Public opinion on the India-Pakistan tensions affecting economic and market dynamics is mixed. While there's concern over potential economic fallout and challenges for Indian exporters, many acknowledge the resilience of trade through third-party countries like the UAE. A strong sentiment for neutrality and diplomacy is evident, highlighting the need for careful handling to avoid conflict escalation and maintain stable economic relations.

India

Pakistan

Welcome to r/ShareMarketupdates!Please visit- ShareMarketupdates Channel for exclusive content and market updates (https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb6dI4LFXUuUjbs9Ec2F)

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShareMarketupdates) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

Actually, products from Pakistan are exported to the UAE and then to India. This has been a normal practice with a significant volume of imports from Pakistan over the past years. I believe this will continue, as we cannot restrict imports from the UAE

devloperfrom_AUS

During my recent research, I found that India’s merchandise exports to Pakistan surged to a five-year high of $1.21 billion in 2024, despite persistent political tensions between the two countries. This marks a 127.21% jump from $530.91 million in 2023, according to data from UNCTAD and UN COMTRADE, shared on April 23, 2025. It’s a notable milestone, signaling a sharp turnaround in trade dynamics that had significantly declined in recent years.

To understand the context, I looked back at trade patterns between India and Pakistan. The last time exports were higher was in 2018, when India shipped goods worth $2.35 billion to Pakistan. However, trade took a hit after the 2019 Pulwama attack, which led to Pakistan suspending direct trade ties. As a result, Pakistan’s exports to India collapsed from $547.47 million in 2019 to just $0.48 million in 2024. On India’s side, exports to Pakistan dropped to $281 million by 2020. But the 2024 rebound is remarkable—exports have risen more than 300% since 2020, mainly due to trade being routed through third countries like the UAE, Singapore, and Hong Kong. According to a 2024 report by the Indian Ministry of Commerce, about $800 million of total trade followed this indirect route.

Diving into the export composition, I found that India’s shipments in 2024 were dominated by raw materials and intermediate goods. The top categories were cotton ($300 million), organic chemicals ($200 million), and plastics ($150 million), as per UN COMTRADE data. These products are essential for Pakistan’s textile sector, which contributes 8.5% to its GDP and employs around 40% of its workforce, according to the 2024 Pakistan Economic Survey. Interestingly, due to floods and pest outbreaks, Pakistan’s domestic cotton output fell 20% to 5 million bales, creating a shortfall. To fill the gap, it imported 2 million bales from India at $1,500 per bale—double the volume from 2023—based on ICAC data.

One important insight I gained was how this trade is structured. Due to formal trade restrictions, Pakistani importers often use countries like the UAE as transit points. For instance, $500 million worth of Indian goods were routed through Dubai, according to a 2024 FIEO report. This added an extra logistics cost of about 5%, or roughly $60 million, to the total bill. Still, this route remains viable because of proximity—shipping from India to Pakistan via Dubai takes just 7 days, compared to 20 days from Brazil, one of Pakistan’s alternate cotton suppliers. This time advantage also helps cut freight costs by an estimated $30 million annually, per Drewry’s 2024 shipping cost data.

While India’s exports have surged, Pakistan’s exports to India remain negligible—just $0.48 million in 2024, a steep fall from $547.47 million in 2019. This imbalance stems from Pakistan's decision to halt trade following India’s revocation of Article 370 in August 2019. Previously, Pakistan exported cement worth $100 million and dry fruits worth $50 million to India. Now, these items are sourced from Afghanistan and Iran, which cost Pakistan an extra $200 million each year, according to the 2024 Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. The result is a sharp trade imbalance—India ended 2024 with a $1.2 billion trade surplus over Pakistan, per UNCTAD data.

