TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
India-Pakistan conflict a bilateral matter, no need for international mediation
Many claims have been made by the United States about settling other disputes, such as in the Middle East and in Ukraine, but there has been no peace there.
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
Crisis rooted in history: A flare rises over a hill on May 7, 2025, near the main town of Poonch District. India said on May 7, 2025, it carried out “precision strikes at terrorist camps“ inside Pakistan and Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, days after it blamed Islamabad for a deadly attack on the Indian side of the contested region. (AFP/Punit Paranjpe)
A
crisis emerged in South Asia early this month when India launched missile strikes on Pakistan in what it dubbed retaliation against the Pahalgam Attack in Jammu and Kashmir. Skirmishes took place between the two, as Pakistan accused India of launching an act of war. After three days, a ceasefire was agreed upon. Indian Ambassador to Indonesia Sandeep Chakravorty sat with The Jakarta Post’s Yvette Tanamal to give his insights on the conflict and the larger geopolitical landscape that played a role in the conflict. Below are excerpts from the interview.
Question: Can you give a recap and background of the recent India-Pakistan conflict?
Answer: The conflict did not start from the day of the Indian attack. It started before that, which I think a lot of people are forgetting. There was an India Independence Act in 1947, which divided India into India and Pakistan, and there were lots of princely states ruled by kings and princes.
The princely states had the right to either accede to India or Pakistan. In the case of Jammu and Kashmir, the king acceded to India. Now the problem is that he was a Hindu king, but his subjects were Muslims. Pakistan feels that they have a natural claim to that, but that is against the Independence Act.
[Jawaharlal] Nehru, an internationalist like Sukarno, had great faith in the United Nations. He hoped that the UN would understand our point. But we never realized that the big colonial powers would gang up against India; the British, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Americans. They were saying to do a plebiscite, which conditions Pakistan to withdraw its forces. But Pakistan never withdrew its forces.
We think that it was a mistake to go to the UN. Pakistan occupied Kashmir and wanted to seize this territory. They never won.
We have been saying to Pakistan that we want to discuss Kashmir and have normal relations, on the condition that Islamabad does not use terror. Do not send terrorists. The Pahalgam attack on April 22 [of this year] came as normalcy was being restored in Kashmir, and 26 people were killed at point blank range in front of children and family members.
