BJP patriarch LK Advani has recently stated that India appears “incomplete” without Sindh in its territory. The idea that Pakistani territories belong to India has not died even after seven decades. Not a single demand for secession and joining in the last many decades, and even after half a dozen separatist movements on going within India, the conservatives in India have the arrogance to suggest that what happened in 1947 was a mistake. “At times I feel sad that Karachi and Sindh are not parts of India anymore. I was very active in RSS during my childhood days in Sindh,” he went on to say. Indians cannot simultaneously have an emotional connection to cities and towns here and be happy to see Pakistan destroyed. This entitlement, now second nature to many in India, is what makes Indian foreign policy so aggressive, and fuels jingoistic nationalism in its people.

Defence Minister Khawaja Asif on Monday said in the Senate that Pakistan’s armed forces would respond with full force if India tried to carry out any surgical strikes inside Pakistan. A necessary speech to make after General Bipin Rawat, the new Indian Army Chief, threatened Pakistan, as per norm, hinting at “another” surgical strike. The new chief stated earlier this month that India is capable of handling a two-front contingency in the backdrop of the collusive threat from Pakistan and China. Another laughable assertion, after the odd statement by Advani, that India could take on China and Pakistan.

Indian intelligence and political machinery, seems too off the mark in its analysis of what Pakistan is capable of and how much public support is behind the military in Pakistan. Being the smaller state, with fewer resources, it has resisted Indian threats and attacks in the past. Pakistan has existed for about seventy years as a security state, survived three wars, and a global war on terrorism without state failure. In contrast, India does not have security as its first priority, and its global trade and links have served it well over time to become a regional power. It does not have the institutional discipline, or public support to take on Pakistan. While Pakistan has many flaws, national defence is not one of them.

Pakistan will never stop supporting the Kashmiri cause, and due to historical reasons, including the stalemate with India in the 1965 war, we cannot abandon our brothers. Not only are we a security state, we are an ideological state as well, created to resist Indian power. In contrast, India was not created to balance Pakistan’s power. Its security policy and ideology are rootless vis-a-vis Pakistan. A solution for India will never come from military aggression, but from dialogue and compromise – if the Indians can ever recognise the nature of their own statehood.