The overwhelming question on everyone’s mind amid the ongoing tensions between India and Pakistan is whether both nations can take steps toward a lasting resolution. Otherwise, the potential for an all-out war and nuclear confrontation remains dangerously high.
The political leadership and strategic thinkers must take a step back and work towards a peaceful solution, instead of indulging in brinkmanship.
Historical background
Achieving peace is challenging, as the roots of the conflict in the subcontinent can be traced back to the Partition in 1947. This division led to mass migrations and widespread violence, resulting in over 2 million deaths. The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir became a major flashpoint, leading to the first Indo-Pak war (1947-48).
Subsequent wars in 1965, 1971, and 1999, along with ongoing skirmishes, have kept tensions high. The 1971 war also resulted in the creation of Bangladesh, significantly altering regional dynamics. The introduction of nuclear weapons in the 1970s added an alarming dimension to the conflict.
The situation has remained tense, with battle-hardened armed forces stationed along the Line of Control (LoC), established in 1972 as part of the Simla Agreement.
Rising concerns
Global concerns, from Beijing to Washington, have been growing over the possibility of imminent conflict between the nuclear-armed rivals. The recent terror attack in Kashmir, which killed 26 civilians—mostly tourists, including a local pony guide—has further escalated tensions. The gunmen claimed to belong to The Resistance Front (TRF), an offshoot of the banned Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). However, the TRF later denied involvement in the attack.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, addressing a public meeting the day after the attack, vowed the "harshest response" to the perpetrators and conspirators. “We will pursue them to the ends of the earth,” he declared.
The Prime Minister emphasized that the attack occurred at a time when Kashmir was experiencing peace and progress, with schools and colleges thriving, tourism booming, and economic development gaining momentum.
“The enemies of the country, the enemies of Jammu and Kashmir, did not like that. The terrorists and the masterminds of terror want Kashmir to be destroyed again, and hence they executed such a big conspiracy,” he said. Political parties across India have largely united in their support for the Prime Minister’s stance.
Calls for ‘maximum restraint’
The United Nations has urged India and Pakistan to exercise “maximum restraint,” as the two nations imposed tit-for-tat diplomatic measures.
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif condemned the attack and called for a "neutral, transparent, and credible" investigation, offering Pakistan’s participation in any such probe.
However, political rhetoric in Pakistan has intensified. Federal Minister Hanif Abbasi declared that 130 Pakistani nuclear missiles are aimed at India, while Bilawal Bhutto Zardari issued a stark warning: “Either our [Pakistan’s] water would flow in this river or their [India’s] blood.”
Former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif urged PM Shehbaz Sharif to pursue a diplomatic approach and avoid aggressive actions.
Meanwhile, Iran offered to mediate, with its Foreign Minister stating, “Tehran stands ready to use its good offices in Islamabad and New Delhi to forge greater understanding at this difficult time.”
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres also reached out to both nations, urging restraint. His spokesperson warned that a confrontation would have catastrophic consequences for South Asia and the world.
High-level meetings
Prime Minister Modi chaired a high-level meeting to review the security situation in Jammu and Kashmir and the fallout of the Pahalgam attack. The armed forces were given complete operational freedom to determine the timing and mode of India’s response.
Meanwhile, Pakistan’s Information Minister claimed India was planning military action within 24-36 hours. As a result of the heightened hostility, many tourists have left Jammu and Kashmir, impacting the local economy and livelihoods. Intelligence warnings have led to the closure of 48 out of 87 tourist destinations.
‘Jugular vein of Pakistan’
Commentators have linked the Pahalgam attack to a speech by Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir, who recently described Kashmir as the “jugular vein of Pakistan.” His remarks, combined with a series of infiltration attempts, have raised questions in India about whether Pakistan is reverting to cross-border terror as an instrument of foreign policy.
Pakistan, however, called the attack a “false flag operation,” accusing Indian agencies of orchestrating it.
UN Urges ‘maximum restraint’
“We very much appeal to both governments... to exercise maximum restraint, and to ensure that the situation and the developments we’ve seen do not deteriorate any further,” UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters in New York on Thursday.
“Any issues between Pakistan and India, we believe, can and should be resolved peacefully through meaningful mutual engagement.”
Victims of Terrorism Association established
“The Pahalgam terrorist attack represents the largest number of civilian casualties since the horrific 26/11 Mumbai attacks in 2008. Having been a victim of cross-border terrorism for decades, India fully understands the long-lasting impact such acts have on victims, their families, and society. We reiterate that terrorism in all its forms must be condemned unequivocally,” India's Deputy Permanent Representative at the UNOCT, Ambassador Yojna Patel, said at the United Nations on Tuesday regarding the Pahalgam terror attack.
“The establishment of the Victims of Terrorism Association (VoTAN) is a significant step. It will create a structured, safe space for victims to be heard and supported. India believes that initiatives like VoTAN are essential to strengthening the global response to terrorism, ensuring that victims remain at the center of our collective efforts.”
Punitive action on the cards
Nitin Gokhale, a national security analyst and author, in an interview with the Indian news portal Rediff.com, said: “We are not going for war against Pakistan... We are going to do punitive action, which is not the same as war. This can be controlled. It is called escalation control in terms of war theory.”
“India this time will look into hurting the Pakistani army’s interests. It could be their commercial interests, tactical or strategic interests, or one of their leaders.”
Need for a peaceful resolution
The conflict between India and Pakistan has resulted in a significant loss of life over the years. The Partition itself caused over 2 million deaths due to violence, starvation, and disease. Subsequent wars and skirmishes, including the four major wars (1947-48, 1965, 1971, and 1999), have led to thousands of additional casualties. The exact toll is difficult to determine, as it includes both military and civilian losses over decades of conflict.
The human cost of this ongoing tension is a stark reminder of the need for a peaceful resolution.
Manjari Chatterjee Miller, a senior fellow for India, Pakistan, and South Asia at the US Council on Foreign Relations, wrote:
“Is there room for resolution at this point, or is further escalation expected? India has already said it will suspend its participation in the Indus Water Treaty... The treaty has held through four wars, but if India does follow through, its suspension could restrict the water flows of two major rivers to Pakistan. This would be an unprecedented step that could devastate Pakistan’s agriculture, particularly as Pakistan is already suffering from a huge water shortage.
However, the Indian government is under pressure from the Indian public and media to have a robust response, which could also include military action. Modi has portrayed himself and his government as tough on security, and his government has been showcasing Kashmir as a stable region, safe for its residents and tourists. Exacerbating the tensions, the Pakistani government has declared that if India does block the river waters, it would consider it an ‘act of war.’”
With millions affected by violence, displacement, and economic hardship, the need for peace between India and Pakistan cannot be overstated. A collaborative approach, supported by international mediation, could provide a glimmer of hope for the countless lives caught in the crossfire. The world watches, hopeful for a resolution that prioritizes humanity over hostility.
Arms spending
India's military expenditure, the fifth largest globally, grew by 1.6 percent to $86.1 billion, while Pakistan’s spending stood at $10.2 billion, according to the latest report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
Tit-for-tat actions
India suspended the Indus Water Treaty, a crucial water-sharing agreement with Islamabad governing the use of the Indus River system. Pakistan has also suspended all bilateral pacts with India, including the Simla Agreement—a peace treaty signed between the two countries in July 1972.
Developments include:
- The Wagah-Attari border has been shut down, and both countries have suspended trade.
- Pakistanis living in India have been asked to return to their homeland as their visas have been revoked.
- India and Pakistan have downgraded diplomatic ties.
- Pakistan has shut its airspace for Indian airliners.
