+1(209) 348-9544
order@myessayservices.com
+1(209) 348-9544
order@myessayservices.com
Are you in High School, College, Masters, Bachelors or Ph.D and need someone to help in your homework? We offer quality research writing help, All our papers are original, 0% plagiarized & uniquely written by our dedicated Masters specialists. My Essay Services is an experienced service with over 9 years experience in research writing and over 83,000 essays over the years. You will receive a plagiarism check certificate that confirms originality for any essay you order with My Essay Services
Introduction
Over the past years, there is a trend in increase interaction between nations from different nations. As a result, there is an increase in cooperation between these nations. Interaction between nations over different nations results from the richness in materials and human resources within these nations. Among Asian nations, a geopolitical advantage also plays a role in the interaction between these nations. On the other hand, this leads to need for integration of these nations into a regional force. Integration of these nations aims at enabling these nations in having a common regional identity and a cooperative growth strategy making an optimized use of resources (CASHMAN, 2007 pp 420). Even so, it is pointless to unite two states when there exists unresolved conflict. Any underlying conflict may hinder substantial development in case the two nations are to work together in trade or other inter-state issues. This essay is a comprehensive analysis of the potential and remaining inter-state conflict between India and Pakistan (LANE, 2002 pp 358).
Conflict background
In most cases, states with a common interest on resources fail to agree hence resulting to a conflict. This mostly occurs when certain states feels left out in the allocation or division of resources. If there are no clear-cut instructions on measures applicable while resolving the conflict, the involved states end up using their political and economic power to own the resources. Essentially, such an occurrence has never yielded good results for any of the involved parties. Taking the case of India and Pakistan, we find a clear example of an inter-state conflict over the distribution of resources. Among other resources, the three states disagree on the allocation of water from the Indian Ocean. The three states border the Indian Ocean (CASHMAN, 2007 pp 396).
Here, a major problem arises on which state should have a bigger share of the ocean water. Most parts of India are arid and therefore face water shortages for the better part of the year. As a result, the government has to design methods of ensuring fair distribution of the available water sources. When exploiting interstate resources, there are limitations on the level of exploitation that a state should implement. Over exploitation of a shared resource, mostly results in dispute since the other states feel that they are being deprived their share of the resource (LANE, 2002 pp 360).
India and Pakistan share a history from their independence. There is a clear history of violence and betrayal that has cost these states their peaceful interactions. To begin with, there is a case of violence and mass dislocation. During this saga, many people were forced to abandon their land, possessions and family ties. There are claims that India received preferential treatment by the British officials during the distribution of resources. In addition, the division of territorial boundaries plays a key role in the conflict between the states. The unfair division of the territorial boundaries resulted in grave consequences and effects on the relation between Pakistan and India. Over the years, there has not been a perfect solution to this conflict. Consequently, the relationship between the two states has been tarnished a factor that has affected trade and economic interactions (HAYDEN, 2002 pp 206).
The underlying conflict between India and Pakistan is among the long-standing conflicts in the world. The conflict is over the Kashmir region. It started in 1947 when these nations gained their independence from Britain. The main conflict between these nations started when the Maharaja of Kashmir and Hari Singh decided to neither to join Pakistan or India. Following their decision, Pakistan, occupied by mostly Muslims decided to send tribal lashkars aiming at talking to Kashmir about their decision of autonomy. Following Pakistan’s decision, Indian government viewed it as a sign of invasion where they sent their troops aiming at defending the state of Kashmir. This led to the first war between the two nations where India lastly controlled 63% and Pakistan controlled 37% of Kashmir.
However, even before the partition of India and Pakistan, Indus River in the region posed some challenges to the states of British India. This became an international challenge when there was the partition of the states. This increased hostility and lack of supra-legal authority over the underlying issue between these two nations. Pakistan region, which originally had its water source from Indus River, found its water originating from another country. Due to the geopolitical differences between these two nations, there was an increase in hostility between them and as well leading to an increased conflict. The question on the flow of the Indus River was a classic case of the conflicting claims on the up-and down-stream riparian.
