CAUSES OF CONFLICT BETWEEN INDIA PAKISTAN

RELATIONS
Abstract

India and Pakistan are two important countries in the South Asia region and both the countries
have a long and complicated history with each other. In fact, these two countries simultaneously
became independent in 1947 from the influence of the British imperialism. When the British India
curved out, it was supposed to be divided into two parts; the first part which constituted of more
than 75% Muslims was to become Pakistan and the rest of the Muslim population including Hindu
majority known as India, the second part. India and Pakistan have been involved in conflict since
their independence. On the one hand Pakistan is an Islamic state and on the other hand India is a
secular democratic state. As a result, both India and Pakistan have been pursuing different
ideologies in international politics. The Kashmir issue has been playing an important role between
India-Pakistan relations. The Kashmir problem is not only one cause but also there were several
other causes like religion and conflict: Islamic foundation of Pakistan, the Idea of the Pakistan:
The two Nation Theory, Constitutional Difference, Pakistan’s identity crisis and Islamic ideology
against India. Therefore, the present research paper focuses on the root causes of conflict and tries
to suggest the solution of problems between India-Pakistan relations.
Introduction

The conflict between India and Pakistan originated as a clash between Indian and Muslim
nationalism during British colonial rule. The Indian National Congress led the Indian-nationalist
struggle, while the principal Muslim nationalist political organization was the Muslim League. As
the British government retreated from South Asia after “the Second World War”, sent notice to
these organizations to negotiate a constitutional framework for postcolonial India before its
departure. But, the colonial legacy of divide and rule policy made it impossible for both the parties
to meet their demands within the prescribed time. Consequently, the British government imposed
its own plan and departed. According to this plan, the last British Viceroy, Louis Mountbatten,
areas whose populations were predominantly Muslim, were to join Pakistan, while Hindu-majority
areas were to be part of India. There were 565 princely states in British India, which were not
governed directly by the British rule; the decision to join either India or Pakistan was left to their
rulers. However, they were not asked to act according to their people’s wishes. Jammu and
Kashmir had mostly Muslim population but it was ruled by a Hindu ruler who later on decided to
join India. The boundary between India and Pakistan was drawn by a British lawyer Cyril
Radcliffe. The British colonial regime’s departure had catastrophic consequences. As a result,
some three million people lost their lives and seventeen million were compelled to leave their
homes. Therefore, the India-Pakistan conflict remains one of the long terms unresolved conflicts
of our times. It began with the birth of the two nations and has been continued with the periodic
wars. It has also affected communal relations between the two countries and despite occasional
peace initiatives, shows no signs of cordiality. 6 The Relations between India and Pakistan have
been strained by a number of historical and political issues and the several military conflicts fought
between the two nations. However, one can say that the two South Asian countries share same
historic, cultural, geographic and economic links but their relationship has been plagued by
hostility and doubt. 7 The subsequent partition of the former British India displaced up to 12.5
million people, with estimates of loss of life varying from several hundred thousand to a million.8
India emerged as a secular nation with a Hindu majority population and a large Muslim minority
while Pakistan was established as an Islamic republic with a crushing Muslim majority
population.9 Since the creation of India and Pakistan, the two South Asian countries have been
involved in four wars, including one undeclared war, as well as many border skirmishes and
military stand-offs. In addition to that, Pakistan has been engaged in proxy wars against India by
providing military and financial assistance to the non-state actors. The Kashmir dispute has been
the main cause of direct or indirect of all major conflicts between the two countries with the
exception of the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, where conflict originated due to turmoil in East
Pakistan.

Research Questions

Following are the research questions around which this research study will revolve:

1- What are the Causes of Pak-India Conflict?

2- Will there be any counter-conflict policy to improve the issues in Pak-India relationship?

Research Objectives

1- The first objective of the research study is to elaborately explain the main causes behind the
deteriorating relations between Pakistan and India despite their huge share of boundary and great
number of potential economic progress.

