
Those are the words of Pakistan Association of Otago president Anam Nawaz.
Miss Nawaz said she opened Instagram early yesterday morning and saw news of India’s offensive unfolding against Pakistan and Pakistani Kashmir.
She called her younger sister who remains there with their parents ‘‘right in the middle of the conflict’’.
Yesterday was a very emotional and stressful day.
‘‘Here in other countries apart from India and Pakistan, we live very closely together.
‘‘We have spouses in India, we speak the same language, we eat the same food, we laugh at the same jokes.
‘‘I mean, if you’re in New Zealand or any other country, we don’t see any difference.
‘‘Back home, India and Pakistan, they are two rivals ... there is no conflict here.’’
News agency Reuters reported India attacked Pakistan and Pakistani Kashmir, with at least 26 deaths reported as India said it struck nine ‘‘terrorist’’ sites.
Pakistan said it had shot down five Indian fighter jets.
The worst fighting in more than two decades was linked to an attack by Islamist militants on Hindu tourists that killed 26 people in Indian Kashmir last month, the news agency said.
It was in the middle of the night when Miss Nawaz spoke to her sister, but she told her all flights had been cancelled and airspaces had been closed.
Although the conflict over disputed Kashmir lands had simmered for about 80 years, this was the worst fighting in Miss Nawaz’s lifetime.
‘‘We are afraid of things getting escalated and for the safety of our families back home and for the safety of civilians on both sides.’’
University of Otago international relations professor Robert Patman said Kashmir, where the fighting was centred, was ‘‘at the heart of this’’.
India controlled two-thirds of Kashmir and the remaining third was controlled by Pakistan.
Although there had been attempts to shift that status quo by Pakistan, it had not happened.
‘‘Peace has proven elusive so far.’’
Both states had claimed sovereignty over the area since they received independence in 1947.
‘‘The conflict’s never been resolved.’’
When Britain ruled the Indian subcontinent, they used a system of regional princes or Maharajas.
When Britain decided to disengage ‘‘quite rapidly’’ from the region in 1947, they basically used the system of regional princes, which British colonialism had operated through, he said.
Each regional prince in particular provinces was given the responsibility of choosing to join a secular India or an Islamic Pakistan.
‘‘The big problem was that while it worked out generally OK, when it came to Kashmir, the regional prince or Maharaja was a Hindu, but the majority of people in Kashmir, 60% were Muslim.
‘‘And so from the moment the regional prince of Kashmir opted to join secular India, there were disputes between India and Pakistan over the future of Kashmir.
‘‘Pakistan said that self-determination of the people of the region had not been respected and India for its part said that it would agree to a referendum or plebiscite but the conditions have never been peaceful enough to allow that.’’
War was waged between the two sides in 1947-48 and into 1949. When it ended, India ‘‘clearly had the upper hand’’.