.. by Raza Muhammad Khan
A US National Intelligence Council’s document titled ‘Global Trends 2030’, was published in 2012, however, the following prophecies outlined therein are still relevant: ‘With potential for increased proliferation and growing concerns about nuclear security… future wars in South Asia and the Middle East (ME) would risk inclusion of a nuclear deterrent…ME and South Asia are the two regions most likely to trigger broader instability’….Asia, …would constitute one of the largest global threats’…causing large-scale damage to the global economy’. These predictions were proven right in the recent conflicts in the Sub-continent and the ME.
Consider this: In Feb 2019, Modi launched a false flag operation(FFO) in Pulwama, IHK and soon after, bombed Balakot in KP, for political advantage in general elections of April 2019. In April 2025, another FFO was undertaken at Pahalgam, IHK, by him to influence crucial State elections in Bihar, that year. Pakistan was blamed for both, without any evidence and as India used nuclear capable missiles in the latter aggression, the conflict could have abruptly escalated to exchange of nuclear weapons. While Pakistani responses to these aggressions humiliated India and caused heavy military losses to it, the BJP achieved its electoral objectives in both instances. Such reckless actions, that are branded as ‘new normal’ by India, could be apocalyptic for Asia. Equally alarming have been the “Twelve-Day War” in June 2025and the second US-Israeli -Iran, conflict that commenced in Feb 2026 and still continues. The Indo-Pakistan standoff also persists; with Indian violation of Indus Water Treaty, despite recent decision of the Hague Court of Arbitration, against Indian suspension of the Treaty. This situation is a clear and present, nuclear flash point.
India and Israel have ignored the root causes of the Kashmir and Palestine disputes and the UNSC resolutions about them for almost eight decades. Both have committed aggression against their neighbours, are involved in brazen assassinations abroad, have denigrated the ongoing, commendable and globally supported Pakistani peace efforts in ME and are misusing their militaries for personal and political agendas. They are also colluding to fulfil their dreams of ‘Akhand Bharat’ and ‘Greater Israel’. Due to the enormity of these threats, Asian peace and stability lays on perilously shaky grounds, with catastrophic consequences.
The most urgent measures to address these dilemmas are: First: Reorganisation of the UNSC, by ending the veto powers of the permanent members and adopting the democratic process of decision making by majority votes, for binding resolutions. This is the only panacea for establishing, rule based and just regional world orders and lasting peace. But this is an arduous imperative which deserves deep commitments and concerted actions by all peace-loving governments, people and the world media. Second: Peace treaties and deals must be made in good faith, should be just and shouldn’t contain any tacitly reserved matters or obscure clauses for a future war.
Third: The legitimacy of the use of force or the threat of its use should never be justified on the basis of political expediencies or religious beliefs. This, like the UN reorganisation, may sound idealistic, however, we must continue for its achievement as the nature and extent of our societal and individual efforts to engage and participate in peace efforts is a survival prerequisite. Further, while reliance on morality and fair play in statecraft may be an elusive goal, a mind-set shift on the matter is possible through convincing appeals, communicated aggressively on all social media platforms, with the belief that the human race has survived so far, due to altruism. We have repeatedly witnessed this inherent spirit of humankind in the aftermaths of the Gaza conflict and numerous natural or manmade disasters, all over the world, that were typically characterized by acts of empathy, sacrifice, selflessness and sharing of resources, despite risks.
Fourth: Arbitration must be used as a substitute for wars and conflicts, as it relinquishes no rights, sacrifices no interest, contravenes no important principles, is consistent with dictates of sound policy and is a measure that appeals to common sense. Just like the corporate world, UNSC Resolutions and bilateral agreements must include clear clauses, binding the parties, as their last resort, to adjust whatever differences may arise between them; not by force but by reference to umpires mutually chosen. This process may have certain limitations but their outcomes may be comparable or better than what wars could promise.
Fifth: Fundamental lessons learnt from military history of all wars, strongly suggest that conflict resolution through violent means should always be the last choice, when all pacific means, methods and measures are exhausted. Additionally, use of force must be limited to protection of only survival (or vital) interests, when there is hope of achieving a favourable environment, or an end state that could minimize or freeze the threats and when national power can sustain protracted fighting. If this isn’t attainable, it may be wiser to change policy; opt for mediation and arbitration; manifest flexibility in stated positions, offer calculated concessions and agree to compromise on peripheral matters.
Sixth: Leaders who pose perpetual threats to peace, are habitual war mongers and peace spoilers, must be held accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity, by International Criminal Court and Ad hoc UN Tribunals, like the ones created for Yugoslavia and Rwanda. The security environment in Asia doesn’t auger well for people of the Region and beyond, who deserve a better, safer and prosperous future for themselves and posterity. They must therefore reject the status quo, elect peace-loving rulers, actively advocate for democratisation of UNSC structure; ending unjust conflicts and respecting international treaties and Resolutions. The rest of the world has also witnessed, how Asian conflicts engulfed it and how severely and adversely were their people’s lives and livelihoods affected. It is, therefore, equally incumbent upon them, to be mindful of this milieu, to mitigate the alluded risks to peace and amity, through measures proffered in this rendition. —The writer is the former President of NDU Islamabad. ([email protected])
.. Source