ISLMUN IV
Study Guide Crisis
Index:
● Introduction of the DAIS: Page 2
● Introduction to the committee and Historic Background: Page 3
● Major stakeholders: Page 6
● Key terms and Important Int. Laws: Page 7
● Important groups and lobbies: Page 9
● Past UN actions and Treaties: Page 11
● Potential solutions: Page 13
● Tried and failed solutions: Page 15
● Timeline: Page 19
● Bibliography: Page 21
ISLMUN IV
Study Guide Crisis
Index:
● Introduction of the DAIS: Page 2
● Introduction to the committee and Historic Background: Page 3
● Major stakeholders: Page 6
● Key terms and Important Int. Laws: Page 7
● Important groups and lobbies: Page 9
● Past UN actions and Treaties: Page 11
● Potential solutions: Page 13
● Tried and failed solutions: Page 15
● Timeline: Page 19
● Bibliography: Page 21
Introduction of the DAIS:
Chair: Aliaana Zahra
Amongst the select few who have made it to
the National debates team of Pakistan and our
esteemed Deputy Head Girl for ISL, Aliaana is one of
the most capable people to chair a committee.
Introducing the Chair for the crisis committee.
Committee Director: Muhammad Maahin
The deputy president of the MUN society,
and one of if not the best CRISIS munners in
Pakistan. Our resident Young Physicist never fails to
deliver and rest assured, the committee is in safe
hands. Introducing the CD for the crisis committee.
Committee Director: Peerzada Shahmeer Alum
The Deputy President of the CS society is a
Data Science aficionado and consummate public
speaker, truly a jack of all trades. Swerving his way
out of many “crises” within his life, you can trust
that the committee is led with diligence.
Introducing the CD of the crisis committee.
Assistant Committee Director: Aashir Ali
The headboy of O levels in ISL, and the
representative for the MUN society in O
levels. His passion for crisis is unmatched,
and that can be seen in the number of
awards he has managed to bring home.
Introducing the
ACD for the Crisis Committee.
Establishment of the ADHOC CRISIS Committee:
In a significant development within the international geopolitical sphere, an ADHOC
committee has been established to investigate and find a solution to the 2024
Pakistan-India missile crisis and to prevent the breakout of a full scale regional war.
This follows the adoption of UNSC resolution 2753 which passed unanimously with
the support of all 15 member nations. The ADHOC committee has special powers
under the aforementioned resolution to carry out and enforce its public directives
and resolutions.
Historic background:
Ever since gaining independence from the British in 1947, the relations between India
and Pakistan have been marked by deep-seated tensions. The partition created two
separate states, leading to widespread violence, mass migrations, and the emergence
of fundamental territorial disputes, notably over the Kashmir region. The subsequent
wars in 1947, 1965, and 1971, along with ongoing skirmishes, have perpetuated a
cycle of conflict and mistrust.
The addition of Nuclear weapons to the equation created even more tensions
between the two states India conducted its first nuclear tests in 1974, and Pakistan
followed shortly in 1998. The solidification of both nations as nuclear powers acted
as a deterrent for full-scale wars and created a precarious balance of power, where
the slightest conflict carries forward the risk of escalating into a catastrophe.
In this context, the 2022 Indian missile strikes on Pakistan marked a significant
escalation in hostilities. These strikes were reportedly a response to an attack on
Indian military personnel in Jammu and Kashmir, attributed to terrorist groups
operating from within Pakistan. The Indian government, led by Prime Minister
Narendra Modi, framed the strikes as a necessary action to safeguard national
security and deter future terrorist activities.
The missile strikes prompted widespread condemnation from Pakistan, which
accused India of violating its sovereignty and escalating regional tensions. The
Pakistani military responded with heightened readiness and military exercises,
raising concerns of retaliation and a potential military conflict. International reactions were
mixed, with some countries urging restraint while others supported India's right to defend
itself.
The 2022 missile strikes serve as a critical backdrop to the current crisis, as they have set a
precedent for India’s military responses to perceived threats. The strikes not only intensified
existing hostilities but also showcased India's willingness to adopt a more aggressive military
posture, which could embolden similar actions in the future.
