GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer
Nuclear Tensions in South Asia
8/15/2025 | 26m 46sVideo has Closed Captions
Last spring, India and Pakistan exchanged military strikes. Where do things stand now?
Following a terrorist attack in Kashmir last spring, India and Pakistan, both nuclear powers, exchanged military strikes in an alarming escalation. Former Foreign Minister Hina Khar joins GZERO World to give Pakistan's perspective and look at where things stand now.
Problems playing video? | Closed Captioning Feedback
Problems playing video? | Closed Captioning Feedback
GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer is a local public television program presented by THIRTEEN PBS
GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer is a local public television program presented by THIRTEEN PBS. The lead sponsor of GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer is Prologis. Additional funding is provided...
GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer
Nuclear Tensions in South Asia
8/15/2025 | 26m 46sVideo has Closed Captions
Following a terrorist attack in Kashmir last spring, India and Pakistan, both nuclear powers, exchanged military strikes in an alarming escalation. Former Foreign Minister Hina Khar joins GZERO World to give Pakistan's perspective and look at where things stand now.
Problems playing video? | Closed Captioning Feedback
How to Watch GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer
GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer is available to stream on pbs.org and the free PBS App, available on iPhone, Apple TV, Android TV, Android smartphones, Amazon Fire TV, Amazon Fire Tablet, Roku, Samsung Smart TV, and Vizio.
Providing Support for PBS.org
Learn Moreabout PBS online sponsorship- The India-Pakistan region is home to one-fifth of humanity.
And to put them at stake because of political engineering happening in your own country is rather being very callous.
(intriguing music) - Hello, and welcome to GZERO World.
I'm Ian Bremmer, and today I am unpacking India-Pakistan relations at a time when tensions remain high.
After nearly eight decades of on-again-off-again conflict, last April saw the two nuclear rivals reach the brink of all-out war.
After a terrorist attack in Kashmir left 25 Indians dead, India and Pakistan engaged in increasingly escalatory military strikes.
Luckily, they were able to reach a ceasefire after just a few days.
Joining me with a Pakistani perspective, former Pakistani Foreign Minister, Hina Khar.
She's by no means an objective voice on the conflict, but she is an important one.
Don't worry.
I've also got your Puppet Regime.
- Okay, what would make you a great lifeguard?
- I'm comfortable working shirtless and love rescuing people from threats.
- But first, a word from the folks who help us keep the lights on.
- [Announcer] Funding for GZERO World is provided by our lead sponsor, Prologis.
- [Rep] Every day all over the world, Prologis helps businesses of all sizes lower their carbon footprint (inspiring music) and scale their supply chains.
With a portfolio of logistics and real estate and an end-to-end solutions platform, addressing the critical initiatives of global logistics today.
Learn more at Prologis.com.
- [Announcer] And by Cox Enterprises is proud to support GZERO.
Cox is working to create an impact in areas like sustainable agriculture, clean tech, healthcare, and more.
Cox, a family of businesses.
Additional funding provided by Carnegie Corporation of New York, Koo and Patricia Yuen, committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities, and: (uplifting music) (upbeat music) - When and why did India and Pakistan become bitter rivals?
The reasons are complicated and contested, but a partial explanation, better than nothing.
So here goes something.
Oversimplification number one: The Brits.
(dramatic music) - [Reporter] Pakistan acclaimed the transfer of British power.
Meanwhile, in Delhi, the stage was set for British rule to give place to the new dominion of India.
- In 1947, nearly two centuries of British colonial rule came to an end, and it split the Indian subcontinent into two countries, Muslim-majority Pakistan and Hindu-majority India.
That partition was one of the most violent human upheavals in modern history, displaced roughly 15 million people.
Territorial disputes and separatist movements soon sprung up and have continued to simmer for nearly eight decades.
Why it's an oversimplification?
Because the partition didn't cause ethnic tensions between Muslims and Hindus.
It exacerbated them, as had the British throughout their rule.
What's more, India's Muslim population is roughly the same size as Pakistan's.
The two nations with a combined total of 1.6 billion people don't fit neatly into two ethnic teams.
See: Bangladesh, which split from Pakistan with India's support back in 1971.
Oversimplification number two: Kashmir.
The entire conflict boils down to Kashmir, the Muslim-majority Himalayan region split between Pakistan, India, and China, and the subject of several conflicts since partition and up until today.
