The recent India-Pakistan conflict presents a distinct character compared to previous encounters.
The persistent discord between India-Pakistan has escalated to a critical juncture. While historical tensions between the two nations have persisted since their inception, the present standoff seems markedly more acute than any prior confrontation.
Political analysts have scrutinized the situation through various lenses. It is posited by some that the existing parallels in the governance frameworks of India-Pakistan are contributing to this intensified animosity.
Historically, India’s dedication to secularism and democratic principles has been markedly distinct from Pakistan’s reliance on religious governance and military authority. Today, the two appear to mirror one another more closely.
India-Pakistan now operate under repressive democracies, with militarized borders and ideologies rooted in religious supremacy. They provoke and intensify each other’s extremism and rage. Using religion as a rallying cry, both regimes show no hesitation in suppressing their own people.
On April 17, Pakistan’s Army Chief Asim Munir delivered a fiery speech in Islamabad, presenting a revised version of Pakistan’s founding history. “We are different from Hindus in every possible way,” he declared. He called Kashmir Pakistan’s “lifeline” and vowed that the country would never back down from the “heroic struggle” of Kashmiris against “Indian occupation.”
Just five days later, on April 22, terrorists launched an attack on tourists in Pahalgam, a part of Indian-administered Kashmir. The attack took place in the stunningly scenic Baisaran Valley, where nearly 2,000 tourists were present. The valley, inaccessible by car, can only be reached on foot or horseback.
India-Pakistan on Kashmir
In that peaceful setting, the assailants approached the tourists and asked them to recite the “Kalma”—a declaration of Islamic faith—to determine their religion. Once they identified the Hindu men, they executed 26 people, most by gunshots to the head.
Except for one, all the victims were Hindu. The lone Muslim victim, a Kashmiri, died while trying to stop the attackers.
The massacre caused indignation throughout India’s political spectrum. Questions rapidly surfaced concerning security flaws and the effectiveness of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Kashmir strategy.
In 2019, Modi’s administration repealed Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, effectively terminating Kashmir’s autonomy and making Jammu and Kashmir a union province. Both Kashmiris and Pakistanis resented the decision. Nonetheless, many ordinary Kashmiris claim that economic and social development are their primary priorities, regardless of autonomy status.
However, the political rhetoric surrounding the Pahalgam incident quickly changed. Pro-government media, newspapers, and Hindu nationalist groups dominated the social media narrative, emphasizing revenge and military retaliation.
India’s response was almost inevitable. Two days after the attack, Modi addressed an election rally. Suddenly switching to English, as if speaking to the world, he declared: “I want to tell the whole world—India will track down every terrorist and their supporters and punish them. We will find them even at the ends of the earth.”
Since the end of British colonial rule in 1947, India-Pakistan have fought three wars and numerous skirmishes over Kashmir. For the past decade, Modi has pursued a policy of “punitive retaliation”—striking back after any attack.
In 2019, in response to a lethal militant attack in Kashmir that resulted in the deaths of numerous paramilitary personnel, India executed an airstrike in Balakot, Pakistan. This resulted in a constrained aerial confrontation, intensifying tensions while avoiding the progression into a comprehensive war. The Balakot strike demonstrated Modi’s readiness to engage in military operations beyond the borders of India.
This readiness was confirmed again last Wednesday, just after midnight, when Indian forces conducted strikes at nine sites inside Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Among the targets was Punjab province, the political and military core of Pakistan, home to nearly half its population. The region includes Lahore, Pakistan’s second-largest city, and Rawalpindi, headquarters of the Pakistani military.
Pakistan has long waged an asymmetrical battle against India—at least since 1971, when it lost its eastern wing to India in a war, resulting in the birth of Bangladesh.
Pakistan supported Islamist insurgents fighting Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s with assistance from the CIA. The jihadist movement focused on Kashmir after the fall of the Soviet Union, taking advantage of local discontent with Indian control to establish itself.
If the Pahalgam attack had a plan, it was probably to exacerbate religious tensions in India by making the Hindu majority turn against the Muslim minority.
Such internal strife might impede India’s ascent to prominence in the world, weaken it, and encourage separatist groups.
Ironically, Pakistan’s military and political institutions now unwittingly supports Hindu nationalist organizations in India. Hindu nationalism has become more assertive during Modi’s ten years in power. Its proponents intentionally confuse Indian and Pakistani Muslims in their rhetoric, portraying both as evil.
In the aftermath of the Pahalgam massacre, violent attacks on Muslims erupted across India. The Indian government named its military response “Operation Sindoor.” “Sindoor” is a traditional symbol worn by married Hindu women. This selection of nomenclature further highlighted the schism in religious beliefs.
Amid escalating hostilities along the Line of Control, Pakistani military forces targeted a Sikh temple in Indian-administered Kashmir, resulting in the tragic loss of at least 10 civilian lives.
In the 2019 standoff, India and Pakistan found themselves perilously close to the precipice of nuclear conflict. At that time, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stepped in at the eleventh hour to mitigate the circumstances.
But the current crisis is even more severe than in 2019—both in scale and intensity. The entire region now appears gripped by a sense of dread. After India’s airstrikes, panic swept through cities in Pakistan. On Thursday, experimental blackouts plunged Mumbai and New Delhi into darkness.
On Friday, the Indian government announced it had struck air defense bases in several Pakistani cities, including Lahore. These strikes were said to be retaliation for Pakistan’s attempted attacks on Indian military installations in northern and western India.
Pakistan, in turn, claimed to have shot down 29 Indian drones and called India’s actions “a grave provocation.”
That evening, Pakistan launched missile and drone attacks on three Indian military bases in northern India and Indian-administered Kashmir. Indian TV and online news platforms reported that India responded by striking multiple Pakistani cities, including Lahore and Islamabad.
Several media outlets are now describing the confrontation as an outright “war.” U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has spoken with Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar and the Pakistani Prime Minister, urging both nations to de-escalate and return to dialogue.
For now, India and Pakistan appear locked in a contest for dominance, treading a perilous path with an uncertain end. Some fear the conflict could escalate to nuclear war. Others speculate that this may trigger a political shake-up in Pakistan—possibly leading to the resignation of the Nawaz Sharif government.
Read More : Cardinal Prevost Turns Pope Leo XIV: The First American Pope