and Global Reaction
  1. Introduction

The India–Pakistan rivalry, rooted in history, borders, and nationalism, has been exacerbated by accusations and episodes of terrorism. In a world increasingly shaped by the global war on terror, the Indo-Pak conflict represents a regional dispute with global security implications.

“Any act of terrorism in South Asia reverberates in global capitals.” – Dr. Moeed Yusuf, Former SAPM on National Security

  1. Historical Overview of Indo-Pak Conflict and Terrorism
  • Partition in 1947 laid foundation for mutual hostility
  • Kashmir became epicenter of militarized and ideological contestation
  • Pakistan accuses India of brutality in Kashmir, India blames Pakistan for cross-border terrorism
  • With the rise of non-state actors post-1979 Afghan jihad, terrorism became deeply embedded in strategic narratives on both sides
  1. Globalization of Terrorism and Indo-Pak Nexus
  • Post-9/11 global security order redefined terrorism as transnational threat
  • Pakistan was a frontline state in GWOT, but also accused of harboring proxy groups
  • India positioned itself as a victim of state-sponsored terrorism, aligning closely with U.S., Israel
  • Global media and diplomacy increasingly view Indo-Pak conflict through the lens of terrorism, rather than traditional territorial dispute
  1. Key Terrorism-Linked Flashpoints in Indo-Pak Relations
  2. 2001 Indian Parliament Attack
  • Led to Operation Parakram, 10-month military standoff
  • Prompted US mediation to prevent war between two nuclear states
  1. 2008 Mumbai Attacks
  • Over 170 killed; India blamed Lashkar-e-Taiba, linked to Pakistan
  • Global outrage; UNSC blacklisted Hafiz Saeed; led to tightening of FATF scrutiny on Pakistan
  1. 2016 Uri Attack
  • India launched “surgical strikes”—significant escalation
  • Indian media securitized cross-border terrorism as existential threat
  1. 2019 Pulwama-Balakot Escalation
  • 40 CRPF personnel killed by Jaish-e-Mohammed operative
  • India bombed Balakot in Pakistan; Pakistan responded with airstrikes
  • First aerial dogfight between nuclear states in decades
  • Sparked global alarm over terrorism-triggered escalation in South Asia
  1. Theoretical Framework

🔹 Realism

  • States use non-state actors for asymmetric warfare
  • Pakistan allegedly uses proxies to offset India’s conventional superiority

🔹 Securitization Theory (Barry Buzan)

  • India securitizes terrorism to justify military assertiveness and international lobbying
  • Pakistan securitizes Indian influence in Balochistan and TTP safe havens in Afghanistan

🔹 Global Security Perspective

  • Terrorism transcends borders—regional conflicts escalate into global threats, especially in nuclear-armed zones
  • Indo-Pak terrorism disputes hinder global cooperation on terror financing, refugee flows, radicalization
  1. International Response and Involvement
  2. FATF
  • Pakistan placed on FATF grey list (2018–2022) for alleged inaction against UN-designated entities
  • Under pressure, Pakistan took legislative and operational measures to curb terror financing
  1. UNSC Sanctions Regime (1267 Committee)
  • Hafiz Saeed, Masood Azhar designated global terrorists
  • China repeatedly blocked India’s efforts to list Jaish-e-Mohammed leaders due to geopolitical balancing
  1. Major Power Mediation
  • U.S. mediates post-crisis (2001, 2008, 2019) to avoid nuclear escalation
  • Gulf states push for restraint due to economic and diaspora stakes
  • Russia and SCO push for joint counterterrorism mechanisms
  1. Spillover Risks: Regional and Global

Spillover Aspect

Impact

Nuclear Escalation

Global catastrophe in case of miscalculation

Refugee Crisis

Millions displaced in event of war or unrest

Islamophobia Rise

Global anti-Muslim narratives fueled by terror

Economic Disruption

South Asian supply chains, trade routes affected

Militant Inspiration

Cross-border groups inspire global jihadist outfits

  1. Constraints to Cooperative Counterterrorism
  • Mistrust and mutual blame
  • Absence of institutionalized intelligence sharing
  • Domestic politics and nationalism limit dialogue space
  • China’s balancing between India and Pakistan blocks global consensus
  • U.S. tilt towards India limits Pakistan’s diplomatic maneuver
  1. Recommendations for De-securitization and Resolution
  2. Joint Counterterrorism Mechanism
  • Revive 2006 India–Pakistan Joint Anti-Terror Mechanism (JATM)
  1. Track-II Diplomacy
  • Foster civil society dialogue to reduce mutual demonization
  • Encourage academia and media collaboration
  1. Bilateral Verification Mechanism
  • Joint working groups on terror financing, border infiltration
  • Encourage UN or SCO monitors to observe sensitive zones
  1. De-escalation Protocols
  • Regular DGMO talks; hotline communication to prevent crises
  • Crisis confidence-building via third-party military observers
  1. FATF-Led Benchmarks
  • Use FATF and UNSC as non-political tools for behavior normalization
  • Focus on compliance, not naming and shaming
  1. Conclusion

The India–Pakistan conflict is no longer a purely regional matter—it is entwined with the global war on terrorism. While both countries have suffered terrorism’s consequences, their mutual accusations and proxy narratives undermine global counterterrorism efforts.