India claims the entire region while Pakistan disputes India's control, but makes no such claim to the areas held by its ally, China.
Why it's an oversimplification?
Kashmir hasn't just been a source of conflict, also been a rare example of cooperation.
Back in 1960, India and Pakistan signed the Indus Waters Treaty agreeing to share the six rivers of the Indus Basin they both depend on.
The pact survived multiple wars until India suspended it following a terrorist attack last April, and now we'll see.
Still, 65 years, nothing to sneeze at.
Oversimplification number three: nukes.
India tested its first nuclear weapon in 1974, spurring an arms race, and Pakistan acquired its own nukes two decades later.
The two nations today have about 170 nuclear weapons each- and that is plenty to turn a tinderbox into a mushroom cloud.
Unless you think the adults are in charge, in March 2022, India accidentally fired a nuclear-capable cruise missile into Pakistani territory.
Why it's an oversimplification?
- [Reporter] The white flash and the heat wave.
- Well, if the Cold War taught us anything, it's that the threat of nuclear annihilation is a real deterrent.
The idea of wiping out one-fifth of humanity has helped to prevent all out war between the rival nations.
The risk of nuclear war in the region remains low.
And finally, oversimplification number four: Politics.
Since 1947, leaders and politicians in both Pakistan and India have repeatedly stoked religious tensions and nationalism to gain power and distract from domestic failures.
Former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan claimed back in 2021 that normalizing relations with India would be a "betrayal," and I quote, to Kashmir.
And shortly after winning re-election in 2019, the Hindu Nationalist Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, stripped Kashmir of its special semi-autonomous status.
Leaders from both sides have found useful political foils across the border.
Why that's an oversimplification?
Actually, that one's pretty much on point.
That brings us to today.
(siren blaring) Terrorist attack on Indian tourists and Kashmir back in April led to a new round of military strikes between Indian and Pakistan.
Despite reaching a ceasefire after just days of fighting, the tit-for-tat escalation showed how quickly things could get out of hand between the two nuclear powers.
Who knows if that off-ramp will be as easy to find the next time around?
Joining me now to talk about India-Pakistan relations as well as Pakistan's role in the world, former Pakistani Foreign Minister, Hina Khar.
Hina Khar, welcome back to the show.
- It's a pleasure to be here.
- So talk to me a little bit, I mean, I know it was a few months ago, but it was a scary time.
Two nuclear powers really facing off against each other.
Talk us through a little bit from your perspective of what this fight was all about.
- So this country, India, a very large, what I call, a belligerent country, decides that if there is a security lapse in their own territory, or if something happens, terrorism is kind of common in South Asia and now the rest of the world also, that they have the right to launch missile strikes into another country, which also happens to be a nuclear state, and not worry about the repercussions, and claim to the world that we have set new norms.
While it was doing that, it offered no evidence to the country that it was attacking or to the world for how that country was in any which way involved with the attack that happened in Pahalgam.
- So you're talking about the fact that the Indian government has and continues to state that the terrorism that occurred, targeting and killing Indian civilians in Kashmir, was that the Pakistani military and ergo leadership was in some way directly contributing to participating and responsible for that attack?
- You know, what you make is kind of a responsible statement.
They don't even make that much of a responsible statement.
They just says, "It emanated from Pakistan."
From Pakistan.
And therefore now they have a right to attack, send missile strikes into another nuclear state.
And by the way, Ian, you know this more than anyone else, this is the first time I believe in history that one nuclear state has launched direct missile strikes into another nuclear state.
And I think that's when we did the first show on the sidelines of Munich- - That's right.
- When I started calling India rogue state for the first time, because that was the first time since 1971, which was the last big war that Pakistan and India had before this war now, that India decided to send its military jets into our territory.
So it shows a behavioral pattern which makes the days which have passed difficult, as you said, scary, as you said, but which makes you really worry about the future, because the norm that they're setting has been in some ways rendered irrelevant by Pakistan's reaction and Pakistan's ability to down their jets.
- So just so I understand, how close were we in your view to a out-of-control escalation?
- From the moment that one nuclear state decides to attack militarily through missiles, through fighter jets, et cetera, another nuclear state, you do not know how quickly you go up the escalation ladder.
So you could be one day away, you could be 10 days away, you could be 30 days away, you could be a few seconds away.