This conflict between India and Pakistan can be looked at in terms of the resumption of water delivery to Pakistan originating from India. Following this conflict between these two nations, several conferences were held aiming at dealing with the water conflict. Inter-Dominance conference held in Delhi on third and fourth May 1948 was the first conference held focusing on the water conflict between India and Pakistan. After the conference, there was an agreement between the two nations where India agreed to the resumption flow. However, it maintained that Pakistan could not claim any share of the waters. This position by the conference was because of Indian claim. The claim stated that since Pakistan had made agreements of paying for the water (according to the Standstill Agreement of 1947). Therefore, Pakistan had made recognition of India’s water rights. On the other hand, there was an underlying misunderstanding between India and Pakistan where Pakistan believed that it a right of prior appropriation where payments made to India were to cover for the operations encountered and as well, the maintenance costs.
While considering the conflicting claims made by these nations, there was no immediate solution developed for dealing with the claims. As a result, an agreement (Delhi Agreement) was signed. The agreement made an assurance to Pakistan where India made a promise of not withdrawing water delivery without allowing Pakistan find alternative sources for their water. Later, India made an expression of its displeasure with the agreement where it made a note on 16 June 1949. The note called for equitable allocation of all common waters within the region. India also made a suggestion of turning the judgment of the case over to the World Court.
There have been several attempts to settle the water dispute in India and other neighboring states. Some of the most noticeable attempts include conferences, the central government, the court system as well as constitutional mechanisms. There were disagreements between the key players in the conflict resolution which is a major reason why attempts to resolve the dispute failed. The main key players in the Karnataka and Tamil Nadu dispute included the states governments, the national parliament, central ministries, the courts and the hoc water tribunals. To resolve disputes arising from resource sharing there is a need to establish management practices and full transparency between the states. This is to establish trust between the nations and ensure that they gain equally (KHAN, 2009 pp 280).
Actor analysis and relationship mapping.
Every conflict has an origin, defined by the aspects, or individuals that caused the conflict. Much of the conflict date back to the colonial times when most of the resource division done. Then, the states become subjects to colonial rule and did not have a right to decide how resources were distributed or used. It is until independence that the states started exercising the inbuilt bitterness and the states set out to claim what they thought was rightfully theirs (CASHMAN, 2007 pp 438). The respective governments also have a role in existence and persistence of the dispute. The individual governments have a role in settling such disputes through negotiations and other mechanism such as corporate ownership. Business people and investors also have a role in gearing up the conflict. Most investors (especially Britons), only consider their personal interests and neglect major aspects of social wellbeing of the people who depend on resources such as water (LANE, 2002 pp 297).
Interstate conflict has caused many hitches in the establishment of regionalism. For instance, the inter-state conflict between India-Pakistan has had a great impact on the relations between the states (KHAN, 2009 pp 286). Consequently, the trade between these states has greatly declined. If we consider the location of the two states, it is clear that there is great economic potential in the region. First, the states share an important resource, which is the Indian Ocean. This resource can be utilized for the gain for these three states. In addition, the ocean is a direct form of transport that connects the three states. This makes it easy for the states to participate in trade by allowing free flow of commodities and people within the region.
Position and interests of actors
Every player has a role in existence and development of the conflict. First, the colonial government interfered with the peaceful existence of the states. Although there were native boundaries between the states, introduction of colonial boundaries left some communities feeling left out in the distribution of resources. This is the case between India and Pakistan where after their partition and after gaining their independence they were left in a conflicting situation on allocation of Indus River (HAYDEN, 2002 pp 218).
Another role player in the conflict between these two nations is the individual state governments. This is because they failed to address the issue of resource sharing between the states. On the other hand, within the initial stages of the conflict, India government played a role in the conflict where it sent out its troops aiming at protecting Kashmir. Several solutions could lessen the conflict or even resolve it fully. Presumably, all the governments involved in the conflict are too proud to settle the dispute through peaceful means. Investors over exploit the shared resources also contribute to the persistence of the conflict. It is therefore the duty of all people involved in the conflict to invest on sustainable development to avoid misuse of resources. On the other hand, India and Pakistan governments have a role to play in the settling the conflict, these states would make great progress both economically and enhancement of social life (SATHASIVAM, 2005 pp 401).
Issues and challenges.
The main reason for dispute between these states is the sharing of resources. Specifically the territorial dispute between the India and Pakistan is control over Kashmir region. The dispute over this region has been in existence for a long time. However, there is a new development in the nature of conflict in this region (KHAN, 2009 pp 300). As stated earlier, the other underlying dispute between these nations is due to the disagreements from the Kashmir insurgents. Currently, some of the residents in this region are supporting Pakistan control over the region while others support full independence for the region. This new development has diverted the line of conflict hence necessitating new techniques of addressing the conflict. The situation is now worse since the affected region is already divided from inside (CASHMAN, 2007 pp 420).