“Unless India and Pakistan treat terrorism as a shared problem, the world will keep treating South Asia as a shared risk.” – C. Christine Fair, Political Scientist

Sustainable peace and counterterrorism in South Asia require structured dialogue, shared intelligence, de-politicized accountability, and global facilitation without bias. Only then can this faultline be stabilized in the interest of regional security and global peace.

Q3. Elaborate Systems Thinking Theory in view of Pakistan and Globalization.

Answer Features:

  • Clearly defines Systems Thinking Theory (STT) with its IR implications
  • Applies STT to Pakistan’s interaction with economic, political, technological, cultural, and environmental systems under globalization
  • Explains feedback loops, interdependence, emergent behavior and holistic analysis
  • Cites real-world examples: CPEC, IMF conditionalities, climate shocks, digital economy
  • Concludes with actionable recommendations for policy coherence and adaptive governance

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Understanding Systems Thinking Theory (STT)
  3. Globalization as an Interdependent System
  4. Applying STT to Pakistan in the Age of Globalization
    • a. Economic System: Debt, IMF, CPEC
    • b. Political System: Governance, International Norms
    • c. Social-Cultural System: Media, Migration, Identity
    • d. Environmental System: Climate Change, Agriculture
    • e. Technological System: Digital Divide, Cybersecurity
  5. Case Study: Pakistan’s COVID-19 Response as Systems Thinking
  6. Advantages of Systems Thinking for Pakistan
  7. Limitations and Challenges
  8. Recommendations for Systems-Oriented Policymaking
  9. Conclusion
  10. Visual Aid: Interconnected Systems Model for Pakistan
  1. Introduction

In an era of global interdependence, national policymaking can no longer be confined to sectoral thinking. Systems Thinking Theory (STT) emphasizes that problems are interlinked, non-linear, and best solved by considering feedback loops, patterns, and whole systems, rather than isolated parts.

As globalization continues to reshape national economies, cultures, and politics, Pakistan’s development and challenges must be viewed through a systems lens.

“The essence of Systems Thinking is seeing interrelationships rather than linear cause-effect chains.” – Peter Senge

  1. Understanding Systems Thinking Theory (STT)

Systems Thinking is an analytical framework that views phenomena as parts of interconnected wholes. It stresses:

  • Feedback loops: cause and effect are cyclical
  • Interdependence: all components affect one another
  • Emergence: systems produce unexpected behaviors
  • Delay effects: policy impact may be delayed but cumulative

In IR, STT helps explain how states interact not only via military or diplomacy, but also through economics, ecology, health, and technology, all operating within a global system.

  1. Globalization as an Interdependent System

Globalization is not a singular process but a convergence of systems:

Domain

Components

Economic

Trade, finance, investment, debt

Political

Governance, alliances, institutions

Cultural

Migration, language, media

Environmental

Climate change, pollution, resources

Technological

Internet, AI, digital capitalism

STT interprets globalization as a web of systemic feedback, where a shock in one domain (e.g., oil prices) reverberates through others (inflation, social unrest, energy policy).

  1. Applying STT to Pakistan in the Age of Globalization
  2. Economic System: Debt, IMF, and CPEC
  • IMF loan conditionalities affect budget allocations (health/education)
  • CPEC, a subset of China’s BRI, links infrastructure development to geopolitical alignment and debt cycles
  • Global inflation, supply chain shocks, and petrol prices have feedback on Pakistan’s political stability and food security

Example: Wheat crisis due to Ukraine war → price inflation → political protests → IMF conditionalities

  1. Political System: Governance and Global Norms
  • Pakistan’s FATF compliance is a response to global financial systems
  • Civil-military balance, elections, and foreign policy are influenced by external perceptions and aid dependencies

Systems View: Global norms on counterterrorism reshape Pakistan’s domestic legislation

  1. Cultural System: Migration and Identity
  • Labor migration to Gulf creates remittance inflow but also brain drain
  • Diaspora activism affects foreign policy (e.g., Kashmir lobbying in UK/US)
  • Digital globalization influences youth ideologies, consumer behavior, even extremism narratives
  1. Environmental System: Climate and Agriculture
  • Pakistan ranks among top 10 climate-vulnerable nations
  • Floods (2022), glacial melt, and droughts affect crops, displace millions
  • Climate-induced migration, health crises, and food insecurity are tightly linked

“Floods in Pakistan are not natural disasters—they are systemic failures.” – UN Secretary-General António Guterres (2022)

  1. Technological System: Digital Divide and Cybersecurity
  • E-governance initiatives (e.g., NADRA, Raast) interact with financial inclusion
  • Disinformation and cyber warfare (e.g., India-Pak digital propaganda) reflect a complex system of state vs non-state actors
  1. Case Study: Pakistan’s COVID-19 Response

Pakistan’s smart lockdown strategy (praised by WHO) shows systems thinking in action:

  • Economic closures → unemployment → food insecurity → Ehsaas Cash Program
  • Closed borders → supply chain disruption → reliance on CPEC routes
  • Health crisis → increased digital adoption → rise in telemedicine and e-learning

This multi-sectoral approach reflects adaptive governance based on feedback loops.