2- The second objective of the research study is to find out if there is any possibility of overcoming
the current downfall of diplomatic relationship between Pakistan and India. This objective is
mainly concerned with finding out the potential counter conflict policy which will help in loosing
up the conflicts and help in rehabbing the deteriorating relations between India and Pakistan and
help in building peace which will open doors to future opportunities.
Literature Review

Ahsan and Tariq (2002) argues that India and Pakistan are two important countries
in the South Asia region and both the countries have a long and complicated history with each
other. In fact, these two countries simultaneously became independent in 1947 from the influence
of the British imperialism. When the British India curved out, it was supposed to be divided into
two parts; the first part which constituted of more than 75% Muslims was to become Pakistan and
the rest of the Muslim population including Hindu majority known as India, the second part. India
and Pakistan have been involved in conflict since their independence. On the one hand Pakistan is
an Islamic state and on the other hand India is a secular democratic state. As a result, both India
and Pakistan have been pursuing different ideologies in international politics. The Kashmir issue
has been playing an important role between India-Pakistan relations. The Kashmir problem is
not only one cause but also there were several other causes like religion and conflict: Islamic
foundation of Pakistan, the Idea of the Pakistan: The two Nation Theory, Constitutional
Difference, Pakistan’s identity crisis and Islamic ideology against India. Therefore, the present
research paper focuses on the root causes of conflict and tries to suggest the solution of problems
between India-Pakistan relations.

Khan and Syad (1999) says that ever since the surfacing of the issue in 1947, there exists a lack of
trust over Kashmir between India and Pakistan. The current improvement in Indo-Pakistani
relations was ingrained by a combination of outside pressure and domestic compulsions, whose
outcome would manage level of India-Pakistan hostility and increased political and economic
interaction. Because of its unresolved nature, Kashmir has been and is a tragedy. Practically this
catastrophe is synonymous for Pakistan and India and more so for the people of Kashmir. The
question is, how to undo the past and roll back the years? On more than one occasion both countries
took up arms over Kashmir, only to discover that what this entailed for outstripped our means and
indeed determination. Learning something from their costly experience, both countries are now
trying to tread a different path, shifting from paranoia and reflexive hostility to a more rational
way of looking at each other. To their mutual benefit, one might add, for never-ending hostility
never served anyone’s interests. Let us by all means, stir the still waters of Kashmiri diplomacy,
which President Musharraf has astutely done, by saying let us “go beyond stated positions” to the
extent that the other side is also willing to go in the same direction”. If India makes a virtue of not
budging from its basic stand — that there can be no change in Kashmir geography — then we
should think hard whether there is any benefit in pursuing a policy of unilateral flexibility. Let us
be sensible about Kashmir by realizing the limits of what is attainable. But, at the same time,
without feeling compelled to compromise our basic position that the fate of Kashmir must be
decided according to the wishes of the Kashmiri people. Pakistan shouldn’t be making concessions
for which it gets nothing in return.

Pak-IndiaBlogspot.com (2012) presented a study arguing that from historical and descriptive
perspectives, it critically analyses the present estrangement between the two South Asia giants
over Jammu and Kashmir between 1947 and 2000. The central thesis of this study is that the Indo-
Pakistani conflict is an extension of the century old Hindu-Muslim tension within the subcontinent
to the inter-state relations between the two countries. Within this context, it postulates that the
conflict is more of religion that is being camouflaged with politics, and argues further that unless
the fundamental causes of militancy and people’s disenchantment are tackled, no worthwhile and
lasting solution is possible. As a result, the article suggests that India and Pakistan should note that
the problem in Kashmir can never be resolved through the barrel of the gun. Thus, a political
solution that could satisfy the urges and aspirations of the people of Jammu and Kashmir living in
all regions and areas and belonging to all faiths and communities that could be eventually
acceptable to the two parties is called for.
Methodology

The data collected for the purpose of this research study is secondary data. The nature of the
research is explanatory. Only the major causes are discussed here keeping the study effective and
precise. The sources of data collection are various research articles, books, online blogs, and
newspapers. The research is descriptive.

Hypothesis

1- There are many causes that are causing disturbance in building positive relationship
between Pakistan and India.

2- Without solving Kashmir issue Pak-India relations cannot be improved

3- In the future Pak-India relationship can be improved and the stance could change from
aggressive to friendly.

Theoretical Framework
 Pak-India
Relations
Causes of conflict
•Terrorism
•Two Nations Theory
•Relious Ideolgy
•Constitutional difference
•Kashmir Issue

Causes of Conflict and their Implications

1- Terrorism

A second point of divergence in the Pakistan-India relationship is terrorism. So far, Pakistan has
proven unable to curtail militant activities and prosecute those responsible for terrorist attacks.
This is a serious concern for India, especially after the 2001 and 2008 terrorist attacks by Pakistani
based militant organizations, which India believes the ISI was behind.

