The Kashmir policy of the United States: A study of the perceptions, conflicts and dilemmas

Palit, Parama Sinha

doi:10.1080/09700160108458997

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, the security decisions made by the United States in the region have constantly aimed to enhance the regional conditions with the objective of promoting a fair and equitable resolution to the Kashmir conflict. Despite the evolving perspective of the United States on the Kashmir issue, the fundamental stance that Kashmir is a contentious region between India and Pakistan remains unchanged (Palit, 2001). United States officials have recognised that a shared comprehension of the strategic occurrences occurring in South Asia, as observed from Islamabad and New Delhi, could create a favourable atmosphere for collaboration between the two neighbouring countries in their efforts to achieve peace and security in the region.…”

Section: Us and Major Power Peacekeeping Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

South Asian Conflicts and Regional Security in the Context of Pakistan-India Relations: A Political Analysis

Parveen

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pakistan and India are geographically proximate and possess a shared historical and cultural background. Consequently, they ought to possess the most favourable interactions, although they have consistently exhibited hostility towards one another. The subject of Kashmir holds significant importance for both states involved. The conflict has occurred on three separate occasions. Despite the existence of significant and effective endeavours aimed at fostering peace, the fundamental challenges that perpetuate the strained relations between the two nations remain unresolved. Pakistan has consistently demonstrated a willingness to propose potential improvements. However, India does not consistently accord them due consideration. India and Pakistan have maintained their independence for a period of over 70 years; nonetheless, they exhibit a lack of concern towards addressing enduring challenges such as the Kashmir dispute and the water crisis. The region of South Asia is predominantly characterised by peace and stability for the two major nations. The inability of the two primary actors in South Asia to reach a peaceful resolution to their respective issues has significant implications for the local security framework.

show abstract

Section: Us and Major Power Peacekeeping Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

South Asian Conflicts and Regional Security in the Context of Pakistan-India Relations: A Political Analysis

Parveen

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…She articulated, "The intention behind the statement was to convey that Kashmir occupies a prominent position on our geopolitical awareness, akin to regions such as Yugoslavia, Somalia, and various territories within the former Soviet Union, including Georgia, where internal strife persists. "We must not underestimate its significance, for within it lays a profound message (Palit, 2001). The United States was vigilantly monitoring the prevailing circumstances in the region of Kashmir.…”

Section: The Us's Role As a Peacemaker After The Cold Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Evaluation of the Mediatory Role Played by the United States in the India-Pakistan Conflict

2023

IJFMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Throughout the Cold War, the US, a strategic ally of Pakistan, forced India to accept the settlement of the Kashmir issue through political will, diplomacy, and economic measures. However, in the post-Cold War era, the US role changed from conflict resolution to crisis management, including defusing tension between the two adversaries. Donald Trump, the president of the United States, has taken up that position and given Pakistan and India a way to end the long-running dispute in Kashmir. As a result, this study concludes that the US's desire to mediate has altered as a result of geopolitical and geostrategic objectives in South Asia, such as the Cold War's strategic conflicts between the US and the Soviet Union and the US's subsequent encirclement of China. This essay also examines the US's attempts at mediation throughout the Cold War and why those efforts were unsuccessful. In addition, how did the US's mediation role affect India's Kashmir policies throughout the Cold War and after? Finally, despite Pakistan's involvement in the US-Taliban peace process in Afghanistan, this study examines the main reasons why the US is politically motivated to end the India-Pakistan conflict.

show abstract

“…The USA's pronounced neutrality in the Indo-Pakistani border skirmishes during the Cold War is an example. For the United States, remaining silent was the lesser of two evils: condoning could have emboldened Pakistan and might have resulted in unwanted conflict, while criticism could have weakened its sphere of influence in the region vis-à-vis the Soviet Union, India's patron (Palit, 2001).…”

Section: A Patron's Strategic Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

To condone, condemn, or ‘no comment’? Explaining a patron’s reaction to a client’s unilateral provocations

Kim¹,

2019

Journal of Peace Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What explains a patron’s decision to publicly condone, condemn, or forgo commenting on its client’s unilateral provocations? We present a new theoretical framework that identifies a patron’s two strategic considerations – maximizing its sphere of influence and avoiding entanglement – and factors that affect them. We claim that whenever a patron faces a great power rivalry or a vulnerable client, it is more likely to condone its client’s provocations in order to safeguard its sphere of influence. On the other hand, when the risk of escalation looms large, the patron is more likely to condemn its client’s provocations in order to avoid entanglement. Focusing on the Sino-North Korean patron–client relationship, we test our theory on an original dataset that tracks China’s official reactions to provocations initiated by North Korea. We find that China tends to condone North Korea’s provocations when the USA criticizes them, and refrains from condemning when North Korea is domestically fragile. We also find that China is more likely to condemn its client’s provocations in the period after North Korea became a nuclear state. In addition, we draw on examples from the USA–Pakistan and the USA–Israel patron–client relationships to illustrate our causal logic. This article offers new insights on how a patron manages its client’s unruly behavior, and provides the first large-N evidence on China’s responses to North Korean provocations from 1981 to 2016.

show abstract

The Kashmir policy of the United States: A study of the perceptions, conflicts and dilemmas

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

South Asian Conflicts and Regional Security in the Context of Pakistan-India Relations: A Political Analysis

South Asian Conflicts and Regional Security in the Context of Pakistan-India Relations: A Political Analysis

A Critical Evaluation of the Mediatory Role Played by the United States in the India-Pakistan Conflict

To condone, condemn, or ‘no comment’? Explaining a patron’s reaction to a client’s unilateral provocations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About