DBWI: IndoPak War of 2002 never takes place?

I know this is probably an overdone scenario at this point, but as someone who survived the nuclear war by a whisker, this is something that continuously intrigues me.

Obviously the POD would be the 2001 Indian Parliament bombing that killed most of the nation's senior leadership never happens/is averted or, less possible, that India never suspects Pakistan of it. Either way, how different would the world be?

OOC: read about the 2001 parliament attacks here. ATL this is a bombing instead.
 
India would probably still be one country most likely, and wouldn't have split into the four states it is now, that's for sure.

This could also have an effect on world cricket actually - a surviving Indian national cricket team, with its financial muscle, would have had some implications for the game globally.

People have speculated that 'twenty-twenty' - the 20-over version of the game that ICC is desperately trying to punt, may have taken off in India and this could have had all sorts of implications.

I wonder what would have happened to the Congress Party in a surviving India. By 2001 they were on their way out, I don't think we would have seen them in government again, even without the war.
 
The war in Afghanistan might be much easier. IOTL, after being kicked out of Afghanistan the Taliban set up shop in the ruins of Pakistan.
 
The war in Afghanistan might be much easier. IOTL, after being kicked out of Afghanistan the Taliban set up shop in the ruins of Pakistan.

Yeah, if you consider Baluchistan to be representative of the entirety of Pakistan.

It really is quite fitting that Bin Laden got to die of seven different types of cancer after trying to set up shop in the radioactive ruins of Abbottabad.

Nonetheless, you might say that the US having to occupy Baluchistan was a good thing. I think many people seriously underestimate just how bad the Bush administration wanted to invade Iraq and the surrounding countries, and the need to secure Baluchistan prevented costly interventions elsewhere.

That being said, what do you guys think of just annexing Baluchistan to the Afghans? It's not like the Pakistani "government" can maintain stewardship over those lands, and access to the sea would really spur economic development in Afghanistan.
 
Nonetheless, you might say that the US having to occupy Baluchistan was a good thing. I think many people seriously underestimate just how bad the Bush administration wanted to invade Iraq and the surrounding countries, and the need to secure Baluchistan prevented costly interventions elsewhere.

Considering how badly Iraq imploded after Saddam Hussein's death in 2007, it's definitely for the best that we never set foot there.
 
Top