In examining the broader trade relationship, I noticed how sensitive it remains to political developments. Bilateral trade peaked at $2.5 billion in 2018 but dropped to just $830 million in 2020. Though the South Asia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), implemented in 2006, was meant to boost regional trade, it has done little for India-Pakistan trade due to continued friction over issues like Kashmir, as highlighted in a 2024 ORF report. That said, there’s still substantial untapped potential—according to a 2024 World Bank study, lifting trade barriers could unlock up to $10 billion in annual trade between the two nations.

On the economic front, this recent trade upswing has had a real impact. For India, $1.21 billion in exports supported around 50,000 jobs across sectors like chemicals and textiles, as per a 2024 CII estimate. Gujarat alone exported $200 million worth of cotton to Pakistan, giving a major boost to its local cotton industry. For Pakistan, Indian raw materials have been critical to sustaining its textile exports, which were valued at $16 billion in 2024, according to the Pakistan Textile Exporters Association, even as the sector faced local supply disruptions.

In summary, India’s exports to Pakistan jumped 127.21% in 2024, reaching $1.21 billion—a five-year high—despite formal trade barriers and strained political ties. This growth was largely driven by $800 million in indirect trade via third countries, with key exports like cotton, chemicals, and plastics helping Pakistan stabilize its textile sector. Meanwhile, Pakistan’s exports to India remain minimal due to the 2019 trade suspension, creating a sizable trade surplus for India. Though current trade volumes are still below the 2018 peak of $2.5 billion, there’s enormous future potential—estimated at $10 billion—if diplomatic hurdles can be addressed.

**For this type of more exclusive content and market updates daily 24\*7 follow our WhatsApp channel we promise you will never be disappointed**  


[**https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb6dI4LFXUuUjbs9Ec2F**](https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb6dI4LFXUuUjbs9Ec2F)

Expert-Two8524

Dr-slyDragon007

Doesn't this mean it will hurt Indian exporters too?

red_dragon

Most of the trade happens through UAE, if India is able to stop that trade especially pharma products, pakistan will be hit hard, the only alternative would be china for pharma which is much more expensive than india,(pharma is the only sector in which india is better than china in terms of production)

aliengamer67601

??? So you want indian exporters to get hurt now? 

No_Shape_Ok0

safwan92

Nothing will happen..
They will just divide their own people..
They will never engage in war..
These politicians have big businesses they will do anything to save these businesses

Unlucky_Client_7118

Can't comment on other topics but it seems obvious to me we should stay neutral and push for peace (as much as we can).

jxx37

https://preview.redd.it/cp4sol5366xe1.jpeg?width=960&amp;format=pjpg&amp;auto=webp&amp;s=f8fd004d058a21d5c68c3507204ad510fdde0076

[deleted]

No impact. Bangladesh has nothing to do with all this.

Downtown-Bat-5493

&gt;If a conflict does erupt, what would be the potential implications for Bangladesh?

It would be more difficult for Bangladesh to normalize ties and trade relation with Pakistan which this government is trying to do. Plane tickets for going west might cost more as they will try to avoid conflict zone. 

&gt;Should Bangladesh remain neutral, or would it be compelled to align with a particular side?

Bangladesh should absolutely remain neutral. Aligning with Pakistan will only bring more problems for Bangladesh while aligning with India is not possible right now because of the current relation we have with India.

&gt;Could either India or Pakistan sustain a prolonged conflict, with or without external intervention?

India can sustain a longer conflict due to its stronger economy and greater resource capacity. Pakistan is really vulnerable right now in every way. They are dependent on the rivers coming from India. There is ongoing insurgency in Balochistan and northwest region. Pakistan's economy is shit even compared to Bangladesh and they got bailout by IMF last year. So, they are in no position to sustain a prolonged conflict.

&gt;What would be the economic fallout across the region?

India is the dominant trade partner for all the other countries in South Asia. So except for some trade disruption near the conflict zone, I don't think there would be any fallout across the region. 

&gt;Would one state be more likely to collapse under the weight of conflict?

Obviously Pakistan is more likely to collapse as I have already said they are in a more vulnerable position. 

&gt;Is there any scenario in which Bangladesh could position itself strategically or economically to benefit?