But I'm appalled by the intent of any country which launches a strike into another nuclear state, knowing full well what the capacity and even the conventional capacity is.
And by no means do we want to disregard the fact that this, the India-Pakistan region, is home to one-fifth of humanity, quite literally one-fifth of humanity.
And to put them at stake because of political engineering happening in your own country is rather being very callous.
Because in situations like this the escalation ladder just can go up in nanoseconds, because when you are using missiles which have the capacity to carry nuclear heads, who knows on the other side as to whether it is carrying or not and how much.
With all the technology that is available to you, there are missteps that happen.
- Now, did you find the American involvement in this war, was it useful?
Was it relevant?
I mean, Prime Minister Modi actually publicly said that the US had nothing to do with the ceasefire, right?
Which, I mean, unusually, because most people are saying how wonderful Trump is, at least publicly.
Modi hasn't done that.
That's kind of interesting.
I mean, how do you see the Americans here, if at all?
- Okay, so I see it obviously the way it was.
Okay, I see it the way it was.
The way it was stated by Secretary Rubio's tweet, the way it was stated by President Trump's Truth Social tweet, if you can call it that.
They basically said that, "Look, we intervened.
We asked them to go towards ceasefire.
Both countries agreed.
We would do trade with them, we would like to normalize."
And Secretary Rubio also said that we would like them to start negotiating on other pending issues between the two countries at another location, et cetera, et cetera.
Now, the Indians came out and said, "Oh, well, they never intervened."
So initially the Indians were calling Pakistan these liars and saying they're misstatements and they're misquoting, et cetera.
And suddenly now they've found themselves in a position where they were calling their own strategic partner in some ways a liar because they said it never happened.
It did happen.
Of course it happened and it happened right after Pakistan decided to launch its counterstrikes.
And when Pakistan launched its counterstrikes, I think India lost a lot of balance because we got their fighter jets.
I know your international audience may not know all the details, but the first time that they did the strikes- - These are the Rafale jets that the- - [Hina] It's the Rafale jets.
- [Ian] Indians have that the Pakistanis- - Which no country has ever lost in combat operation before.
And India has now the unique privilege to be a country who was able to lose Rafale Jets.
So no point-scoring on that count.
But then after that, when Pakistan launched its proper counterstrikes, I think between ninth and 10th, India lost a lot of balance because we were able to go right into the heart of India, we were able to launch as many strikes as we were.
We had targets, military targets, otherwise, from points that they had actually started the attacks from.
We took no civilian targets, unlike India, which was gloating and celebrating the fact that it was able to kill this many Pakistanis, et cetera.
We took no civilian targets because obviously we wanted to be credible, transparent, go by international law, et cetera.
So I think this was really a unique moment, Ian, because in the last two decades or so, India has been projected, promoted all over the world as the democratic, institutionalized, happy India that is a Western partner and shares the values, et cetera.
And Pakistan has obviously suffered from whatever happened in terms of the international cooperation in Afghanistan, how that did not go well.
And I like to believe, again, perhaps you would say a bias to you, that Pakistan got to shoulder all the blame for everybody's mistakes in Afghanistan, right?
Be as it may, where India was, where Pakistan was in the global calculation, every time we would go into a war game, every time we do a calculus, every time we do a calculation, Indian conventional supremacy is never, ever questioned.
And here in the war theater, you found out that it really didn't hold all of that assessment.
- I mean, the Pakistan relationship with US is clearly much more comfortable today than it was in Trump's first administration, when aid to Pakistan was suspended.
We now have more military aid coming from the United States to Pakistan.
We recently had a trip by the military chief of staff to meet with Trump.
They said, "You should get a Nobel Peace Prize," which was later rescinded.
It looks messy, and a lot of times these relationships are.
Tell me what you think the Pakistani military is trying to accomplish with Trump right now.
- So what does Pakistani military want from the United States of America?
What does Pakistan, I think I would put it in the broader context, what does Pakistan want from the United States?
Look, I think interstate relations does have some historical relevance.
And Pakistan and the United States have had longstanding relations which have had to do with the Afghanistan I, Afghanistan II, but also about collaboration, cooperation in multiple fields, certainly in the military field.
I think the United States of America started viewing Pakistan exclusively from the Indian lens.