Additionally, the aftermath of the strikes had significant implications for regional stability. It led
to a series of diplomatic efforts aimed at de-escalation, including back-channel
communications and international mediation attempts. However, underlying issues such as
terrorism, territorial disputes, and national pride continued to fuel animosities.
Key Features of a Crisis Committee:
1. Real-Time Scenario Development: The crisis will be volatile and the situation will
constantly fluctuate. This will be conveyed to the committee via crisis updates.
Crisis updates inform the committee of any development that has taken place
in the situation. The crisis updates are decided by the chairs, however, they
can be and are impacted by the delegates themselves.
2. Documentation: The documentation in a Crisis committee is split up into 4
major portions;
a. Private Directives: A private directive in a crisis committee is a concise,
confidential message that delegates send to the chair to take actions that
are within their control. It does not abide by any laws or rules, expect
that the person sending the private directive ensures they are not
forcing an action that they do not actually have control over. Private
directives can also be written as “Joint” private directives with other
delegates.
b. Crisis Notes: Crisis notes are another way for delegates to impact the
crisis updates. A crisis note is a piece of documentation submitted to
the chair that resembles a crisis update. It is a crisis update that the
delegate wants to be added to the committee. The delegate does not
have to have control over the actions of the stakeholders
mentioned within the crisis note if it is accepted.
a. Press Releases: A press release is a statement that a delegate
wants to to the committee. This is just a statement and it does not
have to be taken as fact. The validity of it can be challenged.
Public directives: A public directive is a document that presents the solutions
for the crisis. It is similar to the draft resolution of regular committees,
however a key difference is that there is no set format for the public directive.
3. Important Notes:
a. Any and all unconventional motions will be in order if followed by
proper procedure.
b. Private directives are not bound to be accepted, the dias holds the
power to accept/reject them.
Major stakeholders
India: Being the aggressor of the conflict, India is one of the largest stakeholders in
the crisis. Their main goals are primarily centered around regional dominance and
maintaining their strategic interests in South Asia. They will likely face international
backlash, and will have to respond appropriately.
Pakistan: Being on the receiving side of the attack, Pakistan will also be one of the
largest stakeholders in the crisis. They will focus on their national defense and
sovereignty, and likely a counter-attack back onto India as has been done in the past.
Furthermore, one of their main goals would be to garner international support and
turn the tides against India.
United States: The U.S. has significant interests in South Asia, including promoting
stability, countering terrorism, and maintaining strategic partnerships with both India
and Pakistan. The U.S. may play a mediating role, advocating for de-escalation and
conflict resolution. This would provide a means for the U.S. to instigate a hegemony
in the South Asian region.
China: Being one of Pakistan’s biggest allies, China will likely provide military and
diplomatic support to Pakistan, whilst also keeping its own interests in mind. China
will likely use this as a means to further their economic development.
Regional Neighbors (Afghanistan, Iran, Bangladesh): These countries have their
own security concerns and may be affected by the regional instability. Their
positions can influence the crisis dynamics and the potential for broader conflict.
Key terms and Important International Laws:
1.Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
is an international agreement established in 1968, aimed at preventing the spread of
nuclear weapons and promoting peaceful nuclear energy use. It comprises three
main pillars: non-proliferation, disarmament, and the right to peaceful use of nuclear
technology. India and Pakistan are both non-signatories, which complicates regional
security dynamics, as both nations possess nuclear arsenals. Their status outside the
NPT raises concerns about nuclear proliferation and the potential for conflict, making
the treaty a critical framework in discussions surrounding global nuclear governance.
2.Weapons of Mass Destruction: (WMD) Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
include nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons capable of causing widespread
death and destruction. In the context of India and Pakistan, nuclear weapons are
particularly significant, as both countries developed their arsenals amid ongoing
tensions. The existence of WMDs raises the stakes in military confrontations, creating
a deterrent effect but also increasing the risk of catastrophic escalation. International
efforts to control and reduce WMD proliferation remain crucial, especially as both
nations engage in arms development and regional security dilemmas.
3.Line of Control (LoC): The Line of Control (LoC) is the de facto border that
separates Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir from Pakistan-administered
Kashmir, established after the first Indo-Pakistani War in 1948. The LoC is critical in
the ongoing Kashmir conflict, often witnessing skirmishes and ceasefire violations. It
serves as a frontline where both military forces are stationed, and any escalations can
lead to significant military confrontations. The LoC’s status complicates peace efforts,
as it symbolizes the unresolved territorial dispute and the volatile nature of India-
Pakistan relations.