Yes, it is the perfect time for Bangladesh to focus on Arakan in Myanmar without involvement from India. I heard a rumor that Bangladesh is taking preparation for an operation in Arakan with the support of USA. If we can create a buffer zone there and return all the Rohingyas, it would greatly increase our security along the border and it would be a big step towards resolving the Rohingya issue.

itvus

To answer your questions: 

1. None whatsoever from a security point of view. There are economic considerations. See below. 

2. India doesn't need Bangladesh to do anything except being neutral. Taking the side of Pakistan is obviously a non-starter and it would be disastrous for future relations. There's no benefit there for Bangladesh to take the side of their former genocide perpetrators. 

3. India can sustain a prolonged conflict, with some damage, given its large domestic economy. Pakistan cannot sustain a war longer than two months at most without collapsing and that's being generous. 

4. SAARC trade levels are not massive. Foreign investments to India and Pakistan would suffer. Bangladesh would be fine. 

5. Pakistan could collapse within two months. They have a first-use of nuke policy if they are losing a conflict. Which itself would wipeout the country in case of a Indian nuclear retaliation. Even if nukes are not used, and if Pakistani military loses territory in the conflict, that might lead to break up of the country. It would certainly lead to more demands for redrawing the Durand Line from Pashtuns. 

6. Bangladesh stands to gain from taking Pakistan's market share in the textiles exports as well as general redirection of foreign direct investment in South Asia away from Pakistan.

mormegil1

If a war erupts, why don't we sell arms to both countries and get rich 😂

Hot-Priority3826

After the election of India these tensions will lossen up. The current government of India needs some issues to get vote from a particular type of demographic people.

AdministrationOwn972

I predicted this would happen. NOBODY listened to my predictions. 

If a conflict does erupt, what would be the potential implications for Bangladesh

Well Most of Pakistan's economy depends on the water of those rivers that they use for irrigation. This is something they knew and I know they probably wanted kashmir for this reason. Now with Modi removing access to these water sources, their aim would be on us to either re-establish relations, and use our jute/other resources, use our people to fight indians, or guilt us by saying how we're all desi muslims or get us to smuggle weapons to Assam. I saw this coming. I said it before it was all about water sources and nobody believed me. Now, the fact that bangladesh demanded billions of dollars was something I never expected and will prove to be a hurdle, but expect us to be mentioned in their media, and expect their ISI bots to target us, spread propoganda about us like they've been doing after 2020. 

  
Should Bangladesh remain neutral, or would it be compelled to align with a particular side?

We should remain neutral and never talk about it. I do wish my friends families are safe if war were to happen but I also don't want Bangladesh to be fighting in wars it doesn't need to. 

  
Could either India or Pakistan sustain a prolonged conflict, with or without external intervention?

China is going to side with Pakistan and America is going to side with india. I even guessed it might be another proxy war with the perfect time being started after the tarrifs but I also know Pakistani army has been trying to cause havoc on india for a really long time. But now that this happened, I'm 100 percent sure china and america is going to fight one another through india-pakistan. 

What would be the economic fallout across the region?

Pakistan's economy is going to suffer but they'll probably trade with Bangladesh. Bangladesh is going to fight its own to resist or allow Pakistani influence. USA already put tarrifs on Bangladesh, and I'm sure trade with india has decreased due to current events, so I don't know what's going to happen next in terms of Bangladesh's economy. We probably will trade with Pakistan but don't know if it'll cover anything. 

Would one state be more likely to collapse under the weight of conflict?

If there was a war, both india and pakistan will suffer. Both have nukes, both will not step down, and both have influenced another part of it's country to saperate and will leverage that. (India-kashmir and khalistan wants to saperate, pakistan-bolachistan). Now with the current events in bangladesh, I believe we'd be pressured to take a side. If we take pakistan's side, we'll be first told to influence and smuggle weapons to assam, and then maybe to fight indians. Which means, during the next few years expect a lot of propaganda, guilt-tripping, muslim-muslim-bhai-bhai rhetoric.