  1. Advantages of Systems Thinking for Pakistan
  • Better policy coherence: avoids siloed ministries
  • Anticipates unintended consequences
  • Enables inter-ministerial collaboration (e.g., climate–water–health nexus)
  • Supports adaptive governance in response to shocks (pandemics, cyberattacks)
  • Encourages sustainable development planning
  1. Limitations and Challenges
  • Bureaucratic fragmentation in Pakistan limits inter-system communication
  • Lack of real-time data infrastructure for system-wide monitoring
  • Political instability hinders long-term planning
  • Systems Thinking requires training, institutional coordination, and political will
  1. Recommendations for Systems-Oriented Policymaking
  • Establish Systems Analysis Units within Planning Commission and PM Office
  • Integrate SDGs and Vision 2025 goals into cross-sectoral platforms
  • Use scenario-based policy modeling (e.g., impact of oil shock on poverty, water stress on urban migration)
  • Improve inter-ministerial data sharing and coordination
  • Leverage partnerships with UNDP, UNESCAP, and Think Tanks for systemic capacity-building
  1. Conclusion

In an era where pandemics, climate disasters, debt crises, and technological shifts transcend borders, Pakistan’s survival and progress demand a shift from reactive to systemic thinking. STT offers a powerful lens to craft coherent, resilient, and adaptive policies.

“Systems Thinking doesn’t solve problems—it reframes them so that solutions become possible.” – Donella Meadows

By embracing interconnectedness, foresight, and adaptability, Pakistan can navigate the turbulence of globalization and build a future anchored in strategic systems alignment

Q4. Determine the factors in emergence of Neoliberal Institutionalism; highlight your discussion with practices of International Financial Institutions and Pakistan.

Answer Features:

  • Explains historical, theoretical, and global context for the rise of Neoliberal Institutionalism
  • Contrasts it with Classical Realism and Neorealism
  • Highlights role of international financial institutions (IFIs) like IMF, World Bank, WTO
  • Anchors answer in Pakistan’s experience with structural adjustment, FATF compliance, and global governance
  • Includes scholarly views, facts, quotes, and tables as per CSS acing requirements

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Understanding Neoliberal Institutionalism
  3. Historical Factors Behind Its Emergence
    • a. Post-World War II Liberal Order
    • b. Interdependence and Complex Cooperation
    • c. Failures of Neorealism to Explain Peace and Integration
  4. Key Principles of Neoliberal Institutionalism
  5. Role of International Financial Institutions (IFIs) in Promoting Neoliberalism
    • a. IMF
    • b. World Bank
    • c. WTO
  6. Pakistan’s Engagement with IFIs: A Neoliberal Institutional Case
    • a. IMF Programs and Structural Adjustments
    • b. World Bank Projects and Conditionalities
    • c. FATF and Institutional Reforms
  7. Critical Appraisal: Benefits and Criticism
  8. Theoretical Evaluation and Real-World Relevance
  9. Conclusion
  10. Table: IFI Conditionalities and Institutional Changes in Pakistan
  1. Introduction

The post-Cold War world has seen a marked shift in global governance through institutions. Neoliberal Institutionalism emerged as a dominant theory in International Relations (IR), offering a liberal critique to the Realist worldview. It argues that despite anarchy, states can cooperate, especially through international institutions that facilitate transparency, information sharing, and compliance.

“Institutions matter. They reduce uncertainty and promote cooperation.” – Robert Keohane (1984)

  1. Understanding Neoliberal Institutionalism

Neoliberal Institutionalism (NLI) is an IR theory that acknowledges an anarchic international system but argues that states pursue absolute gains and benefit from cooperation via rules-based institutions. It emphasizes:

  • Mutual interdependence
  • Long-term interests over short-term power
  • Role of international regimes in shaping behavior

NLI contrasts sharply with Neorealism which focuses solely on power and relative gains.

  1. Historical Factors Behind Its Emergence
  2. Post-WWII Institutionalization
  • Formation of Bretton Woods institutions (IMF, WB, GATT)
  • United Nations, NATO, and OECD reinforced belief in institutional solutions
  1. Complex Interdependence (1970s)
  • Rise of global trade, MNCs, and technology integration
  • States faced common problems: oil shocks, debt crises, environmental risks
  1. Failure of Neorealism
  • Neorealism couldn’t explain European integration (EU), US–China cooperation, or WTO’s effectiveness
  • Peace between rivals (e.g., US–Japan) challenged realist pessimism
  1. Key Principles of Neoliberal Institutionalism

Principle

Explanation

Cooperation is Rational

Institutions help states escape the prisoner’s dilemma

Absolute Gains Matter

Focus on long-term benefits rather than relative advantages

Institutions Reduce Transaction Costs

By offering rules, dispute resolution, and info-sharing

International Regimes

Norms and expectations guide behavior even in anarchy

  1. Role of IFIs in Promoting Neoliberalism
  2. IMF
  • Offers balance-of-payments support in exchange for macroeconomic reforms
  • Promotes fiscal discipline, trade liberalization, monetary tightening
  1. World Bank
  • Provides development financing with conditions promoting privatization, deregulation, poverty targeting
  • Integrates states into market-oriented global economy
  1. WTO
  • Encourages free trade, non-discrimination, tariff reduction
  • Legally binds members into rules-based trade regimes