Of particular concern is the future of Hafiz Saeed, the alleged “mastermind” behind the Mumbai
terrorist attack that h killed 166 people. His future and accountability continues to dominate the
agenda between the two states. India has given all the evidence related to the attack to Pakistan
and now wants its neighbor to detain and extradite Saeed for trial. In Pakistan, however, the Lahore
High Court has quashed all cases against Saeed, essentially freeing him. In April 2012, Washington
offered a US$10 million bounty for Saeed. So far, the bounty has had little effect, with Saeed
boasting, ‘this is a laughable, absurd announcement. Here I am in front of everyone, not hiding in
a cave’, ABC News reported on 5 April 2012. He went on to identify his leading role in the Difa-
e-Pakistan council of religious parties and claimed that the bounty was merely an attempt by the
US to ease India’s concerns.
India has vowed that it will only move forward on normalizing relations once Pakistan
demonstrates a commitment to countering terrorism. Many believe that Pakistan lacks the requisite
will and capacity, however, and is therefore unable to satisfy India’s demands. On 26 September
2012, Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari told leaders at the 67th United Nations General
Assembly that ‘no country and no people have suffered more in the epic struggle against terrorism,
than Pakistan.’ Certainly, Pakistan has suffered immensely at the hands of terrorist attacks. Yet,
even if Pakistan had the will, which some doubt, it is unlikely to possess the capacity to defeat
terrorist forces, especially given the enormous administrative, economic and political problems it
faces – problems that have led some observers to controversially label it a “failing state”.

Thus, although the US is believed to be placing increased pressure on Pakistan to bring terrorists
to justice, there remains little confidence in New Delhi that progress will be made. Moreover, the
threat of another terrorist attack on Indian soil that could be traced back to Pakistan-based militants
remains constant. This would likely derail relations once again. Like Kashmir, the issue of
terrorism will remain a major irritant in the relationship and will need to be addressed if relations
are to improve.

2- Religion and Conflict: The Islamic foundation of Pakistan

All the religions have two dimensions, first is theological belief that relates to one’s relationship
with a “Supreme reality of whatever kind” and second is Sociological belief that pertains to
dealings with human society. As a result, people compare only the theologies and declare them all
to be the ‘same’ or ‘equivalent’. However, one must pay special attention to the second dimension
of religion, namely, the social theories mandated by different religions. It is here where the root of
conflict is to be located.10 Rajeev Malhotra also argues that the theological and internal,
sociological, aspects of a religion are not the primary causes of global conflict, rather the external,
sociological, aspects of religion are the direct causes of global conflict. It is the business of the
world to interpret, question, and challenge those aspects of a religion that take a position
concerning outsiders. 11 For instance, Islam’s socio-political strategies in dealing with the
nonMuslim world are now at the crossroads. The positions acquired by Islamic leaders will have
long-term outcomes for the entire world, including both Muslims and non-Muslims. Religion has
been a powerful link between individuals and groups since it has begun. Religion as a symbol,
builds up civilizations and molds cultures. Hindu and Muslim are two different religious
philosophies, social customs and literatures. They neither intermarry nor dine together and indeed,
they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and
conceptions. Their aspects of life are totally different. Therefore, Muslim countries have demanded
as a separate homeland where they have the freedom to practice their religion and live their lives
as free individuals of an independent country. There were several important social demands that
dominated the Islamic orthodoxy as adopted by Pakistan’s government are:

- Pakistan was carved out from India which based on the Islamic theory that Muslims require
their own separate nation in order to follow the Islamic Laws. This theory is equivalent to
segregation by demanding a separation of socio-political jurisdiction for Muslims; and
Islamic exclusiveness and imposition of Islamic “Laws” upon the public sphere.

- The Islamic doctrine divides humanity into two nations that transcend all boundaries of
man-made countries. All Muslims in the world are deemed to be part of one single nation
called Dar-ul-Islam (Nation-of-Islam) and rest of the non-Muslims are deemed to belong
to Dar-ul Harb (Nation-of-War). This bi-polar definition cuts across all sovereignty,
because sovereignty is man-made, inferior and subservient to God’s political and social
bifurcation. The Islamic doctrine demands loyalty only to the Islamic Laws and not to the
man-made laws of nations and states. The consequence of this doctrine is that a Muslim is
required to fight on the side of a Muslim brother against any non-Muslim.