ZucchiniDifferent167

Bangladesh should remain neutral but I think won't remain neutral because of its own people. We don't have national unity like china, japan or other developed countries. We have some people who can deliberately conspire anything to put bangladesh in this conflict even if it can destroy the country. They only want to serve their political purpose nothing else!

Nirzak

It might actually benefit us. I've heard Pakistan is taking over in textile industry.

VapeyMoron

ফেসবুকে জামায়াতি পোস্ট আর জিওপলিটিক্স একনা, বিএনপি ২০০৪ এ পাকিস্তানি ফাঁদে পড়ে ১০ ট্রাক অস্ত্র পাচারে ধরা খেয়ে আজ ২০ বছর ক্ষমতার বাইরে, বাংলাদেশের যা অবস্থা তাতে ভারতের সাথে কনফ্লিক্টে জড়ালে ৭ দিনও টিকতে পারবো না, বিএনপি জামায়াতের ভারত ইস্যুতে বিশাল একটা ভোটভান্ডার আছে জন্য ওরাই এই ইস্যু নিয়ে নাড়াচাড়া করে বেশি

Responsible-Check-92

A starving Bangladesh will starve more unfortunately because Nunus is busy looking after his ego and the antiBangladesh rajakars and pedos

Friendly_Branch_3828

India has hostile attitude towards us...so when opportunity arises we should join other countries &amp; make sure India is neutralized

NaffyTaffyUwU

China's bad relationship with India had nothing to do with Pakistan. If China gives up Pakistan, it merely lose Pakistan, it won't gain India. Their conflict is mainly due to the border dispute with Bhutan and India.

GerryManDarling

Pakistan is able to provide an access to the sea for chinese goods that is on the west of Malacca's strait without being a potential competitor for China

leaningtoweravenger

Because China sees India as a potential economic/military rival in the near future, but not Pakistan.

disc_jockey77

China built a major naval harbor that, who could have thought, can also host chinese submarines. Pakistan is one of the few places that allow China to project power into the Indian Ocean.

Zestyclose_Jello6192

China is building a road that passes through Pakistan into western China. They are very dependent on oil imports and this gives them another route for importing oil other than shipping it over the ocean through a bunch of political entities that have various and changing relationships with China. 

The road only passes through Pakistan which should make it easier to keep good relations with them. Especially as a hedge against India. China will need to defend that road at the very least. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Pakistan_Economic_Corridor

Clyde_Three

Two reasons for the Chinese to not give up on Pakistan:  
1) They've invested a lot on the CPEC (China-Pakistan Economic Corridor), which will basically allow China to economically transport goods by land through Pakistan and then to the world through its ports. This achieves another goal of China's: to reduce its dependence on the Malacca Strait, which India or the US with its southeast Asian allies could choke in case of a US-China conflict in the future

2) By getting Pakistan to keep making trouble along the India-Pakistan border, India will have to spend a considerable amount to deal with that. Add to that the Pakistani sponsored separatist movements and terrorist organisation in Kashmir and India has a headache to deal with. This reduces India's capability to build up their strength along the Indo-China border, something which China wants

Lol8920

You're turning it around, the whole point of supporting Pakistan is to hem in India and keep a check on them.

silverionmox

The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend.

EU and US -&gt; Russia.  
India and US -&gt; China.  
Pakistan and China -&gt; India.  
Russia and Iran -&gt; US.  
Saudi and US -&gt; Iran.  
and So on...

While I do believe that China loves realpolitik, I think people sometimes forget that China and Pakistan have a uniquely deep friendship and Pakistani people support China in high numbers. Why get rid of that especially when a lot of countries and their citizens don't like China? Plus, Pakistan lets China make huge investments in their economy with one belt one road and Pakistan has a strained relationship with the US. China would not want to give up and let the US swoop in. 

