4 Comments
User's avatar
Nakayama's avatar

My naive belief is that if there were no outsider influences, China, India, and Pakistan could reach an agreement to split Kashmir. I prefer an independent Kashmir, but that seems impossible in reality. Right now, all three parties use Kashmir as a distraction from domestic issues. With foreigners meddling in between, things are even more difficult than they need to be. Therefore, it is better to go slow; going fast will only increase the speculation that someone is planning something.

Expand full comment
Dr. Deepak Natarajan's avatar

At the risk of being lynched, I would wholeheartedly support the LOC being converted to an international border and both nations—Pakistan in particular—getting on the job of nation-building. The world is changing very fast, in fact too rapidly; Pakistan needs to understand how to navigate through these changes effectively. Indulging in terror attacks on civilians is stupid and counterproductive. Who would not want to board a train from Delhi to Astana and from there to Moscow? It is up to the generals in Pakistan to make such an endeavour possible.

Expand full comment
Paulo Aguiar's avatar

In a world where strength defines survival, strategic infrastructure like PAKAFUZ isn’t just about trade—it’s about locking in influence over key corridors before rivals can. Real challenges exist, sure, but those who wait for perfect conditions are always left behind. Russia, Uzbekistan, and their partners are right to push ahead with planning, because the first mover advantage in Central Eurasia could reshape the balance of power for decades. Success won’t come easily, but neither does anything worth having.

Expand full comment
Berta Nelson's avatar

Taking the long view almost always works. It is most advantageous for Russia to secure this route for the reasons you mention and many more. Further protecting Russian borders is as good for tomorrow as it is for today. Thanks for info on this coming meeting.

Expand full comment