Would you like to know how many people have read this article? Or how reputable the author is? Simply
Daniel Markey, a senior research professor in international relations at John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, has warned war between India and Pakistan is more likely than an outbreak with China.
"A true war scenario between India and China, though is quite possible, is less likely than an India Pakistan one even now."
Speaking to the British newspaper, Express, Markey said: "The prospects of a live, conventional war between India/Pakistan is always greater than India China".Furthermore, India and China, up until now, have a remarkable track record of avoiding violent conflict and just as many and possibly many more reasons to avoid this spilling into war than India/Pakistan do."
Markey went on to explain how he believes there is a "significant amount of economic interest" between India and China and both their leaders have spoken on prospects of an extensive relationship.
He continued: "Despite all this uptick in tensions between India and China, there is still a significant amount of economic interest on both sides. Within the past few years, both of their leaders were touting the prospect of a more extensive relationship."
Despite the border tensions reaching new heights over recent weeks, Mr Markey still believes a "true war scenario" between the nations is less likely than India and Pakistan.
In the past eight months (from January 1 to September 7) there have been 3,186 ceasefire violations by Pakistan along the Line of Control (LoC), the Indian government told the Parliament. This is the highest in the last 17 years.
Moreover, there were also 242 incidents of cross-border firing (from January 1 to August 31), in the Jammu region, along the international border with Pakistan, Shripad Naik, Minister of State for Defense, said in the Rajya Sabha.
Markey argued that India-Pakistan conflicts could benefit India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi. "Dealing with Pakistan never worked, excepting the status quo in Kashmir wasn't working for India either."
If you look at the Indian side, you'll see a legitimate Indian argument, voiced by many inside and outside the government. So when Prime Minister Modi takes these actions, they are not unpopular, they are electorally beneficial on his part," he said in reference to the airstrikes carried out by the Indian Forces against Pakistan last year.
Another round of China-India diplomatic talks
Meanwhile, Indian and Chinese diplomats held talks on Wednesday. There was no headway in the border standoff, however the situation on the ground has not escalated yet and key will be to continue with the non-escalation and then move towards de-escalation, Indian Express reported Thursday.
The talks were held within the frame work of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairs (WMCC) which met for the fifth time since the border standoff in Ladakh began in May.
At the talks Indian side said that the next round of the meeting of Senior Commanders "should be held at an early date so that both sides can work towards early and complete disengagement of the troops along the LAC in accordance with the existing bilateral agreement and protocols, and fully restore peace and tranquility".
After the WMCC meeting, the Ministry of External Affairs said that the two sides "reviewed the current situation along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the India-China border areas and had frank and detailed discussions on the developments since the last meeting of the WMCC on 20 August, 2020".
"The two sides attached importance to the meetings between the two Defense Ministers and the two Foreign Ministers held earlier this month. They also noted that the agreement between the two Foreign Ministers should be sincerely implemented to ensure disengagement at all the friction points along the LAC," it said.
Pushing its old claim line in Ladakh and hardening its position on the situation there, Beijing had on Tuesday said it does not recognize the Union Territory of Ladakh and is opposed to the construction of Indian infrastructure there.