Meanwhile India and China have a pretty contentious history of border disputes and India used to support the ussr when China and ussr were enemies. Plus their people don't have a particularly good view of China. They prob won't get much out of trying to improving relations with then.

Ezeitgeist

China has already invested billions in Pakistani politicians, and is so unpopular in India that it's largely a lost cause.

The PRC and India are strategic adversaries. They are - from a long-range view - involved in a "struggle for the mastery of Asia". To that end, Pakistan plays an important role for the PRC as it keeps India somewhat preoccupied (particularly given the prospect of a potential 2-front war).

That said, if you review the strategic studies documentation and papers emerging from India till the late 1980s (and even in the 1990s), you would notice the preoccupation of Indians with Pakistan. The governments of those times did not help either and, frankly, not did the strategic-military establishment in India. This is evident in how skewed the Indian Armed Forces are in favour of the land forces. In fairness, it should also be mentioned that this was also reflective of what some have referred to as India's "continental mindset", which was a relic of the British Raj.

Times, however, have changed. Indian strategists increasingly view the country as one with dominant maritime interests and one can see how the naval/maritime capabilities of the country are improving (carrier battle groups being set up, SSBNs out on active patrols and a number of them being under construction, SSNs being designed and constructed, new mega naval bases being built etc). Pakistan is now considered as "an irritant" - a security threat no doubt, but not necessarily a "strategic threat". The story for Pakistan, of course, is different and it views India as a strategic threat but that's another discussion.

So, the reason why the PRC does not abandon Pakistan is because the latter is a tool/instrument by means of which the former is attempting to constrain India.

robothistorian

They fight over water. They fight over land. They will never see eye to eye. They dont trust each other. Pakistan is in a bad financial situation and is kinda hopeless. It needs a China to give it things and China will keep trying until it completely fails...

FrontBench5406

I mean short of India bending the knee to China there is a very obvious reason why they don’t give up on Pakistan. There are some Indian nationalists confused as to what the exact issue between China and India is, India wants to be a great power and respected whereas China might be looking to replace the United States as the regional hegemon in Asia. Those are two very different and conflicting goals.

Calfis

You know what I would say to China about making deals with Pakistan?..."good luck with that."

China will probably use Pakistan like how USA did. Great for proxy stuff like access to port, belt and road initiatives and more. Pakistan is a failed country.

Diligent_Driver_5049

India and China has similar natural endowment, population, and trade potential. Furthermore they compete for the same water source from the Himalayas and tibetan plateau that sustains their civilizations. The indo Pacific trade route is vital for both nation's trade and prosperity.

India is a regional hegemon to China, hence they're natural rivals.

Fearless-Moose4634

Pakistan is a nuclear power and a militarily, a regional power. It also has a stranglehold on Afghanistan and serves as a counter weight to Indias ambition in the region. And Pakistan has enormous potential for economic development. Something that has been ignored by you. I think it was in the 50s or 60s that Pakistan was on the same level as South Korea. 30 years from now, Pakistans economic outlook may be very different to now. And the Chinese generally think 30 to 50 years.the same time frame that people look at when thinking strategically.  Without Pakistans influence, China would have a much tougher time stopping Indias ambition in the region

thunderbolt851993

Even if china abandoned pakistan, they would not gain india. Because china and india have a dispute over land. That said I can't help but think that antagonizing india has been a massive mistake by china. 

They basically drive india closer towards the West and japan. India also has a large developing middle class with lots of consumers that china might not have access to.

plmukas

India is too big to be a puppet. China does not have friends or allies only vassals.

Cleftbutt

I read a good book called Prisoners of Geography about how geography shapes geopolitics. 

In that it discusses how Pakistani ports are important for China's oil imports from the Middle East as it gives a route that does not involve passing through the very narrow Malacca Strait which could easily be blockaded in a war situation. 

