The current status of Kashmir is of grave international concern. Kashmir is being severely overlooked as a third party while two nuclear powers, India and Pakistan have battled both diplomatically and militarily without cessation.
Since 1947, during the partition of India and Pakistan into two separate states, control of Kashmir and the formation of the Line of Control (LoC) through the territory has been at the forefront of securing both countries` national identities. Both countries, and this has been proven in the last 60 years, fail to want to compromise or negotiate a solution that will result in the best possible payoff for one another.
India`s military spending, which trumps Pakistan`s military expenditures, seems able to pour millions of dollars into maintaining the LoC. Pakistan seems willing to maintain the stalemate, with great pleasure in holding the capability of nuclear annihilation should it come to war with neighbouring India.
The Kashmiri problem is, to say the least, a difficult issue, and the international community and especially the Kashmiri people would ultimately like the situation resolved sooner rather than later.
To say there is one factor contributing to the demise of the situation is naive: The Kashmiri situation has incalculable factors which come into play when determining if there is indeed a solution. Anticipating the future, and predicting if relations between India and Pakistan will strengthen or cease because of Kashmir is, of course, impossible, but I believe that looking to the conflicts that have occurred in the past and providing careful analyses of the situations may determine the course of action of the two countries and bring finality to the Kashmir problem.
Questions that both countries have asked for a great deal of time are: Are we willing to risk vulnerability, should we be nice to the other country, should we provoke the other country, knowing full well that this could escalate to total nuclear war? Will we ever be able to forgive the other country for what they have done in the past, if so, should there be action taken, and if not, will there be repercussions, sanctions or poor relations between us?
The important thing to maintain is that with both countries having an entirely different philosophy on Kashmir, religion, politics, life, and warfare - questions like these cannot be solved in the course of a couple of years - these differences have plagued both India and Pakistan for over 60 years.
In India and Pakistan there are several points to consider when dealing with the issue of Kashmir, including the series of ineffective heads of state, interstate and intrastate policies, political and religious identity issues, geostrategic importance, military balance, sovereignty, and ideological and religious disputes.
Two players, India and Pakistan, are competing against one another in a non-cooperative game and the results will be determined by the way they play the game (for example negotiating tactics and handling disputes and conflicts). Some of the aims are to prove that although as some deterrence authors believe, no previous event acts as a predictor for what will happen in the future, this does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that past events between India and Pakistan have no bearing whatsoever on the events in the future. To strategize based on extrapolated formulae would more than likely lead to an undesired result (for either player) and worst case scenario - failure (and triumph for the other player).
There are a number of possibilities that may engulf Pakistan in regards to its relation with India - a full scale nuclear war could threaten both countries` existence, a major war could divide the country on a number of issues, prolonged resistance regarding Kashmir could wear down the country psychologically and militarily and divide the country, however a success or failure could lead to an entire change of policy for Pakistan, but the chance of conceding Kashmir is next to nil.
In applying game theory, decision making among states is often strictly guided by making and implementing rational choices. When irrationality prevails, it is often under the pretext that the situation has in a way turned undesirable in some shape, way or form. The state that India, Pakistan and Kashmir find themselves is a good example of the Nash Equilibrium, which states that no individual wishes to deviate from the social norm and that expectations are coordinated.
India believes that Pakistan will do the rational thing and vice versa. In applying Nash, it shows unbelievably that Pakistan and India`s efforts are coordinated, whether they choose to believe in this or not.
A Nash Equilibrium is ideally the situation both parties would like to be in because whatever the other player intends to do will result in a less than perfect outcome. If this occurs on a regular basis, one player will always want to deviate from their selection, causing a worse payoff for them, but the best payoff for the other player, something that does not make sense to perform.
Kashmir represents such an important landmark in India-Pakistan relations, and because it is simply not an easily conquerable land that favours one side more than the other (India), it presents a bigger problem in the fact that there is tension not just between the main players, but also between the relationships of Kashmir and Pakistan and to a lesser degree Kashmir and India.
Basic game theory applies to the timeframe in a conflict when essential decisions need to be made, therefore strategy between two players can be directly correlated to the models offered. This is where the argument emerges against using the aforementioned events data. In using events data to predict a future outcome, the observer is ignoring coercion, short term cooperation, rational deterrence, bullying and believing that reciprocation will occur. Regardless if models are believed to be applied, the other state will conclude that the other state is operating on the strategy that they are employing the best strategy, one that will ensure themselves the greatest payoff, and the one that makes the most sense and is the most rational.
The conflict surrounding south Asia is of tremendous concern to the current state of the world. As Pakistan plays an integral part in becoming an ally to the western world in curbing the violence of the al-Qaeda network, the country still experiences threats from India in regards to, but not exclusive to Kashmir, as well as the dominant sectarian violence occurring in the country and all over the world - the battle between Sunnis and Shi`as. Unfortunately, Pakistan has also become one of the centres in the growing havens for terrorists and any future trouble in the region could lead to an already volatile global situation.