Now, India, having shown its lack thereof of some strength which were associated with it, or for whatever reasons, which is best known to the two parties, which is the United States of America and India, I think there is a reality check in the United States of America about how Pakistan must not be viewed from the Indian lens, which is an exceptionally belligerent towards Pakistan, wanting hegemonic designs towards Pakistan, et cetera, and wanting an independent relation with Pakistan, looking at what Pakistan has to offer to the US and what the US has to offer to Pakistan.
I think what Pakistan has to offer to the US is not limited to, but it is absolutely a major part of it, is the very, very good counter-terrorism work that we've been able to do in the last few months, last few years.
And I think that has built a lot of confidence.
Other than that within the region, within whether you call it Indo-Pacific, whether you call it West Asia, whatever nomenclature you use, I think the relevance of Pakistan for the United States remains.
And other than that, we have people-to-people contact.
We have contacts and education, we have contacts in our trade, et cetera.
So I think it is just the ability or the learning from experience of not viewing Pakistan from any hyphenation with India or with Afghanistan and viewing Pakistan for Pakistan.
And this is what Pakistan seeks from the United States also.
A normal, predictable, consistent relationship which is based on mutual interest and a lot of mutual respect.
- Pakistan's most important relationship over the past decade has been with China.
Belt and Road has had significant investments, some of them have panned out well, some of them have not.
China's had more economic challenges recently.
They've been less interested in following through in a lot of the big commitments that they've made.
But there's also security alignment.
China-India relationships has improved a little bit, but is still fairly tense.
There are a lot of sanctions that are challenging that relationship.
A lot of export controls, that kind of thing, initially from India against China.
So now give me the Pakistan view on your China relationship today.
- Okay, so please allow me the space to say that I just find it so interesting that suddenly, in the last 10 years, the world has started noticing Pakistan and China's strong strategic ties.
Pakistan and China have had historical ties which have been strategic in nature and very, very deep for many decades.
And one beneficiary of those ties was Henry Kissinger's plan to normalize with China, as you may remember, where Pakistan played a key role in being that bridge which allowed them to connect.
So Pakistan and China have had these relations, whereas at the same time, Pakistan has had very strong relations with the US all of this time throughout those decades.
But the world wasn't noticing China as a competitor.
- Correct.
- Okay?
At that time.
And so world didn't care.
Who cared about China-Pakistan relations?
Suddenly, where China is feeling and seeming like a threat to the world because of its emerging economic power, technological power, perhaps military power, which is no way compared to the US, we view China in a very different way, Ian.
And as a friend and as someone who likes to associate themselves with the Western countries also and does not want the world to be broken into two blocs, I just feel like an alien in this new world that is being created around us, where everybody's told that somebody has to be the enemy.
Now, this country that you continue, or not you, but many analyses all over the world continue to talk about as very belligerent, very hegemonic, wanting power, et cetera, and wanting military.
We've always seen in our region, which happens to be an immediate neighbor of China, to be a country which only relies on economic relationships, which has not gone and done any interventionist attacks in another country to set it right, which has not really attacked another country in the region for decades or perhaps maybe centuries or not.
Within Pakistan and within the broader region, China has been a force of stability and a force of economic... To be able to give the type of economic goods and infrastructure which were no more available by the World Bank or the Asian Development Bank, so as the traditional multilateral agencies stopped financing infrastructure, China came in and wanted to do it in a really big way.
We were all up for it because we all truly believe that having trains which go from South Asia to West Asia, having strong highways which connect other nodes of Pakistan with the southern nodes and perhaps with China, but also on the western side, I'm not here sitting here really worrying about what China is going to do economically.
And what has that changed vis-a-vis Pakistan or their collaboration with Pakistan?
I mean, honest answer is nothing.
- I'll go back to where we started, because development in your region, stability in your region, ultimately there's one country that's much larger as much a country that's much more economically, technologically sophisticated, also has all the water.
And that's India.
And if there's one thing that we've learned in the last few years, it's that we're living in a world where economic and political and military power has had greater impact.
- Absolutely.
- Fewer rules, more fragmentation.
- Absolutely.
- You can do what you want if you have the capacity.
- Absolutely.
- And so does that reality require Pakistan in reality to be much more cautious, much more restrained, understand that no one's to your rescue and so you better actually find a way to suck up?
I mean, I see what's happened to Iran recently from Israel and think about what you will of the Israelis or the Iranians, that's not the point.