- The main principle of Islam is that God’s “nation” means the ”Dar-ul-Islam”, sooner or
later takes over the world. Others, especially those who are in the crosshairs, see this as
religious imperialism. In addition to that the Pakistan’s official account of history proud on
the Mughal Emperor Aurungzeb because he plundered and oppressed the infidels, Hindus
and Buddhists. Likewise, many other conquerors, such as Mohammed of Ghazni, are
portrayed as great heroes of the Islamic victory. Even Pakistani missile’s nomenclature
after an Islamic conqueror of India in the Medieval Period. Given this divine mandate, the
culture of aggressiveness promoted and celebrated in social life, which non-Muslims see
 as Islamic prejudice. The Terrorist attack on American twin towers in September 2001 was
the misjudgment of timing and Dar-ul-Islam’s ability to take over the world.

Since the formation of Pakistan, it has been going through its ideological and identity crisis. The
vision of the forefathers was to create a separate land for the Muslims of the Sub Continent. The
land was for the Muslims that followed the great tradition of Muslims living in harmony with their
brethren. A common thread binding them, called the nation of Pakistan. Regretfully, it was just a
dream. The people of Pakistan are still unclear about who they are and what their destiny should
be. Are they secular and democratic country or a Pan Islamic citadel? The creation of Pakistan was
a conspiracy in itself. No matter which side of the debate, you cannot deny that what Jinnah
accomplished, his philosophy is merely repeated as talking points on certain occasions, such as
Pakistan Day, Independence Day or his birth or death anniversaries. Pakistan has been divided and
subdivided into so many class and categories ranging from religious, economic, geographic and
linguistic lines that will require a complete overhaul to bring. A lot has been said about the reasons
behind its failure. No nation on this earth can survive without a unity of purpose. The diversity in
any nation is actually considered its strength. Unfortunately, in Pakistan case it has been to its
detriment.

3- The Idea of Pakistan: The two Nations Theory

Sir Muhammad Iqbal, the leading Muslim philosopher of that time, was an Indian nationalist in
his early writings. But in 1930, in his poem, The Millat, his thoughts had crystallized on Muslim
separatism. He explained the concept of partition in his presidential address to the Muslim League
in Allahabad in 1930. He further says that a unitary form of government was inconceivable and
religious community had to be the basis for identification. His main argument was communalism
in its highest sense that will bring harmony. Iqbal also demanded the establishment of a
confederated India to include a Muslim state consisting of Punjab, North-West Frontier Province,
Sindh, and Baluchistan. In his subsequent speeches and writings, he reiterated the Muslim claim
for nationhood which was “based on unity of language, race, history, religion, and the economic
interests”. However, Iqbal formally gave no name to his projected state. Subsequently, it was done
by a group of students at Cambridge University in London who issued a pamphlet in 1933, entitled
“Now or Never” by Chaudhary Rehmat Ali. They totally opposed the idea of federation and said
that India was never a single country. Rehmat Ali demanded the North-West region as a national
status for “Pakistan”. Moreover, he further explained the term as “Pakistan…is…composed of
letters taken from the name of our homelands, which is Punjab, Afghani, [North West Frontier of
Pakistan], Kashmir, Sindh, Tukharistan, Afghanistan, and Baluchistan. It meant that the land of
Pakistan, was spiritually pure and clean. In the 1937 elections to the provincial legislative
assemblies, the Indian Congress party gained majorities in seven of the eleven provinces. Congress
refused to form coalition governments with the Muslim League, even in Uttar Pradesh, which had
a substantial Muslim minority, and vigorously denied the Muslim League’s claim to be the only
true representative of Indian Muslims. This permanently alienated the Muslim League from the
Congress. In addition to that in 1939, the Aligarh Muslim people’s resolution reflected the
hardening of the Muslim leadership’s thinking: “Neither the fear of the British bayonets nor the
prospects of a bloody civil war can discourage (the Muslims) in their will to achieve free Muslim
states in those parts of India where they are in majority”. To rally this political support, Jinnah
used Pakistan as the unifying cause. His famous Presidential address in 1940 to the Muslim
League’s annual convention in Lahore was a watershed event to segregate Dar-ul-Islam in the
Indian subcontinent. He argued: “It is extremely difficult to appreciate why our Hindu friends fail
to understand the real nature of Islam and Hinduism. They are not religions in the strict sense of
the word, but are, in fact, different and distinct social orders. It is a dream that the Hindus and
Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality, and this misconception of one Indian nation has
gone far beyond the limits, and is the cause of most of our troubles, and will lead India to
destruction, if we fail to revise our notions in time. The Hindus and the Muslims belong to two
different religious philosophies, social customs, and literature. They neither intermarry, nor
interdine together, and indeed they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly
on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspects on life and of life are different. It is quite clear
that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have
different epics, their heroes are different, and they have different episodes. Very often the hero of
one is a foe of the other, and likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two
such nations under a single State, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must
lead to growing discontent and the final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the
government of such a State”. Jinnah’s theory was partially rationalized by his understanding of
history according to which segregation was normal and natural across the world. In his above
speech, Jinnah goes on to say: “History has also shown to us many geographical tracts; much
smaller than the subcontinent of India, which otherwise might has been called one country, but
which have been divided into as many states as there are nations inhabiting them. The Balkan
Peninsula comprises as many as seven or eight sovereign States. Likewise, the Portuguese and the
Spanish stand divided in the Iberian Peninsula.” At the Lahore convention in 1940, the Muslim
League demanded that the areas of Muslim majority in northwestern and eastern India should be
grouped together to constitute independent states autonomous and sovereign and that any
independence plan without this provision was unacceptable to Muslims. The Lahore Resolution
was often referred to as the ‘Pakistan Resolution’. This was a false theory of history on Jinnah’s
part. Recent events demonstrate that the trend towards European unification as opposed to
subdivision, because the common interests greatly outweigh what divides the various diverse
peoples of Europe. However, without any concrete ‘dispute’ between Hindus and Muslims, the
logic that was prevailed, Muslims require segregation of political and social life in order to be in
compliance with the demands of Shari’a. One can analyze that the Two-Nation Theory was a
manifestation of the doctrine of Dar-ul-Islam versus Dar-ulHarb.

