Causes of the India–Pakistan enduring rivalry

Paul, T. V.

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511616112.002

Cited by 49 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet, the existence and persistence of a number of power-asymmetrical rivalries pose a challenge to realist assumptions: the USA and Cuba, for example, or more pertinently, India and Pakistan. Paul shows that while Pakistan is on a variety of material parameters (size, population, and conventional military capability), the weaker party vis-à-vis India, it has been able through strategy, external alliances, and weapons procurement to challenge India consistently since 1947 (Paul 2005a(Paul , 2005b(Paul , 2006.…”

Section: Interstate Level Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From “frozen conflict” to enduring rivalry: reassessing the Nagorny Karabakh conflict

Broers

2015

Natl. pap.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article draws on international relations theory to attempt a reframing of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict in Nagorny Karabakh as an enduring rivalry (ER): a particular kind of interstate conflict known for its longevity and stability. The article begins by identifying a number of conceptual deficits circulating around this conflict, notably the notion that it is a "frozen conflict," before introducing the ER framework and its analytical dividends for this case. Different layers of the ER between Armenia and Azerbaijan are then explored at systemic, interstate, domestic, decision-maker, and temporal levels, with a view more toward identifying directions for future research than conclusive findings. Among the article's tentative conclusions are the primacy of endogenous over exogenous factors in explaining the durability of the rivalry between Armenia and Azerbaijan, the impacts of the passage of time on the human and physical geography of the territory under dispute, and the convergence of conflict dynamics across disparate levels.

show abstract

Section: Interstate Level Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From “frozen conflict” to enduring rivalry: reassessing the Nagorny Karabakh conflict

Broers

2015

Natl. pap.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Binding (Ikenberry 2003;Rock 2000) Blackmailing (Lapp 2012;Walt 2005) Buck-passing (Chan 2010;Christensen and Snyder 1990;Mearsheimer 2001;Mochizuki 2007) Buffering (Gries 2005) Chain ganging (Christensen and Snyder 1990) Delegitimation (Walt 2005) Economic prebalancing (Layne 2006) Evasion (Bobrow 2008) Everyday and rightful resistance (Bobrow 2008;Destradi 2010;Ikenberry 2003;Ikenberry et al 2009;Prys 2010;Schweller and Pu 2011) Hedging (Goh 2005(Goh , 2008(Goh , 2011aHeginbotham and Samuels 2002;Kuik 2008;Medeiros 2005) Leash-slipping (Layne 2006) Log rolling (Ikenberry 2003) Niche diplomacy (Cooper 1997) Modification (Bobrow 2008) Omni-balancing (David 1991) Omni-enmeshment (Goh 2008) Pulling and hauling (Ikenberry 2003) Soft and indirect balancing (Goh 2008;Pape 2005;Paul 2005a)…”

Section: Competitivementioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics of Contestation in Asia: How Japan and Pakistan Deal with Their Rising Neighbors

Ebert¹,

Flemes²,

Strüver³

2014

The Chinese Journal of International Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rising powers have attracted tremendous interest in international politics and theory. Yet the ways in which secondary powers strategically respond to regional changes in the distribution of power have been largely neglected. This article seeks to fill this gap by presenting a systematic comparative analysis of the different types of and causes of contestation strategies undertaken by secondary powers. Empirically, it focuses on two contentious regional dyads in East and South Asia, exploring how structural, behavioral, and historical factors shape the way in which Japan and Pakistan respond, respectively, to China's and India's regional power politics. The paper concludes that the explanatory power of these factors depends on the particular context: in the case of Japan, China's militarily assertive regional role has invoked the most significant strategic shifts, while in the case of Pakistani contestation, shifts in polarity have had the largest impact on the strategic approach.

show abstract

“…The Pakistani elite has been unable to accept the division of Jamma and Kashmir, and seeks equal status with India, while India sees itself as a great power in the region. Pakistan's goals are not purely defensive; instead it is pursuing irredentist ambitions to change the territorial status quo and rival India as a regional power (Paul 2005). This means that ‘trust’ cannot be established until the enduring conflict between those two states is substantively resolved.…”

Section: ‘Rogue States’ and The Sources Of Nuclear Insecuritymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Irrelevance of ‘Trusting Relationships’ in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Reconsidering the Dynamics of Proliferation

Bluth¹

2011

The British Journal of Politics and International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a recent paper Jan Ruzicka and Nicholas J. Wheeler have posited that the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty (NPT) is an example of several 'trusting relationships'. The authors assert that 'since the end of the 1990s the trusting relationships embodied in the NPT have come under strain' and that this accounts for the fact that the 'treaty is facing growing pressures that are eroding what has been an effective barrier to nuclear weapons proliferation'. This article questions the assumptions underlying this analysis. It argues that the approach taken by Ruzicka and Wheeler fundamentally misconceives the dynamics of nuclear non-proliferation. The policy implications generated by this approach are impractical and downright dangerous as they fail to address the causes of proliferation and instead exacerbate the problem further.The proliferation of nuclear weapons is widely perceived by political leaders as one of the major problems of global security in the contemporary era. This is clear from a litany of public pronouncements by US presidents, actions taken by the United Nations and declaratory policies of other states. For example, the commitment by the British coalition government in 2010 to the renewal of its strategic nuclear deterrent was based on the uncertain trajectory of nuclear proliferation, rather than present and certain risks (HM Government 2010a and 2010b). In recent years the academic expert community has renewed its efforts to unravel the causes of proliferation and understand the risks to the non-proliferation regime embodied in the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) and associated agreements.Broadly speaking, the factors that cause states to acquire or to forgo nuclear weapons are security, domestic politics, norms or psychological factors (Sagan 1996/97;Hymans 2006;Solingen 2007;Potter and Mukhatzhanova 2008). One of the key problems in developing a theoretical basis for the understanding of nuclear proliferation is the fact that it is actually very rare, and in each case the causal factors seem to differ significantly. One hundred and eighty-nine states are members of the NPT, including five nuclear states. There are only four states that are not members of the NPT and that have nuclear weapons. Of the four states that acquired nuclear weapons outside the NPT regime, the last one to make the decision to go nuclear and that received civilian nuclear assistance started its nuclear programme 38 years ago

show abstract

Causes of the India–Pakistan enduring rivalry

Cited by 49 publications

References 0 publications

From “frozen conflict” to enduring rivalry: reassessing the Nagorny Karabakh conflict

From “frozen conflict” to enduring rivalry: reassessing the Nagorny Karabakh conflict

The Politics of Contestation in Asia: How Japan and Pakistan Deal with Their Rising Neighbors

The Irrelevance of ‘Trusting Relationships’ in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Reconsidering the Dynamics of Proliferation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About