The other issue that is delaying resolution of the dispute is the issue of humanitarian issues (SATHASIVAM, 2005 pp 398). The conflict involves a region that has many residents whose lives are very important. Making the wrong decision would put their lives at stake. Making a hasty decision may lead to ethical crush which will make the situation worse.
The point of contention in this case is to device the best solution that will be suitable for all parties. Basing the argument on history, there has been constant disagreements regardless of attempts to resolve the issue. The states involved in this dispute have set very high standards for them to drop their interests on the control of Kashmir. None of the parties is willing to lessen their terms conditions for them to quit the pursuit for the region. There are also numerous cases during which this issue has been politicized. Due to the difference in geopolitical organization of these two nations, a political approach to the resolution of dispute makes it more complicated hence delaying the solution. This is as with the case when India sent its troop to Kashmir following Pakistan approach of Kashmir with a request of uniting with it. This leads to a war between these nations and as well complicating the conflict between them.
There are numerous challenges faced while solving the underlying conflict between India and Pakistan. These challenges play a role in the delayed solution of the conflict. The constant dispute has made it very difficult to settle the issue (SATHASIVAM, 2005 pp 405). The involved parties have different interests thus making it difficult for them to agree on a common ground. Selfish interests may also be viewed as a cause to delayed resolution of the dispute. Considering the case of India, its leaders are selfless in terms of water supply in the region. Despite the agreements made on water supply for Pakistan from Indus River, they have their suggestions aimed at protecting their personal interests.
In places where they state that Pakistan does not have the right of claiming water supply from Indus without pay is a show of their selfishness. Mostly, regions affected by dispute suffer from inadequate economic growth. Business people who operate as sole traders in such areas would like to prolong the initiation of a solution in order to continue gaining from the situation. This is a demonstration of selfish interests in some investors whose main aim is to prevent other investors from investing in the area. Similarly, Britons in India protected their interests by having an uneven distribution of resources during the partition of Pakistan and India. This lead to a monopolistic economy, where India was left to benefits the investors, and as well became sole suppliers of water within the region (KHAN, 2009 pp 275). However, serving personal interests at the expense of peace and stability is not only dangerous but also a gross mistake.
In the real sense, the economy would be better if there are many investors. Such investors should understand that competition in the world of business is a good thing. Most people have a negative attitude towards competition and they end up working so hard to destroy their competitors instead of focusing on the development. When competition is viewed positively, it encourages development and allows businesses to grow and develop. The government, investors and the people occupying Kashmir (both Indians and as well those living in the region) should work together towards creating a peaceful environment in the three states. This will result in the positive development in terms of trade, social life and betterment of living standards for people living in the region (LANE, 2002 pp 365).
Options and roadmap on the conflict resolution and the future
Water is an important natural resource used in the daily activities of people. This is during economic activities and as well while carrying out their daily chores. Therefore, water shortages experienced in these two nations poses a challenge to the citizens. On the other hand, it leads to the underlying conflicts between people. It is therefore important for these nations to take measures of dealing with the conflicts so that they can have a cooperative approach towards the challenge faced. As stated earlier, conflicts result from differences between people and as well uneven distribution of natural resources (SATHASIVAM, 2005 pp 412). To resolve the dispute, the players in dispute resolution must develop mechanisms that will resolve both the internal and external conflict.
The initial step towards conflict resolution is an assessment of a conflict in order to understand its extent or scope. This step is essential as it lays a foundation for the entire process of conflict resolution (KHAN, 2009 pp 323). The next step is to analyze the effects of the conflict and the possible damage that may have resulted from the conflict. During conflict resolution, the team is required to device methods of recovering the damage that may have occurred (HAYDEN, 2002 pp 223). Therefore while considering the underlying conflict between India and Pakistan, it is vital for both parties to device methods relating the conflicts and the possible solutions towards the conflict. In addition, considering the water challenges faced by Pakistan caused by the conflict, it is also important for the involved parties to develop compensation and recognition measures to people suffering because of the conflict (LANE, 2002 pp 350).
