@
Secur
Gen. Musharraf's declining power did play a major part because the GoI wasn't sure that any agreement reached with him would stick & be agreeable to others in the system. Kayani's was a major voice & he backed off, saying he couldn’t afford to be charged by Islamists of treachery. It was also the reason that nothing could get done with the next regime(PPP) too because both the GoP & the PA were pushing for more. GoI now remains very wary of any agreement because they worry that any agreement & compromise made will simply not be honoured by others in Pakistan.
On Kayani's dislike for NS, that is common knowledge, even on diplomatic cables in wikileaks. It was believed to be the main reason that Kayani didn't overthrow Zardari, because he distrusted NS more than he disliked Zardari.
Not really. Our economy has not much to benefit from links to central asia, afghanistan etc, certainly not as much as you might like to assume. Our growing energy needs will be met, Pakistan will never be the main conduit for that. Iran is presently sanctioned but Pakistan is a far bigger mess than a sanctioned Iran & in any case, ties with Pakistan will simply not improve anytime soon. As I have said many times earlier, Pakistan's asking price (Kashmir) is not something India will ever be willing to pay. As mentioned before, desirable but not necessary.
The government is hardly pursuing ties with Pakistan on a direct economic rationale, believe me, I understand India far better than you do. You have nothing much to offer, certainly not anything that will make us consider your price.
The International Court of
Arbitration depends on the two parties adhering to the IWT. Abrogation would remove jurisdiction. ICJ has no standing on matters between India & Pakistan, the reason why the
"Atlantique" case was thrown out.
It certainly could be abrogated but that is an theoretical argument. Not something that is likely to happen. International pressure? Yeah, most definitely but if India were in such a situation that she considered abrogation, international pressure would not be sufficient. If international pressure hasn't changed Pakistan's behaviour, it would be stupid to assume that India can be stopped.
We don't actually need to. Not now. Pakistan is the one complaining about India violating the "spirit" of the treaty, it is given & accepted at the Hague, that India is not violating the law. When plenty can still be done with altering anything, why bother. I only pointed out that just like Pakistan violated an agreement like the LoC during Kargil, the IWT is no permanent holy cow. If push came to shove, it too could be in the firing line......
"Could" being the operative word.