Seminar paper from the year 2002 in the subject Politics - Region: South Asia, grade: 2,0, University of Münster (Institute for Political Science), course: Is all theory grey?, language: English, abstract: After the dreadful tragedy that happened in New York on 11 September, the world had to redefine the extent of terrorism. In this context there is one conflict that is gradually turning over to be an explosive powder keg. It is the Indo-Pakistan conflict about the area called "Kashmir". Ever since the British colonial power ended in 1947 and the Muslim League demanded the partition of India and Pakistan, there has been a smouldering conflict between Pakistan and India about ′the bone of contention′ Kashmir. Pakistan and India have always been irreconcilably divided in the most important aspects such as religion, culture, economic interests and the social system. From neo-realistic point of view, this conflict bears numerous factors that gave rise to it and influenced its development. The underlying assumption is that the problems at issue were predictable and, hence, maybe could have been fought against earlier and more determined. Having a look at the common history of India and Pakistan, it has obviously always been a conflict between Muslims and Hindus and, on the other hand, between different cultures within these confessions. It just all turned out to be explosive when, they had to decide about India′s independence in 1947. Although these negotiations were without doubt a risky question of gaining and loosing power, the negotiation partners found a reasonable and ostensibly peaceful solution by splitting British-India in the Hindu part of India and the northern, Muslim part, from then on called Pakistan. However, they could not have suspected that they sowed the seed of a terrible future conflict between the two powers-to-be.

Seminar paper from the year 2019 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Region: Near East, Near Orient, grade: 1,3, , language: English, abstract: The Kashmir conflict arose parallel to the partition of British India in 1947, so it is as old as the Indian Union and Pakistan itself. Both India and Pakistan are claiming the entire sovereignty over the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir with India having control over approximately 55% of the land area and Pakistan 30%. China, which is controlling a small area of the region, is involved in the conflict as a third party. The conflict, more than 50 years old, not only survived the Cold War, it was the direct and indirect cause for three wars between India and Pakistan, for an arms race that continues to this day and for the transformation of both states into nuclear powers. This regional conflict is unique because Pakistan has already threatened India with the use of nuclear weapons on several occasions - even in the event of a massive conventional attack by India. Over the course of five decades, the conflict has become an integral part of the respective national and, in the case of India, democratic self-image and political consensus. India bases its democratic self-image on the thesis of the one, the secular nation. The state of Jammu and Kashmir is the only one with a Muslim majority and thus formally underpins India's claim to overcoming Hindu-Muslim antagonism.

The chronic conflict between India and Pakistan over Kashmir has generated a great deal of scholarly and popular literature. The dominant and prevailing view is that the conflict is essentially beyond solution. This book examines a contrary hypothesis that such a view, though widely held, is unjustified. In this regard the author presents a realist study of the possibilities of bringing peace to Kashmir and compares it with three relevant, protracted and violent conflicts elsewhere in the world. Verghese Koithara argues cogently that the main difficulty with regard to resolving the conflict in Kashmir lies not in the stakes involved, but in the patterns of attitude and behaviour that have developed over the years. The structure of the conflict is actually more capable of being resolved today than is generally believed, maintains the author. Through an analysis of the conflicts in Northern Ireland, Sri Lanka and Palestine, he provides a useful perspective on conflict dynamics and how conflict resolution can be more realistically sought through a peace strategy rather than a war strategy. More specifically, the author: - Looks at the history and the current context of the India-Pakistan conflict through a lens of political realism. - Draws relevant parallels between the India-Pakistan conflict and the conflicts in Northern Ireland, Sri Lanka and Palestine with regard to both the evolution of the conflicts and peace efforts. - Presents reasons why a durable peace--based on the Line of Control becoming the settled border and the two parts of Jammu & Kashmir being given parallel and substantial autonomy--can be achieved in todays conditions.

"A superb book.…Mearsheimer has made a significant contribution to our understanding of the behavior of great powers."—Barry R. Posen, The National Interest The updated edition of this classic treatise on the behavior of great powers takes a penetrating look at the question likely to dominate international relations in the twenty-first century: Can China rise peacefully? In clear, eloquent prose, John Mearsheimer explains why the answer is no: a rising China will seek to dominate Asia, while the United States, determined to remain the world's sole regional hegemon, will go to great lengths to prevent that from happening. The tragedy of great power politics is inescapable.

The security relationship between India and Pakistan is generally viewed through a neo-realist lens. This book explains the rivalry of these countries by looking at the socio-cultural norms at two levels, and discusses a hypothetical security community that could result in peace in the region.

Realism and constructivism, two key contemporary theoretical approaches to the study of international relations, are commonly taught as mutually exclusive ways of understanding the subject. Realist Constructivism explores the common ground between the two, and demonstrates that, rather than being in simple opposition, they have areas of both tension and overlap. There is indeed space to engage in a realist constructivism. But at the same time, there are important distinctions between them, and there remains a need for a constructivism that is not realist, and a realism that is not constructivist. Samuel Barkin argues more broadly for a different way of thinking about theories of international relations, that focuses on the corresponding elements within various approaches rather than on a small set of mutually exclusive paradigms. Realist Constructivism provides an interesting new way for scholars and students to think about international relations theory.

This volume, first published in 2005, analyses the persistence of the India-Pakistan rivalry since 1947.