The Strategic Culture of India and Pakistan

The way humans behave can very narrowly be defined by their previous interactions with each other. Experiences shape the very core of what culture is. Since culture is a shared experience for a group of people, it includes the material traits of a racial, religious, or social group which unites all those involved. Extending the definition of culture and taking it in the context of the strategic culture of a state, the strategic culture of any particular state is the beliefs, values, and assumptions that play a role in shaping how that state approaches its military and security strategy. The three noteworthy areas that shape strategic culture can be broadly known as: the historical experiences of a state, their shared identity as a state, and the influence of culture. These three encompass how a country would view threats and securitize issues accordingly.

Strategic culture plays a significant role in shaping the national security framework of any state. Firstly, when it comes to making decisions, strategic culture can provide guidelines through which the decision-makers can perceive their security challenges. This would aid them in coming up with appropriate responses to security threats. Taking the example of states that have a history of military conflicts with each other, in the case of an emerging crisis between them, both states would first make sure that they can militarily fight back before trying any diplomatic means to resolve the conflict. Secondly, culture affects how we perceive things; depending on respective cultures, two states might see the same threat in a different light. Depending on how a state views the concept of sovereignty and external intervention, one state could see the military presence of another state in its territory as a threat to its national security, whereas another state might simply see it as a way of enhancing its security with additional aid from an ally. Thirdly, strategic culture, especially a history of wars and conflicts, would always influence the military doctrine of a nation. A state with a volatile neighbor would emphasize having nuclear deterrence and extremely capable conventional forces in order to balance the threat. Such is the case in South Asia.

Taking the argument of strategic culture in South Asia further, the two nuclear states, India and Pakistan, have a history of perceiving each other as a threat ever since their independence. In the decades leading up to that, they have viewed each other’s military capability as a threat towards each other, which has resulted in a security dilemma. As it is often the case that where there exists a security dilemma, an arms race follows. The case of Indo-Pak is no different. Both states have placed extreme focus on their nuclear deterrence, and they have used that concept of deterrence to ensure their national security. But the deep-rooted history of conflict and competition between these states has further encapsulated them in a culture of perceiving each other as adversaries. This ideology serves as a barricade between them and ensures that any efforts for peace and stability are undermined.

The following paragraphs will discuss the strategic culture between India and Pakistan in greater detail. Understanding the strategic culture of these states is important for a number of reasons. One of them is that only by understanding the values of each state respectively can we come up with a diplomatic strategy that can work for both states without undermining the national ideology of either. Another is that it is important to uncover what factors have contributed to the security dilemma between these states, especially to formulate solutions for conflicts that don’t revolve around threatening nuclear attacks in every crisis. Finally, decision-makers can alter their policies and approaches to be more effective if they understand the strategic culture of the other side.

Starting with Pakistan, one of the primary determinants of Pakistan’s strategic culture is its history. Beginning with the British Raj, efforts to divide and conquer the subcontinent led to a massive ideological divide between Muslims and Hindus. Each saw the other as a mortal enemy, creating divisions between people who previously shared a culture to the extent that they no longer viewed each other as anything but different. Moving to the partition of the subcontinent in 1947, the massive loss of lives and livelihoods, as well as the violence people endured, transformed Pakistan into a security state from the very start. The Indo-Pak wars of 1947, 1965, and 1971 further emphasized how the smaller state was vulnerable to attacks from its much stronger neighbor and underscored the need for a strong defense to survive.

Then there is Pakistan’s political ideology, which is greatly influenced by its military. Being a security state that views its immediate neighbor as a survival threat has turned the state’s political aspirations extremely nationalistic. Since Pakistan’s creation, the military establishment has been a key player in decision-making and forming national policies, which has led to political decisions that focus more on security than democracy, turning Pakistan into a semi-authoritarian state.

Geographical proximity to threats, especially in the case of India, which Pakistan sees as an imminent threat, has also been a longstanding challenge for Pakistan. When China is added to the mix—the animosity between India and China and the alliance between Pakistan and China have further complicated the relationship between Pakistan and India—this has driven the already unstable relationship between the two nuclear states further off course.

Finally, and likely the most important aspect of Pakistan’s strategic culture, is its nuclear capabilities. After gaining nuclear weapons, Pakistan’s strategic thinking shifted more toward deterrence through nuclear means, shaping its military policies around the importance of maintaining a nuclear arsenal capable of offering credible deterrence. As Pakistan cannot match India in terms of conventional military power, it seeks to compensate by ensuring that the nuclear deterrence factor can secure the national safety of the state.

Moving onto India, the history of colonialism has shaped the very foundation of nationalism in India. The struggle for independence led to a great focus on national security policies. India has seen the partition of 1947 as losing a part of itself. The sense of reunification might not have been as strong as China’s need for unification with Taiwan, but the sentiment is quite similar for India. For the longest time, India showed itself as a state focused on achieving a united subcontinent once again. The 1971 war, which separated Bangladesh from Pakistan and turned it into an autonomous state, further divided the region. This separation and India’s role in it made India more cautious in ensuring that its territorial integrity remains intact. These geographical disputes and conflicts have impacted India’s military stances and national policies.

When it comes to political ideology, India is more democratic in the sense that the military does not have as big of a hold on the political matters of the state. Therefore, India is more nationalistic and diplomatic in its values. But that does not mean that the military does not control matters of national security. In this context, the political environment of India can be seen as a mixture of both a democratic government and military influence in strategic decisions. This ensures that the military has limited involvement, only where it is essential, which is in the case of external threats.

As for the geopolitical threats, India does see China and Pakistan as adversaries. In the case of Kashmir, India emphasizes that Kashmir is a part of its territory. This has been a longstanding dispute between Pakistan and India, which has only escalated ever since its emergence during the partition. Instances like Operation Gibraltar have further pushed the conflict as a primary concern. The strategic importance of Kashmir has turned it into an issue neither side would consider backing down from. Another threat that India faces is from China and its growing influence in the region. China has seen rapid growth in the last two decades, which is a strategic challenge for India as both states are now regional powers.

The nuclear policy of India is somewhat ambiguous, but it has shown indications of a “no first use” doctrine. This has a significant impact on the strategic thinking of the state, meaning that after acquiring nuclear weapons, the emphasis is on deterrence. This shows willingness on India’s part to ensure at least some degree of strategic stability in the region. Even though it’s military strategy focuses on maintaining a credible response to any emerging threats.

To conclude, the strategic culture of both India and Pakistan is interlinked. While some aspects seem quite rigid, such as political ideologies and cultural and religious factors, some of these determinants seem to evolve. The threat of China to India in the context of becoming a regional power; the threat of India’s growing alliance with the U.S. to Pakistan in terms of security; India’s integration of AI in its military as an existential threat to Pakistan; and the ever-evolving threat of climate change for both Pakistan and India.