The coastline of India on the other hand is too shallow for the mostpart to have ports of significant enough depth to facilitate the large oil tankers. If India eventually builds out such infrastructure, and tensions between the two countries subside, then there may be less of a need for China to be so intertwined with Pakistan.

hhandley

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend” is not as simple and widespread as it’s presented. Just waking up one day and pulling the plug on Pakistan does not gain China friendship with India.  Not only are there long term issues with deep distrust between them, China is smart enough to know the implications with other relationships when you abandon an ally for their rival.

Rosemoorstreet

Pakistan is an unstable nuclear neighbour with many islamic guerrilla fighter/terrorist groups having various amounts of not only local power but influence within the government.

India could not exist and it would be in China's interest to keep propping it up. Pakistan falling apart is quite possibly every stable major powers biggest security threat. It's just been that for so long that it's not news.

WBUZ9

unused deserve school vegetable flowery swim nutty forgetful strong shrill

 *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*

ManOrangutan

I’m speaking from an Indian perspective here.

There was an attempt through the concept of Panchsheel/Five principles of peaceful coexistence by the first leader of our country, Jawaharlal Nehru, to have an amicable relationship with China. However, the Chinese invasion of Tibet, which Nehru envisioned as being a buffer between India’s and Chinas spheres of influence, as well as the disputes over the control of territories we have called Aksai Chin and parts of Arunchal Pradesh have caused differences between our two countries.

My understanding is that it was an attempt by china to reverse the damages that were caused by the century of humiliation and the subsequent warlord era(?) in Chinese history, by reinterpreting the relations with Tibet and retaking the lands lost to the British. However, the damage it has done to India-China relations will be difficult to fix.

It’s not that all is lost though. We do have a collaborative relationship in places where India is at loggerheads with the west, for starters the WTO tariff related issues. Also keep in mind that China is India’s largest trading partner.

That all being said, what you’re suggesting would be glaringly obvious if it weren’t for the border dispute. I think that both of our political leadership has a no compromise policy when it comes to territorial integrity, which makes it even harder to reconcile. I personally feel like there is more to gain from a cautious collaboration with china over the way things stand.

Interestingly, if I’m not mistaken, Pakistan did recognise some parts of what was then the Gilgit Baltistan territory as belonging to China and had

mastorofpuppies

Two reasons, both related to the nature of the CCP and autocracies in general.

China will never have great relations with any democracy as acknowledging the legitimacy of democratic governance is a threat to their ruling party.

China will only ever have good assymetric relations. That is, if they are clearly the dominant partner that can push the other around.

ThePensiveE

The enemy of your enemy is your friend. Both China and Pakistan have territorial disputes with India. Why should China give up Pakistan? Unless the Indians can properly resolve the territorial disputes with China and Pakistan, the problem is that Indians believe that southern Tibet is theirs, but they also believe that Aksai Chin and Kashmir are also theirs. In this way, the relationship between India and its neighbors will never improve.

Distinct-Macaroon158

Pakistan is just a tool of leverage for China to keep India in check, that's all. The Tibet affair generated mistrust in China regarding India, and successive Indian governments did nothing to find a solution to this. A give-and-take would have normalised things long ago, but India was rigid on its British-created boundaries, which after all gave birth to the country called India. Now things have gone too far for a reset in the near term, but geopolitical winds are shifting and the Indian government is getting closer to China (in spite of the outward rhetoric) given that U.S. power is waning and China's strength is increasing on the world stage.

greatbear8

Because China, at some level, wants to slowly encroach into India. Eroding the border in chunks with whatever nonsense claims. Close ties between China and Pakistan puts India into a box between two countries that have designs on at least some of India's territory.

manifestDensity

China or better to say CCP doesn't like prosperous democracies especially which could create some funny ideas among their own people. 

One of the main aim of CCP's foreign policy is to keep their domestic support intact. So they always use propoganda for their citizens showing those democracies as evil.

That is why CCP always try to show Taiwan, Japan and India, their Asian neighbours which follows democracy as  enemies. Friendly relationship with such countries could be bad for CCP influence inside China.