4. Composite Dialogue Process: The Composite Dialogue Process began in
2004 as a comprehensive framework for discussions between India and
Pakistan, aimed at addressing multiple issues such as Kashmir, terrorism,
trade, and cultural exchanges. This initiative sought to foster better relations
and reduce tensions through structured dialogue. Despite some progress in
various areas, the process has often been interrupted by terrorist incidents
and political disagreements, demonstrating the challenges of maintaining
sustained dialogue. The Composite Dialogue remains a significant attempt to
find peaceful resolutions to complex bilateral issues, though its effectiveness
has varied over time.
5. Kargil War The Kargil War, fought in 1999, was a significant conflict
between India and Pakistan that arose from military infiltrations by Pakistani
forces into Indian territory in the Kargil district of Jammu and Kashmir. The
war lasted for approximately two months and highlighted the fragility of peace
efforts following the Lahore Declaration. The conflict ended with India
regaining control of the territory, but it had profound implications for both
nations, solidifying military postures and increasing distrust. The Kargil War
underscored the volatility of the India-Pakistan relationship and the ongoing
challenges of conflict resolution in the region.
Important groups and lobbies:
1. Governmental Bodies
● Ministries of External Affairs: Both countries’ foreign ministries are crucial in
formulating and executing foreign policy.
● Defense Ministries: These bodies oversee military strategies and defense policies,
impacting relations.
2. Political Parties
● Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP): In India, the ruling party often adopts a hardline
stance towards Pakistan, influencing public sentiment and policy.
● Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI): This party has also influenced the approach
towards India, particularly under former Prime Minister Imran Khan.
3. Military Establishments
● Indian Armed Forces: The military has a significant voice in India's security policy
and often influences government decisions regarding Pakistan.
● Pakistan Army: The military plays a dominant role in Pakistan’s foreign policy,
particularly regarding India and Kashmir.
4. Civil Society Organizations
● Human Rights Groups: Organizations like Amnesty International and Human
Rights Watch often advocate for peace and human rights in Kashmir, influencing
public discourse.
● Peace Advocacy Groups: Various NGOs and civil society groups in both countries
work towards fostering dialogue and understanding.
5. Media
● Print and Broadcast Media: Media in both countries can sway public opinion and
political narratives regarding bilateral relations, often focusing on nationalistic
sentiments.
6. International Organizations
● United Nations: The UN plays a role in mediating discussions and resolutions
related to peace and security in South Asia.
● South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC): While not specifically a
lobby, this regional organization aims to promote economic and regional
integration.
UN actions:
1.UNSC discussions: After incidents involving cross-border strikes and
military escalations, the UN Security Council held closed consultations.
While no resolutions were passed, the discussions highlighted the
international community's concerns about the potential for conflict and the
need for de-escalation.
2.Statements from the UN Secretary-General: The Secretary-General often
emphasizes the importance of dialogue and restraint between India and
Pakistan. In 2022, similar calls for de-escalation and conflict resolution were
made in response to military incidents.
3.Reports from UN Observers: The UN Military Observer Group in India and
Pakistan (UNMOGIP) continued to monitor the Line of Control (LoC) and
reported on ceasefire violations, which are relevant in the context of missile
strikes and military engagements.
4, Bilateral Diplomacy: The UN encouraged India and Pakistan to engage in
dialogue, with various member states emphasizing the need for bilateral talks
to address underlying issues, including military escalations.
5. Human Rights Concerns: Various UN bodies and special rapporteurs
addressed human rights issues related to military actions, emphasizing the
need to protect civilians and uphold international humanitarian law.
Treaties:
Simla Agreement (1972): Signed after the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, this
agreement emphasized the resolution of disputes bilaterally and reaffirmed
the importance of respecting the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir.
Tashkent Agreement (1966): Following the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, this
agreement called for a return to the status quo ante and the establishment of
peace between the two nations.
Lahore Declaration (1999): This was a joint statement issued by the leaders of
India and Pakistan, emphasizing the importance of nuclear safety, economic
cooperation, and the resolution of the Kashmir issue.
