Does India have a right to self-defence against cross-border terrorism?

ON May 7, US Congressman Shri Thanedar supported India’s right to defend itself against terrorist attacks allegedly by Pakistan-backed militant groups targeting Hindu communities.

This highlights the ongoing geopolitical tensions between the nuclear-armed neighbours, tied to historical issues and current security concerns.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), China is the largest supplier of military weapons to Pakistan, having supplied over 81% of Pakistan’s arms imports in the past five years, which accounts for more than 63% of China’s total arms exports. A litany of Chinese media houses views the sales of armaments to Pakistan as a huge push by China to improve self-reliance in its defence industry.

Although China has not engaged in any major war in the past 40 years, Beijing has astutely capitalised on the Military Industrial Complex. As confirmed by Arab News Japan, citing that China’s defence shares and arms exports to Pakistan have soared precisely as civilian casualties mount in the India/Pakistan cross-border conflict.

The report outlines how China emerged as the “real winner” in the recent India-Pakistan conflict after AVIC Chengdu Aircraft shares Pakistan brought from China rose 40% this week, while AVIC Aerospace shares increased by 6% on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.

The report also elucidates in an interview with Nikkei Asia how China’s military technology is being tested in “actual conflict scenarios”. This testing is enhancing the credibility of Chinese equipment, improving China’s psychological and strategic position, and demonstrating that its military equipment can compete with Western standards.

As reported by Arab News in Islamabad: “The market capitalisation of China’s premier jet manufacturer, Chengdu Aircraft Corporation, surged by more than $7.6 billion following the recent India-Pakistan conflict last week.”

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA), which is the military of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC), military-industrial complex now profits from:

• $5 billion annual arms trade to Pakistan (SIPRI 2024)
• 81% of Pakistan’s weapons imports being Chinese-origin
• Joint development of fighter jets (JF-17) deployed in Kashmir operations

This commercial militarisation of colonial wounds has transformed the Indo-Pacific plain, once a unified civilizational zone, into a perpetual theatre of conflict where external powers extract strategic and economic value from brotherly strife.

This exploitation of Colonial legacies between India and Pakistan by China and the Chinese Military Industrial Complex is no different to the United States is very disturbing. This arms trade as political and economic leverage and the weakening of diplomatic solutions are nothing but proxy wars, which are damaging to emerging nations such as India and Pakistan, with multiple implications to the Global South.

India, with a population six times larger than Pakistan’s and the world’s second-largest military, holds conventional superiority but also exposes unresolved territorial disputes, which are weaponised by the largest superpowers.

The ongoing India/Pakistan situation also serves as a critical case study in postcolonial state formation. The conflict involves not just territorial disputes but also issues of identity, sovereignty, and historical memory. While some groups may present the struggle in religious terms, the underlying tensions relate to the borders and policies established during British rule.

As proponents of decolonial discourse, it is essential to examine how imperial legacies influence current conflicts. Of course, International law recognises the right of nations to self-defence; however, addressing historical injustices that contribute to such conflicts remains a critical task. India, similar to many postcolonial states, contends with the impact of a colonial history that prioritised administrative efficiency over organic nation-building.

The world-renowned African literary giant, Wole Soyinka, in his fascinating clash with the late Professor Ali Mazrui on “imperialism” teaches us that all forms of imperialism (Arab or European) must be contested and not whitewashed.

The overlooked history of India includes the creation of two nation-states by Britain, which ultimately resulted in Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The establishment of Pakistan in 1947 and the creation of Israel in 1948 were instances of British colonial boundary-making that transformed religious demographics into political territories. While the Israeli-Palestinian conflict receives considerable historical scrutiny, fewer recognise the similar historical process that divided the Indian subcontinent. This observation is intended to highlight how colonial-era decisions continue to influence modern geopolitical conflicts in both regions.

Historically, the Indian subcontinent maintained a Hindu-Buddhist civilizational core for millennia prior to Arab incursions into Sindh in the 8th century. This period of transformation mirrored similar Arabic expansions into North Africa, leading to significant migration of Arabs to the African continent, where they now preside over countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco.

The 1947 partition orchestrated by the Muslim League in India marked a significant disruption of the region’s historical continuum. Comparable to the establishment of Israel in the same year, the British agreed to the demand for separate Muslim-majority states, leading to the creation of Pakistan (which initially included East Bengal) and subsequently Bangladesh in 1971.

This division formalised previously fluid cultural boundaries, transforming shared civilizational spaces into contested religious territories almost overnight with the introduction of the Radcliffe Line. The partition resulted in the displacement of 15 million people and caused up to 1 million deaths due to sectarian violence, consequences that continue to affect the region today.

India’s right to self-defence against terrorism is well-established under international norms. However, achieving long-term stability requires addressing historical context. It is unfortunate that, while India and Pakistan grapple with their shared history, external powers exploit these divisions for strategic and economic advantages, aiming to dominate the Indo-Pacific Region.

True decolonial justice necessitates acknowledging and confronting such exploitative interventions, whether they originate from Western or Eastern blocs.

Enduring peace is achievable not merely through military deterrence but also by addressing the colonial-era decisions that disrupted shared histories and identities, whilst taking into context the nationhood of these new states, no matter their origins. Viewing South Asia's challenges through this perspective allows for progress beyond recurring violence towards true reconciliation.

* Phapano Phasha is the chairperson of the Centre for Alternative Political and Economic Thought, whose focus is on the Global South and BRICS Plus countries.

** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, Independent Media, or IOL.