4- Constitutional Differences

There were several constitutional differences between India and Pakistan. India was built on an
entirely different worldviews which inspired by the same ideals as the United States, it is evident
from the Indian Preamble to its Constitution: “WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly
resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC
REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:

- JUSTICE: Social, Economic and Political

- LIBERTY: of thought, Expression, Belief, Faith and Worship
- EQUALITY: of status and of opportunity and to promote among them all
- FRATERNITY: Assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the
Nation
On the contrary, the Constitution of The Islamic Republic of Pakistan has the following Preamble:
“Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Almighty Allah alone, and the authority
to be exercised by the people of Pakistan within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust;
…”31 After the death of Jinnah, Pakistan became increasingly radicalized and Islamized, in many
ways more extreme than the founder’s vision. For instance, the Ninth Amendment took place in
1985 caused Article 227 to read: “All existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the
Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah, in this part referred to as the
Injunctions of Islam”.32 However, the Ninth Amendment categorically explains that the “objects
and reasons” for this Islamization are “so as to provide that the Injunctions of Islam shall be the
supreme law and source of guidance for legislation and policy making and to empower the Federal
Shariat Court to make recommendations for bringing the fiscal laws and laws relating to the levy
and collection of taxes in conformity with the said injunctions33.” On the other hand, when we
talk about United States which still has enormous racial inequality the abolishing of slavery, the
important point is that it is committed to racial equality. Similarly, despite many flaws in India’s
pluralism, the State is committed to it. What counts is a commitment to steady improvement. India
has had one of the most aggressive and ambitious affirmative action programs in the world. The
results, while far from perfect, have produced many top level Muslim leaders in various capacities
in India, and a growth of Muslims as a percentage of total population. But in the Islamic Republic
of Pakistan, the Hindu population has decreased from 11% in 1947 to around 1% today, as a result
of ethnic cleansing.

