Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Peshawar – deep inside Pakistan’s own territory . 📍 Where #TTP fighters now set up checkpoints on public roads. These scenes show that #Pakistan’s military regime no longer has full control over its own cities. A regime that claims to possess nuclear weapons, yet fails to contain an internal...

128,739 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Siddhant Nagrath’s core line in that Oxford Union “India vs Pakistan” debate is that Pakistan’s structure and incentives make sustained hostility and even war with India politically and economically attractive for those who hold power there, and that this is stabilised not restrained by its nuclear posture. ​ Nagrath argues that for 77 years Pakistan’s ruling establishment has had strong incentives to maintain confrontation with India, including the possibility of military action. ​ He contends that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons do not create responsible restraint but instead enable aggressive behaviour under a protective umbrella. ​ He claims it is “politically infeasible” and “economically infeasible” for those who hold the money, power, and politics in Pakistan to avoid war, because conflict sustains their position. ​ According to him, when there is Indo‑Pak conflict, it is not Indian leaders like Narendra Modi whose electoral prospects improve most, but Pakistan’s power brokers, who gain legitimacy and resources from crisis. ​ Terrorism and security argument Nagrath asserts that Pakistan has systematically given terrorists a home, weapons, training, military aid, intelligence support, and guidance on where and how to strike India. ​ On this basis, he argues India faces a security environment in which Pakistan-backed terrorism and the threat of escalation are entrenched tools of state policy rather than aberrations. ​ Rebuttal to “nuclear stabiliser” claim Responding to the proposition’s portrayal of Pakistan as a “great nuclear” stabilising power, he suggests nuclear capability has not translated into responsible de‑escalation. ​ Instead, he frames Pakistan’s nuclear status as part of a bargaining strategy that allows it to internationalise crises and shield itself while continuing support to terror networks. Debate Context The event occurred amid prior Oxford Union controversies, including a collapsed India-Pakistan debate where Nagrath and peers like Viraansh Bhanushali participated after Indian leaders withdrew. Nagrath has debated Kashmir issues before, opposing independence motions. The video has garnered views on the Oxford Union channel, reflecting interest in India-Pakistan geopolitical discourse. Credit : Oxford Union.

Augadh

23,925 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten