Main Causes of insecurity in India and solutions
As one of the globe’s largest democracy, India faces many security challenges both locally and internationally. In the past fifty years, it has fought war against its two neighbors, Pakistan and china. Both nations contain nuclear weapons as India does. Making it more than worse and a threat to India’s national security Pakistan and china are united and exchange high technology military possessions like missiles. India’s hostile association with Pakistan emerged from a territorial disagreement over the state of Kashmir which both countries claim. This resulted to the 2008 terrorist attack in Mumbai by the Islamic militants groups hosted by Pakistan (Chapter 2 Realist Theories, 2011).
One of the ways one can use to confront security environments is by implementing measures that regulate arms race. Arms race is the process of building up military weapons in competition, and response to arm dominance. The main aim of arms race is preparing for actions of brutality against each other. Regulating arms race reduces the escalation of threats and thus encourages confidence amongst each other. For instance, the soviet-US nuclear arms race led to the rise of thousands of nuclear weapons.
During a debate held in Lok Sabha about the Indo-US treaty on nuclear energy, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh pointed out that, “the august house should recognize the changed disposition towards India that it is against the US and supporting the Soviet Union” (Shveta & Peyyeti, 2006). He urged US to make good relation with it since it was a pre-eminent power (Shveta & Peyyeti, 2006). Then again, the prime minister signed peace agreements with japan in 2006 (Shveta & Peyyeti, 2006).
Nonetheless, another way of confronting security issues that arise from collective possession problem is by using the reciprocity mechanism. This mechanism unravels the problem by punishing or rewarding behaviors that encourages egotism at the expense of a group. The shortcomings of reciprocity as a way of solving a problem is that it is likely to lead to what is termed as downward spiral where a group just punishes the other for what it believes to be negative to it. However, in international relations, it forms the source of most of the institutions and permits nations to control agreements as well as bit by bit conflict resolution measures (Goldstein & Pevehouse, 2009).
On the other hand, the principle of identity can be used to confront security problems. This principle does not depend on self-interest. Associates of the identity group care about the concern of others more than they care about theirs. They sacrifice their concern in order to profit others. This principle encourages people to live as though they have the same ethnic origin, same nationality and same religious group (Goldstein & Pevehouse, 2009)
Conversely, there is the statecraft mechanism. This is the art of controlling state affairs in a way that makes it possible to maneuver effectively in a world of power politics amid sovereign states. The power strategies are used by actors to cultivate and deploy power competences to accomplish their goals. The fundamental aspect of plan, is selecting the type of abilities to develop and the given inadequate resources, so as to maximize international influence (Chapter 2 Realist Theories, 2011).
In conclusion, the major consideration in conflict confrontation is by coming up with a mutual understandings and decrees that govern this understanding. Conflict between nations majorly arises from land disputes like Pakistan and India and also struggle for dominance. Establishing of power hierarchy also is another major cause of state conflicts. Those at the top govern those who are below and thus fighting for top position begins because of lack of resources. An instance of dominance is in the united nation council where the strongest military powers in the world hold veto. However, the only solution to counter all this to avoid security threats because of dominance is by instilling power sharing deals.
Chapter 2 Realist Theories. (2011).Policy perspectives prime minister of India, Manmohan Singh. Retrieved on 12 november, 2012 from < http://www.pearsonhighered.com >
Goldstein J. S., & Pevehouse, J. (2009). International Relations. Harlow, England: Pearson-Longman publishers.
Shveta, U., & Peyyeti, R. (2006). Contemporary world politics. New Delhi, India: Shakun Printer publication, Print.