00:00When tensions ratchet up between two de facto nuclear weapon states, the rest of the world
00:07is not going to stand by and watch.
00:10The other countries of the world will obviously be talking to both the countries when you
00:15are not talking to each other.
00:16The message has gone to Pakistan that if it continues to use terror as an instrument of
00:22state policy, there would be punitive consequences.
00:27They cannot use the nuclear blackmail in order to continue with state-sponsored terror.
00:35The statement which has come from the President of the United States of America, Mr. Donald
00:43Trump, is whether you like it or not a factual statement.
00:48If you look at the India-Pakistan paradigm in a perspective, from 1947 till 1972, whenever
00:58tensions went up between India and Pakistan, and they were primarily over the state of
01:04Jammu and Kashmir, it is the United Nations Security Council resolutions which were the
01:09military template for whatever interlocution took place between the two countries.
01:17After 1972 till 1990, it was the similar agreement which injected bilateralism into the relationship.
01:28But when Pakistan started waving the nuclear word, 1990 onwards, and the then Deputy National
01:38Security Advisor, Robert Gates came to India on the 19th of May, 1990.
01:45Even onwards, whenever there has been a flashpoint in the India-Pakistan equation, there has been
01:54intervention by foreign powers led by the United States of America.
02:01It happened in 2001 at the height of Operation Parakram.
02:07It happened subsequently when tensions went up between India and Pakistan, post the 26-11
02:13terror attack.
02:15It happened again after the Uri surgical strike in 2019.
02:22After the Pulwama-Balakot dynamic, President Trump publicly took ownership from Hanoi of the
02:30fact that he had ratcheted tensions down between India and Pakistan.
02:35And on 10th of May, 2025, his social media post and the subsequent statement by Secretary of
02:45State, Marco Rubio, again testifies and underscores to the fact that there has been back-channeling,
02:53brokering, arbitration, third-party mediation, whatever you may like to call it.
03:00You see, the bottom line ultimately is that when tensions ratchet up between two de facto
03:08nuclear weapon states, the rest of the world is not going to stand by and watch when you
03:14have missiles flying from there to here and, you know, everywhere.
03:19So therefore, the other countries of the world will obviously be talking to both the countries
03:26when you are not talking to each other.
03:33and if you are not talking to each other, then we will answer to each other.
03:40And the other countries have told us that we have three attacks there.
03:42And the other countries will say that we are not talking to each other.
03:45Well, one thing is very evident that a message has gone to Pakistan that if it continues to
03:54use terror as an instrument of state policy, there would be punitive consequences.
04:00And those punitive consequences in the aftermath of the Pahalgam massacre were executed by the
04:09Indian armed forces between the 7th and the 10th of March, 19, 20, 25.
04:17Therefore, under those circumstances, I think the Pakistani leadership would have realized that
04:25it cannot be business as usual. They cannot use the nuclear blackmail in order to continue with
04:34state sponsored terror. And I do hope that the Pakistani leadership, both the civilian leadership
04:42and more importantly, the military leadership, and even most importantly, the Pakistani deep state,
04:48which has spawned these semi-state actors would get the message very, very clearly.
Comments