The main military of Pakistan, General Sahir Shamshad Mirza, has emphasized the need to move towards conflict resolution instead of management, warning that his absence could result in a destructive escalation.
The comments follow a recent military confrontation between India and Pakistan for the accusations of New Delhi against Islamabad, without evidence, about a deadly attack in the occupied pahalgama of Kashmir. When New Delhi launched air attacks in early May, killing civilians, Pakistan knocked down five Indian aircraft in retaliation. After attacks in the air bases, an American intervention was needed on May 10 so that both parties finally reached a fire.
The Mirza Gen, president of the Joint Committee of the Heads of the Heads of Study of Strategic Studies of the Chiefs of the Chiefs, organized by the International Institute of Strategic Studies in Singapore on Saturday night.
During a discussion panel, entitled “Regional Mechanisms of Crisis Management,” General Mirza said: “It has become imperative to go beyond conflict management towards conflict resolution. This will guarantee sustainable peace and a safe crisis management.”
Then he emphasized that an “early background resolution [dispute] In line with the resolutions of the UN Security Council and according to people’s aspirations it is essential “for lasting peace in southern Asia.
The CJCSC warned: “Given the Indian policies and the extremist mentality of policies, the absence of a crisis management mechanism may not give enough time to global powers to intervene and affect the cessation of hostilities. They will probably be too late to avoid damage and destruction.”
During his speech, General Mirza also highlighted the coffee dispute and the recent military clash between Pakistan and India.
“When there is no crisis, Kashmira is never discussed, and as we always say that it is the resolution of Kashmir Disputes in line with the aspirations of the people of Kashmir and in line with the resolutions of the CSNU that will address many problems.
“The nucleus that resides between Pakistan and India is Kashmir,” said the CJCSC.
He added that unless countries did not “enter into conflict resolution”, which said that it could initially be through conflict management and then lead to resolution, the problems “would always explode.”
Other speakers in the panel included the Vice Minister of National Defense of Canada Stefanie Beck and the head of the Army Army of Fiji, Major General Jone Logavatu Kalouniwai. The head of defense of India staff, Gen Anil Chauhan, also addressed a separate discussion about defense innovation yesterday.
In an apparent reference to the Kashmir dispute, the CJCSC also pointed out: “Crisis prevention is better than the fight against the crisis. Deleted disputes, whether territorial or ideological, cannot be handled indefinitely.”
General Mirza said that Pak-India’s recent climbing had underlined “how regional crisis management frameworks remain hostage to the belligerence of countries,” noting that the only line of contact between the two countries was the direct line of the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO).
The general general said that after the military conflict, the “threshold of a staggered war has been dangerously low, which implies a higher risk on both sides, not only in the territory in dispute but throughout India and all Pakistan.”
“The India Emballet as a net safety provider for the West and its ambition to become a regional hegemon is discouraged to participate in conflict management options,” said CJCSC Mirza.
Then he said that Pakistan wanted a “peaceful coexistence with India based on mutual respect, sovereign equality and, most importantly, dignity and honor.”
“We seek a main order, an order anchored in equality and sovereign restriction. In this, crisis management is not simply a set of tools but strategic ethic,” he added.
The CJCSC emphasized the need for Asia-Pacific regions and South Asia to revitalize and strengthen the existing bilateral, regional and multilateral frameworks instead of calculating the new mechanisms. “States must communicate more and more often and more effectively.”
‘Conventional warp threshold now lower’
During the IISS session, General Mirza also said that after the military shock of Pakistan-India, the conventional war threshold had “significantly degraded” at “dangerous levels.”
“The decrease in this threshold to dangerous levels, if the next time such conflict occurs and the cities are directed first and the borders become irrelevant mainly, […] There could be a possibility, I am not trying to create an alarm, but I am talking about logic, there could be the possibility that before the international community intervenes due to the restricted or restricted time window, damage and destruction may have already taken place, ”he warned.
General Mirza said the wars of 1965 and 1971 with India were “always confined to the territory in dispute.” “[However,] This time, it has transcended that and has reached the international border. “
The CJCSC also pointed out: “Instead of going first to the borders, which used to be the conventional domain or ancient domain, the cities have been attacked and the borders have remained relatively, if not silent, comfortable.”
On the night of May 6 to 7, New Delhi had launched a series of air attacks in Punjab and Azad Kashmir, which resulted in at least 40 civilians who lost their lives with another 121 injured.
The army has confirmed that 13 security personnel, including members of the Pakistan Army and the Pakistan Air Force, were martyred, the more than 75 they were injured during the confrontation with India.
By pointing out that for these attacks, India had “crossed the threshold of the territory in dispute on the international border,” said General Mirza who had significantly reduced the threshold.
Highlighting the absence of a crisis management mechanism, the “Jingoistic” role of the Indian media and the mentality of their leadership, said: “If there had not been a third -party mediation, it would have gone to the following levels.”
The main general mentioned the United States, the United Kingdom, Turkiye, China, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates as the “interlocutors.”
Speaking about the management of crisis in Asia-Pacific, CJCSC Mirza described it as the “geopolitical cabin of the 21st century.” “Its trajectories will shape security architecture not only for this region but also for the world.”
By offering eight observations, he declared that the crisis management debate in the Pacific in Asia must also focus on southern Asia, adding that the structures that support the modern state system were losing vitality.
He also requested institutionalized protocols, inclusion of key stakeholders and resolution of peaceful disputes; He stressed the importance of communication; and emphasized that emerging technologies compress the decision space.
“The erroneous concept, the narrative war and the distortion of the information are oxygen for climbing. We must disarm not only militarily but rhetorically,” Mirza observed. “Power and interest, not morality or principles, now Supreme Reina.”
On the challenges facing the Asia-Pacific, CJCSC Mirza made four observations, one is: “Asia-Pacific today seems to be descending to an extended era of great reply of energy and strategic uncertainties.”
In addition, he pointed out that Asia-Pacific needed an “organic institutional security architecture for the region”, which was missing since “to a large extent it had been guided by extra regional powers.”
