On 7th May, 2025, late at night, India carried out Operation Sandoor against Pakistan. New Delhi said the operation was launched in response to the Pahalgam attack. It launched strikes in Kotli and Muzaffarabad areas in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, as well as Bahawalpur, Sialkot, and Muridke in mainland Pakistan. In an official statement, India claimed that the strikes were focused and non-escalatory, adding that no military facilities had been targeted. After the Indian attacks, 31 people lost their lives, and 46 were injured. Pakistan, which dissociated itself from the Pahalgam attack, responded by shooting down five Indian combat planes, including three Rafale, one MiG-29, and a SU-30. Indian air defence systems could not counter the incoming attack.
Since 1971, this has been the largest Indian attack on Pakistani civilians. To this end, it is necessary to look at possible reasons behind India’s aggressive attitude. The Western states- the US, UK, France, and Russia, etc- continue to armIndia with advanced technology and weaponry and provide politicalsupport. As a result, India feels confident enough to strike against Pakistan. For instance, India used Scalp Cruise Missiles to target areas in Pakistan. These missiles would not be available to India had it not received the MTCR membership in 2016, asthese missiles fall under category I of the MTCR. This unequal treatment served as a cause of unilateral Indian aggression in South Asia, the most sensitive nuclear flashpoint that exists.
Another cause is the biased mindset of the Indian political elite, which inadvertently blames Pakistan. The Hindutva-dominated Indian political culture presents Pakistan as anti-civilizational and an occupier of what belongs to Akhand Bharat, as per Modi’s concept of the greater India. Bias overshadows logical decision-making and leads to stereotyping. Resultantly, a biased political mindset creates a reality contrary to what logic entails. One had seen warmongering and an anti-Pakistan narrative dominant in India after the Uri, Pulwama, and Pahalgam attacks. Also, in Indian-held Kashmir, Indian forces have a heavy presence both along the line of control (LOC) and in the regions of Jammu and Kashmir. In the hinterland, India has deployed all units of Rastriya Rifles, specially designed to conduct counter-terror operations.
The question arises, how in such a militarized region, militants could infiltrate from LOC and go as deep as 200 km into Indian-held Kashmir and carry out the deadly attack? This points out towards the failure of the Indian security and intelligence apparatus, which has failed to protect its civilian population. It can be said that to mask its failure, the Hindutva-driven government of India blamed Pakistan. This culminated in an attack on the innocent Pakistani civilians on 7 May. This attack was conducted without a proper investigation of the incident. In addition, India has yet to apprehend the perpetrators involved in the attack.
To those who argue that Pakistan is behind the Pahalgam attack, it is pertinent to highlight certain facts that rule out Islamabad’s involvement. Islamabad has been countering Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and their hideouts in Afghanistan since 2008, and most recently as of 2022. Besides, Pakistan has witnessed attacks such as the Jaffar Express attack carried out by the Baloch separatists. This separatist outfit enjoys the backing of the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), India’s intelligence agency. Given Pakistan’s economic woes, security issues, and diplomatic involvement in Afghanistan, it is unlikely that Pakistan is involved in the Pahalgam attack. Additionally, Pakistan has been against the use of terrorism; the onus lies on the Indian security forces for their supposed negligence and oppression in the Indian held Kashmir.
India’s belligerent action, which has become a new normal, threatens peace in South Asia. Although New Delhi claims that it has targeted the bases of Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed in Pakistan, yet they have only targeted mosques, madrasas, and unarmed civilians, including children and women. They intentionally targeted mosques that enjoy religious reverence among the people and could create resentment among the people, forcing the Pakistani government to retaliate. Another point is that such strikes won’t end terrorism in India because many militant movements across India are a reaction to political, socioeconomic, and religious injustice.
In addition to targeting civilians and suspending the Indus Water Treaty (IWT), India also targeted the Neelum-Jehlum hydropower plant. Targeting civilians and energy infrastructure across the LoC is an attempt to derail crisis stability. India, frustrated by the nuclear weaponisation of Pakistan, has increasingly tried to push the line on how far it can escalate military crises. It aligns with what Vipin Narang said: the contemporary landscape of nuclear powers in South Asia is showing little fear of escalation. It will further erode the trust between India and Pakistan, pushing the latter to retaliate. The vicious cycle of attacks and retaliation will increase the chances of escalation. Given India and Pakistan’s shared history of mistrust and resulting hostilities, such attacks are deadly and counterproductive. The Prime Minister of Pakistan, Shehbaz Sharif, described the Indian aggression as an act of war, and Pakistan gave a befitting response to India on May 9-10. Pakistan has effectively used the right to self-defence against Indian aggression under Article 51 of the UN charter. On the international level, Pakistan is likely to raise its voice against international discrimination that has been driving Indian belligerence. To bring peace, the international community should be objective in renouncing India’s irresponsible behaviour.
Muhammad Kumail Mehdi is a Research Assistant at the Center for International Strategic Studies, Islamabad.