5- Kashmir Issue

The Kashmir issue is a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir region.
India claims the entire state of Jammu & Kashmir and as of 2010, administers approximately 43%
of the region, including most of Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, Ladakh, and the Siachen Glacier.
India’s claims are contested by Pakistan, which controls approximately 37% of Kashmir, namely
Azad Kashmir and the northern areas of Gilgit and Baltistan.35 India has officially stated that it
firmly believes that Kashmir is an integral part of India, though the Prime Minister of India,
Manmohan Singh, stated after the 2010, his government is willing to grant autonomy within the
purview of Indian constitution to Kashmir if there is consensus on this issue.36 In reply, Pakistan
says that Kashmir is a disputed territory whose final status must be determined by the people of
Kashmir. In addition to that China claims that Aksai Chin is a part of China and does not recognize
the addition of Aksai Chin to the Kashmiri region. Some of Kashmiri independence groups believe
that Kashmir should be independent of both India and Pakistan.37 However, in 1947, the British
colonial rule in India ended with the creation of two new nations: the Union of India and the
Dominion of Pakistan. While British suzerainty over the 565 Indian princely states ended:
According to the Indian Independence Act of 1947, “the suzerainty of His Majesty over the Indian
States lapses, and with it, all treaties and agreements in force at the date of the passing of this Act
between His Majesty and the rulers of Indian States”,38 so the states were left to choose whether
to join India or Pakistan or to remain independent. Jammu & Kashmir, the largest of the princely
states, had a predominantly Muslim population, while having a Hindu ruler, Maharaja Hari
Singh.39 At the time of partition, Pakistan expected that the Kashmir to be annexed to it. In
October 1947, Muslim revolutionaries in western Kashmir40 and Pakistani tribals from Dir entered
into the Kashmiri region intending to liberate it from Dogra rule. Unable to resist the Pakistani
invasion, the Maharaja Hari Singh signed the instrument of accession on 25 October 194741 that
was accepted by the government of India on 27 October 1947.
Conclusion

In a nut shell, we can say that the Kashmir problem is not root cause of India Pakistan conflict.
But there are several causes behind this conflict like religion and conflict, Pakistan’s Islamic
foundations, history of the two-nation theory, different post-independence directions, and
Pakistan’s identity crisis and its Islamic ideology against India. These causes have been
responsible for Indo-Pak periodical Wars. Despite these causes, India always tries to maintain
peaceful and healthy relations with Pakistan, while Pakistan always tries to undermine India’s
initiative. Pakistan also tries to maintain good relations with china with the intention of India’s
encirclement because China has also animosity with India and lay territorial claims over the Indian
territories. In addition to that Pakistan has struck friendship with the United States since 1947
against India. But things have changed according to time and India has emerged as a staunch ally
of the United States at the dawn of the twenty first century. India always tries to resolve the
Kashmir problem but Pakistan criticized India’s effort. History tells us that the war is symbol of
destruction not integrity and it is not ultimate solution of conflict between the two countries. If
both the countries want peaceful solution then they have to start and continue political dialogue, it
is the only way that will lead to peaceful solution. However, it is best way in comparison to war.
One alternative can be, if Germany can be integrated then why not India-Pakistan because Pakistan
was part of India and people of both the countries has same culture, tradition and religion.
References

1. Ahsan, Tariq (2002), “History of the IndiaPakistan Conflict”, [Online: Web] Accessed 12
August 2012, URL http:// coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/issue47/ articles/a02.htm.

2. Khan, Syad (2008), “History of the IndiaPakistan Conflict”, [Online: Web] Accessed 16 July
2011, URL, http:// www.cssforum.com.pk/css-optionalsubjects/group-e-history-subjects/indopak-
history/16692-history-india-pakistanconflict.html.

3. Ahsan, Tariq (2002), “History of the IndiaPakistan Conflict”, [Online: Web] Accessed 12
August 2012, URL http:// coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/issue47/ articles/a02.htm.

4. Paul, T.V (2006), The India-Pakistan Conflict: An Enduring Rivalry, UK: Cambridge University
Press, p.3-21, [Online: Web] Accessed 8 July 2012, URL, http://www.scribd.com/doc/55617861/
The-India%E2%80%93PakistanConflict-An-Enduring-Rivalry.

5. Chapm, Athar (2013), “Diplomatic Relations with India”, [Online: Web] Accessed 6 January
2013, URL, http:// www.studymode.com/essays/DiplomaticRelations-With-India-1335253.html

6. “Indo-Pakistani Relations”, [Online: Web] Accessed 12 August 2012, URL, http://

pakindiasite.blogspot.in/p/indo-pakistanirelations.html.; Affairs of Pakistan
7. Manners, Andrew (2012), “India-Pakistan Relations: Old Rivals, New Beginnings?”