Nehru was over-conscious of the strategic situation of the Subcontinent lying at the mouth of vital regions of South-East Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa, with enormous political, economic and strategic importance. The Indian Ocean surrounding it has vitally served trade and commerce between the East and West, giving predominance to the British Empire as the major world power in past centuries. He entertained the grand idea of Greater India. The matter of fact is that the emergence of Pakistan frustrated Nehru’s ambition to see India replace the Indian British Empire.
Nehru wrote in his ‘Discovery of India’ in the mid-1940s that ‘the Pacific is likely to take the place of the Atlantic in the future as a nerve centre of the world. Though not directly a Pacific State, India will inevitably exercise an important influence there. India will also develop as the centre of economic and political activity in the Indian Ocean area, in South-East Asia and right up to the Middle East.
Her position gives her an economic and strategic importance in a part of the world which is going to develop rapidly in the future. If there is a regional grouping of the countries bordering on the Indian Ocean on either side of India, including Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, India, Ceylon (Sri Lanka), Burma (Myanmar), Malaya (Malaysia), Siam, Java (Indonesia), the present-day minority problems will disappear, or at any rate will have to be considered in an entirely different context.
Nehru clearly wanted India to replace the outgoing British Empire as the political and economic leader of the small states in the region. As a matter of fact, the creation of Pakistan constituted the biggest hurdle in the fulfilment of Nehru’s dream. The discovery of hydrocarbon resources in the Middle East made it impossible for India to compete with the USA and the Western world for political, economic and strategic influence in that region.
The Congress leaders accepted the partition half-heartedly and never respected the sovereignty of the smaller states in the region, including Pakistan. India annexed Bhutan while trying to assert its hegemony over Maldives, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Myanmar. Pakistan resisted tooth and nail the Indian hegemonic ambitions. The South Asia Regional Cooperation (SARC) established decades ago to facilitate economic integration within the region, was never allowed to prosper by India. The SARC has remained dormant since its birth because of India’s hostility towards Pakistan.
The Greater India remained the major dream of Indian leaders, who believed that the demand of Muslims for a separate sovereign country was a temporary and transitory phenomenon which, they asserted, would disappear in independent India and parliamentary representative governance. They were shy of elaborating on how the minority Muslims would remain politically and economically equal partners in any parliamentary democracy without a constitutionally sanctioned power-sharing formula.
India’s growing relationship with Israel constitutes a perennial threat to Pakistan
The unity of the Muslims under the leadership of the Quaid, and the All India Muslim League’s spectacular success in the electoral contests of 1945 and 1946, and the USA leadership’s support for an independent country for the Muslims of the Subcontinent, forced the British India administration to agree to establish two successor states.
The Congress leaders colluded with the Viceroy for the division of Punjab and Bengal on a communal basis. This was done only one month before the two successor states came into being. Even this moth-eaten Pakistan (Quaid’s words) was not acceptable to the Congress leaders. They tried to strangle it by stopping its share of the finances, arms and ammunition, river waters, while driving a large number of Muslims out of their homes to migrate to Pakistan.
The Indian leaders hosted the fugitive ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, Raja Hari Singh, forcing him to sign an instrument of accession of his Muslim-majority state with India. With Governor Mountbatten’s consent, the Indian government air-transported Indian troops to Srinagar, and occupied the valley except for a small part of it and Gilgit and Baltistan, which the rebelling Scouts had freed from the fugitive Raja. The Kashmir dispute was taken to the UNSC by Jawaharlal Nehru in 1948. India has been refusing to implement UNSC resolutions.
The Indians threatened to divert the waters of the rivers emanating from Kashmir. The World Bank intervened and negotiated the Indus Basin Water Treaty by handing over Ravi, Sutlej, and Beas to India, and leaving Indus, Jhelum and Chenab for Pakistan. This treaty survived wars. It was arbitrarily suspended by the Narendra Modi regime after its humiliation in May last year.
India attacked Pakistan on 6 September 1965 with a plan to take over Lahore. We stopped the enemy across the BRB canal, denying the Indian commander the pleasure of having his evening tea in Lahore Gymkhana. They avenged their humiliation later in 1970, less because of their strategic superiority but mainly due to the disunity in our national rank and file. But the resilience of the nation turned this part of the country into a viable, vibrant and strong Muslim state with impregnable defences.
The relentless Indian animosity towards Pakistan illustrates the background of Pakistan’s decision to go nuclear on 28 May 1998 to create a security balance with the treacherous enemy, which has been rapidly transforming into a Hindu Rashtra State at the cost of the Indian Muslims. Nuclear deterrence has saved Pakistan from Indian aggression.
India changed its strategy, projecting Pakistan as a state sponsoring terrorism. Whether it be the terrorist attacks on the Indian Parliament, Taj Mahal Hotel, Pathankot, Pulwama or Pahalgam, it pointed the accusing finger towards Pakistan. Narendra Modi has heightened this hostility. Before going into the general elections, he staged a false-flag violent event, holding Pakistan responsible, to bolster his electoral chances. He did it in August 2019, with airstrikes on Balakot. His two aircraft were downed, with a Wing Commander, Abhinandan, captured alive in Pakistan.
Modi held Pakistan responsible for the murder of tourists in Pahalgam and launched airstrikes on Pakistan in May 2025. India lost seven aircraft, including two of the most expensive Rafales, in the three-day aerial war. The world recognised the strategic prowess of Pakistan. The ceasefire was arranged by President Donald Trump at the behest of Indian leaders, though they never admitted it later.
Pakistan has regained its place in international diplomacy. India arrogantly downgraded its bilateral relations with Pakistan long ago, viewing it as a dying state. This year, the nation celebrated the humiliation of India in the shortest but the largest air war from 7–10 May. We have to beware of the treacherous enemy. India’s growing relationship with Israel constitutes a perennial threat to Pakistan.