“IFIs are the vanguards of Neoliberalism, institutionalizing market logic globally.” – Joseph Stiglitz (2002)

  1. Pakistan’s Engagement with IFIs: A Neoliberal Institutional Case
  2. IMF and Structural Adjustments
  • Pakistan joined IMF in 1950, but post-1988, reforms accelerated
  • Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) in 1990s pushed:
    • Subsidy cuts on electricity and agriculture
    • Privatization of state-owned enterprises (PIA, PTCL)
    • Tax reforms and austerity measures

In 2019, Pakistan signed a $6 billion IMF EFF program, conditioning monetary tightening and autonomy of SBP.

  1. World Bank Projects
  • World Bank backed National Education Reforms, Ehsaas Program, and Climate Resilience Initiatives
  • Loans conditional on governance reforms, procurement transparency, and gender inclusion
  1. FATF Compliance and Neoliberal Discipline
  • Pakistan placed on FATF grey list (2018–2022) for failure to curb terror financing
  • Compliance led to legal reforms (Anti-Money Laundering Act, CFT laws), institutional strengthening (Nacta, FIA reforms)
  • Reflects institutional behavioral change due to global norms pressure
  1. Critical Appraisal: Benefits and Criticism

✔️ Benefits

  • Institutionalization of reforms (e.g., SBP independence, tax digitalization)
  • Greater fiscal transparency and governance alignment
  • Integration into global markets and investment flows

❌ Criticisms

  • Loss of economic sovereignty
  • SAPs led to unemployment and poverty spikes in 1990s
  • IFIs blamed for one-size-fits-all approach and overemphasis on austerity

“IMF prescriptions often prioritize macroeconomic metrics over human lives.” – Amartya Sen

  1. Theoretical Evaluation and Real-World Relevance
  • Neoliberal Institutionalism explains why Pakistan continues to comply despite domestic opposition
  • Institutions like IMF and FATF create path dependencies and incentive systems
  • Yet, Realist critique remains valid—states comply strategically when benefits outweigh costs
  1. Conclusion

The emergence of Neoliberal Institutionalism marked a shift in IR theory, emphasizing institutionalized cooperation and absolute gains. Pakistan’s economic history, marked by frequent IMF engagement, WB reforms, and FATF pressures, is a textbook case of institutional influence shaping domestic policy.

While institutions offer frameworks for global integration and cooperation, Pakistan must balance neoliberal compliance with safeguarding national interests and ensuring inclusive growth.

“Institutions can guide the path, but the journey must align with the people’s needs.” – Shaukat Aziz, Former PM of Pakistan

Q5. How can the energy crisis of Pakistan be resolved? Emphasize your discussion vis-à-vis China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).

Answer Features:

  • Diagnoses Pakistan’s structural energy crisis with statistics
  • Examines CPEC’s contribution to generation, transmission, and policy reforms
  • Highlights renewables, circular debt, governance, and geopolitical implications
  • Offers a comprehensive, multi-layered solution framework
  • Includes maps, tables, and real-world data to support arguments

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Understanding Pakistan’s Energy Crisis
    • a. Nature of the Crisis
    • b. Key Structural Causes
  3. Role of CPEC in Energy Sector Development
    • a. Energy Projects under CPEC
    • b. Generation Capacity Addition
    • c. Infrastructure and Grid Investment
  4. Limitations and Missed Opportunities of CPEC
  5. Broader Strategic Solutions
    • a. Renewable Energy Transition
    • b. Circular Debt Resolution
    • c. Governance and Regulatory Reform
    • d. Regional Energy Connectivity
    • e. Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs)
  6. Strategic Significance of Energy Security
  7. Conclusion
  8. Table: Major CPEC Energy Projects
  1. Introduction

The energy crisis in Pakistan is a chronic and multidimensional challenge that continues to undermine economic productivity, industrial growth, and human development. Frequent power outages, unaffordable tariffs, and circular debt plague the system.

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)—a $62 billion initiative under China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)—has emerged as a game-changer in energy development, but structural inefficiencies remain unresolved.

  1. Understanding Pakistan’s Energy Crisis
  2. Nature of the Crisis
  • Demand–supply mismatch: ~29,000 MW demand vs. ~25,000 MW available (peak shortage ~4000 MW)
  • Circular debt exceeding PKR 2.6 trillion (as of 2023)
  • High transmission losses: ~18–20%
  • Overreliance on imported fossil fuels
  1. Key Structural Causes
  • Inadequate investment in generation and transmission
  • Poor governance in DISCOs (distribution companies)
  • Price distortions due to subsidies and theft
  • Delay in adoption of renewable energy mix (wind, solar, hydro)

“Energy insecurity is not just about outages—it’s about institutional dysfunction.” — Dr. Hafiz Pasha

  1. Role of CPEC in Energy Sector Development

CPEC has channeled nearly $35 billion into Pakistan’s energy sector, targeting short-term shortages and long-term capacity building.

