India eases pressure in US tariff negotiations by intensifying its tense relations with Pakistan.
Pakistani media reported that the military received intelligence suggesting that India would go to war within 36 hours. Pakistani media did not make unfounded claims; it was reported that Modi convened India's highest-level security meeting, which included the defense minister, advisors, and chiefs of staff. At the meeting, Modi stated that India would strike a fatal blow to terrorists and authorized the military to take any action at an appropriate time. Previously, an Indian reconnaissance aircraft conducted a three-hour flight along the Line of Control in Kashmir, with analysts suggesting this could be a precursor to a ground offensive. A Pakistani drone was also captured. Although it is unclear where Pakistan obtained its intelligence, from India's actions of cutting water supplies and increasing troops, the claim appears to hold some truth. However, purely from a military perspective, India does not currently have the conditions to wage war against Pakistan. First, the areas controlled by India in Kashmir are mostly plains, while those controlled by Pakistan are mostly mountainous regions. Relatively speaking, Pakistan has the advantage of being able to advance or retreat as needed, giving them a geographical edge. Second, after India closes the dam gates to release floodwater, it causes disaster for Pakistan but also blocks their retreat route, uniting the Pakistani people's consensus—only by defeating India is there no other way out. This, in turn, creates an advantage for Pakistan in terms of 'people's unity.' In terms of 'heavenly timing,' India is even less prepared. In terms of weaponry, F35 remains just a verbal agreement, Rafale fighters have only been partially delivered, Su-30s have yet to be modified, and the Light Combat Aircraft, MiG, and Mirage jets are unlikely to shoulder heavy responsibilities. Pakistan, on the other hand, has 60 fourth-generation fighter jets.
In terms of 'heavenly timing,' 'earthly advantages,' and 'human harmony,' India lacks all these factors. Why, then, is Modi escalating such a tense situation? The answer is likely that India's intentions lie elsewhere. For India, the pressing issue right now is not about "terrorists," but rather tariff negotiations.
India and Vietnam are among the first countries willing to negotiate tariffs with the United States and are very likely to commit to substantive negotiations. However, they submitted too early. A few days later, East Asia raised the anti-tariff flag. After several rounds, the situation took a sharp turn. India discovered that many countries, including Vietnam and Japan, had turned away, and even South Korea had suspended negotiations citing elections. What about India? Modi realized he couldn't turn back. So, what should he do? He would drag it out.
Do you remember when Vance visited India? Vance just left, and tensions between India and Pakistan flared up. How coincidental is that? What was Vance doing here? He came to follow up on tariff issues. For the Trump administration, the most pressing concern right now is tariff negotiations. If he can break through in India, he will win again. Therefore, he is most worried that India will create unnecessary complications, dragging out the tariff negotiations.
How to drag it out? For Modi, tariff negotiations are a crisis. Whether it’s agricultural products or high-tech negotiations, India does not have an advantage. India's average tariff on the U.S. is 17%, which is 10 percentage points higher than the U.S. tariff on India. Once the negotiation table is set, India is at a disadvantage. But if it opens up, India's agriculture and e-commerce industries will collapse. Therefore, calling this a crisis is not an exaggeration. What to do? Create a new crisis, one that it can control. Perhaps the rising tensions between India and Pakistan are coming from this.
Rekindling of Indo-Pakistani Conflict
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1830805533336585/
Disclaimer: This article represents the views of the author alone.