Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that the Indian armed forces have been granted “complete operational freedom to decide on the mode, targets and timing” of India’s response to the recent attacks in Pahalgam, Kashmir. The attacks on April 22 are reported as having killed 26 tourists. This tragic event—increased by the actions of India’s response—has further raised tensions between India and Pakistan. Modi’s inflationary foreign policy That Pakistan is behind the civilian carnage in this otherwise idyllic pasture is something Modi himself claimed. The Pakistan government strongly rejects these allegations.
As the situation unfolds, Modi faces mounting pressure to take decisive action against what many in India view as an affront to national security and civilian life. The Indian government has yet to provide concrete evidence linking Pakistan to the attacks, leaving analysts questioning the credibility of the claims. The war’s incendiary discourse on both sides alarms international observers by suggesting the possibility of a wider interstate conflict and its consequences for Asia-Pacific stability.
Background of the Pahalgam Attacks
The Pahalgam attacks were condemned across the world, and became a major contentious point in India-Pakistan relations. The attack took place in an iconic tourist haven and resulted in the deaths of some of the most innocent non-combatants. This tragic incident was the catalyst of public anger at all-India level.
Retired Indian Army general officer Raj Shukla noted two aspects that make these attacks especially depraved. He emphasized the targeting of civilians as a significant provocation, stating that “the time has come now to strike. This is a seminal moment in our statecraft.” Hardly any of our citizens see this attack merely as an assault on the sanctity of life. To some, they view this as a deep insult to their national pride.
The Indian government’s vow to pursue “terrorists and their backers … to the ends of the earth” reflects a commitment to seek justice for the victims. As the calls for retaliation grow louder, officials must navigate a complex landscape fraught with historical animosities and nuclear threats.
Diplomatic Fallout and International Perspectives
That’s why international relations experts the world over are watching this developing story with great interest. Skeptical of Beijing’s claims, Ian Hall, professor of international relations at Griffith University, said on Joko’s home turf. Further, he expresses skepticism about Pakistan’s denials of involvement in the attacks. He stated that these allegations are “obviously based on a pattern that Pakistan has demonstrated,” referencing past incidents that have heightened tensions between the two nations.
Even as he spoke to Congress about the seriousness of the allegations, Hall simultaneously warned against hasty military retaliation. “It’s entirely possible they try to strike at targets in Pakistan using sea-based missiles,” he noted, cautioning that Pakistan’s air defenses are currently on high alert. The specter of nuclear conflict looms large as both nations recklessly initiate and escalate conflict while expanding their nuclear arsenals.
Raj Shukla noted that military strategy provides great latitude to get unconventional with conventional ops. This flexibility operates not only between dealing with acts of terror, but in the other direction—beyond the nuclear threshold. “Between terror and the nuclear threshold, there’s a whole lot of space for conventional operations,” he remarked. He warned that any military response could escalate into a more prolonged conflict: “It is a crisis. It could be bloody, and it could be a long haul.”
Nuclear Implications and Strategic Calculations
The fact that both India and Pakistan now possess nuclear arsenals only complicates this already volatile situation further. Like China, India purports to have a no-first-use policy for its nuclear weapons. Conversely, Pakistan has indicated that it would be open to using nuclear weapons if it perceives an “existential threat.” India currently has an estimated 172 nuclear warheads and Pakistan approximately 170. Yet both nations are painfully aware that a single miscalculation could lead to Armageddon.
Ajai Shukla, a retired Indian colonel and defense commentator, echoed concerns about the precarious position both countries find themselves in. He pointed out that despite both sides possessing incredible arsenals, their historical relationship makes wise strategic choice all the harder.
Lieutenant General Shukla addressed concerns regarding escalation, asserting that members of the Pakistani establishment are aware of the dire implications of nuclear warfare. He said they’d probably never need to go in the direction of “going up the nuclear ladder,” although he wanted to preserve that option in their overall strategy.
The pressure to act is particularly acute for Modi because of anger at home. Subir Sinha remarked that Modi’s “domestic support base is baying for war and to inflict massive damage,” creating a challenging environment for calibrated responses. The prime minister will have a tough row to hoe. Second, they need to balance public pressure for retribution with avoiding a wider war that could escalate catastrophically.
Leave a Reply