advertisement
After the deadly Pulwama attacks on CRPF jawans on 14 February, Indo-Pak relations seem to gone further sour.
With a lack of clarity on the exact details on the events, the hashtag #SayNoToWar trending, and rising nationalist fervour in both countries, there are many questions that need answering.
Meanwhile, international media outlets have been weighing in on two neighbouring, nuclear-armed countries’ escalating crisis. From talking about the opposing narratives of both countries to the possibility of war, here is a list of all that they said.
The Washington Post reported on the conflicting reports from Indian and Pakistani media outlets on the situation.
Read all the latest updates about the Indo-Pak crisis here.
The article further asserted that the “jingoism consuming popular opinion on both sides of the contested border” might make it difficult to de-escalate the situation.
However, The New York Times reported on how the conflicting story-lines about the events sent out by both governments, while confusing, could be a boon.
The article purported that the conflicting reports was a deliberate decision by the Indian and Pakistani governments, saying, “But in the jarring escalation of hostilities, the leadership of each nuclear-armed country also appeared to leave itself a way out of pushing the conflict into war.”
Looking at the regional crisis from a larger lens, The Guardian reported on the international community, and especially the US, urging “both sides to pull back from the brink.”
The article focussed on the US’ waning influence and lop-sided support under the Trump administration, as compared to earlier instances of the US using diplomacy to solve international crisis.
Associate professor of Disarmament Studies at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Happymon Jacob wrote for Al Jazeera on behind-the-scenes reasons for the crisis, such as the upcoming Indian elections and Pakistan’s need to save face post the attacks on their territory.
Jacob wrote on the confusing opposing narratives, “The scale of the "air battle" is difficult to gauge given conflicting reports.”
He added that “This is also a war of perceptions for both Modi and Khan” and after Pak PM Imran Khan’s speech earlier today, it is up to India to either choose an “unfavourable compromise or an escalation which would invariably involve more violence.”
BBC’s India correspondent reported on the uncertainty that lay ahead for both countries, and the rest of the world because of the possibility of nuclear use. The report also echoed other media outlets in saying that war was not in any country’s best interest, and de-escalation was possible although it was unclear which country would back down first.
Reiterating the need to bring down tensions but remain firm on an anti-terror stance, the article quoted Daniel Markey, a senior professor at Johns Hopkins University in the US saying, “The goal now is to introduce a higher level of punishment for each instance of Pakistani aggression.”
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)