India-Pakistan Confederation

The concept of an India–Pakistan Confederation refers to a proposed political arrangement in which the sovereign states of India and Pakistan would form a confederated union to address longstanding regional conflicts, enhance cooperation and promote shared development. Although never realised, the idea has periodically attracted attention from political leaders, historians and commentators who view such a framework as a potential means of resolving disputes rooted in the 1947 partition of British India. Proponents argue that a confederation would allow both countries to retain sovereignty while coordinating policy in defence, foreign affairs, economic development and cultural exchange.

Historical Background

The proposal for an India–Pakistan Confederation is deeply embedded in the historical circumstances surrounding the partition of India. On 14 August 1947, British India was divided into two dominions: India and Pakistan. This division split the historically unified provinces of Punjab and Bengal, creating significant demographic upheaval and widespread communal violence. The intellectual foundation for the creation of Pakistan lay in the Two-Nation Theory, which maintained that Hindus and Muslims constituted distinct nations requiring political separation due to irreconcilable religious differences.
The immediate aftermath of partition saw India and Pakistan embroiled in their first conflict over the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, a region claimed in full by both nations. This dispute triggered the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947–48 and set the precedent for three subsequent wars: the 1965 conflict, the 1971 war, and the 1999 Kargil confrontation. Except for the 1971 war, which resulted in the independence of Bangladesh, each conflict stemmed from territorial and political disagreements in Kashmir.
Despite recurrent hostilities, diplomatic engagements such as the Simla Agreement and later bilateral accords fostered commitments to peaceful dispute resolution and facilitated limited cooperation. Cross-border transport links including the Samjhauta Express and the Delhi–Lahore Bus have served as symbolic measures intended to normalise interactions between citizens of the two nations.

Evolution of the Confederation Concept

Advocacy for an India–Pakistan Confederation has emerged intermittently since independence, often during periods of renewed dialogue or political re-evaluation. Early support originated from Indian leaders such as Jawaharlal Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah, who believed that a form of political association could mitigate the tensions generated by partition. In 1972, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto encouraged public debate in Pakistan on the viability of a confederation by instructing national media outlets to explore the idea.
The intellectual foundations of the proposal have also been linked to interpretations of the Lahore Resolution of 1940. Some historians, including Ayesha Jalal, have argued that the resolution envisioned autonomous Muslim-majority regions within a larger Indian union rather than a wholly separate sovereign state. Former Pakistani Prime Minister Ismail Ibrahim Chundrigar echoed this perspective, contending that the resolution sought to “weld” Pakistan and Hindustan into a united India on equal terms, rather than fully divide the subcontinent.
Throughout the twentieth century, several prominent thinkers, journalists and politicians in both countries revisited the concept. They often framed it as a means of addressing unresolved issues stemming from partition and as a step towards restoring historical civilisational ties within South Asia.

Rationale and Proposed Features

Supporters of an India–Pakistan Confederation typically advance political, economic and cultural arguments. A key premise is that cooperation in defence and foreign policy would reduce military expenditures and redirect resources towards development sectors such as public health, education and infrastructure. The idea of a common currency and harmonised economic policy has been presented as a tool for expanding trade, improving regional connectivity and enhancing global competitiveness.
Some advocates propose that leadership positions within the confederation could rotate between Indian and Pakistani representatives to ensure parity. A ceremonial head of state and a joint parliamentary framework have also been suggested as mechanisms to institutionalise political collaboration without compromising national sovereignty. Advocates often draw parallels with the European Union, viewing it as an example of how historically antagonistic states can integrate while retaining autonomy.
Additional suggestions include softening the India–Pakistan border, establishing shared legal structures and even coordinating aspects of military organisation. Lieutenant General Asad Durrani, for example, envisaged an entity with common laws, a joint currency and eventual integration of armed forces, conceptualising Delhi as a potential confederal capital.

Regional Extensions and Comparative Models

Some thinkers propose that a wider South Asian confederation could emerge from existing regional bodies such as the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). This hypothetical arrangement would involve Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka in a cooperative structure inspired by European integration. Supporters of this broader vision argue that shared geographic, cultural and economic features would support the formation of a more cohesive South Asian community.
Others maintain that neighbouring states such as Nepal, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan might be willing to consider a preliminary confederal process, provided that political stability and mutual trust improve across the region.

Criticisms and Challenges

Critics of the India–Pakistan Confederation concept highlight significant political, ideological and practical obstacles. Decades of conflict have resulted in deep-seated mistrust between the two nations, making large-scale institutional cooperation challenging. The unresolved dispute over Kashmir, coupled with divergent national security doctrines and domestic political sensibilities, further complicates the possibility of shared governance.
Opponents argue that the idea is overly idealistic given the entrenched national identities that emerged after partition. They note that previous diplomatic overtures regarding joint defence or cooperative arrangements were rejected by Indian and Pakistani governments due to incompatible territorial and strategic perceptions. Moreover, some commentators assert that the fragmentation of Pakistan in 1971 demonstrates the enduring strength of ethnic nationalism over broader religious or regional unity.
In Pakistan’s official stance, confederation has been regarded as a “mirage”, with the government reaffirming the permanence and sovereignty of each nation-state. For critics, proposals for confederation overlook structural disparities and potential power imbalances that could hinder equitable participation.

Political Reactions and Public Debate

The notion of a confederation periodically returns to public discourse, particularly when prominent political figures express support. In 2004, L. K. Advani, then Deputy Prime Minister of India, suggested that future generations might reconsider the viability of confederation, reflecting on whether partition had truly resolved intercommunal tensions. This statement generated widespread media attention and renewed debate.
Pakistani political leader Altaf Hussain has also voiced approval, arguing that a confederation could provide a regional framework similar to the European Union. Several Indian and Pakistani intellectuals have described the concept as a forward-looking approach to regional stability, while critics persist in emphasising its impracticality.