IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/asseca/v1y2014i3p319-345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Persistency of the India–Pakistan Conflict: Chances and Obstacles of the Bilateral Composite Dialogue

Author

Listed:
  • Thorsten Wojczewski

    (Thorsten Wojczewski is a Research Fellow at the German Institute of Global and Area Studies in Hamburg, and a doctoral candidate at the University of Kiel, Germany. He has also been a Visiting Research Fellow at the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, New Delhi, India. E-mail: thorsten.wojczewski@giga-hamburg.de)

Abstract

This article investigates the underlying causes for the persistency of the India–Pakistan conflict and, on this basis, the chances and obstacles of the bilateral composite dialogue initiated in 2004. In particular, it wants to provide a theoretically grounded account of the factors that facilitated and constrained the bilateral composite dialogue process. Drawing on the regional security complex theory, this article examines the rivalry between the two South Asian nuclear powers on four levels of analysis: the domestic, the regional, the interregional and the global level. The analysis shows that there have been some substantial changes on all four levels in the recent decade or so and that these changes have provided more beneficial conditions for a peace process. These changes include, inter alia, India’s new regional policy, the consequences of the 9/11 terrorist attacks for the region and India’s growing power capacities. However, major obstacles to the India – Pakistan dialogue and a permanent conflict resolution continue to persist: the dominant role of the military in Pakistan, conflicting national identities and the still partially contested nature of statehood in India and Pakistan, which is in the case of Pakistan linked to the growing power of Islamic fundamentalists.

Suggested Citation

  • Thorsten Wojczewski, 2014. "The Persistency of the India–Pakistan Conflict: Chances and Obstacles of the Bilateral Composite Dialogue," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 1(3), pages 319-345, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:1:y:2014:i:3:p:319-345
    DOI: 10.1177/2347797014551269
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2347797014551269
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2347797014551269?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Debidatta Aurobinda Mahapatra, 2004. "Russia's Policy Towards the Kashmir Issue in the Changing World Order," International Studies, , vol. 41(1), pages 129-143, February.
    2. Moravcsik, Andrew, 1997. "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(4), pages 513-553, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:bla:glopol:v:8:y:2017:i::p:62-74 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jeffry Frieden & Stefanie Walter, 2019. "Analyzing inter-state negotiations in the Eurozone crisis and beyond," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(1), pages 134-151, March.
    3. Anna Michalski, 2013. "Europeanization of National Foreign Policy: The Case of Denmark's and Sweden's Relations with China," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(5), pages 884-900, September.
    4. Vennesson Pascal, 2010. "Military Strategy in the Global Village," New Global Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-43, February.
    5. Matera Paulina & Matera Rafał, 2019. "Why does cooperation work or fail? The case of EU-US sanction policy against Iran," Croatian International Relations Review, Sciendo, vol. 25(85), pages 30-62, November.
    6. Rebecca Adler-Nissen, 2016. "Towards a Practice Turn in EU Studies: The Everyday of European Integration," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 87-103, January.
    7. Mathieu Rousselin, 2012. "The EU as a Multilateral Rule Exporter - The Global Transfer of European Rules via International Organizations," KFG Working Papers p0048, Free University Berlin.
    8. Wolfgang Wagner, 2017. "Liberal Power Europe," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(6), pages 1398-1414, November.
    9. Justin Leinaweaver & Robert Thomson, 2014. "Testing models of legislative decision-making with measurement error: The robust predictive power of bargaining models over procedural models," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 43-58, March.
    10. Thiago Lima, 2021. "Brazil’s Humanitarian Food Cooperation: From an Innovative Policy to the Politics of Traditional Aid," Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy, Centre for Agrarian Research and Education for South, vol. 10(2), pages 249-274, August.
    11. Akbar, Yusaf H. & Kisilowski, Maciej, 2015. "Managerial agency, risk, and strategic posture: Nonmarket strategies in the transitional core and periphery," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 984-996.
    12. Flemes, Daniel & Wojczewski, Thorsten, 2010. "Contested Leadership in International Relations: Power Politics in South America, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa," GIGA Working Papers 121, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    13. David Lektzian & Glen Biglaiser, 2014. "The effect of foreign direct investment on the use and success of US sanctions," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(1), pages 70-93, February.
    14. Ulrich Krotz, 2009. "Momentum and Impediments: Why Europe Won't Emerge as a Full Political Actor on the World Stage Soon," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47, pages 555-578, June.
    15. Leuze, Kathrin & Brand, Tilman & Jakobi, Anja P. & Martens, Kerstin & Nagel, Alexander-Kenneth, 2008. "Analysing the two-level game: international and national determinants of change in education policy making," TranState Working Papers 72, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    16. Ghulam Shabbir & Amjad Naveed & Muhammad Ali Khan & Shabib Haider Syed, 2022. "Does Peace Promote Bilateral Trade Flows? An Economic Analysis of Panel Data in Asian Perspective," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 64(1), pages 143-158, March.
    17. Kevin J. Sweeney, 2003. "The Severity of Interstate Disputes," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(6), pages 728-750, December.
    18. Michael Mousseau, 2005. "Comparing New Theory with Prior Beliefs: Market Civilization and the Democratic Peace," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(1), pages 63-77, February.
    19. Mark Duckenfield & Mark Aspinwall, 2010. "Private interests and exchange rate politics: The case of British business," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 381-404, September.
    20. Xinyuan Dai, 2006. "The Conditional Nature of Democratic Compliance," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 690-713, October.
    21. Jérôme Sgard & Yves Schemeil & Eric Brousseau, 2011. "overeignty without Borders: On Individual Rights, the Delegation to Rule, and Globalization," Sciences Po publications 28, Sciences Po.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:1:y:2014:i:3:p:319-345. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.