I think you will have to make everything go wrong for Pakistan in order for it to implode.
Probably yeah. Maybe the 1990s sounds like the most likely scenario.
I think you will have to make everything go wrong for Pakistan in order for it to implode.
I think Afghanistan will only take the Pashtun areas of Balochistan, but if they take the whole thing all they are getting is the Baloch Ethnofascists switching their target from Pakistan to Afghanistan.
Also, why can't anyone understand that it was never India's policy to reverse the partition? India damn well knows enough about Pakistan that their people are very patriotic, especially the Punjab area. They would only send troops to Punjab in a Pakistan implodes scenario to protect their own interests, and when everything ends India sends the troops home. And Sindh? What would they get out of Sindh, aside from a pro-Pakistan insurgency? India has more interests in dividing up Pakistan than taking Pakistan. Even Subramian Swami, some hard line BJP Hindu Nationalist who has made a name for himself by making stupid and outlandish remarks, wants to invade Pakistan and divide it into four. Not annex it, divide it into four.
I think you will have to make everything go wrong for Pakistan in order for it to implode.
Show me any claims India has on Pakistan besides Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir.
the NWFP, and other areas would become independent
Iran
Doubt it. Iran has no territorial claims on Pakistan.
Was referring to the Balochistan region which Iran controls a part of, perhaps Iran sees the emergence of a Baloch state in the former Pakistan (possibly later Afghanistan) as threat along similar lines to how Turkey views a Kurdish state.
And no, Afghanistan and Iran aren't going to annex territory either for the same reason. They're not going to want to bring in the security headaches or hostile populations.
That does not take into account the Balochi who reside in Pakistan as well as Afghanistan and Iran and would readily take advantage of Pakistan's collapse to establish an independent state.
This doesn't apply to the Afghanistan annexing pashtun areasAgain, states do not routinely sweep in to grab neighboring territories because it's enormously expensive, draining, carries big international costs, and often means you get a hostile population.
This doesn't apply to the Afghanistan annexing pashtun areas
Even if an independent Balochistan were to emerge (and that's a big lift ... the vast majority of unrecognized states fail to win international recognition and struggle to act as independent states), that doesn't automatically lead to Iranian or Afghan expansion. Again, states do not routinely sweep in to grab neighboring territories because it's enormously expensive, draining, carries big international costs, and often means you get a hostile population.
While I absolutely agree with you that India wouldn't annex anything besides having Pakistan drop its claims to Kashmir, I don't follow your logic that they wouldn't partition Pakistan in to weaker successor states if they had the chance. In the long-run, a united Pakistan in the process of developing nuclear weapons (if we're assuming a 1970s-1990s range for this proposed implosion) is way more of a security threat to India than a bunch of squabbling successor states. Granted, there would be a lot more internal strife in those successor states, and there would still heavy anti-Indian and Pakistan-nostalgia sentiments, but I don't see how that's more of a threat.They're not likely to break up the country either, unless it falls apart on its own, since the successor states will likely be weaker and more of a security threat to India than a surviving Pakistani state.
While I absolutely agree with you that India wouldn't annex anything besides having Pakistan drop its claims to Kashmir, I don't follow your logic that they wouldn't partition Pakistan in to weaker successor states if they had the chance. In the long-run, a united Pakistan in the process of developing nuclear weapons (if we're assuming a 1970s-1990s range for this proposed implosion) is way more of a security threat to India than a bunch of squabbling successor states. Granted, there would be a lot more internal strife in those successor states, and there would still heavy anti-Indian and Pakistan-nostalgia sentiments, but I don't see how that's more of a threat.
secessionist movements elsewhere in Pakistan, though real, have never been more than a fringe viewpoint.
with the crucible of Partition forging a great deal of national unity