  1. Energy Projects under CPEC

Project

Capacity (MW)

Type

Location

Port Qasim Power Plant

1320

Coal

Karachi

Sahiwal Coal Plant

1320

Coal

Punjab

Engro Thar Coal Block II

660

Coal (Lignite)

Sindh (Thar)

Quaid-e-Azam Solar Park

1000

Solar

Bahawalpur

Karot Hydropower

720

Hydro

AJ&K/Punjab border

  1. Generation Capacity Addition
  • CPEC contributed ~10,000 MW to national grid
  • Helped reduce load-shedding from 12–14 hours/day (2013) to 4–6 hours/day (2018)
  1. Transmission and Infrastructure
  • Matiari–Lahore ±660 kV HVDC transmission line operational
  • CPEC catalyzed infrastructure upgrades to carry new power
  1. Limitations and Missed Opportunities of CPEC
  • Overdependence on coal (environmental cost + import burden)
  • Delays in hydropower and renewable components
  • Limited focus on DISCO reforms or circular debt reduction
  • Poor coordination between federal and provincial energy planning

“CPEC solved megawatt shortages but ignored megawatt management.” – Dr. Abid Suleri (SDPI)

  1. Broader Strategic Solutions
  2. Renewable Energy Transition
  • Shift from coal-heavy to green energy mix
  • Exploit untapped solar (2.9 million MW) and wind (340,000 MW) potential
  • Introduce net-metering and incentives for distributed generation
  1. Circular Debt Resolution
  • Introduce prepaid smart meters to reduce theft
  • Privatize poorly performing DISCOs
  • Shift to cost-reflective tariffs with targeted subsidies
  1. Governance and Regulatory Reform
  • Empower NEPRA as independent regulator
  • Encourage performance-based funding for DISCOs
  • Depoliticize board appointments
  1. Regional Energy Connectivity
  • Leverage Central Asia–South Asia (CASA-1000) hydropower transmission
  • Partner with Iran for electricity import in Balochistan
  • Explore Pak-China-Afghanistan trilateral grid integration
  1. Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs)
  • Expand private sector participation in renewables and efficiency projects
  • Provide guarantees and insurance through Sinosure and WAPDA
  1. Strategic Significance of Energy Security
  • National security: Energy disruption affects military and digital systems
  • Industrial revival: Textiles, cement, and IT require 24/7 reliable power
  • Climate diplomacy: Green energy transition aligns with SDGs and COP commitments
  • Debt stabilization: Reducing fuel imports improves balance of payments

“Energy security is economic security—and both are national security.” – Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, Former PM

  1. Conclusion

While CPEC has delivered short-term relief to Pakistan’s energy woes, the long-term solution requires systemic reforms, diversification of energy sources, and improved governance.

Pakistan must pivot from ‘megawatt thinking’ to ‘energy systems thinking’—ensuring that future expansion is green, smart, and economically sustainable. CPEC can serve as a launchpad, not a crutch, for Pakistan’s energy transformation.

Q6. Evaluate the significance of water conflict between India and Pakistan in perspective of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT).

Answer Features:

  • Presents historical and legal background of the Indus Waters Treaty (1960)
  • Evaluates India–Pakistan water conflict in light of hydro-politics, strategic rivalry, and international law
  • Discusses Kishanganga, Baglihar, Ratle disputes
  • Provides data, quotes, maps, and analysis of climate stress and population growth
  • Suggests resolutions via diplomacy, mediation, and environmental cooperation

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Historical Background of the Indus Waters Treaty
  3. Treaty Provisions and Mechanisms
  4. Emergence of the Water Conflict
    • a. Indian Hydropower Projects
    • b. Pakistan’s Objections
  5. Legal and Strategic Dimensions
  6. Role of Climate Change and Demography
  7. Water as a Weapon?
  8. International Responses and Third-Party Mediation
  9. Way Forward: Conflict Resolution & Cooperation
  10. Conclusion
  11. Table: Major Disputed Projects and Treaty Status
  1. Introduction

Water is the lifeline of agriculture and survival, especially in South Asia, where two nuclear-armed rivals—India and Pakistan—depend heavily on the Indus River System. The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), signed in 1960 with the help of the World Bank, has long been considered a model of water-sharing diplomacy.

However, increasing strategic tensions, Indian dam constructions, climate vulnerability, and mutual mistrust have turned water from a shared resource into a potential flashpoint in bilateral relations.