They have no love for Pakistan either. However, Pakistan is the friend in "my enemy's enemy" sense. Moreover, position of Pakistan is geopolitically important. Last but not the least important point : the government of Pakistan is always ready to be sold for a few billion dollars.

bikbar1

China isn't there for money. They want a slave country so they can get access too sea and not be challenged by pakistani people. They want pakistan to remain weak but not collapsed.


As for India, China will never accept another equal. What it wants is a servile neighbor. That's the Chinese way. It has always been that way since the imperial days. Or more accurately Chinese imperial society never ended to begin with.


General Guidelines - Buy/Sell, one-liner and Portfolio review posts will be removed.

Please refer to the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/IndianStockMarket/comments/17bcg2a/frequently asked questions_post_your_common/) where most common questions have already been answered. Join our Discord server using [Link 1](https://discord.com/invite/fDRj8mA66U) 


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IndianStockMarket) if you have any questions or concerns.*

So, are the global factors more favourable this time? We are in the middle of a trade war. There is a high chance of recession. The earnings are expected to be bad. This conflict can act as a trigger. Saying it will not have much effect is not prudent. The situation is really complex this time.

strawma_n

Relax guys they need to manage monthly expiry 
Jo hoga may me hi hoga

After URI we took revenge after 16 days .. after pulvama we took revenge after 12 days….. iss baar bhi hoga pr boht bda hoga to planning bhi utni hogi Abhi 5 days hua hai wait and watch

By this logic 8 days k baad hoga kucch hona hai to

Outrageous_Plenty433

wars ho bhi jayegin ya koi sa surgical attack market nu upad hi Jana hai ye pakki hai. US Israel ke paise apne bajar mein hi ayega. Thoda idhar udhar expiry volatility hoyegai hii par net net upar hi jana ab toh.

imukon

Guys let’s not Pre-empt the things we have no clue about. We don’t even know that would this be a Full scale war or would it be targeted operations which we have done in the past. We don’t even know who will be starting the 2nd phase, would it be Pakistan who will attack in a Pre-emptive manner ( we all know how their legs are shaking rn ), or would it be India who would be starting it. 

TOO many unknown variables at this point I’d say, and this is not a very good time to chase returns in my opinion. Stay safe and DO NOT take a hasty decision to Take out money or put money if you do not need it for atleast 2-3 years.

UpbeatAd3429

What if FIIs start dumping? Their participation has increased over time. LIC and SIP money can't control the sell off

the_money_prophet

Nowadays peoplw don't do anything even with 20% correction. No one got worried in Feb, they got worried in March. After last week's rally, the optimism is back, even if portfolios are red. So, I guess markets would have to keep falling more than 25% for 3 months for people to wake up. Before that it's all buy the dip, corrections are healthy, don't chase returns, make strategic allocation, all these MBA Marketing answers are ready to be typed.

Killer_insctinct

MarlinRando9

Different time periods, different position of the country in economic cycle, different political and social environment changes the outcome. These studies become useless on how equity markets behave during war if they fail to point other factors as well. Wars have made some countries from ultra-rich to mediocre country (United Kingdom post World Wars), from mediocre to ultra-rich countries as well (United States of America post World Wars), peaceful countries which haven't waged war also been all over the rich to poor spectrum (Iceland where 2008 Financial crisis tremors was first felt, New Zealand peaceful country but have been in some sorta economic problems since 2019). Same could be seen across equity markets, bond markets, currency and commodity markets as well. There is nothing like one rule applies to all similar situations in markets at all. 

wh1t34053bl00d

Goodness people is everything about money? Yes there will be some minor turmoil but it need not be turned into a profit-making business. Market has withstood the test of time, it will withstand this one also, do we really need to go into how much it will go down, up, whatever? There are more important things at play here.

the_storm_rider

Recent escalations in India-Pakistan tensions have significant economic implications, affecting foreign exchange reserves and defense spending...

India-Pakistan Tensions Impacting Economic and Market Dynamics

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want