On the other hand, it is vital for both nations involved in the conflict have a combined approach towards the conflict. This is with an aim of solving the conflict and avoiding further loss from the conflict. Example in the conflict, during the war while Indian troops were sent to protect Kashmir, many people lost their lives and as well property. On the other hand, there was a delayed solution of the allocation of natural resources faced by Indians and as well Pakistanis. Therefore, while dealing with a conflict between two nations, it is important to have immediate measures of dealing with the conflict to avoid further damage and as well hatred between the involved parties (LANE, 2002 pp 369). While solving a conflict, an immediate solution to the conflict gives the involved parties time for healing. Taking the case of India and Pakistan, the underlying conflict is among the long-lasting conflict in the world. No immediate solution has been achieved and as a result, more damage continues to be experienced by the involved parties.
In conflict resolution, the best method of ensuring that the conflict is fully resolved is to address it from its root causes. For instance, the problem in India-Pakistan involves the sharing of inter-state resources. If a solution to this problem is to be established, the involved parties have to address the problem by visiting the history of the region and understand the cause of the conflict. This will aid in establishing a sufficient solution for the conflict. For such a case, inflicting a court ruling may not be the best solution. Nonetheless, the court can still play a role to ensure that justice take its course in resolving the dispute. To ensure a wholesome solution, other bodies such as religious organizations and community leaders in ensuring that everyone is involved in the conflict resolution process (CASHMAN, 2007 pp 254). This will ensure that the solution that is arrived at is acceptable to all occupants of the region.
There are different measures that can be used while dealing with the conflict between India and Pakistan. I suppose that the involved parties focus on the causes of the conflict by addressing water resources of Indus basin. More so, while addressing the water resources from this river, it is important for the involved parties’ work cooperatively aiming at enhancing an even allocation of the resources in the basin (LANE, 2002 pp 403). This is a roadmap solution towards creating cooperation between these nations and as well creating an even distribution of the natural resources (water) along Indus basin. This will ensure mutual gain for the two states regardless of the circumstances. This will involve setting up marine boundaries that specify the extent to which a certain state is entitled to along with its resources. This is a viable solution even though the movement of marine animals cannot be controlled. However, other economic activities that involve individual states must not exceed the boundaries unless there is a well stipulated and legal agreement. This will ensure a cordial relationship between the three states (KHAN, 2009 pp 296).
Lastly, while dealing with the conflict between India and Pakistan, a future solution applicable while solving the underlying conflict. This is through solving the problems of the basin on a functional level other than a political level. Considering the geopolitical diversity faced by the two nations, it is important to have a functional approach while dealing with conflict. This is important as it equips a fair distribution of the basin resources and as well prevents influence from political diversity of these nations. More so, as with the proposed Black initiative where there was an expectation from each nation to have a Bank engineer who had the role of planning on the development of the Indus basin. The role of the engineer was to develop possible measures of having a mutual benefit of these nations from Indus River. This is another functional approach aimed at promoting and creating friendly ties between these two nations. On the other hand, it promotes even distribution of water resources following the engineer consultancy program.
Conclusion
As seen from the essay it is clear that conflicts facing different nations and regions have a severe impact on the underlying interaction between people in these regions. On the other hand, conflicts affect economic activities carried out by people. Therefore, there lies a need for the establishment of different methods of dealing with these conflicts. There are many factors leading to conflicts among people. As from the essay while looking the underlying conflict between India and Pakistan, conflicts can result because of uneven distribution of natural resources in a region. The underlying conflict between these two nations results from the uneven distribution of natural resources (along Indus River).
In addition, it is also clear that political setting of these two nations play a role in the underlying conflicts between the nations. Among the Asians, difference resulting from political setting leads to conflicts between the involved parties. This is similar between Bangladesh and India. They have a difference in their political setting and as a result, they face a limitation while creating interaction ties between them (CASHMAN, 2007 pp 296).
Considering the challenges faced by people living in these regions, there lies a need for establishing methods of dealing with the water challenges. Individual governments have a role to play in ensuring that the citizens enjoy the natural resources without interference and facing challenges resulting from water issues. On the other hand, while dealing with these challenges, a combined approach to the water issue could aid these nations while dealing with conflict. Attaining this combined approach is by developing a different approach method towards the conflict (AYDEN, 2002).