“The next war in our region will be over water, not oil.” — Ismail Serageldin, Former World Bank VP

  1. Historical Background of the Indus Waters Treaty
  • Signed in 1960 by Indian PM Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistani President Ayub Khan, mediated by the World Bank
  • Divided the six rivers of the Indus system:
    • Eastern Rivers: Ravi, Beas, Sutlej → allocated to India
    • Western Rivers: Indus, Jhelum, Chenab → allocated to Pakistan with India allowed limited use
  • The IWT survived three wars (1965, 1971, 1999) and decades of mistrust, making it a rare example of functional cooperation
  1. Treaty Provisions and Mechanisms
  • Establishes the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) for dialogue
  • Grants India non-consumptive use (hydropower, transport) on western rivers
  • Pakistan may raise objections to any Indian design perceived to violate the treaty
  • Dispute resolution via neutral experts, arbitration, or the World Bank
  1. Emergence of the Water Conflict
  2. Indian Hydropower Projects

India has initiated numerous projects on western rivers, which Pakistan claims alter flow timing and volume, violating the treaty:

Project

River

Capacity (MW)

Pakistan’s Concern

Baglihar

Chenab

450 + 450

Excessive pondage, gated spillways

Kishanganga

Neelum

330

Diversion of water to Jhelum

Ratle

Chenab

850

Design violates IWT provisions

  1. Pakistan’s Objections
  • Filed complaints with the Permanent Indus Commission, then World Bank arbitration
  • Fears India’s upstream control can be weaponized in times of conflict
  1. Legal and Strategic Dimensions
  • India argues its projects follow the IWT’s technical criteria and are for non-consumptive use
  • Pakistan views these as strategic encroachments on lifeline rivers
  • IWT allows India “run-of-the-river” projects but requires detailed design submissions, which India often delays or avoids

“The Treaty does not grant India the right to manipulate river flows at will.” – Justice (R) Shamsuddin, Pakistan’s Water Expert

  1. Role of Climate Change and Demography
  • Pakistan faces severe water stress, expected to reach absolute scarcity (below 500 m³ per capita/year) by 2025
  • Melting glaciers, erratic monsoons, and glacial lake outbursts (GLOFs) affect river flows
  • Population growth → demand surge for irrigation, drinking, and energy
  • Groundwater depletion accelerates due to lack of recharge from reduced river flows
  1. Water as a Weapon?

After the 2016 Uri attack, Indian PM Narendra Modi remarked:

“Blood and water cannot flow together.”

This raised fears of India revoking the IWT, though legally difficult. India has threatened to maximize its allowed usage, potentially cutting seasonal flows into Pakistan.

Pakistan perceives this as hydro-diplomatic coercion—a modern non-kinetic pressure tactic.

  1. International Responses and Third-Party Mediation
  • The World Bank paused arbitration in 2016–2017 to resolve legal issues between the parties
  • In 2023, Pakistan again approached the World Bank due to continued disagreements over Kishanganga and Ratle
  • Global actors including China, US, and Gulf states have encouraged restraint, fearing water conflict escalation in a nuclear region
  1. Way Forward: Conflict Resolution & Cooperation
  1. Revisiting the Treaty Mechanisms:
    • Modernize IWT to address climate variability, data sharing, and early warning systems
  2. Joint Environmental Monitoring:
    • Co-develop glacial monitoring, flood forecasting systems
  3. Track-II Diplomacy:
    • Academic, civil society, and water experts’ dialogues can bridge mistrust
  4. Water-Climate Linkage:
    • Align cooperation with Paris Agreement and SDGs (Goal 6) on water security
  5. Arbitration and Legal Recourse:
    • Use International Court of Arbitration (ICA) where deadlock persists
  1. Conclusion

The Indus Waters Treaty remains a rare beacon of resilience in India–Pakistan relations, yet the water conflict is intensifying due to hydropower race, climate insecurity, and geopolitical mistrust.

Water must not be viewed as a weapon but as a shared vulnerability requiring collective responsibility. Both nations must reinvigorate institutional cooperation, update treaty mechanisms, and engage in climate-sensitive diplomacy to secure sustainable peace and regional stability.

Q7. Discuss “Nuclear Factor” as one of the major determinants of International Politics with reference to USA, India, and Pakistan

✅ Answer Features:

  • Explains the evolution of nuclear deterrence theory in IR
  • Examines nuclear doctrines of USA, India, and Pakistan
  • Analyzes the nuclear factor’s impact on bilateral and regional power dynamics
  • Includes facts, quotes, IR theory, and strategic stability discussion
  • Provides a comparative table of nuclear postures

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Theoretical Foundation of the Nuclear Factor in IR
  3. United States: Global Nuclear Hegemon
    • a. Deterrence and Alliance Management
    • b. Non-Proliferation Regime
  4. India’s Nuclear Posture
    • a. Strategic Autonomy and NFU Doctrine
    • b. Evolution under Strategic Competition with China and Pakistan
  5. Pakistan’s Nuclear Policy
    • a. Minimum Credible Deterrence
    • b. Full Spectrum Deterrence
  6. South Asia: Regional Impact of the Nuclear Factor
  7. Strategic Stability, Brinkmanship, and Deterrence
  8. Challenges to the Nuclear Order
  9. Conclusion
  10. Table: Comparative Doctrines and Capabilities
  1. Introduction

The “nuclear factor” has been one of the most powerful forces shaping global politics since 1945. It has transformed state behavior by altering the cost-benefit analysis of war, ushering in what Kenneth Waltz termed “the nuclear peace.”

In the context of USA, India, and Pakistan, nuclear capability has not only shaped power balances, but also influenced alliances, deterrence strategies, and regional stability.

“The possession of nuclear weapons changes everything except human nature.” – Frederick Dunn

  1. Theoretical Foundation of the Nuclear Factor in IR

According to Neorealist theory, nuclear weapons serve as ultimate deterrents in an anarchic world. Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) underpins nuclear stability between rival states.