Composite Dialogue Process (2004-2008): While not a treaty, this process
involved multiple rounds of discussions on various issues, including Kashmir,
trade, and terrorism. It aimed to build trust and find comprehensive solutions.
Ceasefire Agreements: Various ceasefire agreements have been signed,
notably in 2003, which aimed to reduce hostilities along the LoC. While these
agreements have been violated at times, they have been crucial in
establishing temporary peace.
Bus Diplomacy (2003-2004): This initiative involved transportation links
between the two countries and was symbolic of a thaw in relations, though
it did not result in formal treaties.
Potential solutions:
1.Bilateral Dialogue and Negotiations
In the complex landscape of India-Pakistan relations, continuous and open
dialogue emerges as a fundamental solution. Regular meetings at various
levels—encompassing government officials, military leaders, and civil society
representatives—can create a structured platform for addressing grievances.
This approach fosters an environment where both nations can express their
concerns and seek common ground. By establishing a formal schedule for
these dialogues, delegates can ensure accountability and momentum.
Informal discussions, facilitated by think tanks, can further humanize the
opposing side, breaking down barriers and paving the way for more
productive negotiations.
2.Economic Cooperation
Creating economic interdependence stands out as a powerful incentive for
peace. By negotiating trade agreements that reduce tariffs and eliminate
barriers, both countries can unlock mutual benefits. Initiatives that promote
joint ventures in key industries—such as textiles, agriculture, or technology—
would not only enhance economic ties but also foster collaboration.
Implementing transportation links and trade routes can facilitate commerce,
making the prospect of conflict less appealing compared to the potential for
shared prosperity. Ultimately, economic cooperation can shift public
perception and promote stability.
3.Crisis Management Mechanisms
Establishing effective crisis management mechanisms is crucial for preventing
misunderstandings from escalating into conflict. One practical solution
involves creating a dedicated hotline between military leaders to facilitate
immediate communication during tense situations. This direct line would
help mitigate the risk of miscalculation or accidental conflict.
Additionally, regular joint military exercises focused on humanitarian response
and disaster relief can foster cooperation and build trust among armed forces.
Such initiatives would not only enhance operational readiness but also
strengthen personal relationships, proving invaluable during moments
of crisis.
4.Cultural Exchanges
Promoting cultural exchanges serves as a vital avenue for breaking down
stereotypes and fostering greater understanding between the peoples of
India and Pakistan. Initiatives could include art and music festivals, student
exchange programs, and collaborative sports events, all aimed at showcasing
the richness of each other's cultures. By engaging in these activities,
individuals can appreciate shared histories and values, challenging negative
narratives perpetuated by media and political discourse. Educational
institutions can play a crucial role by incorporating peace education and cross-
border projects, encouraging collaboration among students from both
nations.
5. Joint Counterterrorism Efforts
Given the shared challenges posed by terrorism and extremism, collaborative
counterterrorism initiatives can address mutual concerns while fostering
cooperation. Establishing joint task forces or intelligence-sharing agreements
would enable both countries to combat terrorism more effectively. Such
efforts could include joint training programs for security personnel and
community outreach initiatives aimed at preventing radicalization. By
confronting a common threat together, India and Pakistan can build trust and
demonstrate their commitment to regional security, ultimately paving the
way for more profound collaboration in other areas.
In navigating the intricate dynamics of India-Pakistan relations, these
solutions offer pathways toward stability, cooperation, and lasting peace.
Tried and failed solutions
1. Simla Agreement (1972)
The Simla Agreement, signed on July 2, 1972, aimed to establish bilateral dialogue
between India and Pakistan to resolve disputes, especially over Kashmir. It
emphasized peaceful resolution and mutual respect for territorial integrity.
However, the agreement faced significant challenges. Genuine dialogue remained
limited, and recurring hostilities, like the Kargil War, undermined its principles.
Domestic political shifts and rising nationalism further complicated relations, while
external influences, particularly from the U.S. and China, added to tensions. The
unresolved Kashmir issue continued to be a flashpoint, as seen in incidents like the
2019 Pulwama attack. Overall, while the agreement was a crucial step, its
effectiveness has been hampered by persistent conflicts and a lack of political will.
