How do we solve the Indian border problem

Many countries have border issues, since nations are man made, as long as nations exist, there will be border disputes. Even within India there are border disputes between states. Historical claim, ethnic relation, these things are blurry issues and there can never be a final solution to these things. What is important in all this is to see that border disputes, whether between countries or states, shouldn't affect regular life of the people and trade between the two, because that affects the earning of both parties and enables a third party to enter and make some money acting as a middleman, which essentially reduces the slice of the pie for the two parties.

India and China have border issues, they do some posturing over it, but it never disrupts their trade. And that is how it should be. Both are fast developing economies with lots at stake when it comes to foreign investment. If China allows border dispute to escalate to a war, at the most they will gain some land in Ladakh or Arunachal Pradesh, but they will get isolated in the international community, lose foreign investment and the Indian market. Gaining a piece of land which doesn't have much mineral and is not very hospitable, by standing to lose hundreds of billions of dollars every year due to sanctions and disruption in trade doesn't sound very lucrative. Foreign investors hate volatility brought in the economy by war, and at the first scent of war or even high intensity skirmishes, they will be the first one to take flight. For the same reason, India won't be too keen to push China over reclaiming the land it lost in the 1962 war. If one of them is able to create a hegemony in this region and becomes far far superior in strength compared to the other country in future, then yes, it can afford a small scale war over border dispute, with the knowledge that they can easily overwhelm the opponent into submission to its terms. But for now, both will talk but nothing will get resolved because China demands certain areas, currently in Indian possession, as their own; whereas India has no such claim apart from the land gained by China in 1962, which is anyways regarded by China as a part of it historically and is a part of their overall claim. Unless India suddenly makes a counter claim of historical rights over the greater area of Kashmir as it existed under the Kingdom of Kashmir, going by present scenario, there is no chance of a give and take, and without a win-win situation there will be no resolution. So currently, maintaining status quo is in India's favour, breaking status quo is in China's favour, but China won't risk war to break the status quo at this point, especially over some claims which are pretty weak at best, given that the regions claimed by them are on the ground that they are part of Tibet, and Chinese claim over Tibet itself is disputable

The point of give and take is in demonstration in the case of the enclave transfer resolution reached by India and Bangladesh. Both had some interest in resolving the issue and both side received something in return for what they gave up. With this resolution, border dispute between India and Bangladesh is more or less resolved. Also, with the construction of the border fence by India, the border is going to be well demarcated and adventurism by both sides' border forces will hopefully be minimal.

Border disputes with Bhutan and Nepal are negligible and not of much importance. They are valuable to India as buffer states and they need India to access its ports, infrastructure and market to sell whatever goods they produce. Even their tourism, which is one of their highest revenue generator, is heavily dependent on India. Free movement is allowed for both these country's nationals within India. Moreover, they need India to balance China and vice-versa, so that neither of them will think of usurping their land. Given that, whatever minor border disputes that are there at present, there won't be much interest in resolving those disputes. If it gets resolved, well and good, if not, no harm done either. This doesn't mean nothing can happen in future as well. If the Communists start controlling Nepal and side with China, then they can use border dispute as an issue to create disturbance against India. Similarly, although a much more remote chance compared to Communists of Nepal, if fundamentalist Buddhists start controlling Bhutan and side with China, then even they can create an issue over the border at the behest of China. This is why I disagree with India's policy of supporting democratisation in Nepal and Bhutan. India supported democratisation of Nepal and is also supporting the same in Bhutan, whereas India's equation is better with the royal family in both these countries. Monarchy and dictators provide a one window solution, especially when they are already favourable towards India. Toppling them is necessary only when they are turning hostile towards India's cause. Supporting democratisation is just asking for trouble in this case, as it will bring uncertainty and can even bring to power forces like the Communists in Nepal, which can lead to all sorts of trouble, not just border disputes. But I digress.

Lastly, coming to Pakistan, there are a few border disputes - Kashmir, Sir Creek, Siachen, of which Kashmir is the overwhelming favourite of Pakistan. This dispute again is not going to be resolved, at least not any time soon and certainly not through talks. As I have mentioned earlier, there needs to be something for both parties for a border dispute to be resolved amicably, whereas in this case there is no such thing. In case of Kashmir, if there is a resolution through talks, only one country can emerge as the winner and end up getting more land, which is not going to happen as the other country is never going to agree to such terms. Only other solution is to convert the LOC to international border and seal the current status quo, which again neither of the countries will agree to as that will mean giving up claim over entire undivided Kashmir, which both countries do at present, forever and settle permanently with whatever each have at present. Pakistan will never agree to it because the current status quo is in India's favour and any break in this status quo can only benefit Pakistan; moreover they even have an outside chance of getting Kashmir, if in future they manage to pressurise India to hold a plebiscite as was originally mandated. India won't agree as well, because they will have to forever relinquish claim over Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, but they won't gain anything in return, as they will still need to station troops there and there is no guarantee that insurgency will end if LOC becomes international border. As for all the other disputes, Pakistan wants more land, not India, so again no give and take possible, therefore no resolution either.

Apart from this, there are some political and domestic realities in both India and Pakistan because of which no resolution is possible for these two nations' border disputes.

Firstly, Pakistan army controls Pakistan government either directly or through proxy. They eat up about 25% of Pakistan's total annual budget. They need Kashmir dispute and enmity with India to stay relevant and to justify such kind of expenditure on themselves. If we judge the effects of resolution of Kashmir dispute vs continuation of the dispute, it is overwhelmingly in favour of continuing the dispute. If the Kashmir issue is resolved peacefully, the illusion of India as the existential threat of Pakistan will end. There will be no need to maintain such a large army and they certainly won't need 25% share of the budget. It will also stop or reduce substantially the funding that the army gets from some nations for supporting mujahideens and insurgency in India. When the very bread and butter of an institution depends on the existence of just one issue, the institution has to be pretty darn stupid to resolve that very issue.

Secondly, neither Pakistan nor India is losing anything much because of this ongoing Kashmir dispute, for them to show any eagerness in resolving this issue. As I had mentioned earlier, war and even high intensity skirmishes turn off foreign investors, but here low intensity skirmishes happen every day and high intensity skirmishes every few years, yet neither country loses anything. Pakistan doesn't because it has nothing to lose, as simple as that. Its economy is already in shambles. Their army and army's puppet politicians have zero interest in developing the country's economy and welfare of the general citizens, therefore skirmishes damaging economic interest of Pakistan doesn't exist. For India, skirmishes with Pakistan doesn't have the potential to have a very big impact on its economy as long as it remains a skirmish and doesn't escalate to a full blown war. As India's economy and global stature has improved, skirmishes and insurgencies created by Pakistan in Kashmir have gained more nuisance value rather than any real impact. I have to add here, neither country will escalate the skirmishes to an open war at present like it happened in past. India won't because it will be harmful for its foreign investment prospects, and Pakistan won't as it knows that it doesn't have the economic or military strength to take on India in a no holds barred match, so it will continue as just some mortar shelling and random gun fires. The only threat at present that India has from Pakistan is, when Pakistan sponsored terrorists strike in key cities, but that's not going to go away with the resolution of the Kashmir dispute.

Thirdly, neither country will be ready for any kind of compromise because of domestic audience. Any compromise will mean one country will have to either give up some part of land to the other country or at least give up claim of some part of land. That's not going to go down well with the domestic audience. If any political party in India is seen as agreeing to hand over or give up claim over a piece of land to Pakistan, and especially if it is Pakistan, that political party will get obliterated from the face of Indian political landscape. Same goes for Pakistan as well. No politician will be stupid enough to invite his own annihilation.