Key IR concepts:

  • Deterrence: Threat of massive retaliation prevents first strikes
  • Second-Strike Capability: Ensures survivability and retaliation
  • Extended Deterrence: A state deters attack on its allies
  • Credibility and Brinkmanship: Vital for stable deterrence
  1. United States: Global Nuclear Hegemon
  2. Deterrence and Alliance Management
  • The US was the first nuclear state (1945) and remains the largest nuclear spender
  • Maintains strategic triad: land, sea, air-based nuclear systems
  • Provides extended deterrence to NATO, Japan, and South Korea
  • Uses nuclear arsenal to shape international norms and enforce balance
  1. Non-Proliferation Leadership
  • Key architect of NPT (1968), CTBT, and IAEA Safeguards
  • Pursues dual-track strategy: prevention of new nuclear states and modernization of own arsenal
  • Engaged in arms control agreements: INF, New START (Russia), but withdrew from JCPOA (Iran)

“The US nuclear arsenal is not only for defense—it is a geopolitical tool.” – Henry Kissinger

  1. India’s Nuclear Posture
  2. Strategic Autonomy and NFU
  • Conducted nuclear tests in 1974 (Smiling Buddha) and 1998 (Pokhran-II)
  • Declared a No First Use (NFU) policy with credible minimum deterrence
  • Maintains a tri-service strategic command and growing SSBN fleet
  • Emphasizes strategic autonomy, resisting arms control treaties like NPT
  1. Evolving Doctrine
  • China’s missile developments and border tensions (e.g., 2020 Galwan clash) impact Indian nuclear planning
  • Shift toward preemptive counterforce doctrine hinted by Indian leadership (e.g., 2019 Rajnath Singh remarks)
  1. Pakistan’s Nuclear Policy
  2. Minimum Credible Deterrence
  • Response to India’s 1974 test; nuclearized in 1998 (Chagai-I)
  • Developed short-range delivery systems (Nasr) to deter conventional Indian threats
  • Aims to deter both nuclear and large-scale conventional aggression
  1. Full Spectrum Deterrence
  • Incorporates tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) into doctrine
  • Focused on deterrence at all levels of threat spectrum
  • Maintains non-declared nuclear posture with second-strike ambiguity

“Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine reflects its strategic compulsions, not ambitions.” – Gen. Khalid Kidwai, Former SPD Director

  1. South Asia: Regional Impact of the Nuclear Factor
  • Avoidance of full-scale wars post-1998 (e.g., Kargil 1999) shows deterrence effect
  • Nuclear weapons have not eliminated conflict, but constrained escalation
  • Risk of miscalculation remains high due to lack of crisis stability mechanisms

Key Crises:

  • Kargil War (1999): Nuclear backdrop prevented escalation beyond LoC
  • Operation Parakram (2001–02): India’s mobilization halted due to nuclear deterrence
  • Balakot Crisis (2019): First use of airpower between nuclear powers since 1971; restraint shown
  1. Strategic Stability, Brinkmanship, and Deterrence

Country

Deterrence Type

Nuclear Posture

Doctrinal Clarity

USA

Global + Extended

Second-strike assured

High

India

Regional

NFU (shifting?)

Medium

Pakistan

Defensive–Tactical Blend

Full Spectrum Deterrence

Ambiguous

  • Pakistan’s development of TNWs (Nasr) adds unpredictability
  • India’s shift from NFU to potential preemptive strike capability increases instability
  • Absence of Hotline protocols, arms control treaties, and confidence-building measures in South Asia poses long-term risk
  1. Challenges to the Nuclear Order
  • Asymmetry of power and capabilities between India and Pakistan
  • Weaponization of space and ballistic missile defense (BMD) systems complicate deterrence
  • Non-state actors and the risk of nuclear terrorism
  • US support for India’s entry into NSG perceived by Pakistan as strategic imbalance

“In a world of competing nationalisms, the nuclear factor acts both as a restraint and a temptation.” – Ashley Tellis

  1. Conclusion

The nuclear factor remains a cornerstone of global and regional security architecture, especially with respect to the USA’s global role and the delicate balance in South Asia between India and Pakistan.

While it has helped prevent full-scale wars, nuclear weapons are not a panacea for peace. They demand doctrinal clarity, crisis communication, and institutional maturity to prevent accidental or irrational escalation.

Future stability depends on:

  • Enhancing strategic dialogue
  • Establishing crisis management protocols
  • Pursuing confidence-building measures and regional arms control
  1. Table: Comparative Overview of Nuclear Postures

Factor

USA

India

Pakistan

First Use Policy

Ambiguous

No First Use (debatable)

First Use (undeclared)

Triad Capability

Yes

Partial (SSBN developing)

No

Tactical Nukes

Yes

No

Yes (Nasr)

Strategic Doctrine

Global Deterrence

Minimum Credible Deterrence

Full Spectrum Deterrence

Q8. Pakistan is one of the top 10 countries hit by global climate change trends: what can be the ways and means to manage climate change trends?

