India and Pakistan are once again embroiled in a crisis that has the potential to escalate to a major military confrontation between the two nuclear armed adversaries. Both have a history of outstanding disputes and military crises with each other. After the recent killings of the tourists in Pahalgam, India immediately accused Pakistan for the incident and decided to take punitive action, which amongst other measures included the suspension of 1960 Indus Water Treaty (IWT). In response, Pakistan has warned that any effort to divert its share of the waters would be deemed as an ‘act of war’, and therefore, it retains the right to hold all bilateral agreements with India, including the 1972 Simla Agreement, in abeyance.
The IWT of 1960 that was brokered by the World Bank after a prolonged negotiations spanning over nine years, has survived numerous crisis and wars between the two countries. The treaty that allows both countries to get their fair share of water from the six rivers that flow from the Himalayan region has no provision for suspension or abrogation. Holding it in abeyance is a violation of international treaty, and would pose an existential threat to Pakistan. In response the state may be compelled to use all available means to prevent India from this illegal act.
India, over the past few years, has been building arguments to renegotiate some of the treaty provisions that could allow it to build more reservoirs on the three western rivers that flow into Pakistan. The recent threat to hold IWT in abeyance, most likely, is part of a coercive strategy, which Pakistan considers as an existential threat and may counter it through all available means, including the use of force.
Is India Imitating the Israeli Model in Kashmir?
On April 22, 2025, a group of militants claiming to be from The Resistance Front (TRF) killed 26 tourists at Pahalgam in the Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK). The TRF is a relatively new militant organization comprising mostly of new generation of freedom fighters that came into existence once India decided to revoke Article 370 and remove IOK’s special status.
The TRF, like several other militant groups, is apprehensive about BJP’s ongoing efforts to bring Hindu settlers from other parts of India and allowing them to buy properties from the local Kashmiris, as is being done by Israel in Palestine. The labelling of Pahalgam attack as India’s ‘October 7 moment’ further reinforces this perception and heightens the anxiety amongst the local population that India may be attempting to change the demography of the region by displacing them from their own homeland. While PM Modi may have learnt a few lessons from the Israeli model, but he needs to understand that India is not Israel enjoying unflinching support from the western apologists of the holocaust, and Kashmir is not Palestine. Any attempt to change the demography will have a natural reaction and indigenous response from the new generation of Kashmiri militants who are struggling to survive in a religiously polarized India under the Modi government.
After the Pahalgam attack the international community was quick to condemn it as a ‘terrorist’ attack, but there was no such reaction to the killings of civilians in a devastating train hijack in Balochistan area earlier this year. Unlike Kashmir, which is a disputed territory, Balochistan is part of mainland Pakistan that has been experiencing insurgency because of the Indian-sponsored terrorist groups. These double standards on terrorist acts have once again exposed the hypocrisy of the west and the others who consider Indian lives to be more precious than the Pakistanis.
The Path to Escalation.
Both countries are on an upward escalatory path that is fuelled by several internal and external factors. PM Modi’s public rhetoric promising a military action against Pakistan may have put him in his own ‘commitment trap’. In the absence of a credible third party to play the role of a mediator and a bilateral crisis management mechanism, there is a likely possibility that even a limited kinetic action from either side could spiral into a major military confrontation between the two sides.
Unlike the previous military crises of 2016 and 2019, India may opt for a different kinetic action to create ‘shock and awe’ impact that could help restore India’s image of a credible military power, which had suffered significant battering during the 2019 crisis. India may not replicate the Balakot aerial strike as it would be risky and could end up into another humiliation but could consider launching an aerial strike with a combination of manned and unmanned aircraft, supported by a volley of supersonic Brahmos cruise missiles against pre-selected targets.
India could also consider a joint land, air, and sea-based limited kinetic action to demonstrate its potential in all the three domains, which nevertheless would require extensive coordination and preparation, and therefore would be difficult to operationalize in a short time to satisfy the domestic public.
Whatever military action that India decides, Pakistan’s response is not likely to be proportionate as was in 2019. Depending upon the scope of the threat and own capacity to absorb Indian military offensive, it could include both conventional as well as unconventional options. If there are pressures on the Indian leadership for a military action against Pakistan, there are even greater pressures on the other side, to prove their credentials by outperforming the previous regime of Imran Khan. Any shortcomings or failures would lead to increased resentment amongst the masses making it difficult to manage when the current crisis is over.
No nation can win a war, unless supported by its people. The recent crisis provides a window of opportunity for the national leadership to reconcile internal fissures and unite the nation against the existential challenge posed by India. The current crisis, like the previous ones, would eventually be over, however, the actions by the national stakeholders at this critical juncture would define the future trajectory of the country.
Be the first to comment