All posts by : Kamran Khan

In recent days, tensions between India and Pakistan have escalated once again, casting a long shadow over the region. From journalists to soldiers on the front lines, all seem caught in the same revengeful event. Words like jingoism, propaganda, war, and attack have become commodity in headlines and broadcasts, yet their true weight is borne by those on the ground, stationed at the borders, whose return depends not on rhetoric, but on the restoration of peace. The psychological and strategic price of this standoff cannot be overstated. For those committed to diplomacy, regional cooperation, and a shared future, these developments are disheartening. Years of effort by scholars, policymakers, and peace advocates striving to reshape Indo-Pak relations now seem undone, perhaps not irreversibly, but certainly deeply shaken. The vision of India and Pakistan as enduring partners in peace appears, for now, to have retreated into the realm of distant ideals. Whether that vision will be realized in some alternate future or whether it lies thousands of hard-earned steps ahead in this one, remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that hope alone is no longer enough; it must be matched with courage, dialogue, and a renewed commitment to humanity over hostility. What previously seemed like a slight but workable peace is now more like a precise class misconception, one that is frequently broken by outbursts of tension and bluster, under the shadow of growing hostilities between India and Pakistan. From media-driven nationalism and cross-border clashes to flimsy diplomatic attempts, South Asia appears to be torn between two extremes: a phony war and a phony peace. The strange quiet in Europe prior to the storm of World War II, when announcements were made but action appeared to be on hold, was initially referred to as the “phoney war.” However, the phrase has changed in the context of the subcontinent. It now represents the political and psychological battle fought through state narratives, prime-time panels, and headlines. Propaganda is excessive, and nationalism has been turned into a weapon. However, both administrate appear to be diplomatic, restrained, and “dialogue ready.” This is performance, not peace. The Real Price of Escalation The soldiers positioned along the Line of Control bear the true repercussions, even as patriotic shouts echo from television studios. Futures are clouded, families are split apart, and lives are upended. Every report of a cross-border incident can possibly contain a human loss tale, yet these stories hardly ever make it into the public eye. Beyond defense and security, this alternating tension has broad ramifications. Regional cooperation is disrupted, trade opportunities vanish, and economies suffer. Once promising links between the countries, academic and cultural exchanges are now shrouded in distrust. Worst of all, the goal of creating a wealthy and peaceful South Asia is consistently put off. Despite being applaud in theory, peace is frequently viewed as a political burden in reality, which is one of the biggest contention in Indo-Pak relations. Those who advocates for cooperation run the risk of being branded as weak or unpatriotic in these times of peak enmity. Consequently, authentic communication is either halted or relegated to symbolic actions. Mistrust prevailed due to  the absence of long-term institutional channels for dispute resolution. Trade agreements, backchannel diplomacy, and people-to-people contacts are examples of amicable confidence-building initiatives that can be derailed at the first sign of trouble. From Bluster to Blockade: The Regional Repercussions Months or even years of development might be undone by a single violent act or offensive comment. Through exchange visits, cricket diplomacy, or meetings held in neutral locations, both countries have occasionally presented an appearance of “normalcy” to the outside world. However, structural changes hardly ever follow these moments. They provide the appearance of tranquility without providing the real thing. This phony peace may be useful in the short run by deploying foreign observers or reducing public pressure, but it cannot replace a plan based on responsibility, respect for one another, and a common goal. The prospect of enduring peace between India and Pakistan seems far off now than it has ever been. Trust has diminished and the ideological divide has grown. This moment feels like a terrible reckoning for academics, civil society activists, and diplomats who have dedicated decades of their careers to promoting reconciliation. It now seems more like a poetic thought than a practical goal that both countries could coexist as allies in progress. A Choice Beyond War and Illusion Peace is possible, even if it is an unreal dream. From South Africa to Ireland, history demonstrates that even seemingly unsolvable disputes can be resolved. Political will, public pressure, and a redefining of national interest that include human dignity and shared prosperity in addition to borders and ballots are what actually required.Until then, the subcontinent might continue to be caught in a terrible cycle in which peace is promised but never materialized and war is threatened but not proclaimed. The people of India and Pakistan deserve better than illusions, whether it’s a phony war or a phony peace. They are worthy of knowing the truth and having the guts to alter it.