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Pakistan’s Climate Vulnerability in Global Context
  3. IR Perspective: Climate Change as a Non-Traditional Security Threat
  4. Major Impacts of Climate Change in Pakistan
    • a. Environmental
    • b. Economic
    • c. Social
  5. Ways and Means to Manage Climate Change
    • a. Climate Adaptation Strategies
    • b. Mitigation Measures
    • c. Institutional and Policy Reforms
    • d. Climate Finance and Technology Transfer
    • e. Regional and International Cooperation
    • f. Public Awareness and Local Participation
  6. Case Study: 2022 Super Floods
  7. Conclusion
  8. Table: Policy Actions Matrix
  1. Introduction

Climate change is no longer a distant threat; it is a lived reality for Pakistan, where extreme weather, water insecurity, and glacial melting are disrupting lives and livelihoods. According to the Global Climate Risk Index 2021, Pakistan ranked 8th most affected country globally in the last two decades.

“We are victims of a problem we didn’t create.” — Sherry Rehman, Pakistan’s Climate Minister at COP27

Pakistan’s position as a climate-vulnerable, low-emission country calls for both national adaptation and international climate justice mechanisms.

  1. Pakistan’s Climate Vulnerability in Global Context
  • Pakistan contributes less than 1% to global GHG emissions
  • Yet it faces:
    • Frequent floods and droughts
    • Glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs)
    • Agricultural losses
    • Heatwaves and rising sea levels
  1. IR Perspective: Climate Change as a Non-Traditional Security Threat

In International Relations, climate change is a non-traditional security threat, affecting:

  • Water, food, and energy security
  • Human displacement and conflict risks
  • Interstate cooperation and aid dependence

Frameworks like Environmental Security Theory and Securitization Theory view climate change as a threat multiplier, especially in fragile states like Pakistan.

  1. Major Impacts of Climate Change in Pakistan
  2. Environmental
  • 35 glaciers melting rapidly (Hindu Kush–Himalaya belt)
  • Increase in GLOF events in Gilgit-Baltistan and Chitral
  • Soil erosion and desertification in Sindh and Balochistan
  1. Economic
  • Agriculture loss: 45% of labor force affected by weather shifts
  • 2022 floods caused $30 billion in damages
  • Infrastructure destroyed: 13,000 km roads, 2 million homes
  1. Social
  • Over 33 million people displaced in 2022 floods
  • Rise in water-borne diseases, malnutrition, and poverty
  1. Ways and Means to Manage Climate Change
  2. Climate Adaptation Strategies
  • Expand National Adaptation Plan (NAP)
  • Construct climate-resilient infrastructure in vulnerable zones
  • Promote drought-resistant crops and agroforestry
  1. Mitigation Measures
  • Implement Renewable Energy Policy 2030 to achieve 60% clean energy share
  • Improve public transport systems to cut urban emissions
  • Introduce green building codes and urban forestation
  1. Institutional and Policy Reforms
  • Strengthen the role of Ministry of Climate Change (MoCC)
  • Establish Climate Risk Management Authority
  • Improve coordination between NDMA, provinces, and civil society
  1. Climate Finance and Technology Transfer
  • Leverage Green Climate Fund (GCF) and Loss and Damage Fund (COP27)
  • Secure low-interest green loans from ADB, World Bank
  • Encourage China-Pakistan Environmental Cooperation under BRI

“Developed nations must honor the $100 billion/year pledge to the Global South.” — Antonio Guterres, UN Secretary-General

  1. Regional and International Cooperation
  • Collaborate with SAARC, ECO, and ASEAN on regional climate monitoring
  • Expand transboundary water diplomacy on Indus and Kabul rivers
  • Align with SDGs (Goal 13) and Paris Agreement targets
  1. Public Awareness and Local Participation
  • Launch school-based climate literacy programs
  • Empower local governments and women-led NGOs for climate planning
  • Use digital tools (SMS alerts, climate apps) for early warning
  1. Case Study: 2022 Super Floods
  • Rainfall was 5x higher than average in Sindh and Balochistan
  • Affected 1 in every 7 Pakistanis
  • Crop loss: ~80% in Sindh (cotton, wheat)
  • Illustrates need for pre-disaster planning vs. post-disaster response
  1. Conclusion

Pakistan’s climate crisis is no longer a threat of the future—it is a present catastrophe. Addressing it requires a multi-level approach, combining local resilience, national reforms, and global cooperation.

Pakistan must adopt “climate-centric governance”, ensuring that every sectoral policy integrates climate resilience. International justice must also be upheld, with polluting nations compensating climate-vulnerable states like Pakistan.

  1. Table: Policy Actions Matrix

Sector

Adaptation

Mitigation

Stakeholders

Agriculture

Climate-resilient seeds

Smart irrigation

Ministry of Food, NGOs

Urban Planning

Flood zoning, green belts

Green buildings

CDA, Provincial Authorities

Energy

Hydropower, solar microgrids

Wind, solar, bioenergy

NEPRA, Private Sector

Governance

NAPs, Risk Authority

Cross-ministerial coordination

MoCC, NDMA, Planning Commission

International

GCF, COP participation

Carbon markets

UNFCCC, ADB, IMF

. . IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 IR II-2017 

You cannot copy content of this pages.