2. Composite Dialogue Process (2004-2008)
The Composite Dialogue Process was initiated in 2004 to facilitate comprehensive
discussions between India and Pakistan on multiple issues, including Kashmir,
terrorism, and trade. This framework aimed to create a structured approach to
address longstanding grievances and improve bilateral relations.
However, the process faced significant challenges. It was severely disrupted by
terrorist attacks, most notably the 2008 Mumbai attacks, which resulted in India
suspending talks. This incident deepened mistrust between the nations and fueled
skepticism about Pakistan’s commitment to combating terrorism. As a result, the
promising dialogue framework struggled to regain momentum, highlighting the
fragility of peace initiatives in the face of ongoing violence and political tensions
3. Lahore Declaration (1999)
The Lahore Declaration, signed in February 1999, sought to improve relations
between India and Pakistan while addressing critical issues like nuclear safety
and confidence-building measures. The agreement represented a commitment to
dialogue and the promotion of peace, aiming to foster cooperation in various sectors.
However, the declaration's impact was quickly undermined by the Kargil War later that
year, which escalated military tensions and eroded trust between the two nations.
This conflict highlighted the fragility of peace efforts, as it showcased how quickly
diplomatic initiatives could be compromised by military actions. The Kargil War served
as a stark reminder that without sustained dialogue and cooperation, efforts like the
Lahore Declaration could easily falter.
4. Bus Diplomacy (2003-2004)
Bus Diplomacy refers to initiatives launched between India and Pakistan in 2003-
2004 to promote people-to-people contacts and enhance trade through cross-border
bus services. This effort aimed to foster goodwill and improve bilateral relations by
facilitating easier travel and communication.
While initially successful in building a sense of camaraderie, the initiative ultimately
fell short of addressing core issues like Kashmir. Rising violence, including terrorist
attacks, disrupted the momentum, leading to heightened tensions and stalled
progress. As a result, despite its hopeful beginnings, Bus Diplomacy illustrated the
limits of confidence-building measures when not supported by substantive dialogue
on key geopolitical concerns.
5. UN Resolutions on Kashmir
The UN Resolutions on Kashmir, primarily adopted in the late 1940s and early 1950s,
called for plebiscites to determine the region's status, reflecting international concern
over the conflict between India and Pakistan. These resolutions aimed to provide a
framework for resolving the Kashmir dispute through the will of the people.
However, their implementation has faced significant challenges. Disagreements over
the terms of the plebiscite, including the conditions for its conduct, have led to
stalemate.
Furthermore, India and Pakistan have differing interpretations of the resolutions,
complicating any potential consensus. As a result, the UN's role has been largely
ineffective, leaving the Kashmir issue unresolved and continuing to fuel tensions
between the two nations.
6. Track II Diplomacy Initiatives
Track II Diplomacy initiatives involve informal dialogues among civil society leaders,
former officials, and intellectuals from India and Pakistan, aimed at building trust
and fostering understanding. These initiatives create a space for candid discussions
on sensitive issues without the pressure of official negotiations.
While some efforts have successfully enhanced mutual understanding and
encouraged collaborative thinking, they face significant challenges. Most notably,
these initiatives often lack governmental backing, making it difficult to translate their
insights into formal agreements or policy changes. Consequently, while Track II
Diplomacy can pave the way for greater dialogue, its impact is limited without official
support and a commitment to implement actionable outcomes.
7. Nuclear Confidence-Building Measures
Nuclear Confidence-Building Measures (CBMs) aim to establish communication
channels and protocols regarding nuclear safety and conflict prevention between
India and Pakistan. These initiatives seek to reduce the risk of nuclear escalation
through transparency and dialogue, fostering a safer security environment.
However, significant challenges persist. Persistent misunderstandings, regional
tensions, and military posturing can undermine these measures. The absence of
effective communication during crises often exacerbates fears of miscalculations.
Furthermore, both nations’ strategic concerns and nuclear doctrines complicate trust-
building efforts. As a result, while CBMs represent a critical step toward stability,
ongoing tensions and a lack of mutual confidence continue to threaten their
effectiveness.
8. Cessation of Hostilities Agreements
Cessation of Hostilities Agreements, particularly the 2003 ceasefire along the Line
of Control (LoC), aimed to reduce violence and foster a more peaceful environment
in Kashmir. This agreement represented a commitment to halt cross-border firing
and improve the humanitarian situation for civilians in the region.