Personally, I believe that the water challenges faced by India and Pakistan cannot be dealt with while using an engineering solution. This is because this is a seasonal problem resulting from variations in water supply. Despite the governments having an engineering approach towards the conflicting seasonal variations in water in these nations, it is important for the parties involved to have clearer and better approach towards the conflict between the nations. My argument results from the geographical setting of these nations. On the other hand, considering the measures applied by the nations in this region, I believe that the potential underlying conflicts between these two nations will end. There lies some questions on measures of dealing with conflicts resulting from the political difference. This is because these two nations continue to different political setting and as a result diversifying their conflicts (SATHASIVAM, 2005 pp 420).
In conclusion, to the paper, it is clear that conflicts affects interactions and cooperation between people. Therefore, while responding to a conflict it is vital for the parties involved to take effective measures aimed at dealing with conflict. This is as seen in the above case of India and Pakistan where despite the two nations being in the same continent they have many conflicts facing them. Their diversified natural resources and geographical setting is seen to be the main contributors towards the conflict (LANE, 2002 pp 385).
References
CASHMAN, G., & ROBINSON, L. C. (2007). An introduction to the causes of war: patterns of interstate conflict from World War I to Iraq. Lanham, Md, Rowman & Littlefield.
KHAN, S. (2009). Nuclear weapons and conflict transformation: the case of India-Pakistan. London, Routledge.
HAYDEN, P. (2002). Debating environmental regimes. Hauppauge, N.Y., Nova Science Publishers.
SATHASIVAM, K. (2005). Uneasy neighbors: India, Pakistan and US foreign policy. Burlington, Vt, Ashgate.
LANE, J.-E., & ERSSON, S. O. (2002). Government and the economy: a global perspective. London [u.a.], Continuum.
People are expected to obey the law of God but at the same time they are expected to obey the law made by man. At the work place, the employment law guides both the employees and the employers. However, they are also supposed to obey the law of God that regards employment. In the past years, there was a general believe that believers should not get involved in matters of the government and politics. The employment law, though applied in various workplaces is made by the government and hence qualifies to a matter of politics and government (Moore, 2004). In the past years, believers could only apply God’s law in the workplace and in the various aspects of their lives.
However, the government law has become accepted among most believers as they have increasingly got working in public service. It is an issue that has stimulated debate among different groups as some believers view the government law as being a contradiction of God’s law. In business organizations, managers need to apply employment law in managing employees. However, some managers take into consideration God’s law in management. Some of the comparisons and the contradictions between the employment law and the God’s relevant law are as follows;
Discrimination by either race or ethnicity is not right according to the employment law. Similarly, God’s law say that all people should stay in love of one another regardless of where one comes from. In other words, God’s law does not support discrimination (ADL, 2012). The world today is occupied by people of various races and origins. With the increased globalization, the various races have even occupied countries where they go for business or in search of employment. For instance, the United States of America is one of the nations that have a high mixture of races. Companies are expected to employ people regardless of the races and ethnicities. This will promote the co-existence of people from all races as the God’s law requires. Similarly, it adheres to the employment law which is against discrimination.
In some other aspects, the employment law may be in contradiction with God’s law. According to God’s commandment, one is not supposed to work for all the seven days in a week. However, there are companies that require employees to work for seven days. This is allowed by the employment law as long as they are paid for the days they work. The question arises on whether those people who work on the seventh day of the week are right in relation to the law of God. This is an issue that has as well led to many debates among believers. Depending on the nature of their operations, some companies have to run for seven days in a week. Therefore, the people working on the seventh day are right to do so. But again, they do not adhere to the law of God. In such an instance, the two laws contradict each other.
It is said that all people are supposed to adhere to the governing authorities. Apostle Paul gave believers through the writings in the book of Romans that “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God” (Moore, 2004; Pp. 227) Paul explains that those people who do not agree to the authority rebel against the law of God and that they will be judged for that. Therefore, based on these teachings, all employed people should adhere to the employment law as it is the governing authority. At the same time, they are expected to act according to the will of God.
References
ADL (2012), Religious Accommodation in the Workplace: Your Rights and Obligations; Anti- Defamation League,
Moore, Karin A. (2004) "God's Law and Man's Law: Can They Peacefully Co-Exist in the Life of a Christian Appellate Judge?," University of St. Thomas Law Journal: Vol. 2: Iss. 1, Article 9.
Browse More Essay Topics 24/7/365 Support 11+ Yrs in Essay Writing Pay for Quality not Quantity Score that A+ Grade
