By Ahmed Binavi
May 2025
As India and Pakistan once again teeter on the edge of open conflict—this time triggered by the April 2025 Pahalgam attack—the real question isn’t just about Kashmir. It’s about history. It’s about power. And it’s about why Pakistan—a country long accused of harboring extremist networks—was ever allowed to possess nuclear weapons in the first place.
The answer lies in the legacy of empire.
After the British partitioned India in 1947, they left behind not just divided land, but a divided people. Pakistan, carved out as a new state, became a geopolitical pawn—an artificial buffer zone that could be used to restrain India should it ever turn against Western interests. In this context, Pakistan’s eventual development of nuclear weapons in 1998 wasn’t just overlooked—it was tolerated, if not quietly supported, by former colonial powers and their allies.
Why? Because a nuclear-armed Pakistan guarantees that India, the rising democratic giant, can never act freely without considering the threat next door. If India dares to move too far from the strategic interests of Britain or the U.S., Pakistan becomes the leash. This is not a coincidence; it’s a calculated legacy of control.
India has consistently adopted a “No First Use” policy with its nuclear arsenal. Pakistan, by contrast, has refused to make such a commitment—keeping the threat alive, unpredictable, and useful for those who benefit from regional instability.
Today, as missiles fly and civilians die, the world once again calls for restraint. But perhaps it’s time to ask: Who created this imbalance? Who empowered Pakistan to hold a nuclear gun to India’s head—and why?
Until these questions are answered, peace in South Asia will remain a myth.