However, the effectiveness of these agreements has been significantly hampered by
frequent violations and ongoing skirmishes. Despite initial reductions in hostilities,
both sides have engaged in periodic exchanges of fire, undermining trust and
security.
Additionally, the lack of a robust verification mechanism has made it challenging to
hold parties accountable. As a result, while these agreements have the potential to
enhance stability, their impact has been limited by continued conflict and distrust.
Timeline:
1947-1971: Early Conflicts and Wars
● 1947: Partition of British India creates India and Pakistan, leading to mass
violence and migration.
● 1948: First Indo-Pakistani War over Kashmir ends with a UN-mediated ceasefire
and the establishment of the Line of Control (LoC).
● 1965: Second Indo-Pakistani War occurs over Kashmir, concluding with a
ceasefire brokered by the Soviet Union.
● 1971: Third Indo-Pakistani War results in the independence of Bangladesh.
The Simla Agreement was signed in 1972, emphasizing bilateral dialogue.
1972-1998: Nuclear Developments and Ongoing Tensions
● 1972: Simla Agreement sets the framework for resolving disputes,
particularly Kashmir.
● 1989: Insurgency in Kashmir begins, leading to increased military presence
and violence.
● 1998: Both countries conduct nuclear tests, solidifying their status as
nuclear powers and heightening regional tensions.
1999-2008: Major Incidents and Diplomatic Initiatives
● 1999: Lahore Declaration is signed to improve relations; the Kargil War later
that year undermines this effort.
● 2001: Attack on the Indian Parliament by militants linked to Pakistan
escalates tensions, leading to military mobilizations.
● 2003: A ceasefire agreement along the LoC is announced, aiming to
reduce hostilities.
● 2004-2008: The Composite Dialogue Process begins, addressing multiple
issues, including Kashmir and terrorism.
2009-2018: Heightened Tensions and Key Attacks
● 2008: Mumbai attacks by Pakistan-based militants lead to the suspension of
peace talks and heightened tensions.
● 2016: Uri attack by militants leads to Indian surgical strikes across the LoC,
marking a new phase in military responses.
● 2019: Pulwama attack results in significant casualties, prompting Indian
airstrikes in Balakot, Pakistan, escalating military confrontation.
2019-2024: Political Changes and Ongoing Challenges
● 2020: India revokes Article 370, removing special status from Jammu and
Kashmir, further escalating tensions.
● 2021: Both nations reaffirm the 2003 ceasefire agreement, leading to a
temporary reduction in hostilities.
● 2022: UN discussions on Kashmir revive, but no significant progress is made.
Accidental missile launch of India into Pakistan.
● 2023: Track II diplomacy initiatives gain traction, promoting informal dialogues
between civil society leaders.
● 2024: Ongoing regional tensions with sporadic clashes along the LoC; focus on
nuclear confidence-building measures continues amid complex geopolitical
dynamics.
• Bibliography
• Metcalf, Barbara D.; Metcalf, Thomas R. (2006), A Concise History of India
(2nd ed.), Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-68225-1
• Shamim, Syed Jazib (2018), Nuclear Proliferation in South Asia Towards World
War III, doi:10.2139/ssrn.3111513.
• Budania, Rajpal, "India's Pakistan Policy: A Study in the Context of Security,"
South Asian Studies, Vol.30:2,1995.
• https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-pakistan/india-pakistan-militaries-
agree-t o-stop-cross-border-firing-in-rare-joint-statement-idUSKBN2AP0PG
• https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/11/13/pakistan-summons-top-indian-
diplom at-over-kashmir-violence
• https://books.google.com/books?id=3z8sNZTVv5gC&pg=PA77
• https://m.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-pakistan-came-close-to-firing-
miss iles-at-each-other-on-february-27/story-rVsBjZ5qmxXMprktzDNqcM.html
• https://oxfordre.com/asianhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.0
01.0 001/acrefore-9780190277727-e-
746?d=%2F10.1093%2Facrefore%2F9780190277
• 727.001.0001%2Facrefore-9780190277727-e-
746&p=emailAwJzLgl97Zj0w#:~:te xt=South%20Asia-
,Definition,administered%20by%20India%20and%20Pakistan.
