India, Pakistan row impact for Kenya

In the last two decades, China has dominated our economic discourse.

India and Pakistan are geographically nearer, but we talk less about them. They were trading partners long before China came to the scene.

The gravity trade theory suggests you trade more with neighbours than distant countries. Remember your physics?  It should not surprise you that Kenya’s key trading partners are Uganda and Tanzania.  

More curiously, Pakistanis and Indians settled in Kenya long before the Chinese came ashore.

Most Kenyans may not be aware that Pakistan and India were one country before 1947. The Indians, who built our railway and made Kenya their home, were probably from both places. 

I doubt if any of us can differentiate between an Indian and a Pakistani on the streets. How different is Urdu compared with Hindi? The Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) was built by Easterners too. Who will build the third one? 

After independence in 1947, India was violently partitioned based on religion, with Pakistan being predominantly Muslim and India Hindu. 

We originally had one Pakistan separated by India. Pakistan in the east became Bangladesh in 1971, a further partition. The partition did not resolve all the issues. It rarely does, as problems in the Sudans have demonstrated. One is the ownership of the Jammu and Kashmir region claimed by the two countries.

The spectacularly beautiful region hugs the snow-peaked Himalayas. The region has been a source of conflict between the two countries, resulting in three wars with no clear winner.  

The two countries are now threatening each other again after 26 people were killed in Indian-controlled Kashmir.

India blames Pakistan and has bombed some sites inside Pakistan. Pakistan has vowed to retaliate. The world is watching with bated breath as drones become the weapon of choice. 

The world has enough conflicts to get another one. A conflict between the two countries is frightening. Both are nuclear-powered. In addition, Pakistan, though democratic, has undue influence from the military.

India, on her hand, is a democracy but is driven by Hindu nationalism. The sheer population of the two countries matters. India has 1.4 billion people, while Pakistan has 252 million. 

But why should we bother with a conflict so far away? Such a big population is a good market. It’s another question why there is more focus on China with a similar population, but it is farther than India. 

First, both India and Pakistan are our trading partners. A full-blown conflict would affect trade. Remember how Kenya’s tea exports to Sudan were affected after the war erupted?

We export lots of tea to Pakistan and, in turn, import lots of rice from Pakistan. That would be affected by any conflict through prices. Have you noted how rice has slowly become a staple in Kenya?  

Kenya exports soda ash, tea and coffee to India, while some of our imports from India include petroleum products, pharmaceuticals, machinery, cereals, and vehicles. We can’t forget medical services. A conflict in the Indian subcontinent would be felt here at home through the prices of both imports and exports.  Do you recall the hike in prices of wheat and oil after the Ukraine war? 

It’s possible that in case of an all-out war, each country, India and Pakistan, would pressure Kenya not to trade with the enemy, further depressing trade.

The interconnectedness of trade means a singular event somewhere reverberates through the system. Think of how a traffic jam in one part of the city is felt in other parts of the same city. The conflict would join other conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, the DR Congo, the Sudans, Somalia and other places that are not parties to it. 

What is the possibility of sucking in other countries into the new conflict? Who are Pakistan’s and India’s allies? Who supplies them with weapons? 

China is a key ally of Pakistan, while India is getting closer to the US, seen as a countervailing force to China. Some observers note that the US’s withdrawal from Afghanistan reduced Pakistan’s strategic closeness to Washington. 

My hunch is that the two countries are unlikely to go to war, but tension is bad enough for the global economy. Remember, once wars break out, they get a life of their own, often with unintended consequences. And wars don’t always achieve their strategic objectives. As we celebrate 80 years since the end of World War (WW) II, we should revisit the lessons. One big lesson is how the egos of a few men (rarely women) can destroy nations and lives. Check how many died during WW II. 

Why is the world becoming more conflict-prone? Are we not more enlightened? More educated, more technologically savvy and innovative?  

Why are we so eager to revive old grudges based on religion and other national issues like borders? Just when we thought technology like the Internet would bring us together, we are drifting apart. Is technology exposing the fragility of human nature – hatred, prejudices, jealousy, and envy? 

Any solution? Maybe we should rediscover our human positives like love, care and empathy. A better solution to conflicts could be getting a deeper appreciation of our own mortality.

And that is at the heart of every religion.  We’re the only habitable planet so far; we should not use violence to define our beautiful planet. Let India, Pakistan and other conflict-prone regions sue for peace. 

Finally, I hope to one day visit Jammu and Kashmir. The motivation is historic, not driven by conflict. I asked the grandson of Colonel George Trent why his grandfather settled on the foothills of the Aberdares from India. He told me he wanted a place that resembled the Himalayas. I want to confirm that.