Stumps rationality, cross-currents, realism would have dictated a compromise solution

Question

Pakistan largely absorbed the Muslim majority areas of Kashmir into Pakistan in 1948 itself when it occupied 2/5ths of the state by force. It obtained vital strategic gains as a result - it got contiguity with China and India lost it with Afghanistan. Realism would have dictated a compromise solution, but hatred stumps rationality. By knocking on UN doors against Pakistan's aggression, India exposed the J&K issue to the cross-currents of the Cold War, the price of which we continue to pay with calls for a settlement "in accordance with the wishes of its people", a formula that tilts against India's territorial integrity, undercuts its secular polity already under stress by rising Islamic extremism around, besides giving terror-promoting Pakistan room to continue even today its cynical pretensions of only "giving political, diplomatic and moral support for the right of the Kashmiri people to self-determination".

Please explain to me the highlighted parts.

Source : http://www.hindustantimes.com/A-lose-lose-situation/Article1-594899.aspx#disqus_thread

Avangi · Accepted Answer

Realism would have dictated a compromise solution

If they wanted to be practical, they would have worked out a solution between the parties.

hatred stumps rationality.

I would have used "trumps."
"Stumps" in this context usually means "blocks." Hatred gets in the way of reasonableness.

exposed . . . . to the cross-currents of the Cold War

The UN was heavily involved with "cold war" issues at the time, so its input was strongly influenced by these "issues."

User_gary · Answer

Thanks a lot Avangi.
But the last part "cross-current" is yet quite unclear to me.

Avangi · Answer

"Cross currents" is a metaphor. When a river is peaceful, all the water tends to flow in the same direction. When it's stormy or flooding, the water becomes turbulent, and eddy currents or cross currents may develop.

During the Cold War, both sides were trying to use the United Nations for their own purposes, and often tried to block each other in any way possible. This interfered with the normal order of business (the normal flow of the current in the river).
The implication is that the UN should have brokered a compromise in the Kashmir situation, but the Cold War politics made it impossible to reach any equitable agreement.

Stumps rationality, cross-currents, realism would have dictated a compromise solution

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions