How can they think that killing millions of people will help their cause?
If by ‘cause’ you mean the claim to Kashmir then it won’t help either side but that won’t be the reason nuclear weapons will be used, if indeed they are used at all. A rapid escalation of the conflict will take place if hostilities continue, if in such a case one of the combatants gains conventional military superiority over the other the losing side may very well choose ‘death before dishonour’ and play the nuclear card. You have to remember that nuclear weapons were designed for exactly such situations – to end wars, Kashmir is, in the eyes of the potential protagonists, a good reason to have a war, each step towards it is a step closer to the possibility of nuclear weapons use. The reason will be self preservation not territorial gain.
If you want to look at the ethics that would drive such a use you need to examine the ethics of similar hypothetical situations that are on differing scales.
Is it ethically correct to kill 1 person to save 10?
Most people would agree that it is.
Is it ethically correct to kill 100 people to save 1000?
Now it’s a little harder to decide but the answer must be the same as the first, the only difference in the questions is one of scale.
Is it ethically correct to kill 10,000 people to save 100,000?
Judging by the previous two answers most people would be pushing red buttons at this point.
I believe those lines are drawn on difference not specifically religious grounds, sometimes the lines are drawn even before the differences emerge, take the case of Korea and the 38th parallel, where it could be argued that the line drawn created the difference.
The ideal would be a world without borders but human nature precludes this, even on the individual level we tend towards territorial behaviour requiring, and if necessary, defending our own space. Sharon has posted a prime example of this in the piece about a colleague at work searching through her desk and filing cabinets. If you require another think about your home, how far into your home would let a complete stranger? The odds are they wouldn’t get past the front door, what about a slight acquaintance? Maybe the kitchen or the main living area, would you let either into your bedroom?
The problem in Kashmir is that both parties believe the area is their main bedroom and the opposition forces, defined by difference, are complete strangers.
Thanks for the chance to read and reply