The point is that a lot of Iran's deterrence no longer actually counts for much, right?
So talk a bit about that.
- Okay, So the layout that you gave, I absolutely agree with it.
I think it just seems like there are no rules holding anyone back.
There are no rules, there are no norms of behavior.
And everybody can do whatever they can as far as they have the ability both politically and militarily to be able to get away with it.
However, the lesson that Pakistan has learned from it is quite the opposite of let's suck up and deal with and make peace with it.
The lesson that we have learned from this recent conflict with India is that if you have both the will and the capacity and the capability to be able to defend your sovereignty and keep a belligerent hegemonic country from creating a new norm, attacking, and you attack back, and are able to pay them their payload in damage, you are securing yourself.
So to each their own, that you have to secure yourself and, absolutely right, no one's going to come to help you.
So you have to have all the abilities.
So basically what you- - So the big lesson is Pakistan needs to continue to redouble its military strength, its nuclear deterrent is essential in this environment.
- Its stability, its economic strength, its nuclear.
And, Ian, as someone who was representing this country back in 2010 to '13 as foreign minister of Pakistan and who grew up hearing all of these nice liberal values and lessons and lectures on how you should not be spending on your military, or why did you even build a nuclear facilities or military?
Why are you a nuclear power?
Why did you not invest in your education?
I bought all of that.
I genuinely bought all of that, right?
And I used to wonder why were we reduced to eating grass to become a nuclear power?
And now with this India, with the Hindutva, Modi India, which feels it has a right to launch attack whenever it feels, wherever it feels within its neighborhood, you realize the importance of the thinking and the strategic planning of the forefathers and all the regimes that came into Pakistan and governments that came into Pakistan, which stuck to that notion.
And that is the only thing which is providing us the deterrence and the security that we have today against a country which feels it can attack any time, any day.
And what worries me, Ian, is that this is not a trend which is only confined to Pakistan and India.
When I see NATO countries and when I see the European Union saying that, yes, you can go, what, 0.5% over the budget limitations only for military financing.
We all feel threatened today.
We all have fear which has overtaken us.
So you know how they say that it's very easy to sell fear, but it's very difficult to sell hope.
- Hina Khar, thanks so much for joining us today.
- Pleasure always.
(inspiring music) - And now we turn from the serious world of geopolitics to the land of silly little puppets.
I've got your puppet regime.
- Okay, what would make you a great lifeguard?
- I'm comfortable working shirtless and love rescuing people from threats.
Look out in the water.
Those dolphins are Nazis.
- Next.
- It's like, what the heck do you even do here?
It's like totally inefficient.
It's like, why can't all these people just like save themselves?
- Next.
- Well, I'd like to remove all the people from this strip of beach.
And then- - Okay, next question.
Are there any limitations on your ability to work as a lifeguard?
- None, but just so you know, I will be on my phone all day watching TikTok.
- Well, as you know, limitations is not something I care about.
- Here in the Metaverse, the only thing we're drowning in is community.
- Wait, I had to keep people from dying on this job?
Why?
♪ Puppet regime ♪ - That's our show this week.
Come back next week, and if you like what you've seen, or even if you don't but you have your own bitter rival you'd love to see brought to their knees, we can help you with that.
Why don't you check us out at gzeromedia.com?
(lively music) (lively music continues) (lively music continues) (lively music continues) (intriguing music) - [Announcer] Funding for GZERO World is provided by our lead sponsor, Prologis.
- [Rep] Every day all over the world, Prologis helps businesses of all sizes lower their carbon footprint (inspiring music) and scale their supply chains.
With a portfolio of logistics and real estate and an end-to-end solutions platform, addressing the critical initiatives of global logistics today.
Learn more at prologis.com.
- [Announcer] And by Cox Enterprises is proud to support GZERO.
Cox is working to create an impact in areas like sustainable agriculture, clean tech, healthcare, and more.
Cox, a family of businesses.
Additional funding provided by Carnegie Corporation of New York, Koo and Patricia Yuen, committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities, and: (uplifting music) (fanfare music)
Support for PBS provided by:
GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer is a local public television program presented by THIRTEEN PBS
GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer is a local public television program presented by THIRTEEN PBS. The lead sponsor of GZERO WORLD with Ian Bremmer is Prologis. Additional funding is provided...